2012/11/19 Richard Smith <r...@haveyougotanypets.com>: > Although the tag crop has a page if you look at it's proposal page ( > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Crop ) it seems clear > the idea was abandoned due to lack of support. So it seems strange that the > page was created in the first place.
There are several reasons why a page would be set up, one being the tag in use (there are roughly 20000 objects tagged with crop, so it does make sense to have the page as a definition). > The Produce key does not seem to have had any proposal written for it at all > and only the produce page exists ( > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:produce ) on which no discussion has > taken place. it was introduced in the orchard proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/orchard but again, even if there were no proposal the fact that it is in use justifies the tag definition page. > As it happens I currently have under way a proposal for the key "product" ( > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:product ) which is > similar to produce except it is for the definition of man made output. So > have been thinking about the this subject quite recently. yes, usage starts to appear also for product: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/product some of them might be misspellings of "produce" though. > My slant on this would be that the term crop should be discouraged and > instead "produce" be used in all situations where crop currently is. I think > the set of possible key-values for produce would encompass the entire set of > values that the crop key would cover. OK, fine for me, so basically there is no added meaning for either of those 2? > I would also be happy to take the info from the crop and its child pages and > rework them into the produce page if no one has any serious aversions to the > idea? it's fine, but please keep the definition for crop as well, and don't change meanings of tags in use without discussing it beforehand. > I might also add that while so far the product tag I am proposing has had > more "for" than "against" votes, the main trust of the against camp has been > the lack of need for 2 tags that essentially mean a features output. I > sympathise with this argument and as such wondered what the community thinks > of creating a tag to describe the output of any feature regardless of the > type of output and we look to depreciate both the produce and product tags > entirely (this does seem a shame seeing how well defined the produce tag has > been according to tag info so far). I think we should not do this, there is a big difference between a field where potatoes are grown and a factory where goods are produced or a kiln where stuff is produced. Growing fruit is sufficiently far away from man_made production to merit its own key IMHO. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
