2013/9/3 Pieren <[email protected]> > but : > > "Useful to describe that a certain map object "belongs" to a company > or corporation in any way." > > This definition suggests that "operator" is also the owner... >
maybe we should change this into "some way", so it doesn't (IMHO) imply property? Looking at usage of the tags for owner I see * owner (used 58k times, but seems to come from import(s), has often capitalized values, the leading is UNKNOWN (19%), and other formalized values like PUBLIC, CITY, Dcr␣-␣Division␣Of␣State␣Parks␣And␣Recreation<http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/owner=Dcr%20-%20Division%20Of%20State%20Parks%20And%20Recreation>, Department␣Of␣Fish␣And␣Game<http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/owner=Department%20Of%20Fish%20And%20Game>, PRIVATE are following. There is also a remarkable amount of "X" (place 8).). * ownership (used 42k times, the values meet our general formal requirements (no CAPs, etc.), the values are generalized and documented (municipal, state, private, national, land_trust, private_nonprofit, county), there is wiki docu: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ownership * proprietor (used only 12 times, listing a name) * belongto (used only 2 times) my conclusion would be to keep "ownership" as a tag to denote the kind of owner (private, public, ...) and to put into "owner" the actual name of the owner (if this is suitable for privacy reasons, e.g. in the case of a company, association or a public entity but not in the case of a person). So owner instead of "CITY" would be e.g. "Gotham City". Also we could ask the importer of the "crap" into the tag owner to clean up the mess. cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
