Looks like a good idea - moved
Jan 24, 2020, 18:33 by [email protected]:
> Rather than "Mismatching key names", what about "Counterintuitive key names"?
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 9:20 AM Volker Schmidt <> [email protected]> > wrote:
>
>> OK,
>> my wording was intentionally provoking. But this basic conceptual issue is
>> at the base of many unnecessary tagging modifications.
>> I refrained from adding the OSM version of the duck principle.
>> One of the items in the proposed page illustrates well why I think people
>> need to get the message that we only use words as codes, not as meaning.
>>
>> We had for a long time waterway=canal and for the outline we used
>> water=riverbank (and we still mostly do use that combination). Perfectly
>> working, we did not care if we were mapping the bank of a river or the bank
>> of a canal. At some point someone came up with the idea that canal is not a
>> river hence a riverbank is not a canalbank and introduced water=canal for
>> the concept of the canalbank.
>> (I am a bit exaggerating here the reason for the change was different - see
>> the thread "[Tagging] >> Canal>> banks")
>>
>> My basic message is tags are made of key and value and everything is
>> codewords. We have build a whole structure into the codewords with several
>> levels of colons in order to make extracting things form the database
>> easier, but this is not part of the core structure of the database.
>>
>> There is no mismatch between natural=water and water=canal if you understand
>> that all keys and values are codewords. Human readability is a convenience,
>> but is not reflected in the data structure at all.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 15:31, Jarek Piórkowski <>> [email protected]>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 09:12, Volker Schmidt <>>> [email protected]>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>> > Il ven 24 gen 2020, 11:51 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>>>
>>> [email protected]>>> > ha scritto:
>>> >> One of topics often appearing is mismatch between meaning of key
>>> >> and key text.
>>> >> ...
>>> >> It is created at
>>> >> >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mismatching_key_names
>>> >> but page name is horrible. Ideas for a better one is welcome.
>>> >>
>>> >> Also, I only started it - help in expanding and improving it
>>> >> is highly welcomed.
>>> >
>>> > These are no mismatches.
>>> > Keys and values are in principle arbitrary sequences of alphanumeric
>>> characters. By convention we try to make them mnemonic by using strings
>>> that somehow help us remember the meaning of the string. By convention we
>>> use British English words for keys and values, plus numbers, mainly for
>>> values.
>>> >
>>> > This explanation needs to be placed prominently on the new page, to
>>> avoid any doubt.
>>>
>>> Please no. That wiki page is a much better explanation than this "it's
>>> only symbols".
>>>
>>> Keys and values are ways for us as human editors to communicate with
>>> each other. Those are commonly called "words" - well, at least in
>>> Canadian English, I don't know about British English.
>>>
>>> It is definitely worth explaining why some words as OSM editors use
>>> them are different from words as the rest of the world (or a subset of
>>> the world) might use them.
>>>
>>> --Jarek
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> >>> [email protected]
>>> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> --
> Evan Derickson
> [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
