[OSM-talk] Tag proposal/approval system is too heavyweight
richard at systemeD.net
Thu Mar 20 09:11:08 GMT 2008
Ulf Lamping wrote:
> Frederik Ramm schrieb:
>> Well. Before there were no vineyards on the map. And the discussion
>> was rather dead. What do you expect me to do, start a vote or just do
>> it in a way that works and gets vineyards on the map
> Well, I'd expect you to start a vote just like anyone else and NOT
> "abuse your power position" as one of the persons who knows how to
> change the rendering rules.
Well, there's an issue.
At present there are perhaps three main influences on what tags are
used: what's documented, what's rendered, and what the editors
present as presets.
I can only speak for part of the last-named (and arguably least
significant). Potlatch's preset and autocomplete tags are meant to
reflect what the community wants and uses. At present they are taken
almost directly from Map Features.
Unfortunately Map Features may be diverging from the community. Tags
are proposed and voted on by a very small subset of people. Commonly
used tags have had their descriptions "clarified" so that they mean
something significantly different from what they did originally. And
we have the situation where someone (like Gerv) proposes a sensible
set of tags for an area where he clearly has some subject knowledge -
inland waterways - and where his proposals are being niggled and
criticised unjustly by people who don't; which hardly encourages
people with subject knowledge to lend their expertise. All the
bureaucracy rather reminds me of Wikipedia, to be honest.
Consequently I am leaning towards replacing the Map Features-derived
presets in Potlatch with something produced by a tagwatch-style
approach (though retaining Map Features data as an option for those
who wish to use it).
Is this abusing a position? No, I don't think so. It's the voting
that has diverged from the community, not the other way round, and
Potlatch should follow the community.
More information about the talk