[OSM-talk] "Second decade" visions

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 12.03.2015 1:39, Warin napisał(a):

> In the long term there needs to be a good understanding of what
> scheme/system/philosophy is to be used, and it needs to be Documented
> with a capital D. If that is done by a committe or a loose group the
> doucumentation still needs to be done .. and done before some
> redefining tags if an over all scheme/system/philosophy is too
> succeed.

I don't care for "committee" as much as I care for top-down attitude. +1 
- we have to recap our knowledge of core tagging concepts, document it 
and _only then_ make a re-implementation. Some things we already know in 
general (IMHO) is that:

1. It should be more uniform (like "amenity=school" -> "landuse=school" 
for the school areas).

2. It should be more cascading/hierarchical (like in 
"construction=highway + highway=service + service=parking_aisle").

3. It should be more granular (no more 
"amenity=green_poodle_with_6_legs", just because it's a very common 
case! Rather "amenity=poodle + colour=green + legs=6").

4. It should allow mixing different forms and functions (like in 
"building=church + amenity=place_of_worship", because they can be 
disconnected, like "building=church + tourism=museum").

5. It should treat parallel types of objects as first class citizens 
(kind of "amenity=police + amenity=school" for police academy should be 
possible, since this amenity is equally a teaching place _and_ a police 
place - the same for multiple names: we can make it "name=A;B" if really 
needed, but the semicolon is our last resort and there's no consensus if 
we should use numbering schemes like "name1=A + name2=B" or "name:1=A + 
name:2=B" instead).

-- 
Piaseczno Miasto Wąskotorowe