[Tagging] Map maintenance with StreetComplete - Preferred tagging

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Fri Jul 24 08:48:16 UTC 2020

Jul 23, 2020, 18:06 by osm at westnordost.de:

> 1. Use check_date:smoothness or smoothness:check_date?
Both have some benefits, I am perfectly fine with both variants.

One gets check_date tags out of the way, one keeps tag and its
check date close to each other. In case of tie second seems
slightly preferable.

EDIT: surface:check_date would reduce risk of it getting out of sync,
it seems preferable to me, but check_date:surface also seems fine

> 2. Always record check_date or avoid tagging it where not absolutely
> necessary?
Slight preference toward "avoid".
It is useful/necessary in some cases, but if it possible to avoid it then
it should be avoided.

In the same way as note/description is not used to record
note="this is perfectly normal segment of motorway, nothing special here"

> Maybe it is obvious that my opinion is that StreetComplete should always
> tag check_date as it also adds valuable information for other surveyors
> that do not use StreetComplete. Nevertheless, in the GitHub ticket
> linked above, I played a bit of a devils advocate for the other point of
> view - for being frugal with such meta-tags.
I see no big benefit, and it could double list of tags on objects.
In general, I imagine ideal StreetComplete behavior as mimicking 
what human would do, without requiring human to be aware of tags,
tagging schemes and how OSM data us structured.

Note that in case of changed tags other mappers can look at object history
and see when tag was changed (note, I use JOSM with great history window
- though in iD such extra tags would be hidden anyay).

Note that unlike changeset history such tags may get out of sync, for
example as result of iD mapper editing and not being aware of them.
So relying on object history seems preferable whenever possible.

> So, I'd like to collect what are the advantages and drawabacks of adding
> check_date to all the tags surveyed on-site, with your help.
(1) survives way splits

(1) iD mappers will edits tags without updating check date,
JOSM/Vespuci mappers may decide to not update them
(2) more cruft in tag list
(3) StreetComplete behaves unusually, and produces unusual tagging

Adding *:check_date because something was resurveyed makes
sense and such resurvey is a great idea, but even that is unusual.

I think that *:check_date for every single added tag is an overkill.

> Long story short, not all quests [2] would be eligible for re-survey and
> those who are will have different intervals, partly also based on how
> they are tagged now. I could use your input on how long these intervals
> should be. The issue was already discussed in a GitHub ticket [3], but
> now prepared a wiki page here in which further discussion could take place:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Westnordost/Proposed_Resurvey_Intervals
I would convert it to sections, table is a bit confusing to edit.

And maybe move to talk page to make clear that random comments are welcomed.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200724/40aa81c7/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list