[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (boundary=military)

Russ Nelson nelson at crynwr.com
Fri Oct 16 05:09:06 BST 2009


Pieren writes:
 > 
 > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> wrote:
 > > Why wait?  Tag boldly and document what you did in the wiki.
 > 
 > No, no and no. If you are unsure or unhappy with existing tags, then
 > document, suggest and discuss before putting crap in OSM !

Why?  If it's documented, in what way is it crap?  If you see
something, and tag it with foo=bar, and then write a page at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:foo=bar describing why the foo
key is set to the value bar, then 1) mappers who think to use the same
tag can use it the same way you did, and 2) anybody who's looking at
the map data can look at your documentation to understand what foo=bar
means.

The only problem with tagging foo=bar is that it's not likely that
anybody else will choose the same key, value pair.  Okay, so solve
that problem by tagging it with boundary=military.

The only remaining problem that I can see is that somebody might look
for Tag:boundary=military, not find it (which is actually currently
the case) and create their own definition for it.  But that's an
argument for tagging boldly to which you've already objected.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241    
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog       




More information about the talk mailing list