[Openstreetmap-dev] OSM - Schema - Phase 1 - Request for Comment

[Andy Robinson]

Imi wrote:

>A first start could be a list like
>
>key    value       data primitive  description
>
>name   *           all             The human readable name in english.
>color  html-coded  all             The desired color on the map.
>class  poi         node            Point of interest at the map.
>...

I had thought we would use the XML format to flesh out some detail, but
keeping it table oriented is much simpler and how my lists are already
formatted so it's a good idea. Any XML or other format requirements can be
left till later.

>But I bet you can think of much better ways of organize this, since the
>list will surely become huge soon ;).

I'm a firm believer of KISS and know from experience that a lot of people
are more effective and focused when given a basic structure to work with.
The lists will only become huge and unmanageable of we don't have an
organisational basis for it. So, for instance, if I split the data
primitives (the communication version not the database) into headings as per
my original posting, eg point, way, area, etc; plus look at separate
headings for some of the other key groupings I have (eg type (class),
identifiers, descriptors, labels and rights) it provides a better
communication route to end users who make edits to my proffered default
content, and for them to add new content. There will be obvious duplication
of some components (the generic key "name" for example), but that doesn't
matter at this stage. 

>I think the user will automatically organize this as any other wiki does.
>Just provide a good interface where people can organize themself and they
>will do.

I agree. Provide them structured format and ask them to fill in the boxes
and its easy. At the moment they (we) are throwing ideas out into the dark
so they don't make much coherent sense, which makes it even more difficult
to implement.

The other point is prioritization. Which are those keys that users want as a
core set and therefore those that should be supported by default in an
OSMapp? This is more difficult to be certain about as different priorities
will apply to different users. We may have to default back to the
traditional map as a pointer here plus adding a smattering of web type
capability (eg colour changes) that keep it flowing and the users
interested.

Thanks for the helpful contribution Imi.

Andy