[Tagging] Strange tags

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 02:41, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Given that the lists at this point are arbitrary,

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 7:39 AM Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> That was the conclusion I came to after a more detailed reading of the wikipedia
> page.  Until a couple of days ago I'd only heard of Munros and thought that was
> a semi-official designation.  I now realize these things are arbitrary lists and
> that you or I could come up with a list of Kevins or Pauls.  Even if no more
> lists are ever created, there are too many to sensibly add kevins=yes and
> pauls=yes to various peaks scattered around the world.

Later, in the same post:
> If we were to restrict OSM to only those items of interest to me, it would be a very
> sparse map.  I, too, am reluctant to discriminate against hillbaggers whilst
> catering to cyclists and walkers.

Uhm, so which is it?  In one paragraph, you argue that we mustn't do
it, and in another you argue that we should.

It's true that you or I could have come up with kevin=yes or paul=yes.
But where's the verifiability for a Paui or Kevin list?

To continue the New York examples, the Adirondack 46 are well enough
known that over seven thousand people have put in with the club for
their 46er badge. The Catskill 3500 Club also well known, with some
two thousand people (and a few dogs) having completed the requirements
and applied for membership (dogs can be associate members if someone
pays their fare, but can't vote at club meetings. They needn't have
signed the logs if a member vouches for them.). I don't get to the
West often enough to have even started on a list like the Colorado
Fourteeners, but I know they're there. I've never been to the UK, but
I've surely heard of the Munros and know that scramblers pursue them
with passionate intensity. All of these lists have multiple guidebooks
and maps in print, and organizations with custody of the lists that
vet award applicants. (It's mostly on an honour system, but I know
that for the Catskill 3500's the club makes spot checks against the
log books cached at a dozen or so of the trackless peaks, and assumes
that if you can climb those, you've no reason to lie about the rest.)

At the time that the Marshall brothers identified the Adirondack 46
and resolved to climb them all with their intrepid guide Herbert
Clark, or Bill and Kay Spangenberger got the idea to climb the
Catskills' highest summits, their lists were no more significant or
verifiable than a list of 'Pauls' or 'Kevins'. But after Rev. Ryder
and his Sunday School class got the idea of following in the
Marshalls' footsteps, and the officers of the Mid-Hudson Chapter of
the ADK got the idea of founding a Catskill 3500 Club, the ideas began
to gain traction, and now they have a substantial following. As with
most things OSM, it's a judgment call what deserves inclusion, but
these two lists have almost certainly passed that point.

Whether we have a relation `type=group name=Munros` or whether we have
a tag: `hillbagging:munro=yes` (and yes, I agree that if we go the
latter route, a namespace is a good idea) is something to which I'm
largely indifferent. I'm weakly inclined to the latter (despite what I
said in an earlier post) only because of the technological problems of
maintaining a relation that spans a broad geographic area. A list like
the Northeast 111 (summits above 4000 feet and a certain prominence in
the Northeastern US) has an awkwardly large number of members and an
awkwardly large geographic range (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and
New York - the other Northeastern states have no peaks that meet the
criteria).

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin