[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -(man_made=mineshaft)

Dave F. davefox at madasafish.com
Wed Oct 21 17:09:49 BST 2009


Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Because tags like disused=yes conflict with a general principle in OSM:
> We don't have a fixed set of tags and mappers can invent and use their
> own tags, so it should be possible for software to ignore tags it
> doesn't know without causing problems. If I don't support distinguishing
> between different variants of amenity=parking, I just ignore parking=*
> tags entirely, and while the result is less useful, it's still correct.
> If I don't support disused features, I can just ignore disused=yes tags
> ... no wait, I can't.
>
> Of course, in order to make mapping convenient, it's sometimes necessary
> to break that concept (with access tags, for example), and probably we
> won't be able to get rid of
> disused/abandoned/construction/planned/proposed/etc anymore.
> Unfortunately, people didn't seem to like my status=disused/... proposal
> very much.
>
> Tobias Knerr
I can't work out if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me, but anyway...

Are you suggesting there's no exception rule for renderers?:
Ignore all subsequent keys except for ones label disused or abandoned"


Cheers
Dave F.




More information about the talk mailing list