[Tagging] Trolltags

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Mon Aug 31 12:11:46 UTC 2015


On 08/31/2015 01:41 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> It is not OK to use one tag (for example amenity=hotel) and add second
> tag that negates or massively change its meaning (for example adding
> involuntary=yes to amenity=hotel instead of using amenity=prison).
> Additional tags should clarify meaning of main tags rather than negate
> it.

Agree with most of what you say, just the name "trolltag" implies that
someone was doing this in order to disrupt when often no negative
intention is involved.

> In many cases (like this two cases above) correct mapping is no mapping
> whatsoever.

Yes, with one exception - if a building has been demolished but is still
visible on the aerial imagery most commonly used in the area (usually
this will be Bing), then - at least until we have a "meta database" that
contains information important for the mapping process - it may make
sense to leave *something* there (perhaps a way tagged only with
"note=the building you see on bing was demolished") in order to ensure
that the building isn't re-created again and again by armchair mappers.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the Tagging mailing list