Am 11.06.2013 23:19, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
Here is image=File:Dresden Theaterplatz 138.JPG
wouldn't it be better to have all values tagged according to the same
rules, i.e. use a fully qualified url for the image tag?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dresden_Theaterplatz_138.JPG
I fully agree. There's actually no need for distinction of image origin
in the tagging scheme. Any distinction (as is done with the historical
map) could by done by easily filtering the URL parts. (With the
historical map, only some origins like wikimedia and flickr are used to
create thumbnails - for copyright reasons).
Something I still miss in the image discussion (especially int the
context of the historical map) is a possibility to distinguish between
an actual image (present time) and an image of former times. Of course,
a lifecycle relation would solve this problem but we all know it is not
yet widely adopted, alas.
So I suggest something like:
image=<url> image with no timestamp
image:present=<url> recent image (ok, that's also rather
fuzzy but should be sufficient as it will be used only when another
older image be given, too)
image:ancient=<url> ancient image of the object
image:<date>=<url> dated image, where date format undergoes
the rules described e.g. here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date
(only such date
formats without blanks should be used - maybe we need a rework of the
date format rules)
Regards,
Zecke
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
