[Tagging] Deprecating phone=* in favor of more ambiguity in the database

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Do not worry.

I assure you that many things are done differently than I would desire
and contrary to what I stated as my preference or what I supported with
what I consider as very strong arguments.

Jan 29, 2022, 09:11 by s8evqq at runbox.com:

> I have a feeling some people's opinions weigh more than other. If Richard, Mateusz and Frederick Ramm say NO, it's NO and everybody else should just comply with that.
>
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 20:31:42 +0100, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 1/28/22 19:21, mail at marcos-martinez.net wrote:
>> > The previous debate happened in May 2020, more than 1 year and 8 months ago.
>>
>> And it was the second debate about the topic, and it did not anything 
>> new over the first debate.
>>
>> > If the above is interpreted as established community consensus which is 
>> > not to be challenged under penalty of banning, 
>>
>> I think the penalty of banning comes from a moderator saying "if you do 
>> this again I will ban you". If such a warning is blatantly and willfully 
>> ignored without consequence, we might as well do away with moderators 
>> altogether.
>>
>> As for consensus, taginfo says that "phone" outnumbers "contact:phone" 
>> by 4:1 and the number of people "having last edited" an object with 
>> "phone" outnumbers those having last edited an object with 
>> "contact:phone" by 6:1.
>>
>> I am rather tired of hearing the same old "oh but OSM should have a 
>> CLEAN data structure where everything is nicely put in a NAMESPACE" 
>> discussion again. Saying "if you don't like the topic, ignore it" is 
>> cynical; first of all, once there are too many topics I don't like on 
>> the mailing list, I will dislike the whole mailing list; secondly, Sören 
>> bringing up the same old topic again forces me to re-iterate the same 
>> old arguments against, or else someone will say "hey, see, nobody was 
>> against it".
>>
>> I am not a list moderator but I am in the Data Working Group and when we 
>> say to someone "don't do this again" (even if it should be something 
>> that other users can do with impunity) and this person smiles in our 
>> faces while he's doing the exact thing again, then of course we block 
>> them, and we most certainly don't first start a poll among OSM users 
>> whether they think this is just.
>>
>> So,
>>
>> 1. OSM doens't have a nice and clean data model as taught in your 
>> computer sciene 1+1 and if you can't wrap your head around this then go 
>> play somewhere else;
>>
>> 2. specifically, the phone tag is totally fine and we don't need 
>> contact:phone to store two million times in our database that by the 
>> way, a phone is some way of contacting someone;
>>
>> 3. and Richard was totally right to follow through on his announcement 
>> to not tolerate the same discussion for a third time.
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>> -- 
>> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220129/68b52047/attachment-0001.htm>