[Tagging] Facts and opinions

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Jan 8 12:55:10 UTC 2019

Am Di., 8. Jan. 2019 um 08:31 Uhr schrieb Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>:

> To hypothesize on some of the stuff floating around, obviously there is
> a desire to document exactly what kind of stuff a shop sells, so people
> have proposed stuff like
> motorcycle:tyres=yes
> service:tyres:car=yes
> service:bicycle:tyres=yes
> a hodgepodge of different ways of tagging and potential for 100s of keys.
> But it could be so simple:simply structure the value space.
> All of the above could be:
> sells=tyres:motorcycle;tyres:cars;tyres:bicycle;tools:cars

or sells=motorcycle:tyres;car:tyres
or sells=car_tyres;motorcycle_tyres
or sells=tyres:white:motorcycle...

what makes you believe there will be less hodgepodge when we shift more
information into the values? Look at your own example, there's a
standardization issue with plural (cars) vs. singular (motorcycle,
bicycle). Freeform tagging always will bring us also a lot of variants.

If we open the sells="long list" box the only thing that will help us
maintain a minimum of oversight will probably be the 255 char limit. On the
other hand I can already imagine people inventing abbreviation codes to
cram more things into the values.

I am not a CS person, and if the pros agree that overall, value lists are
better than distinct properties, I will happily accept this, but currently
I see issues with both. Inconsistent tagging can occur just as well in
value lists.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190108/643fa981/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list