Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: - Approval does not imply enforcement. I don't know why you'd think that. Just because we have rules doesn't mean anyone particularly enforces them. You can always claim that every one is free to use his own rules. But once a tag is approved and is documented as such on the wiki, it is usually followed later by the contributors, by the data consumers and by the editors presets. And if someone is trying to use his own/different rule, he will be quickly corrected by someone else. You are right. It is not enforcement, It's a nice illusion of freedom. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
* John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com [2012-02-19 14:13 -0600]: I take it, then, that there are some watercourses tagged as streams, but named XXX River, and there are some watercourses tagged as rivers, but named XXX Stream or XXX Creek? It's what I've done, based on my understanding of the tag documentations in the wiki. So I've done things like tagging the headwaters of the Potomac River[0] as waterway=stream and tagging the quite broad Willis Creek[1] as waterway=river. [0] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.20647lon=-79.47779zoom=16layers=M [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.6956lon=-78.7731zoom=14layers=M -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- NO COMPILER DETECTED ERRORS. -- VM/CMS VS/PASCAL compiler message indicating sucessful compilation --- -- ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Hi Chris, Am Sonntag, den 19.02.2012, 15:53 + schrieb Chris Hill: I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread. There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. There are no such things as deprecated tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. A vote by a few people is certainly not a justification to begin mass edits or wide spread change of other people's carefully chosen work. Discuss: certainly, document: yes please, impose your will over thousands over other mappers: no. You can find the discussion in the wiki. Even users that used the type=collection tag agreed to unify the tagging. Two years ago I've contacted all users that have contributed waterway relations and invited them to discuss. Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any why it is better but don't use a phoney voting process ignored by the vast majority as a mandate for action. I've advertised and talked and the stats shows, that many users use the unified tagging scheme. See: http://www.h-renrew.de/h/osm/osmchecks/02_Relationstypen/planet_waterways.html The final vote is just to finish the proposal and unify the last few tags ... Regards Werner ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Am Montag, den 20.02.2012, 20:11 + schrieb Chris Hill: On 19/02/12 23:38, Steve Bennett wrote: On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Chris Hillo...@raggedred.net wrote: I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread. There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. ... Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any How would you know whether a tag had acceptance? Wouldn't documenting it somewhere make sense? Maybe...in a wiki? I did say document and discuss the OP. What would you call acceptance? Would approved be a reasonable synonym for that? No. It implies some official status that leads people to remove other tags, sometimes with mass edits. Chris, I've said nothing about mass or automatic editing. Every change will be done carefully and manually. The wiki and (currently broken) approval mechanism is not some horrible bureaucracy that exists to ruin your life. It's there so we, as a community, can document the tags we use, and agree on how we use them. While it's ok to spontaneously invent a new tag and use it to solve your current problem, you can surely see the benefits of everyone eventually converging on the same tag? And if so, what would you do with all the old tags that people used before you converged? Wouldn't you deprecate them? No, some tags will wither away, fine. Some seemingly similar tags will exist side-by-side and that is fine too. Most importantly, distinctive differences can emerge too. Just think this through. Approval implies some sort of enforcement, without enforcement what is the point of approval? Just who would make this enforcement happen and how? What would that do to an open project? If only approved tags are used then how would mappers map what they actually see? Wait weeks for some committee to discuss, argue and approve or reject the tag? If you are free to use any tag, what is an approval process for? If approval or 'acceptance' means a tag is rendered or used in a router or whatever then which tool do you mean? There are hundreds run by OSM and other organisations, companies and individuals. Flattening the tag structure by homogenising tags is destroying the fine detail, sometimes carefully crafted by mappers and I will continue to speak out against mass edits that attempt to do just that. It's just different tagging, no fine detail. Please show me the difference of the type=collection and the type=waterway relations we're talking about here. All the difference comes in the tagging history, when the australian mappers started with a different tagging stile than the european mappers. Regards Werner ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On 19/02/12 23:38, Steve Bennett wrote: On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Chris Hillo...@raggedred.net wrote: I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread. There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. ... Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any How would you know whether a tag had acceptance? Wouldn't documenting it somewhere make sense? Maybe...in a wiki? I did say document and discuss the OP. What would you call acceptance? Would approved be a reasonable synonym for that? No. It implies some official status that leads people to remove other tags, sometimes with mass edits. The wiki and (currently broken) approval mechanism is not some horrible bureaucracy that exists to ruin your life. It's there so we, as a community, can document the tags we use, and agree on how we use them. While it's ok to spontaneously invent a new tag and use it to solve your current problem, you can surely see the benefits of everyone eventually converging on the same tag? And if so, what would you do with all the old tags that people used before you converged? Wouldn't you deprecate them? No, some tags will wither away, fine. Some seemingly similar tags will exist side-by-side and that is fine too. Most importantly, distinctive differences can emerge too. Just think this through. Approval implies some sort of enforcement, without enforcement what is the point of approval? Just who would make this enforcement happen and how? What would that do to an open project? If only approved tags are used then how would mappers map what they actually see? Wait weeks for some committee to discuss, argue and approve or reject the tag? If you are free to use any tag, what is an approval process for? If approval or 'acceptance' means a tag is rendered or used in a router or whatever then which tool do you mean? There are hundreds run by OSM and other organisations, companies and individuals. Flattening the tag structure by homogenising tags is destroying the fine detail, sometimes carefully crafted by mappers and I will continue to speak out against mass edits that attempt to do just that. -- Cheers, Chris user: chillly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: No. It implies some official status that leads people to remove other tags, sometimes with mass edits. IMHO that doesn't follow at all. If people are doing unwanted mass edits, then we should find a way to discourage them. The solution is not to discard any notion of an official or accepted tag. Just think this through. Approval implies some sort of enforcement, without enforcement what is the point of approval? Just who would make this enforcement happen and how? What would that do to an open project? If only approved tags are used then how would mappers map what they actually see? Wait weeks for some committee to discuss, argue and approve or reject the tag? If you are free to use any tag, what is an approval process for? You're making a lot of unfounded assumptions. I'm not sure where to start. - Approval does not imply enforcement. I don't know why you'd think that. Just because we have rules doesn't mean anyone particularly enforces them. - if only approved tags are used - I explicitly said that it's ok to invent tags to solve a particular problem, then work with others to converge on a convention - then how would mappers map what they actually see - by using the documented tags, and if that doesn't work, extending them, or inventing new ones. - wait weeks... - no. It definitely doesn't follow that you should wait for some process rather than using a tag. You should use the best tag available, and update as a result of community consensus. - if you are free to use any tag, what is an approval process for - well, I'm not arguing for a particular process. But the answer is so people tag as consistently as possible with each other. Flattening the tag structure by homogenising tags is destroying the fine detail, sometimes carefully crafted by mappers and I will continue to speak out against mass edits that attempt to do just that. Again, you're making unwarranted assumptions. I haven't suggested anything like that. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Hi all, the relation type=waterway proposal was written long times ago but never formally approved: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway The relation is widely used as you can see in statistics: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway#Tools It would be cool if you could vote for the proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway#Voting It would help to clean up the OSM database from a few similar relations that are rarely used but not yet follow the above scheme. Kind Regards Werner (werner2101) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Am 19. Februar 2012 10:47 schrieb Werner Hoch werner...@gmx.de: Hi all, the relation type=waterway proposal was written long times ago but never formally approved: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway The relation is widely used as you can see in statistics: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway#Tools It would be cool if you could vote for the proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway#Voting It would help to clean up the OSM database from a few similar relations that are rarely used but not yet follow the above scheme. Before we vote, shouldn't we try to clean up the proposal? E.g. there is this sentence: Hint: If the waterway starts as a stream and becomes larger, then use the tag of the largest waterway (e.g. river). Well, almost all rivers start small and become bigger ;-), but despite being small, don't they already start as rivers at their spring? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Before we vote, shouldn't we try to clean up the proposal? E.g. there is this sentence: Hint: If the waterway starts as a stream and becomes larger, then use the tag of the largest waterway (e.g. river). Well, almost all rivers start small and become bigger ;-), but despite being small, don't they already start as rivers at their spring? No, because the OSM definition of 'river' is width. (As opposed to languages like French which distinguish between waterways that empty in the sea and those that empty into other rivers). The proposal looks pretty sensible to me. I just wish there was a meaningful process we could follow. Probably what we really want to do is deprecate any alternative tagging schemes, and direct people to this one. Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Am 19. Februar 2012 12:16 schrieb Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Well, almost all rivers start small and become bigger ;-), but despite being small, don't they already start as rivers at their spring? No, because the OSM definition of 'river' is width. (As opposed to languages like French which distinguish between waterways that empty in the sea and those that empty into other rivers). The wiki says: For narrow rivers which will be rendered as a line. For larger rivers see waterway=riverbank. For really small rivers and streams, see waterway=stream. This is ambiguous (reads as if waterway=river isn't appropriate for larger rivers, I changed this right now to Waterway=river is used to tag a river. For larger rivers also have a look at waterway=riverbank. For really small rivers and streams, see waterway=stream. really small river would not be a valid description for the still narrow initial part of a large river, would it? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Am Sonntag, den 19.02.2012, 22:16 +1100 schrieb Steve Bennett: The proposal looks pretty sensible to me. I just wish there was a meaningful process we could follow. Probably what we really want to do is deprecate any alternative tagging schemes, and direct people to this one. As soon as the the proposal gets approved the other relations can be declared deprecated. The usage of type=river decreased over the last year as the major waterway contributors already switched to the type=waterway scheme. I think an approved proposal would give us enough support to start the cleanup of the older tagging schemes. I'd be of course one of the volunteers to unify the taggings. Regards Werner ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On 19 Feb 2012, at 14:34, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: waterway=riverbank is an alternative way of mapping a waterway=river, and can coexist with it. +1, they are actually an additional way of tagging the extent. I still remain of the opinion that a river starts at its spring, independent of the width Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On 19/02/12 11:56, Werner Hoch wrote: Am Sonntag, den 19.02.2012, 22:16 +1100 schrieb Steve Bennett: The proposal looks pretty sensible to me. I just wish there was a meaningful process we could follow. Probably what we really want to do is deprecate any alternative tagging schemes, and direct people to this one. As soon as the the proposal gets approved the other relations can be declared deprecated. The usage of type=river decreased over the last year as the major waterway contributors already switched to the type=waterway scheme. I think an approved proposal would give us enough support to start the cleanup of the older tagging schemes. I'd be of course one of the volunteers to unify the taggings. I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread. There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. There are no such things as deprecated tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. A vote by a few people is certainly not a justification to begin mass edits or wide spread change of other people's carefully chosen work. Discuss: certainly, document: yes please, impose your will over thousands over other mappers: no. Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any why it is better but don't use a phoney voting process ignored by the vast majority as a mandate for action. If you must deprecate, end voting! Cheers, Chris -- Cheers, Chris user: chillly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any why it is better but don't use a phoney voting process ignored by the vast majority as a mandate for action. Voting is a valuable process. Discussions, while valuable, can go on and on forever; at some point you need to get a more definitive up or down for what the community thinks of a given proposal, though of course people can use whatever tags they want. Depending on how you define vast majority, I'd say their tagging practices are definitely impacted (but not defined) by the votes, as they impact (but not define) the presets of JOSM/Potlatch/etc, and thus impact (but not define) how contributors (especially casual ones) tag objects. If we'd like to change terminology from vote to poll and approved to consensus then I'd be fine with that. -Josh ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Before we vote, shouldn't we try to clean up the proposal? E.g. there is this sentence: Hint: If the waterway starts as a stream and becomes larger, then use the tag of the largest waterway (e.g. river). Well, almost all rivers start small and become bigger ;-), but despite being small, don't they already start as rivers at their spring? No, because the OSM definition of 'river' is width. (As opposed to languages like French which distinguish between waterways that empty in the sea and those that empty into other rivers). The proposal looks pretty sensible to me. I just wish there was a meaningful process we could follow. Probably what we really want to do is deprecate any alternative tagging schemes, and direct people to this one. I take it, then, that there are some watercourses tagged as streams, but named XXX River, and there are some watercourses tagged as rivers, but named XXX Stream or XXX Creek? -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread. There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are free to use *any* tags they like. ... Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any How would you know whether a tag had acceptance? Wouldn't documenting it somewhere make sense? Maybe...in a wiki? What would you call acceptance? Would approved be a reasonable synonym for that? The wiki and (currently broken) approval mechanism is not some horrible bureaucracy that exists to ruin your life. It's there so we, as a community, can document the tags we use, and agree on how we use them. While it's ok to spontaneously invent a new tag and use it to solve your current problem, you can surely see the benefits of everyone eventually converging on the same tag? And if so, what would you do with all the old tags that people used before you converged? Wouldn't you deprecate them? Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
