[Tagging] New page "Approval status" for "de facto", "in use", "approved" etc

Tobias Zwick osm at westnordost.de
Mon Jul 29 06:47:36 UTC 2019

One or several wiki edits should stand at the end of every tagging discussion, to document the conclusions made.


On July 29, 2019 8:37:25 AM GMT+02:00, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>Err .. sent to tagging list, so response here. Not to worry, a little
>more chatter.
>(Should there be a wiki edit list? Or would 'we' all then have to join
>that well as the tagging list? Anyone not want to be part of the
>discussions on wiki edits possibly of relevance to tagging? )
>On 29/07/19 16:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> (Not sent to tagging list)
>> I think the idea was that a tree with a proper name is an important /
>> landmark tree?
>> Perhaps you crazy Europeans name your special trees, eg King George's
>> The other suggestion was to use "landmark=yes" but this key is also
>> not recommended. Someone needs to check how denotation=cluster is
>> actually used now days.
>Correct. I looked it up.  :)
>The key denotation is meant for special trees .. see
>So I have changed the wiki again . to simply direct 'special tree'
>tagging to that page.
>If people want to mention names .. the denotation page would be the
>better place for it.
>> Joseph
>> On 7/29/19, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 29/07/19 15:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>>> I've edited the page:
>>>> 1) I reworded some of the helpful changes that Mateusz Konieczny
>>>> made, for better English style.
>>>> 2) I've removed the implication that de facto / approved are
>>>> "recommended" and that "deprecated" / "discardable" etc. are "not
>>>> recommended".
>>>> I also removed the suggestion that "de facto" tags are supported by
>>>> rendering / routing / editing software - while this is usually
>>>> it isn't what determines if a tag is given "de facto" status.
>>>> 3) I removed "obsolete" status from the list with
>>>> However, I now think I figured out what this status is supposed to
>>>> mean: it's supposed to be used for tags that were deprecated, but
>>>> no longer even appear in the database, so the wiki page is only for
>>>> historical information.
>>>> Do we really need a special status for this, or should is it ok if
>>>> retag the 6 tags with this status to "deprecated"?
>>>> - Tag:abandoned=yes - recommended replacement abandoned:*=* - used
>>>> times
>>>> - Tag:amenity=Kneippbecken - approved replacement is
>>>> amenity=kneipp_water_cure - used 0 times
>>>> - Tag:man_made=power_hydro / Tag:man_made=power_nuclear /
>>>> Tag:man_made=power_wind - use  power=generator, generator:source=*
>>>> instead - used a couple of times only.
>>>> - Tag:denotation=cluster - for special trees. Recommend to use
>>>> instead with natural=tree. Had been down to 0 uses at one point,
>>>> now there are a few hundred?
>>> Gah! use name=* for something other than the name? No. Use the
>>> key for that.
>>> Edited wiki to remove this suggestion.
>>>> So only amenity=Kneippbecken and man_made=power_* really fit the
>>>> "obsolete" status, though there are a number of tags currently with
>>>> "deprecated" that are also no longer found in the database.
>>> Once something has been 'depreciated' but now has little to no
>presence then
>>> 'obsolete' is a good status for it.
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging at openstreetmap.org

More information about the Tagging mailing list