<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Hey, just want to add some thoughts here..</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It would be really great if people could just use a tag for one thing. Reusing a tag like `service=*` for multiple things makes it difficult for us to suggest good values in the iD editor based on tag usage.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Check out the popular values for the service tag: <a href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service#values" class="">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service#values</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">You can see that it’s mostly highway stuff, with some railway and other things mixed in.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Because of this, we need to maintain different lists in iD for “service=* values for highways” and “service=* values for railways”. This is ok, but the disadvantage is that it is more lists that we need to maintain in the editor, and it kind of steers people away from being able to use any tag values that they like.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Since the service tag only has 1352 of these kind of new “bus route" uses, it would be really great to retag these using a namespaced key like `route:service` before it gains too much traction.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Inventing tags is totally fine - but reusing existing ones for new uses can be problematic... I hope this is helpful information for people to know why namespacing keys is helpful, and why certain things are difficult to support in iD..</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks!</div><div class="">Bryan</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 6, 2017, at 7:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <<a href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com" class="">dieterdreist@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">2017-10-06 13:00 GMT+02:00 Michael Reichert <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:osm-ml@michreichert.de" target="_blank" class="">osm-ml@michreichert.de</a>></span>:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Some people (including myself) started using service=* for train routes<br class="">
about two to three years ago. The service=* tag was part of the Oxomoa<br class="">
Schema. Why not using this tag with different values for bus routes?</blockquote></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra">by looking at the tags in use on bus route relations, I have found there are already people using this tag:</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra"><a href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=bus#combinations" class="">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=bus#combinations</a></div>these are the current numbers:<br class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra">service 1352</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra">bus 3039</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""></div><div class="gmail_extra">Cheers,</div><div class="gmail_extra">Martin<br class=""></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Tagging mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" class="">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br class="">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>