On 17/03/2015 16:16, Malcolm Herring wrote:
On 17/03/2015 13:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
their tagging scheme is somehow a parallel universe,
Not parallel, but in some cases complimentary. For 95% of objects there
are no overlaps with standard OSM objects. It is those 5% of cases that
do overlap that people notice & hence assume that OpenSeaMap have an
alternative set of tags for everything.
Those 5% are still an issue.
Redundancy in the data, even if not wanted in theory, is part of the
life of OSM because of many reasons, that we can resume by saying that
the community is diverse.
Though, in the case of OpenSeaMap, the fact that *all* keys that overlap
are duplicated shows, in my opinion, that there is no intention to
*integrate* with the community. I understand that having one coherent
namespaced scheme for all the keys interesting OpenSeaMap makes life
easier for data processing, but, imho, that's more of parasite than
nutrient for OSM data.
Plus, remember that, from time to time, we spot some mass edit changes
where OpenSeaMap people **replace** OSM community tag with it's own
namespaced version.
Each data consumer needs to adapt to the database, not the database to
each data consumer.
So yeah, 95% of OpenSeaMap objects are specific and not overlaping with
standard OSM objects, and this in fact is actually *just* OSM data
related to sea and boat navigation, and this is *nice*. But still, after
years of debate, there is friction on the other 5%, and that's sad,
specifically because this devalues the OpenSeaMap perception in the
community, and thus the OpenSeaMap data.
As long as you will try to control the data (and scheme) from a central
point, you will loose the power of the community.
Yohan
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
