[Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Nov 19 07:21:29 UTC 2020

I see changeset source tags as the source(s) used for the work, not
necessarily the source of every change in the changeset.
Most of the source tags I see state the original source of the object, not
the latest source. The original source does not change when a tag or the
geometry is altered.

The history of objects tells me who has touched it, what has changed, but
not why and what the source was, and the associated changeset tags usually
only tell me why the object was affected, but nothing specific for the
object (unless the object happens to be the only thing changed in the

I would rate this information: sometimes useful but not very reliable.
Technical improvements will not fix this.  What the mappers put there could
do with improvement. The challenge is how to get the mappers to do it.

Peter Elderson

Op wo 18 nov. 2020 om 19:09 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdreist at gmail.com>:

> Am Mi., 18. Nov. 2020 um 13:19 Uhr schrieb ael via Tagging <
> tagging at openstreetmap.org>:
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:09:40AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> We have tags like source:name and source:outline for more specific
>> tagging.
> yes, every tag could get a source tag. It would mean a lot of additional
> work for mappers, and the benefit would probably be very small. Usually
> when you check an object for its correspondence with reality, you either
> find the tags accurate or wrong, for various reasons they could be wrong,
> most likely is a change of the thing in the real world. A source tag will
> not help you with this. To me, the most interesting information when
> looking at an edit is whether the person has been on the ground or not.
> source=Bing does not really tell you this, because many people use it when
> they are adding information and Bing is visible in the background, but it
> does not mean that every piece of information that they add actually comes
> from Bing.
>> > From a practical point of view, I am mostly ignoring source tags,
>> because
>> > they are almost never accurate. Typically someone has added them some
>> > versions ago and nobody in between has bothered to remove or update the
>> > tag. To know this, you will have to dive into the object history anyway.
>> Then  you are part of the problem :-) It is very annoying when the
>> source tag is accurate until someone, nearly always an armchair mapper,
>> who comes along and changes things without updating the source tag.
> Most source tags I see are source=Bing and when I add information from a
> survey, I either do not change it, or sometimes I remove it because it is
> not valid any more at this point.
>> Let's encourage people to use the source tag properly rather than cause
>> further decay. Or come up with a better solution, which is definitely
>> not a changeset comment.
> the changeset "comments" are actually structured tags, and from past
> discussions it is the preferred way over source tags on individual items.
> Source tags on items are the older method, they have already proven to fail
> in real world conditions in OSM ;-)
> Cheers
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201119/ece50987/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list