On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Jonathan Bennett < [email protected]> wrote:
> > There's some disagreement over that exact point. There are some mappers > (myself included) who completely ignore the proposal procedure, because > they believe that it's a needless layer of bureaucracy that just hinders > the project. While there's nothing wrong with getting other mappers' > input on a new tag (such as sending out an RFC), having to get > "approval" just gets in the way of mapping. > > IMHO, there has to be balance. Yes, people should probably start using a new tag immediately (if nothing in existence suits) rather than wait for approval. But by the same token, after a tag has been used 50 or so times, people should take steps to get it standardised, supported, more widely used etc. In any project like this, there is organic growth at the start (creation of new, undocumented tags), but it needs to feed into a managed, more structured process. The existing "map features" wiki table is a good start, but it has quite a few deficencies. Summary: Not all "bureaucracy" is bad. Steve
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
