>>> I wouldn't mind if all the existing tags were replaced tomorrow with a >>> brand new set of "intelligently-designed" keys. >> Designed by... a visionary leader? A board of experts? A random draw?
Yes, boards of experts. Subject matter experts. Almost every significant theme that could possibly go into OSM has already has some sort of classification / attribute ( 'tagging' ) schemes suitable for 'whatever' scale, from the simple to the complex, some of them dating back over a hundred years. - Some, like the *APA Land-Based Classification Standards <https://www.planning.org/lbcs/standards/> (LBCS)* have been in development since before 1965. The LBCS can be used recursively through smaller levels of detail, so if you want, it's possible to describe a janitorial closet in an federal office rented from a commercial landlord in a historical building on land held in trust by a private foundation as part of a state university. - The* I**nternational Electrotechnical Commission* glossary ( Electropedia ) has illustrated descriptions of anything attached to a power network, some already translated in multiple languages, for example overhead line tower structures <http://www.electropedia.org/iev/iev.nsf/display?openform&ievref=466-08-05> - There are *NAICIS* ( SIC ) codes with their European and international equivalents, with codings for establishment sizes, and supply chain roles ( wholesale, retail, etc. ) like our local coffee shop <https://www.naics.com/naics-code-description/?code=722515>. - Outdoor display advertising ('signs') has an association with a typology of products from sidewalk switchboards to giant building sized LED billboards. Every scientific domain also has their hierarchical naming schemes for natural features, along wit efforts to reconcile the various domains like the *European Union's Inspire <https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/inspire-principles/9> *effort. ( short intro <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xew6qI-6wNk> ). - Over the past thirty years or so, a lot of people have been making serious efforts to *converge* on common terminology and meanings in their fields, and also between their fields, and tools such as crosswalks to highlight *similarities* and preserve *differences* where it matters. - One of the tools I use is *Suggested Upper Merged Ontology* (*SUMO*) - if I search on the word 'bus' <http://sigma.ontologyportal.org:8080/sigma/WordNet.jsp?simple=null&kb=SUMO&lang=EnglishLanguage&flang=SUO-KIF&word=bus&POS=1>, it not only gives me the expected meaning, but a lot of other possible meanings ( which can cause side effects ). This is only to answer the 'Designed by ... ?' comment. The complete list of standard objections about complexity, interfaces, use by ordinary folks has a considerable volume of academic work available on Google Scholar, if anyone wanted to apply it to OSM. A huge thanks for everyone who contributed to this discussion, I learned a lot about OSM. Michael Patrick Data Ferret
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
