[Tagging] a kind of name:XX-modern-not-used
kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com
Fri Jan 24 14:28:10 UTC 2020
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 8:59 AM Tom Pfeifer <t.pfeifer at computer.org> wrote:
> I am against transforming OSM into an etymological dictionary. While etymological research is of
> course valuable, such results are not easily verifiable for other users, and overload the tagging of
> objects that have plenty of tags in current languages already.
I think we have different readings of the original complaint. To me,
the issue appears to be rather that an armchair mapper paraphrases an
official name that contains a no-longer-current word, yielding a
result that doesn't match the signs. If that's actually what's going
on, then it's Just Plain Wrong. I think the poster wants a way to
flag, 'the archaeism is still in current use - do not paraphrase' as a
quality assurance measure, and if so, I'm all in favour. For
situations that I've thought to be at risk of being corrupted by
armchair mappers or bots with bad assumptions, (e.g., "Gravel Road"
where "Gravel" is a family name, or a private road actually named
"Four Wheel Drive"), I've simply resorted to a note=* to warn mappers.
(note="The 'Vly' in 'Vly Road' is a Middle Dutch word, not an
abbreviation of 'valley' - do not expand").
The other parallel situation I can think of near me is 'Lake George',
which in French can be either 'Lac George[s]' - a translation of the
current name, or 'Lac du Saint-Sacrement' (which is the name that the
French settlers gave it before the English conquered them). I've seen
all three spellings on maps, and 'Lac Georges' is the only one I
haven't seen on bilingual signage. Tagging old_name:fr="Lac du
Saint-Sacrement" pretty well covers that situation.
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
More information about the Tagging