[Potlatch-dev] feature categories, features and tags currently used in OSM Potlatch2 deploy
richard at systemeD.net
Tue Feb 28 14:08:04 GMT 2012
To answer both messages at once...
The theory is that we use what Andy has called "editorial judgement" to
choose the tags for the osm.org deployment. The three main criteria in
my eyes are:
- Coherence: does it share the qualities of other successful OSM tags
(verifiable, unambiguous, meaningful, etc.)?
- Precedence: is it an established tag with demonstrated use (could be
proved via taginfo) among a range of contributors?
- Importance: is it something that many P2 users could find useful?
There is a very obvious set of core tags that come from this.
We have to be pragmatic and not everything will tick all three boxes.
highway=path, for example, is not in the tradition of OSM tagging with
its "granular" rather than "meaningful" approach, but has sufficient
precedence that it has to be included. OTOH smoothness=* breaks
coherence and does not have enough precedence.
Note that OSM wiki-voting is expressly not a distinct P2 criterion in
itself, as is documented on the wiki. However, a good tag from the OSM
wiki process will hopefully be coherent; its 'approval' may lead in time
to precedence; which just leaves us, just like any other tool developer,
to assess whether it is important for our audience. Similarly, a big
showing on taginfo may not be enough in itself (it could just be the
result of an import), but can go some way to meeting the criteria.
I think these three messages sum the challenge up quite well:
That's the theory. In practice everything is, as ever, subject to "hours
in the day" and human fallibility! There are doubtless good tags which
fulfil the above criteria and which are missing from P2; there will be
dupes, and misclassifications, and so on. These can be fixed via trac
tickets, patches and git pull requests.
The copy on osm.org is this:
which is sourced from here:
and note, of course, that there are <include...> elements so you'll need
to look at some other files too.
For any project with a stated maintainer, there will inevitably be some
times when the decision falls back to the maintainer - that's partly
what they're there for. To take three examples of OSM core software, for
the osm.org Rails port that's Tom Hughes; for JOSM it's Dirk Stöcker;
for Potlatch 2 it's me.
More information about the Potlatch-dev