[OSM-talk] [OHM] Should we map former endonyms?

Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 20 09:54:37 UTC 2014


On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Gorm E. Johnsen <osmlist at gorm.cc> wrote:
>>but astonishingly I can't find a single instance of these with taginfo
>> right now (maybe some mass-retagging?).
>
> An example of different names through time:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9873833
> Instances like the one above are even searchable in nominatim.

The question here is more to know if we use "old_name" or "name:fi" in
this context.

But about these tags "old_name:<dates>", I think there is a consensus
to not map historic features in OSM when they don't exist any more
(the famous "on the ground" rule). What is the interest of tagging the
3, 5 or 10 previous endonyms when the topology is different today ? I
agree that "old_name" can help mapping in some ways like using old
maps or old traffic/street signs. But tagging the whole list of older
names is a new paradigm where OSM becomes an encyclopedia. But OSM is
not Wikipedia. And if you want to see the list of events and previous
names of a place, it's easier and enough to read the wikipedia article
about this place. One tag "wikipedia=*" instead of dozens
"bla:<dates>=blabla".

Pieren



More information about the talk mailing list