[Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag
61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Jun 6 22:51:23 UTC 2018
On 07/06/18 00:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2018-06-06 16:39 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann <osm at imagico.de
> <mailto:osm at imagico.de>>:
> On Wednesday 06 June 2018, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > there is unanimous (?) consensus that landuse is about the usage of
> > land (“For describing the primary use of areas of land.”)
> I don't think so.
> There probably is a strong majority among OSM mappers that
> think key semantics are irrelevant for the actual meaning of tags.
> What a tag in OSM means depends on what it is actually used for, not
> what someone says the key used requires it to mean.
> I think there is a misconception here. Of course tag interpretation
> will always have to follow actual usage of the tags. We are discussing
> how to introduce new tags. The proposal process is also there as a
> short cut to start together with the same tag, rather than undergoing
> the time expensive tedious process of waiting for the "crowd
> intelligence" to produce them.
If the tag colour=black were used for dark grey .. that would be ok as
that it what it is used for.
Then it is used for mid grey .. again that is ok .. that is what it is
Then it is used for light grey ..
Then it is used for white ... after all that is what it is used for ..
The meanings of the key and value should make logical sense .. other
wise it is a convoluted thing that is being thrust on all mappers and
The meaning should not migrate over time by the misuse of the tag by a
number of mappers.
If key semantics are irrelevant then why use words at al, why not use
some code A45TZ=FG57 for instance?
The truth is humans use words as they convey a meaning, changing taht
meaning for one use makes for confusion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging