[Tagging] Revisiting proposal/voting scheme

Kotya Karapetyan kotya.lists at gmail.com
Thu Mar 19 10:33:44 UTC 2015

OK, I see the difference between our approaches. I still don't see the
problem though:

> If you convert that to a Key:Smoothness page, the wiki becomes
> completely disconnected from the db.

Sorry, I don't understand it. Do you mean the OSM database? How is it
connected now and why will a change of a word in the wiki page break any

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:10 AM, moltonel 3x Combo <moltonel at gmail.com>

> On 18/03/2015, Kotya Karapetyan <kotya.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:00 PM, moltonel 3x Combo <moltonel at gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> >> Why should the page be "converted to a feature page" ?
> >
> > Because I would mark a proposal page as such in some place. Otherwise a
> > stable 10 year-old feature page cannot be easily distinguished from a
> > proposal created yesterday. I see something like moving the page to a
> > different namespace or removing a "proposal" status. Not changing the
> > content or rewriting the page.
> Ok, I understand better where you're coming from. But this doesn't
> gain anything compared to the current workflow. You still have a flag
> day when the proposal is deemed done/accepted. You're losing the
> information that it's a design doc under consideration (in my view,
> tagging schemes remain "under consideration" until they get widely
> used in the db, regardless of their approved/rejected status).
> Let's take an example. Somebody writes a proposal about the smoothness
> key that finally solves all the problems and has unanimous acceptance.
> If you convert that to a Key:Smoothness page, the wiki becomes
> completely disconnected from the db. If instead you keep the proposal
> page as-is, but add links on the key pages with "conforms to /
> contradicts proposal foo" links for each value, you get the best of
> both worlds.
> >> Feature pages and proposals should be writen in parallel, not one
> >> after the other.
> >
> > I am promoting writing a single "feature proposal" page, which, after the
> > initial discussion, is made just a "feature" page. So nothing is written
> > one after another.
> It may be just editing/moving an existing page rather than creating a
> new one, but you still have one after the other. At no point do you
> have both the feature page and the proposal available at the same
> time.
> Remember that, in my initial suggestion, the feature page and the
> proposal serve two different purposes : to document existing practices
> and to document desired practice. I think it's important to clearly
> distinguish the two in the wiki. The wiki is here to guide, not to
> direct.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150319/ee65b21c/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list