<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hello all,</p>
<p>thanks for all your replies and input. It is however a little
frustrating indeed that all this only happens after the discussion
period - which is not the first time with my proposals. I think
rather than voting against, you should abstain from the vote, if
you're only coming out with your opinion now, because it was
announced here and on the weeklyOSM.<br>
</p>
<p>As so many things, yes, the <font face="Courier New, Courier,
monospace">settlement</font> and <font face="Courier New,
Courier, monospace">site_type</font> group of tags is a mess. I
tried to tidy up the <font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">settlement</font>
and related tags before I started my proposal, though. And yes,
we do have two different uses for <font face="Courier New,
Courier, monospace">settlement_type</font>, as I have laid out <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:settlement_type">on
the page</a>. I would propose that where it is not used in an
archaeological sense, that the few cases (related to the
earthquake in Haiti maybe?) be changed to <font face="Courier
New, Courier, monospace">settlement:origin=planned/ spontaneous/
unspecified</font> or something like that.</p>
<p>I chose <font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">settlement_type</font>
as a parallel use to <font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">fortification_type</font>
which was established long before I started mapping heritage in
Ireland afaik, so I was only trying my best to follow an
established pattern.</p>
<p>The mess with <font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">defensive_settlement=crannog</font>
is my fault - I had created a preset for JOSM and forgotten to
adapt it after retracting that proposal. I've cleaned up that mess
now. I meant to wait until this proposal was approved, in case it
got rejected.<br>
</p>
<p>If anyone wants to start a proposal for <font face="Courier New,
Courier, monospace">site_type</font>, please be my guest.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Anne<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 07/10/2022 13:07, martianfreeloader
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:966ac4c8-79a1-b83e-5f3d-0464d805b75a@posteo.net">Being
practical: Just use the settlement_type=crannog tag.
<br>
I'm totally fine this.
<br>
<br>
Being principal would be to approve the settlement_type=crannog.
<br>
I'm not fine with this for the reasons laid out.
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 07/10/2022 13:46, Peter Elderson wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">I am one of those who didn't bother to
look what it's about.
<br>
I share the wish to tag crannogs as important historical
structures still existing today.
<br>
I share the criticism that _type does not mean anything. At the
same time I don't care if it is there or not; settlement=* also
does not say what kind of categorisation is used for the values.
But the settlement key ius already in (scarce) use for something
else, with values yes and no.
<br>
<br>
As for implicit approval of the higher tags, fine with me! They
are in actual use in a scheme, and for me that is good enough.
If anyone would start a separate vote for that, fine. If the
current vote is postponed till after, fine, it is the royal way
I think, but I think it is not necessary. I think we can be
practical about this, not principal. It's just not big enough.
<br>
<br>
Peter Elderson
<br>
<br>
<br>
Op vr 7 okt. 2022 om 13:10 schreef Andy Townsend
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com">ajt1047@gmail.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com"><mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com></a>>:
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 07/10/2022 11:27, Marc_marc wrote:
<br>
> Hello,
<br>
>
<br>
> Le 07.10.22 à 12:11, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
<br>
>> who cares for "in use" or "approved"
<br>
>
<br>
> me :)
<br>
>
<br>
> approved that means that the subject has been
discussed,
<br>
> that people have spent time on it, that there has been
<br>
> an opportunity to detect problems, to propose
improvements
<br>
> it's quite different from an "in use", because a guy
invented
<br>
>
<br>
Unfortunately discussion and "voting" by people who have
only the
<br>
vaguest idea of what the thing being voted on is adds no
value*. There
<br>
is a place on the "B Ark" for them...
<br>
<br>
The fact that there was only one comment during the
fortnight of
<br>
discussion means that people really don't know (or don't
care) what
<br>
these are, and people who do know and care (such as the
proposer)
<br>
should
<br>
probably "just map these". Whether that's via
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/defensive_settlement=crannog">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/defensive_settlement=crannog</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/defensive_settlement=crannog"><https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/defensive_settlement=crannog></a><br>
(which is slightly ahead in taginfo) or
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/settlement_type=crannog">https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/settlement_type=crannog</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/settlement_type=crannog"><https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/settlement_type=crannog></a>
<br>
matters
<br>
little; there are few of them in OSM right now, and the word
"crannog"
<br>
is characteristic enough, that they can fairly easily be
remapped into
<br>
some "better" archaeological scheme at some later stage.
<br>
<br>
What matters is getting them mapped, and getting from the
10s currently
<br>
in OSM to the 1500 or so that apparently do or did exist**.
<br>
<br>
Best Regards,
<br>
<br>
Andy
<br>
<br>
* We still don't know what bicycle=designated means
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/use-of-bicycle-designated-vs-bicycle-yes-outside-of-germany/3230">https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/use-of-bicycle-designated-vs-bicycle-yes-outside-of-germany/3230</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/use-of-bicycle-designated-vs-bicycle-yes-outside-of-germany/3230"><https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/use-of-bicycle-designated-vs-bicycle-yes-outside-of-germany/3230></a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
** According to wikipedia. I was surprised that there were
apparently
<br>
as many as 1200 in Ireland.
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org"><mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org></a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging"><https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging></a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>