[Tagging] iD presets
osm at imagico.de
Thu Jun 21 10:16:41 UTC 2018
On Thursday 21 June 2018, Bryan Housel wrote:
> As I see it, the users of iD and the community are deciding which
> presets get included. I might recommend a change in what the display
> name should be, or what icon it should have, but I almost never tell
> someone that they can’t add a preset or field (some examples coming
> up next).
Then why do you object to Frederik's idea of separating the tagging
presets from editor development and give up control over the decisions?
No specifc suggestion has been made so far how such a project would be
managed (and as i have already said i have concerns about one single
preset collection with no alternatives under any kind of central
control) but still this remains an important question here for me.
I am glad you work on improving possibilities for choice of presets and
this could over time be used to allow alternatives - like converting
the JOSM presets (which already includes a lot of specialized add on
preset collections) or managing diverse independent preset collections.
This is IMO the best way to go ahead here.
> I actually think being more involved in tagging discussions here is
> probably the solution to educating mappers about how to design tags
> in a way that is easier for software (and users) to work with.
I think this comment (as well as your list of criteria for preset
decisions) greatly illustrates where we differ on a very fundamental
level. IMO the whole point of OSM is having a mapper centric approach
to tagging, mappers decide which tags to use based on what is most
convenient for them. I am all for educating mappers how to better
achieve this because many new mappers struggle with that obviously.
But the aim should not be to cater developers of software (or
indicrectly the users of the software as you put it). Pursuing this
aim on a large scale would be poison for OSM.
To give you a specific example - not something with particularly high
impact but still one of my favorite in this regard. Mapping an
aeroway=runway with a two note way and a width tag is quite clearly the
quickest, most compact, most convenient and at the same time perfectly
precise method to map it. But for editor developers like you this is
complicated because you have to visualize the runway width and support
interactive manipulation of it. For you it is way more convenient if
mappers agree to map runways with polygons. Ok, this particular case
is not strictly a pure tagging problem but i hope it illustrates the
difference between a mapper centric approach to tagging and a developer
or data user centric approach and why i think it is highly important to
stick to the former.
More information about the Tagging