[Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Intentionally omitted name tags

[Marc_marc]

Le 16.07.23 à 02:38, Brian M. Sperlongano a écrit :
> Comment is requested on a proposal to introduce two tags to indicate the 
> reason why a name=* tag has been omitted from a feature:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Omitted_name_tag 

did we need to have this thread again and again ?
1) the fact that a name is disputed doesn't mean that it doesn't have a 
name. if it doesn't have a name, then the name isn't disputed !
2) the fact that a name exist in several local language again isn't a 
subdivision of "this doesn't have a name", default_langage may already
be used for that

about the rationale
1.1. yes it's possible to solve vandalism issue about the Persian Gulf / 
Arabian Gulf naming dispute : just revert the vandalism.
adding a noname=for me it should not have a name=* but for another it 
should have one" doesn't solve the issue, you only have 2 tags for a 
waredit in stead of on
1.2. I see a used case if you see something rongly  tagged with 
noname=yes and delete it but aren't not sure yet how to spell the name=*
I also doesn't see why you call it trolltag

so in fact, you don't only want to add new tag to express why somebody 
think that an object shouldn't have a tag, you also want that ppl
that think that are allowed to remove the name tag
that's a *bad* idea.
how did I render a name in that case ? how 'll it solve the Persian Gulf 
/ Arabian Gulf naming dispute ? currently showing disputed name
is better than don't show anything because someone disagree with
the more common name(s)

Regards,
Marc