[Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 22:00, Cj Malone <CjMalone at mail.com> wrote:

> > But not all of them are necessarily contacts.  I've added URLs for
> > historic buildings that give more information about the
> > building.  There is nobody to talk to about it.  I've added websites
> > for companies; there is a contact page on that website but the URL
> > I've given is for the company website as a whole.
>
> Surely that's an argument for new tags as well as contact:website, for
> example description:website where a user agent could give users a "Read
> more" link. A website tag is generic, which has the obvious benefit of
> used widely and easily, but more precise tags like contact:website give
> user agents much more flexibility.
>
> It was an argument against replacing website=* with contact:website=*
as some seemed to be proposing.  If you wish to propose more
*:website=* tags that is fine b me (I can use any I find useful and
ignore the rest).

We can't replace phone with contact:phone in all cases, as some wish to do,
because of phone boxes.  We can't replace website with contact:website in
all cases, as some wish to do, because there are a lot of POIs with websites
or URLs that are not contacts.  As long as this is understood, I don't have
a
problem with contact:phone and contact:website.  If, however, people insist
on replacing phone and website completely, then I will not be happy.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200510/481b4c1f/attachment.htm>