[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

Peteris Krisjanis pecisk at gmail.com
Sat Oct 3 10:38:04 BST 2009


2009/10/3 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>:
> 2009/10/3 James Livingston <doctau at mac.com>:
>> On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote:
>>> Time to end this debate
>>>
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values
>>
>>
>> Oh, and this:
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/VotingOnTheWikiIsStupid
>
> Not that I'm disagreeing, but simply saying something is a bad idea
> and there is no point to it isn't very useful.
>
> Instead we should be striving for something that is a good idea to
> replace it with, at this stage the only 3 options are:
>
> * do what ever you like
> * benevolent dictator
> * committee
>
> The first is going to cause problems later on due to ideologically differences.
>
> The second is the best option in theory, but not always the best
> option in practise.
>
> The third is generally the best option in practise most of the time,
> it should comprise of no more than 10 people, preferably 5 since the
> more people involved the less people are going to come to a consensus.
>

Actually more important question - why people which love mapping (and
I guess we all do, otherwise we wouldn't be here), are discussing such
simple things as BOOLEAN values in a midday of the Saturday? (ok, for
others it is probably very very early morning). I mean, COME ON, it is
already governing practice to use "YES", or "NO". No, 0 or 1, or true
or false won't be supported. Because we don't have infinitive time to
decide on such basic THINGS. It is common sense to move on such things
even if you don't like it. I don't like lot of stuff in current OSM
tagging scene, but I write notes, put migration paths for future for
objects I draw and then later I will decide if I can advance futher
(for example, to do micromapping when tagging for it setles down).

And yes, tagging needs comittee and needs seperate list. And it needs
"chain of decision command". Otherwise we spend time hitting dead
horses and not mapping.

Sorry for a rant, but it seems very strange when people push freedom
of decision just a sake of freedom of decision. We don't try to push
our rules of driving on streets. We follow current rules and common
sense. Maybe let's try to do it also here.

Cheers,
Peter.




More information about the talk mailing list