One or several wiki edits should stand at the end of every tagging discussion, to document the conclusions made.
Tobias On July 29, 2019 8:37:25 AM GMT+02:00, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: >Err .. sent to tagging list, so response here. Not to worry, a little >more chatter. >(Should there be a wiki edit list? Or would 'we' all then have to join >that well as the tagging list? Anyone not want to be part of the >discussions on wiki edits possibly of relevance to tagging? ) > >On 29/07/19 16:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > >> (Not sent to tagging list) >> >> I think the idea was that a tree with a proper name is an important / >> landmark tree? >> >> Perhaps you crazy Europeans name your special trees, eg King George's >Oak? >> >> The other suggestion was to use "landmark=yes" but this key is also >> not recommended. Someone needs to check how denotation=cluster is >> actually used now days. > >Correct. I looked it up. :) > >The key denotation is meant for special trees .. see >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:denotation > >So I have changed the wiki again . to simply direct 'special tree' >tagging to that page. >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:denotation%3Dcluster > >If people want to mention names .. the denotation page would be the >better place for it. > >> >> Joseph >> >> On 7/29/19, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 29/07/19 15:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >>>> I've edited the page: >>>> >>>> 1) I reworded some of the helpful changes that Mateusz Konieczny >just >>>> made, for better English style. >>>> >>>> 2) I've removed the implication that de facto / approved are >>>> "recommended" and that "deprecated" / "discardable" etc. are "not >>>> recommended". >>>> >>>> I also removed the suggestion that "de facto" tags are supported by >>>> rendering / routing / editing software - while this is usually >true, >>>> it isn't what determines if a tag is given "de facto" status. >>>> >>>> 3) I removed "obsolete" status from the list with >deprecated/discouraged. >>>> >>>> However, I now think I figured out what this status is supposed to >>>> mean: it's supposed to be used for tags that were deprecated, but >now >>>> no longer even appear in the database, so the wiki page is only for >>>> historical information. >>>> >>>> Do we really need a special status for this, or should is it ok if >I >>>> retag the 6 tags with this status to "deprecated"? >>>> >>>> >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_with_status_%22obsolete%22 >>>> >>>> - Tag:abandoned=yes - recommended replacement abandoned:*=* - used >34,000 >>>> times >>>> - Tag:amenity=Kneippbecken - approved replacement is >>>> amenity=kneipp_water_cure - used 0 times >>>> - Tag:man_made=power_hydro / Tag:man_made=power_nuclear / >>>> Tag:man_made=power_wind - use power=generator, generator:source=* >>>> instead - used a couple of times only. >>>> - Tag:denotation=cluster - for special trees. Recommend to use >name=* >>>> instead with natural=tree. Had been down to 0 uses at one point, >but >>>> now there are a few hundred? >>> Gah! use name=* for something other than the name? No. Use the >description >>> key for that. >>> Edited wiki to remove this suggestion. >>> >>>> So only amenity=Kneippbecken and man_made=power_* really fit the >>>> "obsolete" status, though there are a number of tags currently with >>>> "deprecated" that are also no longer found in the database. >>>> >>> Once something has been 'depreciated' but now has little to no >presence then >>> 'obsolete' is a good status for it. >>> >>> > > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
