On 05.11.2014 07:19, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > And it is not just because with the second solution new values > for main tag will quickly appear (see building=*).
This doesn't matter in this particular case, because natural=ridge and natural=arete were approved at the same time. > With second > scheme there is much smaller pool of people that really understand how > main_tag should be processed and tagged. > > For example I have enough general knowledge to implement support for > natural=ridge (everybody knows what it means), but with natural=arete it > would require at least some learning about specialist terms. Currently I > have no idea is this tag is even correctly spelled - Wikipedia defines arete > as "term meaning "virtue" or "excellence"." - and ridge related article is > titled "arête". I also have not enough knowledge to decide whatever > something is ridge or arête, is it clear term or something fuzzy. That's why we have a wiki with descriptions. When you find a description fuzzy or misleading, please improve it. > Yes, I can learn about it - but I worry about the same happening for more > things. I am NOT interested in learning about how to recognize different > different power tower types, I want to tag just power=tower and leave > further classification to power enthusiast that will use subkeys so > rendering power towers on my map will be easy to implement. Your argumentation is based on practical issues, but essentially your considerations are merely theoretical. As a data consumer, e.g. when you want to render power towers in a 1:25000 map, you are well advised to have a look at the subtags. Maybe there are power tower types which represent power towers so small and unimportant that you find it better to omit those on your 1:25000 map. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
