Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
I don't know if people didn't get the message that I had to stop the voting process, because I had to make a change to the proposal page, and if they're not reading the headings on the page. The opening of the voting booths is retracted and you can merrily discuss away. Martin can re-open the vote when he has the time. Anne On 03/11/2022 13:36, Sarah Hoffmann via Tagging wrote: On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 11:56:45AM +, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: Hello all, Martin is too busy the next couple of days, so with his permission I have opened the voting booths for the key historic to be approved. The minimum 2 weeks passed a couple of days ago, and the discussion has died down, so hopefully everyone is ready to vote. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Historic I'm not quite sure if that has been discussed yet with three places for discussion to chose from, but the proposal has a rather big flaw in my eyes: historic=* is one of these keys that is used as a primary key to define the object but also frequently seen as a property for other objects to mark them as historic. In contrast to other keys, there doesn't even seem to be any clear distinction for single values if they are meant to be used as a property or a main tag. Random example: historic=manor. About 77% of objects tagged with historic=manor have a building=* tag, which makes perfect sense. A manor is a building after all. So it looks like historic=manor is more of a property tag to a building. But what about the 23% other manors that are not tagged as building? Is a historic=manor without a builing=* tag meant to be used as a primary key? I would expect that an apporved wiki page to historic=* mentions this problem and gives some guidance to mappers and data users how to handle this situation. Sarah ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
sent from a phone > On 3 Nov 2022, at 14:39, Sarah Hoffmann via Tagging > wrote: > > Random example: historic=manor. About 77% of objects tagged with > historic=manor have a building=* tag, which makes perfect sense. A manor > is a building after all. So it looks like historic=manor is more of a > property tag to a building. But what about the 23% other manors that are > not tagged as building? Is a historic=manor without a builing=* tag > meant to be used as a primary key? you said manor is an example, and I agree, but we have still to look at all object types individually, because for a historic=castle only 58% have a building tag, and looking closer we might eventually find that some of them could be extended as well. A castle (defensive one, this tag is very generic compared to manor) typically is composed of several buildings, open space, defensive walls and more, so having a combination with building seems less likely unless the mapper has selected the main building and ignored the others. Similarly I could imagine a manor to be bigger than a single building, e.g. comprising ancillary buildings, a garden or similar. Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 11:56:45AM +, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > Hello all, > > Martin is too busy the next couple of days, so with his permission I > have opened the voting booths for the key historic to be approved. The > minimum 2 weeks passed a couple of days ago, and the discussion has died > down, so hopefully everyone is ready to vote. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Historic I'm not quite sure if that has been discussed yet with three places for discussion to chose from, but the proposal has a rather big flaw in my eyes: historic=* is one of these keys that is used as a primary key to define the object but also frequently seen as a property for other objects to mark them as historic. In contrast to other keys, there doesn't even seem to be any clear distinction for single values if they are meant to be used as a property or a main tag. Random example: historic=manor. About 77% of objects tagged with historic=manor have a building=* tag, which makes perfect sense. A manor is a building after all. So it looks like historic=manor is more of a property tag to a building. But what about the 23% other manors that are not tagged as building? Is a historic=manor without a builing=* tag meant to be used as a primary key? I would expect that an apporved wiki page to historic=* mentions this problem and gives some guidance to mappers and data users how to handle this situation. Sarah ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
I think the best way out is to think detached from the meaning of the strings of characters we use for tagging. Let's document that we have have certain values for the key "historic" that describe objects that are not historic, and not even old. After all the purpose of the wiki is to describe the tagging as is, not as it should be an ideal tagging system. On Thu, 3 Nov 2022, 14:05 Brian M. Sperlongano, wrote: > The main issue I have with this proposal is that there is a longstanding > controversy regarding the historic key. Namely, the question of whether it > is used for things that are historic or merely old. I don't see how a > proposal centered around this key can move forward with that fundamental > debate unaddressed. > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022, 8:56 AM Anne-Karoline Distel > wrote: > >> Thanks for pointing that out, I've closed the vote again, and will open >> again tomorrow. I don't know if that it the procedure when you correct >> an oversight on the proposal page. >> >> Anne >> >> On 03/11/2022 12:16, Daniel Capilla wrote: >> > Please, >> > >> > Check the wiki talk page of this proposal before opening the voting >> > time. Some issues are not cleared resolved. >> > >> > Thank you. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > >> > Daniel Capilla >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > Tagging mailing list >> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > ___ > 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
The main issue I have with this proposal is that there is a longstanding controversy regarding the historic key. Namely, the question of whether it is used for things that are historic or merely old. I don't see how a proposal centered around this key can move forward with that fundamental debate unaddressed. On Thu, Nov 3, 2022, 8:56 AM Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > Thanks for pointing that out, I've closed the vote again, and will open > again tomorrow. I don't know if that it the procedure when you correct > an oversight on the proposal page. > > Anne > > On 03/11/2022 12:16, Daniel Capilla wrote: > > Please, > > > > Check the wiki talk page of this proposal before opening the voting > > time. Some issues are not cleared resolved. > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Daniel Capilla > > > > > > ___ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ > 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
Thanks for pointing that out, I've closed the vote again, and will open again tomorrow. I don't know if that it the procedure when you correct an oversight on the proposal page. Anne On 03/11/2022 12:16, Daniel Capilla wrote: Please, Check the wiki talk page of this proposal before opening the voting time. Some issues are not cleared resolved. Thank you. Regards, Daniel Capilla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
Please, Check the wiki talk page of this proposal before opening the voting time. Some issues are not cleared resolved. Thank you. Regards, Daniel Capilla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic
Hello all, Martin is too busy the next couple of days, so with his permission I have opened the voting booths for the key historic to be approved. The minimum 2 weeks passed a couple of days ago, and the discussion has died down, so hopefully everyone is ready to vote. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Historic Take care, everyone! Anne aka b-unicycling ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Approved - Pedagogy
Hello all, Key:Pedagogy [1] has been approved with 12 votes for, 2 votes against and 2 abstentions (link [2]). Thanks to those that contributed and voted. Dian Links: -- [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pedagogy [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:pedagogy___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
