[Tagging] Discussion about Multivalued Keys

moltonel 3x Combo moltonel at gmail.com
Wed Jan 27 21:54:05 UTC 2016

On 27/01/2016, Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com> wrote:
> The main problem is that the lane tagging is established tagging with
> several 10.000's of mapped ways. Do you really want to change that ?
> It will take years before they are all converted to whatever new
> syntax we come up with. Not to mention data consumers (e.g. OsmAnd)
> that have to be adapted to support both syntaxes.

While it may not make sense to convert existing lane tags to whatever
gets decided here, the lane attribute is a good usecase to test an MV
scheme against. If an MV scheme can't handle a known important
usecase, we'll have a hard time recomending it as *the* MV scheme.

FWIW, I think the suffix scheme maps to the :lanes namespace in a very
logical and straightforward way. It's just... Much more verbose than
the currently established scheme. Even if editors started supporting
this kind of structured data in a nice way, it'd be a hard sell
compared to typing a handfull of ';' and '|'. This is certainly an
important reason why semicolon-MV remains popular despite its
technical issues compared to suffix_MV. Mappers do not (all) think
like programers.

More information about the Tagging mailing list