[Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging
Daniel Koć
daniel at xn--ko-wla.pl
Sat May 16 22:25:44 UTC 2015
W dniu 16.05.2015 18:41, Martin Koppenhoefer napisał(a):
> There surely is some logical structure in the current osm tagging
> system and yes, you either look up the tags or learn them, or you will
> have to use presets ;-)
Presets are good! But I think their primary purpose is for thing you
have no chance to remember exactly, like number of steps, surface types
and so on.
But sooner or later the presets are not enough and you hit the wall.
> Any system will not be obvious.
>
> Yes, there are also some exceptions and oddities in the system I would
> like to get rid of like you do, but it's not the amenity key or the
> k/v structure for tags.
It sounds to me like an excuse to hold the inefficient, fixed system you
have to remember instead of dynamic system allowing mappers do the
mapping with less doubts. Nothing is perfect, but we can do better.
Why not area=golf_course (if it's an area) or just golf_course(=yes if
you need to still use k/v structure)?
Is it harder to remember? No, it's easier!
Does it create fundamental questions about what type it really belongs
to? Not for the mapper.
Do we loose categorization? No! We can just have more flexible category
tree on wiki and change it or simply expand if needed. Wikipedia do this
and it's working. There's no need to have fixed set of overlapping
definitions in the phone book, but it doesn't mean the only alternative
is complete chaos!
--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
down" [A. Cohen]
More information about the Tagging
mailing list