<div dir="ltr"><div>In my opinion changing the word doesn't get rid of the problem. Especially if the "word" - no matter if it is published, approved, whatever - is the result of another glorious vote. There should be no "vote" at the end of any discussion, because the discussion never ends! Especially there should be no "vote"
before the tag is used on a wide base and proves itself! (A very, very
bad habit that established itself on this mailing list in the previous
months.)<br><br>Instead of any "status" we should show to the wiki reader how wide the acceptance and support of a given feature is. There should be a list of supporting mappers, supporting applications and - if possible - a number from taginfo. On each wiki page we should only show the number of supporting mappers and applications (including a link to the respective lists where) and the usage from taginfo.<br><br></div>Every new tag/feature should be a proposal for at least a year (yes, I mean a year and not a week, day or hour). If after a year the tag/feature is used(!) by the community, it will be moved outside the proposal namespace. The determination of "used by the community" of course will be highly subjective and we can not define rules for this, because the usage strongly depends on the feature itself, e.g. camp-site features will have different usage numbers than traffic signs. But the number of supporters will provide some objective to the wiki readers.<br><div><div><div><div><div><br></div><div>Finally - some of you may ask now: what about the rejecters, disapprovers, vetoers? Easy! They should find a better solution than the proposed one, document it, use it, support it.<br></div><div><br><br></div><div>Best regards,<br></div><div>Martin <br></div></div></div></div></div></div>