Hello all,I step back from my proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone_2 .CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: Sören Reinecke via Tagging To: &quo
MARLIN LUKE wrote:
> Reading a thread like this honestly won't encourage any participation
> from outsiders (myself included)
With the best will in the world, I don't think it's productive or welcoming
to encourage outsiders to think that they should come into OSM and tell
everyone that 2
On 05/12/19 00:41, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote:
This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key.
Both proposals are to depreciate one key in favour of another.
The general opinion looks to be .. no.
As you probably don't believe that .. go ahead and have your vote
sent from a phone
>> On 4. Dec 2019, at 16:53, Sören Reinecke wrote:
>
> > If it wins, what do you expect would it mean in practical terms?
>
> In practical terms we make using OSM data one little step easier because they
> do not need to watch out for possible two or more keys and to risk
LeTopographeFou De: luke.mar...@viacesi.frEnvoyé: 4 décembre 2019 5:52 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)
Hi there,
Disclaimer:
-I don't have
52 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)
Hi there,
Disclaimer:
-I don't have much experience with OSM.
-I find the proposition of unifying the usage quite logical.
-Now that I've read some responses, I
Telegram account: @valornaramMy OSM account: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Valor%20NaramCheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: MARLIN LUKE To: Sören Reinecke via Tagging CC:
Hi
Hi there,
Disclaimer:
-I don't have much experience with OSM.
-I find the proposition of unifying the usage quite logical.
-Now that I've read some responses, I understand why the community could be
against.
However:
I'm amazed at how harsh people are against Sören. He's been putting some time
purpose are not elegant and makes the use of OSM data harder.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message ----Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: Chris Hill To: tagging@openstreetmap.orgCC: On 04/12/2019 13:41, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote:&
> they do not need to watch out for possible two or more keys and to risk to
> forget one.
>
> Cheers
>
> Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram
>
>
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)
> From: Martin Koppe
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 16:11, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > Others have also made sensible arguments against this.
>
> What kind of points? Am I something missing?
>
You appear to be missing EVERYTHING. Re-read the responses to this
thread. Then try
to
do not deprecate "phone". You had your chance to vote for the deprecation of "contact:phone" in favor of the more used "phone" key which I would have then promoted if my first proposal had succeeded.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subjec
essage --------Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: Martin Koppenhoefer To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" CC: Sören Reinecke Am Mi., 4. Dez. 2019 um 15:07 Uhr schrieb Sören Reinecke via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org>:Now I try it the ot
On 04/12/2019 13:41, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote:
This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key.
OSM doesn't do deprecation of a well-used tag. It doesn't do
homogenisation for the sake of it. It doesn't do a new dressed-up vote
to get around a failed vote. You put
Sorry to have caused confusion:
I am against deprecating either of the two alternatives for the same reason.
Data consumers will have to live with that..
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 15:53, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 14:42, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> if it fails, will you try to
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 14:42, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
if it fails, will you try to deprecate both tags?
> If it wins, what do you expect would it mean in practical terms?
>
Sensible points. Others have also made sensible arguments against this.
There is no
sign, from his responses, that any
Am Mi., 4. Dez. 2019 um 15:07 Uhr schrieb Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> Now I try it the other way around: Deprecating "phone" tag.
if it fails, will you try to deprecate both tags?
If it wins, what do you expect would it mean in practical terms?
Cheers
Martin
ne" tag.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message ----Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: Volker Schmidt To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" CC: On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:42, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
Some asked me to restore the old version, the new version which I want
to vote on can be found here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone_2
id="-x-evo-selection-start-marker">
-Original Message-
From: S??ren Reinecke via Tagging
Reply-To: "Tag
Volker Schmidt :
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:42, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>
>>> This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key.
>>>
>>
> (For deprecating a key that is used 1 504 275 times with another one with
> the same meaning you
Are we going to have more individual votings about each of contact:website,
contact:fax, contact:dovecote, ... ?
>
> Surely we know from previous discussions that
>
>- some people prefer using "phone" as a key,
>- some people prefer "contact:phone"
>
>
as has been written by Andy,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:42, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key.
>>
>
-1
(For deprecating a key that is used 1 504 275 times with another one with
the same meaning you need very very good
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:42, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key.
>
-1
--
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
ap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 13:25:14 +
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
>
>
> It'd also be good to see an explanation of why it's worth the
> time even going through this a
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 13:19, Andy Townsend wrote:
It'd also be good to see an explanation of why it's worth the time even
> going through this again - haven't we all got better things to do?
>
+1
--
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
On 04/12/2019 12:01, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Sören Reinecke wrote:
This proposal tends to make Key:contact:phone the official tag
for tagging phone numbers and to deprecate Key:phone which is
not fitting in the idea of grouping keys. Anyway it's bad to have
two keys for the exact same purpose
Did this, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone/content
and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone
.
But anyway I'm not quite happy about the section
Sören Reinecke wrote:
> This proposal tends to make Key:contact:phone the official tag
> for tagging phone numbers and to deprecate Key:phone which is
> not fitting in the idea of grouping keys. Anyway it's bad to have
> two keys for the exact same purpose in use.
Please just kill me now.
Am Mi., 4. Dez. 2019 um 12:43 Uhr schrieb Sören Reinecke <
tilmanreine...@yahoo.de>:
> Hi Martin and others,
>
> The new proposal overwrites the old one. There's just the new content
> except the section "Vote 1". What I can do is putting everything in the
> "content" section into a new page. It
ion?CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message ----Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)From: Martin Koppenhoefer To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" CC: Sören Reinecke Sören, may I suggest you set up a new page for the new
Sören, may I suggest you set up a new page for the new proposal? It is
already a very long page, and readability would certainly benefit from a
more streamlined proposal page.
Cheers
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
31 matches
Mail list logo
