[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Phone)

Colin Smale colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Tue Oct 8 20:08:08 UTC 2019

On 2019-10-08 21:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> On 8. Oct 2019, at 15:40, Colin Smale via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote: 
>> In that case it makes perfect sense to consolidate onto one or the other. But if there are any perceived semantic differences, however subtle, then either we find some way to represent that using other tagging, or we accept that a certain nuance will be lost.
> there could be phone numbers with automatic announcements, so "phone" will still be valid, but contact:phone would not suit well. To give an example. It cannot be seen from the "phone"-key that this is the case though. I'm happy with loosing the subtle differences that may make  "contact:"-prefixed tags slightly more specific, in exchange for more universally usable "almost-equal" more generic tags without the prefix.

So the subtlety you are referring to, is that some phone numbers
routinely connect to a recording instead of a human. 

How about phone:recorded_message=* which would leave room for phone=*
for a manned line, or recorded_message=yes, which would not?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191008/aed69af1/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list