[OSM-talk] Several approved features moved to Map_features page

[Ben Robbins]

>Wait a second, a common has a very specific historical, social and legal 
>meaning in the UK that is very different to a village green

I don't think this is a reason to have them in completly different keys.  
That was my point.   The historical value of a common doesn't really justify 
it being a leisure= tag.

>It may still appear as "blob of green" on a map but it may also be of 
>interest to somebody some day. I'm sure the same holds for countries that 
>have a similar common law background.

If all that matters here is having stuff render, then why debate tags at 
all?  just mush the keyboard, but check that the rendering rulesheet 
coralates with the data.

>I don't understand why you care if people use these additional tag values?

I don't care that they use them.  I just said I wouldn't.  I do care for 
OSM's data aiming for being a high standard though.  I'm not just concerned 
with my bit of editing only, surprisingly.  If I was, then why would I ever 
look at the standadised tags page?  I would just make up all my own tags.

>You could just ignore them or tag them when mapping, nobody is compelling 
>you to do either.

Yes.  I said that at the end of the previous email.  I could indeed, but It 
would be nice to have standadised feature page that works for everyone, and 
is consitent and logical.  I agree they different things should have 
different tags just because if they don't then information is lost.  But 
that was not, and isn't my point.

All/

I object to the way opion and orders are not being split apart here.  I also 
object to the fact that critisms are instantly asumed to be aggressive, and 
not made with the aim of progress. There are problems that need sorting.  
Patriotism and lack of self-critism with a project is a great weakness.

I'm trying to be critical so that we end up with a logical tagging scheme to 
create good maps, and I hope others would do the same.  In the original post 
I said I was against it, I shan't be using it, and asked if it was intended 
that we add every bit of grass that can be publically accsessed.  I also 
asked where the page was it was from so I could see the vote.  Now tell me, 
where in there do I suggest what anyone else should do?, and where did I say 
that I couldn't continue if this tag was created?... I didn't.  I asked when 
is the grass not the green anylonger....and, in fact, that was not answered. 
  I also just wanted to check there was a vote on it...whats wrong with 
that?

Now, rather than talk any more about tagging greens, I shall resort to 
something more productive and get down to some mapping, as in that progress 
is a posibility.  Making maps stress tests tags and  makes opions valid, so 
I shall keep this tag in mind from now on, but am very sceptical that I will 
be able to make much of it.

Sorry for taking up mailing list space with this pointless flamewar.  I'm 
not gunna post anything more on this topic, as abosultly nothing is being 
gained from it.

Ben

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Hotmail is evolving – check out the new Windows Live Mail 
http://ideas.live.com