[Tagging] better classification systems

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Feb 12, 2021, 08:47 by tomasstraupis at gmail.com:

> 2021-02-12, pn, 09:24 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging rašė:
>
>> Is anyone familiar with some classification system actually better than OSM tagging,
>> used to classify things mapped in OSM (or some subset of that)
>> for use by people without specialized training?
>>
>
> Yes.
>
Can you give a specific example of actually existing system?

"well designed system of classification that covers everything
in field, deals well with new appearing objects, works worldwide,
is not confusing and is easy to use" sounds relatively simple
until someone start to actually create one.

I suspect that "plan properly from the beginning" is not sufficient.

So I am curious is there any success story in the field.

>  1. You have codes instead of words for key=values.
>
It seems to fail due to "requires specialized training to use it" part
(or description/name would be tightly coupled to codes,
that would just add extra step for additional complexity without
any benefit)

> 1b. When using codes a user is forced to look up in the dictionary
> what that code means and that description is no longer restricted in
> length.
>
Use of tags like 
man_made=scaled_down_streets_that_may_be_used_for_traffic_safety_education_or_as_a_type_of_a_playground
is entirely possible with current OSM tags, just noone likes this idea.
 
(this was proposed half-serious in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/scaled_down_streets_that_may_be_used_for_traffic_safety_education_or_as_a_type_of_a_playground
)

>  1c. This eradicates pointless discussion if A or B is a better word
> to describe feature class C.
>
And you have the same discussion about code description 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210212/18f9c9b3/attachment.htm>