[Tagging] Proposal - voting finished - man_made=lamp
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Nov 26 12:16:34 UTC 2013
2013/11/26 Manuel Hohmann <mhohmann at physnet.uni-hamburg.de>
> - - At the end of the voting period there were 18 yes, 18 no and one
> partial yes. If this in in any way a "clear" result, then it is a draw.
A draw means "rejected" as it isn't a majority for "yes". A "partial yes"
like an "abstain" counts as vote that isn't "yes", so for practical reasons
you can count this like a "no". At least this is what the rules had been so
To make it clear, I am not in general against tagging lights and lamps
(besides those that already get tagged), but I also do not think that all
kind of light emitting objects have necessarily to go under one and the
same tag. Generally substituting one tag by requiring two tags isn't
desirable (IMHO). The tag "highway=street_lamp" is widely used and there is
(IMHO) no reason to believe a street light/lamp isn't part of a highway.
You can see it as one or the other and apparently there are not so few
mappers who see it as a usable tag.
Given that there is already a tag for the (supposedly) most required thing
in this field to be tagged, why not invent a (or more) new tag(s) for what
remains and you want to tag? And when inventing a new tag, why not do it
"right" (i.e. with the correct terminology)? Just as there are different
words in German (Leuchte, Strahler, Scheinwerfer, Fluter as opposed to
"Lampe"), there are also in English. Why not e.g. use a tag "floodlights"
for certain typology of lights, or "lantern" for another? As an analogy, we
also do not use "highway=street", "street=primary" because the way stuff
went has brought us this distinction already in the "main tag", and someone
now trying to reinvent this wheel would most probably fail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging