[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discouraging the use of deprecated schemes
jayandseth at gmail.com
Wed Mar 24 13:04:41 UTC 2021
> BTW, we really should consider a proper community communication tool such
> as e.g. Loomio for the whole community. These mailing lists are a real
> dread and probably one of the reason why there are so few who participate.
Both the Slack <https://app.slack.com/client/T029HV94T/C01LV023K1V> and
(extremely active) have dedicated #proposals channels...
The hope is to merge them in the future
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 6:35 AM Sören alias Valor Naram <valinora at gmx.net>
> We could do a test with Slack because Slack is ideal because it combines
> thread (like in email threads or so called replies) with a chat like
> approach. And it works brilliantly and is innovative. If you ask Microsoft
> and Co, then it is too innovative because they're just copying the features
> from Slack over to their own platforms to wipe out Slack from the market
> and not willing to protect Slack from such an action by simply not doing it.
> ~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discouraging the use of
> deprecated schemes
> From: Martin Koppenhoefer
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> Am Mi., 24. März 2021 um 01:04 Uhr schrieb <mail at marcos-martinez.net>:
>> Frederik wrote:
>> - There will not be one consistent tagging system that works for the
>> planet. I think people will agree on some things and chose to go
>> own paths in others, and that's ok.
>> I disgree and I think many people misunderstand the point. I'd never
>> impose ONE single tagging scheme as such for the whole world. The world is
>> indeed too complex. But we can agree to apply different tagging schemes in
>> different contexts.
> I agree with Marcos here, a consistent tagging scheme does not mean we
> will use the same set of tags globally but that usage of the tags is
> consistently applied (the same tag is used for the same thing as opposed to
> using the same tag for different things / with different intended meaning),
> one actual question is in the detail: how long is a thing to be considered
> "the same", what are its essential characteristics, or in other words: when
> do things start to be different and should be tagged differently? We do not
> need "consistence" in the sense that only one tag is used for the same
> property (no real problem, or a very minor inconvenience, if we use phone=*
> and contact:phone in parallel), but we should strive to intend the same
> meaning when we use the same tags (when we don't, things break apart).
> While we could have different regional standards ("foo"-tag means bar in
> Europe and foobaz in Oceania), and it might work (to some extent already
> done, e.g. typical tags for bicycle details, ...) we should try to limit
> these cases to a minimum because it makes life harder for everyone, better
> use different tags all together if different concepts should be expressed.
> There is a lot of difference (in the detail) due to cultural differences.
> For example if you see a German petrol station in an urban area, you can
> probably assume it has a 24/7 shop where you can buy some food (typically
> including fresh milk), beer/alcohol and tobacco (because the German law
> says they are exempt from Ladenschlussgesetz and can sell "travel
> supplies", as everybody knows alcohol makes a perfect travel supply). In
> Italy, petrol stations in the city almost never have such a shop, they are
> often completely automatic and you will not find any staff. They will never
> sell tobacco unless they are also a tobacco shop (only in the countryside).
>> Which means we need more complex rules - not the absence of rules. If the
>> Italian community decides they handle address tagging very different from
>> other countries (for those who don't know: "Housenumbers are usually
>> assigned to the access points of a property (e.g. a gate on the perimeter",
>> even if it is hundreds of meters away from the actual building) that is
>> fine. But this needs to be documented then and regarded as standard.
> It is documented in this detailed way, but it is also completely
> consistent with a definition like "add addresses to the object where they
> apply to". In Germany, addresses are added to building plots (even plots
> without a building on it), while in Italy, addresses are associated with
> doors, gates and entrances. Actually if you look at the details from this
> point of view, it is the Germans that deviate from the definition, because
> they mostly do not add the addresses to building plots (unless it is a
> polygon POI) but inherit it to a building on the site. Our tagging is
> consistent, it's the way addresses are associated in the real world that is
>> It doesn't make sense to have Italians applying this rule in Germany and
>> Germans tagging in Italy as they are used at home!
> they're doing it anyway, sigh. One reason are tools. A lot of tools insist
> you add addresses tags to a building, nudging you to do it. Tools are very
> powerful in OSM, the hints from bug linters are often not questioned,
> editor presets are assumed to represent "consensus", with maproulette you
> can perform distributed mass retagging, etc. This said, some Germans are
> actually mapping like this (in Germany), adding address information on
> nodes (often entrances).
>> So, yes, I vote for giving more "power" to the outcome of votes. During
>> mailing lists debates and the voting process is where consensus should
>> happen. Visible, countable, open to everybody. BTW, we really should
>> consider a proper community communication tool such as e.g. Loomio for the
>> whole community. These mailing lists are a real dread and probably one of
>> the reason why there are so few who participate.
> Email has the advantage that everybody already knows the system, many have
> a client already setup (or use a web client), it's seemlessly usable on
> mobile and desktop. Any other tool has a higher barrier of entry, as you
> would have to learn it.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging