[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Artificial

Phake Nick c933103 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 21 14:24:28 UTC 2020


在 2020年10月21日週三 17:37,Oliver Simmons <oliversimmo at gmail.com> 寫道:

> Agreed, if we are doing this once, we better have a way to do it again as
> doing it once guarantees that it will happen for another tag in the future.
>
>
>
> Changing in inside OSM and the OSM Wiki is the easier part though, it’s
> informing and getting all of the software to recognise the new tag
> (preferably both as the old tag will still remain on old stuff).
>
> Older software is the issue as getting that to be updated is near
> impossible.
>
> There are *tons* of styles and software e.t.c. that are going to break
>
>
>
> *From: *Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl>
> *Sent: *21 October 2020 10:25
> *To: *tagging at openstreetmap.org
> *Subject: *Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Artificial
>
>
>
> On 2020-10-21 10:59, Robert Delmenico wrote:
>
> I'll do some more research before the vote goes ahead. I've read quite a
> bit of research around gendered language since first mentioning this idea.
>
>
>
> I'll be sure to list them in the proposal but feel free to send through
> any sources that are both for and against the arguments I have raised. I'm
> thinking that I'll mention the arguments both for and against on the
> proposal page as this is a big proposal which if it succeeds will have a
> big impact.
>
>
>
> If anyone has any arguments for or against that they wish to have included
> in the proposal, please feel free to leave them on the talk page for the
> proposal.
>
>
>
> If this goes through, it will be traumatic, however you look at it. Do you
> have any suggestions how to abstract this specific example into a more
> generic process to a) review all tags currently in the database; b) all
> wiki content suggesting tagging; and c) all future proposals, to assess
> their appropriateness in the current and likely future environment?
>
>
>
> I don't mean to be flippant - this is a serious suggestion. If we are
> going to have this kind of discussion around any graphology incorporating
> "possibly offensive" groups of letters we had better have a proper policy
> in place and a well-oiled process to deal with it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Given the history of language evolution, people keep adopting different
terms for discriminatory use and thus what uacceptable vs what is not will
always be changing. And since it is almost possible to predict what term in
the future will be used by duscriminators, it is basically impossible to
guarantee it will happen again. The best we can do is to minimize such
chance and hope next time it happens will be more than a millennium from
now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201021/049266a7/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list