This is a separate discussion, not specific for trailhead tagging. Let's keep this thread about basic trailhead tagging.
Op vr 11 jan. 2019 om 09:17 schreef Marc Gemis <[email protected]>: > Just as we do not map a wikipedia link to shop=car to explain the > concept for shops selling cars, we should perhaps not map wikipedia > links to explain TOPs. > We do not link nodes and routes of walking networks to wikipedia pages > (or other sites) explaining how you have to use them. > We do not link highway=motorway to a wiki page on osm.org to explain > the meaning of that concept. > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 8:45 AM Peter Elderson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Analogy is not right. Not tagging all trailheads with this wikipedia > reference, just the specific limited set fitting this specific concept > described on the wikipedia page. > > Any of the existing prefixed keys does not fit either, e.g. > brand:wikipedia or operator:wikipedia is not fitting: it's not a brand and > it's not an operator, it's a concept used by multiple operators (will be 12 > operators in the end). > > So you could invent concept:wikipedia and add that to the trailheads > using the concept. What would that accomplish? Exactly the same > information, on exactly the same amount of nodes, just bypassing the > existing referencing mechanisms, making it useless. The prefix keys are > useful if multiple wikipedia references are applicable (according to the > mapper). > > > > But again, this is local additional tagging which other mappers may or > may not like. > > > > I would like to focus on the idea of basic mapping of trailheads fitting > all trailheads that mappers find useful to map. The basic proposition is: > > > > highway=trailhead on a node at a (visibly) designated or customary > location for starting one or more trails. > > I move to add name=* as important second tag, because I think the place > will almost always have a designated or customary name which makes it that > much more usable for searches, lists and maps, but I understand there are > examples of trailheads without a name. > > > > This covers all trailheads mapped worldwide so far, and excludes > locations where a trail just crosses a road. Of course, the whole thing is > not an obligation. There is no rule that every place fitting the > description Shall Be Tagged As A Trailhead, just the ones mappers find > worth tagging. > > > > > > > > Op do 10 jan. 2019 om 17:47 schreef Mateusz Konieczny < > [email protected]>: > >> > >> wikipedia tag should be on trailhead solely in case where Wikipedia > article is about this specific trailhead > >> > >> AFAIK there is no existing tag to cover linking to Wikipedia pages > describing type of feature, and > >> at least I see no use for it (but feel free to invent new one - though > sooner or later someone would use it > >> to link "Tree" article from every single natural=tree) > >> > >> Maybe tagging operator (and operator:wikipedia) will be enough? > >> > >> Jan 10, 2019, 5:06 PM by [email protected]: > >> > >> No it’s not. Please rethink your analogy. > >> > >> Mvg Peter Elderson > >> > >> Op 10 jan. 2019 om 13:34 heeft Marc Gemis <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven: > >> > >> On the wiki page for the Wikipedia tag [1] > >> > >> "only provide links to articles which are 'about the feature'. A link > >> from St Paul's Cathedral in London to an article about St Paul's > >> Cathedral on Wikipedia is fine. A link from a bus depot to the company > >> that operates it is not (see section below)." > >> > >> what you do is similar to the bus depot example of what not to do. > >> Perhaps you could use "Secondary Wikipedia links" (see [1]) to resolve > >> your problem. > >> > >> > >> The discussion of the Starbucks usage was a.o. in the thread of [2] > >> > >> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia > >> [2] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-January/075432.html > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:14 AM Peter Elderson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Where can I find that discussion / decision? > >> > >> Op do 10 jan. 2019 om 10:16 schreef Marc Gemis <[email protected]>: > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 4:20 PM Peter Elderson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> The wikipedia page is not a list, it is a description of what a TOP is > in Nederland. A wiki page about trailhead tagging is not the right place > for that. I think this is within the scope of the wikipedia key. > >> > >> > >> Just as it was discouraged (aka "please remove the tags") to tag every > >> Starbucks cafe with the Wikipedia link of Starbucks, I think the > >> linking an individual TOP point to the general description of TOP > >> should be discouraged. > >> > >> m. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Vr gr Peter Elderson > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tagging mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > > > > > -- > > Vr gr Peter Elderson > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Vr gr Peter Elderson
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
