[Tagging] propose/help to rename a key -

Peter Wendorff wendorff at uni-paderborn.de
Mon Mar 21 16:27:38 GMT 2011

I only agree with you partially, here.
I agree, that it should not be confusing, wherever possible: A value for 
feature (or class) A should not be identical to the meaning of another 
class B in any local language.
But to use foreign names IMHO is more natural than to encode it in numbers.


Am 21.03.2011 17:14, schrieb crom:
> Hi,
> thank you for your comment
>> ...
>> It's more clear now, what THE PROPOSAL wants to say with the 
>> protect_class key - but I don't see the measurable scale in this key. 
>> Therefore I don't see the benefit of hiding information in numbers 
>> instead of tagging 
>> protect_class=nature_reserve|nature_park|conservation_park|.... or 
>> something like that.
> on my view, just thats the point of this concept: to merge all these 
> possible strings in values/cluster/.., which can be rendered easily?
> "In order to allow the use of familiar country-specific 
> conservation-categories, the multiplicity of "nomenclatures" was 
> assigned to a few number of IDs ("protect_class") - it might looks 
> more friendly to join an abstract code (simple number) with my local 
> name, than a foreign name."
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Concept
> regards, crom
>> ...
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list