[Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs
colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Fri Oct 30 12:33:10 UTC 2015
On 2015-10-30 12:52, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Colin Smale wrote:
>> Can you give some examples of the "tagfiddling" you refer to,
>> that annoys you? How do we fix that?
> highway=path and the associated access tags are the canonical example.
> highway=path was created to address perceived problems with
> highway=cycleway/footway, but in fact has made the situation less clear and
> significantly harder to process. Coupled to this is a proliferation of
> access values - from simply =yes to =designated and now =official. The
> result is that, in my experience, path tags are now the hardest thing to
> process in OSM.
Is the situation now clear? Is it now (unambiguously) clear to (all)
mappers how to tag paths? Have we gone back to tidy up any "legacy
tagging" from before/during this discussion period? Or did the
discussion just fizzle out after the handful of participants lost the
will to live?
> What tires me, is the lack of any decision-making process which
> is paralysing the whole business, and the lack of any (formal)
> attention for the data quality.
> It isn't paralysing OSM. OSM continues to advance. OSM data quality
> continues to improve. The improvements are, today as five or more years ago,
> driven by people wanting their data to be used.
I think your definition of data quality is a lot more forgiving than
mine... How does this statement relate to the "highway=path" example
> The tagging@ list and wiki
> are "noises off" but very rarely change anything - indeed, the tagging@ list
> was expressly set up solely to get the noise off the talk@ list. It only
> paralyses you if you choose to be paralysed. :)
So you are saying that any discussions on the mailing lists are just
distractions as the real decisions are taken elsewhere. Where would that
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging