dieterdreist at gmail.com
Sun Mar 21 00:04:12 UTC 2021
Am Sa., 20. März 2021 um 21:15 Uhr schrieb Sören Reinecke <valinora at gmx.net
> Luckily for you that you're not a data consumer because otherwise you
> would want the OSM community to actually listen to us which they don't do
> at all sadly :(
> We have two options:
> 1. If we find a way to distinguish between url=*, website=*, webpage=*
> which is also reasonable understandable to newbies, then it can be an
> improvement. But as I followed the discussion here I doubt that we find a
> good definition for each of them.
> 2. We deprecate url, website, webpage in favor of website or url or
> webpage and do an automatic edit to change all occurrences of the
> deprecated ones to the approved one. But we don't touch all the tags for
> the social media websites because they are special websites and handled
> differently by most applications.
FWIW, "webpage" is not in use at all, and I do not see a reason to
introduce it, because we already use "url" for what I can imagine webpage
could be good for.
The other 2 have a distinct meaning, more or less:
- website is typically understood to mean the official website, usually run
by the object or a mother organization.
- url is for all other urls (in particular those that are not covered by a
more specific tag).
Because of the people that want to help us by standardizing tagging, you
should now also have a look at "contact:website", which has by today grown
to 335.148 uses (15% of "website"), but you can still safely ignore
"contact:url" (currently less than 50).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging