[Tagging] Differences between crop and produce?

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Nov 19 23:19:49 GMT 2012


2012/11/19 Richard Smith <rich at haveyougotanypets.com>:
> Although the tag crop has a page if you look at it's proposal page (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Crop ) it seems clear
> the idea was abandoned due to lack of support. So it seems strange that the
> page was created in the first place.


There are several reasons why a page would be set up, one being the
tag in use (there are roughly 20000 objects tagged with crop, so it
does make sense to have the page as a definition).


> The Produce key does not seem to have had any proposal written for it at all
> and only the produce page exists (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:produce ) on which no discussion has
> taken place.


it was introduced in the orchard proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/orchard
but again, even if there were no proposal the fact that it is in use
justifies the tag definition page.


> As it happens I currently have under way a proposal for the key "product" (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:product ) which is
> similar to produce except it is for the definition of man made output. So
> have been thinking about the this subject quite recently.


yes, usage starts to appear also for product:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/product
some of them might be misspellings of "produce" though.


> My slant on this would be that the term crop should be discouraged and
> instead "produce" be used in all situations where crop currently is. I think
> the set of possible key-values for produce would encompass the entire set of
> values that the crop key would cover.


OK, fine for me, so basically there is no added meaning for either of those 2?


> I would also be happy to take the info from the crop and its child pages and
> rework them into the produce page if no one has any serious aversions to the
> idea?


it's fine, but please keep the definition for crop as well, and don't
change meanings of tags in use without discussing it beforehand.


> I might also add that while so far the product tag I am proposing has had
> more "for" than "against" votes, the main trust of the against camp has been
> the lack of need for 2 tags that essentially mean a features output. I
> sympathise with this argument and as such wondered what the community thinks
> of creating a tag to describe the output of any feature regardless of the
> type of output and we look to depreciate both the produce and product tags
> entirely (this does seem a shame seeing how well defined the produce tag has
> been according to tag info so far).


I think we should not do this, there is a big difference between a
field where potatoes are grown and a factory where goods are produced
or a kiln where stuff is produced. Growing fruit is sufficiently far
away from man_made production to merit its own key IMHO.

cheers,
Martin



More information about the Tagging mailing list