[Talk-GB] Designation: should we begin using prefixes

[Andrew Chadwick]

On 03/05/12 10:22, Jonathan Harley wrote:
> +1 for prefixes to designate a country on features which are already
> geographically located in a country being bonkers.

Putting the discussion back ion track again, I suspect it's really
jurisdictional rather than country-based, even if the objects we're
tagging obviously have their own location. The designation=* tag records
the *legal* classification of an object, after all. Were you to assume
that jurisdictions are geographically based, you would be strictly wrong.

> I'm not clear what problem these prefixes are supposed to solve, 

I'm not really proposing any concrete set of prefixes yet, of course: we
don't know enough about the possible consequences of having a great many
designations yet, but one potential annoyance jumps out immediately.
Some of the documented values could easily overlap in meaning depending
on who gets to designate it. It may not be an issue, but tags like

  designation=national_park
  designation=national_nature_reserve
  (and indeed, designation=public_footpath)

could easily apply to database objects in other English speaking
jurisdictions to which different legal concepts apply. Does anyone else
see possible problems here?

I'm not even going to go into disputed classifications/designations.
Keep it simple for now, and hope your designation=fracking_zone stays
out of my designation=national_scenic_area...

-- 
Andrew Chadwick