<p>Throwing my hat in like a true masochist...</p>
<p>I have added perhaps 100 trees - urban/rural, in 'clusters' and on streets where I would not say there is a cluster but where they are closer than 50m. I am also interested in an import from my local council.</p>
<p>The wiki is clearly ambiguous and not followed consistently - if at all - by mappers. </p>
<p>Either resolution will therefore impose a new unambiguous definition on a large proportion of nodes entered by many mappers. This is unavoidable.</p>
<p>The only course of action is to propose one or more unambiguous definitions on the wiki, explaining their retroactive effect, and to put those to a vote.</p>
<p>Further emails arguing one way.or another will clearly fail to bring about any resolution.</p>
<p>Regards,<br>
Tom </p>
<p><blockquote type="cite">On 11 Sep 2010 08:51, "Pierre-Alain Dorange" <<a href="mailto:pdorange@mac.com">pdorange@mac.com</a>> wrote:<br><br><p><font color="#500050">NopMap <<a href="mailto:ekkehart@gmx.de">ekkehart@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<br>
</font></p>> Yes, you missed something.<br>
<br>
I think you also miss lot of things.<br>
<br>
Reply you got were mostly sarcastic and it's a vague discussion in an<br>
obscur ML.<br>
<br>
Launch a bot after receiving 3 confuse answers on a mailing list is not<br>
a consensus.<br>
Many users do not read this thread and discover an unknwon tag in the<br>
area they work.<br>
It usually consider as a bad thing in OSM to change things without real<br>
consensus (long discussion and a majority of the people that participate<br>
to the discussion agree) and without any documentation.<br>
<br>
If everybody act like you did, OSM would become a big mess.<br>
<br>
On the tree discussion.<br>
Yes "tree" tag was starting for remarkable tree but now the real use is<br>
for tree.<br>
Of course users that tag remarkable tree would see there work disolve<br>
by this, but it's allready done.<br>
Adding cluster with a bot is not a good option, 2 remarkable tree can be<br>
close (i add example here in my town).<br>
We have to discuss and found a reasonable option.<br>
<br>
Original single tree tag was probably an error, because as it has been<br>
said, we usually tag remarkable things with a remarkable tag not a<br>
common one...<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
Pierre-Alain Dorange<br>
<br>
Why don't i run a bot that change "cluster" to "bazinga", i prefer this<br>
word ? (isarcasm)<br>
</font><p><font color="#500050"><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Tagging mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>htt...</font></p></blockquote>
</p>