[Tagging] Nuclear Key

Tom Chance tom at acrewoods.net
Sun Apr 17 10:15:19 BST 2011

On 2 April 2011 11:11, Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping at googlemail.com> wrote:

> This way we'll have to change each and every tag every year because someone
> finds the "new and improved" way to do things as the current tag fashion
> expects him to.

Ulf, the new schema was introduced after quite a lot of discussion, changes
to the proposal and debates about the best way to proceed. I don't remember
anybody saying the existing schema was sufficient. Why waste everyone's time
grumbling when this "imperfect but all we have" process has run its course?

I agree that in general we don't want to have to keep changing the way we
tag things. Five years since I started with OSM it irritates me sometimes
too. But in the case of the power=generator tags it was a case of the
original tagging being very basic and insufficient to say what sort of
generator an object is. So we changed it. Get over it.

> *... and I'll especially call it wiki fiddling if the currently widely used
> tags are removed from the wiki without even keeping a note of the old tags.*

This I accept, needing obsolete tags documented for data users is a valid
point that I didn't consider when updating the wiki.


http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20110417/3da8a767/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list