<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/3/20 8:31 am, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:750BD1DC-90E3-4930-9BC8-7DB75F3FF234@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">sent from a phone</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 29. Feb 2020, at 22:25, Warin
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com"><61sundowner@gmail.com></a> wrote:<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:M1FvGqc--3-2@tutanota.com">
<blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px
solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
<div>`map_source=openstreetmap` is a good tag?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>Yes, though I think that posting<br>
</div>
<div>the same thread to tagging and talk ml<br>
</div>
<div>is a poor idea.</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I think source_map=* or source:map=* would be better as
that can also be used for other specific 'sources'. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div>I would prefer map:source, the tag is information=map so it
seems more consistent to further describe the map with map:*=*
tags</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Yet the source key is still relevant. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>See<br>
</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source</a></p>
<p>For</p>
<p>source:name ~ 120,000 uses<br>
</p>
<p>source:ref ~182,000 uses<br>
</p>
<p>source:addr ~7,880,000 uses<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>It would be nice to have some consistency with the use of the
source key? <br>
</p>
</body>
</html>