[Tagging] Separating usage docs from design docs (was: Increasing voting participation)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 10:30:00 UTC 2015


I'm not sure whether lowering the bar for the introduction of new tags
(even more, as it is altready quite low) is really helpful. Once a tag is
there it is hard to change its meaning. Some of the trouble that we face
currently stems from tag and key pages that have been written without
following the proposal process. These document often tags with minor usage,
and much more than the average tag they introduce problems because they
don't integrate well with the whole system of tags. Nonetheless, these tags
find some adoption, and are very hard to change after some time. If the
mapper setting up those tag pages would have consulted with the community
before, it is very likely that the flaws would have been discovered and
corrected before the tag found its way into the system (or in some cases it
would have been pointed out that there already was an established tag for
the intended purpose).

I also believe we should encourage people to document new tags, but we
should have a way (besides naked taginfo stats) to communicate whether a
tag is well established and widely used, or if it is just a first idea. The
current system of tag definition pages and the proposal name space (with
various statuses) does solve this problem, but has the problem that it is
not used by a lot of people, and there is a lot of reluctance to use tags
before they are marked "approved" (this is something that pops up
frequently on local mailing lists when you suggest a tag that has "just a
proposal page"). IMHO this can hoefully be overcome by communication and
maybe by changing the wording (abolish "approved" "rejected" and use
something more descriptive).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150320/a00e60b1/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list