[Tagging] propose/help to rename a key -

[Peter Wendorff]

Am 21.03.2011 18:41, schrieb crom:
> Hi Peter,
>> ... A value for feature (or class) A should not be identical to the 
>> meaning of another class B in any local language.
> mmh?
> protect_class is an ordersystem for an easy handling (mapping & render).
> why should similar managed naturereverves not run with the same value 
> - on this "order-level"?
> did I got it?
> sorry, you have an example? where it is like that? where you see a 
> problem?
You are right - that particular issue is solved by using numbers. My 
statement was there to agree here that this is a requirement for a good 
proposal.
>> But to use foreign names IMHO is more natural than to encode it in 
>> numbers. 
> in the real live. in this case, we are dealing in any digital, 
> abstract space.
> You want to give the protect_class=4 a chinese string?
> isn´t it a matter of  taste?
Common language for OSM is (British) English. That in mind: no, I don't 
want to give the protect_class=4 a chinese string, but a intrinsic 
meaningful string within the English language.
> and you think, this scheme doesn´t work / - will make problems?
Of course it works.
But I don't like it.
Protected areas might be a feature not very common - but would you 
prefer to have a numbering scheme for highway=*?

I think, it's a good fact, that highway is commonly tagged with values 
like footway, residential, primary, secondary, motorway etc.
I would highly prefer this widely agreed scheme over something like
highway=1 for motorways, highway=2 for primarys, highway=3 for 
secondarys etc. as it's far more difficult to understand "out of the box".

Same argument I would apply to your proposal.

I dont' have much time currently to work it out in detail, but with a 
short look over the section protect_classes I would say:

- nature_reserve is a candidate to substitute 1
- national_park is a candidate to substitute 2
- nature_monument could be a candidate to substitute 3 (here I'm not 
sure about the meaning of 3 yet - but that would even more be the case 
with the numeric variant)


Be aware: I'm neither sure if that values are really good and consequent 
to use together with the whole classification system, nor am I a native 
English speaker.

regards
Peter