On 28/01/2016 8:51 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2016-01-27 18:00 GMT+01:00 moltonel 3x Combo <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
You barely broach the subject of how MV and namespaces combine. For
example if an object has multiple refs with sources, it should be
clear wether an MV tag corresponds to "multiple sources for all the
refs" or to "source for the 2nd ref". In suffix syntax, this could be
distriinguished by "ref_1=x ref_2=y source_1:ref=a source_2:ref=b" vs
"ref_1=x ref_2=y source:ref_1=a source:ref_2=b", even though this is
becoming hairy.
Errr I would rather see
ref_1=x
source:ref_1=y
Keep the value the same from the first key to the delimited referrer =
makes it easier for all to recognise and sort.
I believe we should restructure the way we use metadata aside with
data in the particular tags source and maybe note and fixme (but not
description). We are trying to convince people to add source tags on
the changesets, but putting them on individual objects still has
strong advocates, so we will likely have to live with it.
Some of my change sets have more than one source, I document to
discriminate the sources as well as I can. But it is a good deal clear
to me if I put it on the way/node/relationship.
As an idea, the source information could become a subtag of another
tag, i.e. rather than being attached to an object it would be attached
to a tag (or to the position). This could also become more refined
with several, optional formalized source tags, e.g. for the source
date, a source link, a source license(?), etc.
name:source= ? Rather than source:name=... humm That would make people
think about the source being part of some characteristic of the object.
cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
