[Tagging] Beautified JSON presets for natural=tree
adam.c.snape at gmail.com
Sat Jul 22 14:22:21 UTC 2017
I wasn't arguing in favour of the change, merely addressing John Willis'
concern. I suppose the intention might be to reduce the likelihood of
erroneous descriptive name tags such as name=tree. New mappers sometimes
often fail to realise that name boxes in the editors often should be left
blank. I suspect that JOSM users are much less likely to make this mistake.
Then again, I suspect they are also much less likely to be deterred from
leaving a name because there is no preset name box.
On 22 July 2017 at 14:24, Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn at rushpost.com> wrote:
> On 07/22/2017 08:18 AM, Craig Wallace wrote:
> > On 2017-07-22 13:50, Adam Snape wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> Removing the name key from the JOSM preset wouldn't stop somebody
> >> adding a name tag in the few cases where a tree really was named. Nor
> >> would it remove name tags from existing trees.
> > But what's wrong with having the name as an optional tag on the preset?
> > if it is not relevant for that particular tree, just leave it blank.
> > Yes it is the minority of trees, but I think there are quite a few trees
> > that have some sort of name. And it is often of historic interest, so
> > worth recording it.
> If I remember right, we have this field on highway=traffic_signals even
> though only one country (Japan) uses it.
> Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn at rushpost.com>
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging