[OSM-dev] JOSM: Several tags with same key
zerebubuth at gmail.com
Sat Apr 4 20:09:40 BST 2009
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Marcus Wolschon <Marcus at wolschon.biz> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Matt Amos <zerebubuth at gmail.com> wrote:
>> maybe what we need is an "amenities" tag specifically for multiple
>> co-located amenities?
> I strongly disagree.
> That is even harder to parse then the ";".
please explain. having amenity for a single amenity and amenities for
multiple (maybe semicolon separated, or one of the many other
suggestions) sounds much easier to parse. it also means that the
complex multiple-value tag is only needed where required, allowing the
simpler existing tagging scheme to continue where it isn't required.
> I really do like the "amenity:bar"="yes" -aproach.
> The current namespace of "amenity" is preserved,
> an automatic adding of the new name to every place
> with the old one is possible (to have a transition-period)
> and it does solve the problem.
bots are strongly discouraged - if you want people to start using your
tagging suggestion please ask them.
>> i think its better to describe the tags which are actually in use,
>> rather than proscribe the tags which are allowed.
> There is a problem with what people are tagging and there
> needs to be a change to this tag to solve it.
no, people are tagging as they see fit. the problem is that, in some
very rare situations, it is difficult to parse. this is not a problem
that needs an invasive solution.
> This calls for a proposal on the "Key:amenity" -page with
> a voting announced on talk.
> As the issue affects so many there will be a few people
> needed to play moderator on the Talk-page. Else this may
> end like the "license"-discussion on the talk-list. (Hearing
> the same thing repeatet over and over again without getting
> anywhere until the threads died.)
unfortunately, as i'm sure we're all aware, trying to change an
established convention is like trying to push water uphill ;-)
More information about the dev