<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">There are inconsistencies from one
place to another around the world. <br>
These idiosyncrasies are what make the world so interesting for
travellers. <br>
OSM needs to cater for that. <br>
<br>
Reading the OSM wiki can be reading the last change by some editor
'fixing' it for their view, which may well be fine for their part
of the world but not meet your view out your window. <br>
Some mappers now ignore the wiki.<br>
<br>
For Australian specific thing - this list and the wiki guidelines
are your friend. <br>
Changing the Australian Guide wiki is usually done by consultation
here, so you get a broader view than a single idea. <br>
<br>
On the general wiki .. vagueness may well be in place to allow for
these world variations. Changing it is difficult in that others
may object to your changes... the problem becomes one of reaching
an agreement.. and then someone else objects etc. <br>
<br>
<br>
On 21/09/19 12:02, Sebastian S. wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:82F6BCA2-66D4-42B5-8C2E-83C4A1F09747@consebt.de">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
Hi Andrew, I fully, whole heartedly agreed.<br>
Wiki is supposed so evolve. <br>
Gardening to fix little broken or spelling issues.<br>
Bigger changes are best outlined here on the list to capture
common sentiment.<br>
<br>
I must admit I often just look up things in the wiki, so for me it
is mostly a reference and it takes more commitment to actually
improve. To update e.g. tagging guideline aspects one would first
need to step back, which is what you seem to have done.<br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
brevity.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 21 September 2019 10:45:44 am AEST,
Andrew Harvey <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrew.harvey4@gmail.com"><andrew.harvey4@gmail.com></a> wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> I completely agree the "how to map" of OpenStreetMap
(not just tags, but also things like when to split a
highway, when to snap nodes, what should be mapped etc) is
full of "inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and vagueness".
But when I look at where OSM is today I think we've done a
pretty amazing job all things considered, yes we still
have much more work to do, but being a mostly volunteer
self organising community the best way to make OSM
stronger is hands on driving this change.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think the easiest way to get started is improving
documentation on the wiki, documenting all the different
"how to map" concepts used today, documenting
these "inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and vagueness",
then as a community we can refine approaches to eventually
resolve these issues. There's a lot of precedent in OSM
for deprecating things when we have better/more commonly
used.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Any time you encounter an inconsistencies I'd encourage
you to raise it, either on the globally tagging list, or
if it's local here on talk-au.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at
09:57, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au <<a
href="mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>A special thank you for the links yesterday. I have
read them. "Australian Tagging Guidelines" and "Good
practice" are worth knowing and I am very grateful for
our forefathers that put so much effort into writing
these documents. It worth noting, however, when you
compared the two that they are riddled with
inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and vagueness. It is
worth remembering this when we experience another of
those "I am right, you are wrong" conversations.<br>
</div>
<div>Reading "Australian Tagging Guidelines," I thought
of Geffory Rush from Pirates of the Carribean, "they
are more guidelines than rules." Unapproved tracktypes
for 4WD (inventing tags, don't exist but perhaps they
should) and small towns called cities so they appear
the map (mapping for the renderer), and the principle
of "we map what is there" but then don't map what is
private (often difficult to verify too). The
descriptions are full of contradictions and vagueness.
The "Lifecycle prefix" wikitext needs more work,
particularly examples of use to get consistency in its
application. As much of it is not rendered (Mapnik),
mapping it could be considered as a low priority.<br>
</div>
<div>Harry Wood's blog "community smoothness" addresses
vagueness in language and how everybody has a
different opinion of what a text means. That is not
new of course and with certainty, everybody has an
opinion about what the right way is. It is human
nature, when it comes to our own beliefs, every
evidence supporting it is embraced and every evidence
against excluded.<br>
</div>
<div>Finally, it is easy to forget that the Wiki is
written in dozens of different languages and there
will be inconsistencies between Wiki entries in
different languages. I can verify that for two.
English and German wiki pages descriptions are not
surprisingly culture-specific (see also the
chemist/pharmacy/drug store discussion for AU/UK/US
comparison).<br>
</div>
<div>Despite our best efforts inconsistencies,
idiosyncrasies and vagueness will reign in the OSM
anarchy.<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>