[OSM-talk] Several approved features moved to Map_features page
ben_robbins_ at hotmail.com
Mon Feb 19 23:57:20 GMT 2007
>Wait a second, a common has a very specific historical, social and legal
>meaning in the UK that is very different to a village green
I don't think this is a reason to have them in completly different keys.
That was my point. The historical value of a common doesn't really justify
it being a leisure= tag.
>It may still appear as "blob of green" on a map but it may also be of
>interest to somebody some day. I'm sure the same holds for countries that
>have a similar common law background.
If all that matters here is having stuff render, then why debate tags at
all? just mush the keyboard, but check that the rendering rulesheet
coralates with the data.
>I don't understand why you care if people use these additional tag values?
I don't care that they use them. I just said I wouldn't. I do care for
OSM's data aiming for being a high standard though. I'm not just concerned
with my bit of editing only, surprisingly. If I was, then why would I ever
look at the standadised tags page? I would just make up all my own tags.
>You could just ignore them or tag them when mapping, nobody is compelling
>you to do either.
Yes. I said that at the end of the previous email. I could indeed, but It
would be nice to have standadised feature page that works for everyone, and
is consitent and logical. I agree they different things should have
different tags just because if they don't then information is lost. But
that was not, and isn't my point.
I object to the way opion and orders are not being split apart here. I also
object to the fact that critisms are instantly asumed to be aggressive, and
not made with the aim of progress. There are problems that need sorting.
Patriotism and lack of self-critism with a project is a great weakness.
I'm trying to be critical so that we end up with a logical tagging scheme to
create good maps, and I hope others would do the same. In the original post
I said I was against it, I shan't be using it, and asked if it was intended
that we add every bit of grass that can be publically accsessed. I also
asked where the page was it was from so I could see the vote. Now tell me,
where in there do I suggest what anyone else should do?, and where did I say
that I couldn't continue if this tag was created?... I didn't. I asked when
is the grass not the green anylonger....and, in fact, that was not answered.
I also just wanted to check there was a vote on it...whats wrong with
Now, rather than talk any more about tagging greens, I shall resort to
something more productive and get down to some mapping, as in that progress
is a posibility. Making maps stress tests tags and makes opions valid, so
I shall keep this tag in mind from now on, but am very sceptical that I will
be able to make much of it.
Sorry for taking up mailing list space with this pointless flamewar. I'm
not gunna post anything more on this topic, as abosultly nothing is being
gained from it.
MSN Hotmail is evolving check out the new Windows Live Mail
More information about the talk