Re: [talk-au] Namespace for maintenance tags

2020-09-20 Thread Andrew Harvey
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 at 15:18, Sebastian Spiess wrote: > I'm for using ref= or ref:xxx= as these would be references. Referencing > or relating to the PSMA data set. I don't see comment as suitable when > there is a reference tag for referencing identifiers. > If we use ref, then I feel it

Re: [talk-au] Namespace for maintenance tags

2020-09-19 Thread Sebastian Spiess
On 19/9/20 3:58 pm, Warin wrote: > On 17/9/20 11:40 am, Andrew Davidson wrote: >> On 15/9/20 10:53 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote: >>> >>> 1. psma:loc_pid. Where this is a stable ID that is used as a >>> reference, the existing ref tag is better for this. If we want to be >>> more specific then ref:psma

Re: [talk-au] Namespace for maintenance tags

2020-09-18 Thread Warin
On 17/9/20 11:40 am, Andrew Davidson wrote: On 15/9/20 10:53 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote: 1. psma:loc_pid. Where this is a stable ID that is used as a reference, the existing ref tag is better for this. If we want to be more specific then ref:psma or something like that would work. No need to

[talk-au] Namespace for maintenance tags

2020-09-16 Thread Andrew Davidson
On 15/9/20 10:53 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote: 1. psma:loc_pid. Where this is a stable ID that is used as a reference, the existing ref tag is better for this. If we want to be more specific then ref:psma or something like that would work. No need to invent new tags here when one already exists,