Re: [Tagging] inuse, defacto
On 18.04.2015 09:31, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: So far we have 3 parameters: number of OSM objects, number of real-word objects, number of users. Let's put them into a formula in order to enable objective decisions and avoid edit wars. I don't think it's as easy as that. Other things to consider: - If there is an alternative tagging concept around, then the numbers need to be a lot higher. On the other hand, if a tag is universally considered a good idea, usage numbers don't matter as much. - A tag that is only used in a certain country or region is probably not a defacto standard yet (except for things that exist nowhere else). - Application and/or editor support is important, no tag can be considered fully established without it imo. To be honest, I doubt it's possible to put it into a formula. My personal interpretation of defacto is a tag that is used by a lot of mappers and applications throughout the world, and you can print it on a mug without having to worry that it might be outdated anytime soon. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite
Am 18.04.2015 um 06:31 schrieb Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com: FWIW, on a mountain where I volunteer I mapped the campgrounds with the tagging shown on the proposed extensions page which uses ref=* instead of addr:street or addr:unit. I'd also use ref for the number/code. What do you use to say it's a camping pitch? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] inuse, defacto
Why is it important? The main thing that matters is than only one definition exists for an item, irrespective of how often it is used. On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 5:46 PM Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 18.04.2015 09:31, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: So far we have 3 parameters: number of OSM objects, number of real-word objects, number of users. Let's put them into a formula in order to enable objective decisions and avoid edit wars. I don't think it's as easy as that. Other things to consider: - If there is an alternative tagging concept around, then the numbers need to be a lot higher. On the other hand, if a tag is universally considered a good idea, usage numbers don't matter as much. - A tag that is only used in a certain country or region is probably not a defacto standard yet (except for things that exist nowhere else). - Application and/or editor support is important, no tag can be considered fully established without it imo. To be honest, I doubt it's possible to put it into a formula. My personal interpretation of defacto is a tag that is used by a lot of mappers and applications throughout the world, and you can print it on a mug without having to worry that it might be outdated anytime soon. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite
On Apr 18, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 18.04.2015 um 06:31 schrieb Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com: FWIW, on a mountain where I volunteer I mapped the campgrounds with the tagging shown on the proposed extensions page which uses ref=* instead of addr:street or addr:unit. I'd also use ref for the number/code. What do you use to say it's a camping pitch? Cheers, Martin I’ve been using the tagging suggested at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_camp_site#Tagging_of_individual_pitches so they have camp_site=pitch on them. The campgrounds I tagged first at located at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/34.81435/-119.10098 a copy of the map I made for the local fire department can, for the moment, be found at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19663978/campgrounds.pdf From tag info it looks like over 700 camping pitches have been tagged with camp_site=pitch with a lesser number being tagged with some of the additional information tags like camp_site:table or camp_site:surface Cheers, Tod smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Way inside riverbank
On 14.04.2015 15:59, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: Changing topics, I've just stumbled on the wiki on the natural=water, water=river tagging that I wasn't aware of and is supposed to replace waterway=riverbank. 4 years after being approved, it still represents only about 3% of the riverbank tagging. I guess that the it's more uniform and logical argument wasn't compeling enough, and that tagg...@osm.org != osm community... I offer you another explanation: Validator developers may have missed that voting, and therefore they did not implement a deprecated warning. Editor support for the new tags may be missing too. (I don't know, because I use an editor where all tags have to be typed in manually.) It's not documentation that helps spread new tags. It's editors and validators. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] inuse, defacto
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: I recently came across a never proposed tag with some 600 uses marked de-facto. If that's the way to bypass the proposal process, I will never care about proposals any more. How do you know there was any intent to bypass the proposal process ? Tags can reach widespread use without ever having been discussed or documented. There were no 600 uses when the page was created. Somebody documenting this in a de-facto proposal after the fact is a good thing. Not when I had just started a topic called Status on the discussion page. The user who changed the status to de-facto did not even reply to that topic. And do you think that 600 is de-facto? I will set all the tags I invented to inuse as soon as I used them once, and to defacto as soon as I used them twice, because 2 uses are widespread compared to 1. There's obviously some threshold where it's reasonable. Don't mock using an extreme value, it just devaluates your good argument. As a software developer, I use to consider extreme values. And being somewhat into mathematics, I use to choose the easiest solution for given parameters. So you find the 1 / 2 thresholds too low? That's something to start with. So far we have 3 parameters: number of OSM objects, number of real-word objects, number of users. Let's put them into a formula in order to enable objective decisions and avoid edit wars. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
