[Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

Josh Doe josh at joshdoe.com
Wed Jun 29 14:35:03 BST 2011

It might be useful to know how many uses of the two variants were present
before Eugene (seav) began changing them. My impression is that both were
being used commonly, and thus data consumers had to accept both spellings,
and so this change isn't such a big deal. Of course it would have been
appropriate for a message to be sent to the list beforehand.

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jonathan Bennett <
openstreetmap at jonno.cix.co.uk> wrote:

> On 29/06/2011 14:19, Mike N wrote:
>>  I don't see these edits as out of line or unusual.   It's not so
>> different from the dozens of other projects to create more unified tags so
>> that data consumers have a chance of using the right tag.
> I suspect the "tags" you're talking about in other projects don't have
> quite the same significance as they do in OSM. Can you give us an example of
> what you mean?
> I see bulk-changing one tag to another in this way as being equivalent to
> changing a method name in an open source library without changing its
> functionality, just to make the name nicer. Anyone using that method in
> their code will get a compilation error all of a sudden, but nothing has
> actually improved in the library. You break some people's use of the data
> without having a net benefit.
> To put it another way, if the edits could be done using a simple algorithm,
> they haven't added anything to the OSM data itself, since that algorithm
> could be applied as post-processing. It's just rearranging deck chairs.
> ______________________________**_________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/tagging<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20110629/c199c4d5/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list