<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 19, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Frederik Ramm <<a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" class="">frederik@remote.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">Hi,<br class="">Perhaps it would make sense to treat the iD editor and the tagging<br class="">presets it uses as two different projects that are conceptually separate<br class="">enough so that the tagging presets as rolled out on <a href="http://osm.org" class="">osm.org</a> can be<br class="">curated by a group that is separate from the editor writers?<br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>I used to think that splitting off the iD presets into their own project was a good idea, but I’ve changed my mind in the past few years. I don’t think the OSM community is particularly good at inventing tags, I can’t think of anyone that I would trust to turn the presets over to, and it’s not like we have a lot of people stepping up to lead another OSM software project. People will surely take exception to this, but that’s the uncomfortable truth as I see it. </div><div><br class=""></div><div>I still think that tagging should ultimately be driven by the community, but that people working with software (editors like iD/JOSM, styles like osm-carto, routers like OSRM, data consumers) should not be afraid to speak up about a problematic tagging scheme before it is too late to change it.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="">I don't think designing tags is what the editor writers should do, that<br class="">would clearly be overstepping their mandate.</div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>We probably disagree on what my “mandate” is then. That’s ok.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>My goal is to make it so that anybody can use iD to contribute meaningfully to OSM. Mostly I want people to enjoy mapping and stay engaged. I like to say that the point of iD is to “convert people who don’t care about maps into people who do care about maps.” I don’t care about tags as much as you probably think I do.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div><div><b class="">Some things that matter to me:</b></div><div><br class=""></div><div>If a mapper wants to add a lifeguard station, there should be one lifeguard preset (and additional fields to supply more details if known). Not 4 lifeguard presets.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>If a mapper splits a way, they should not be silently breaking the `transit:lanes` tags added by other contributors. If someone is just getting started with their editing, and they split a way, they should not get an angry changeset discussion that they don’t understand.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>When a mapper adds a phone booth preset, the tags should already be set up for them according to the best practice on the wiki. We already have a checkbox field for `covered=yes/no` and some code to render covered ways under other stuff. `covered=booth` is special (doesn’t work like other uses of `covered`) and I’d like to avoid adding custom code for it if possible. It’s nice to ask people first before just closing an issue as ‘wontfix’.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>When a mapper adds a picnic shelter - do we assume it is a building, or do we ask the user to add a `building=*` tag. Do we render it like other buildings? Users should be able to add picnic shelters without reading pages of wiki and tagging list guidance.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>I can think of dozens more, but we’ll probably get to those eventually. Stay subscribed to this list if you want to talk through lots more interesting tagging conundrums. </div><div><br class=""></div><div>Thanks for listening,</div><div>Bryan</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div></body></html>