On 1 April 2014 17:31, Dan S <[email protected]> wrote: > 2014-04-01 16:29 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett <[email protected]>:
>> last year's State of the Map. > > And well done indeed! Thank you. >> I've just modified [[Template:KeyDescription]] by adding >> two parameters: >> for "website" and "url_pattern" > Tell me if I've misunderstood you, but you're proposing that the > url_pattern given in the wiki "infobox" KeyDescription is intended to > be machine-readable, in the sense that a third-party data consumer can > plug url_pattern together with the actual key-values found in OSM and > automatically find the URL for something? If so, the idea is > intriguing and I think it's a nice lightweight thing we can do. Yes; that's it. > I have a small quibble which is please change it from "URL" to "URI", > since I think the latter is the more appropriate concept. We're aiming > to interlink _identities_ of items really, for the machines. I'd be happy to do that; what do others think? While semantically correct, I think more mapper might understand "URL". >> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Wikidata> >> >> The sooner we move that from "Talk:Proposed_features/" to "Key:", the better. > > Wikidata proposal looks good to me. I'm about to move it to RfC. I look forward to your support ;-) >> Other issues which are unhelpful to data re-users include keys with >> missing documentation; redundant keys ("Key:openplaques_plaque" vs >> "Key:openplaques_id"); > > I have never seen these tags, but there are very few uses - this > example is probably really easy to consolidate into one tag. Yes; but it was just an example. Nonetheless, the former is the better name, as OpenPlaques also has IDs for people and organisations, as well as the plaques themselves. >> ambiguous keys ("ref=1234" - ref in whose database?) > > That's an interesting question. "ref" is widely used, and generally > used quite coherently, _but_ its meaning is contextual on other tags. > For example, "amenity=post_box" & "operator=Royal Mail" tells you > where to expect the ref to point. I wonder if "operator" sets the > context in many other cases? (I accept, of course, that many objects > aren't tagged with operator.) Or the ref may not relate to the operator. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.u _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
