Mar 8, 2020, 02:41 by [email protected]: > That would be tempting, because it would mean a lot less work for us in the > short term. However, I'm afraid of ending up like PTv2 - > 1. It 'does not deprecate the old tags', use of the new tags is 'recommended > but not mandatory'...whatever that means. > It means that highway=bus_stop usage and support, while completely ignoring new tags introduced by PTv2 is fully compatible with PTv2.
Yes, supporting just highway=bus_stop, railway=tram_stop, amenity=bus_station and completely ignoring public_transport=platform, public_transport=station and so on is one of possible ways for implementing approved PTv2 proposal. Yes, PTv2 is not a well written proposal. No, I am not entirely sure why it was done this way (I have some theories but...) > 2. People with a preference for the old tags see that as an excuse to keep > using them > Simple tags are fully PTv2 compatible. > 3. Consumers see that as an excuse to not support the new schema, even after > 8 years of people requesting it - > > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/311 > Supporting simple tags (and only simple tags) are fully compatible with approved PTv2 proposal. Simple tags are also more popular and simpler to use. > 5. Both sets of tags have to be documented, making the documentation more > verbose than it might be. > They should coexist...for a transitional phase. But it has to be just that - > a _transition_, not a permanent inconsistent mess. > Note that it is extremely rare in OSM to actually transition tags. waterway=wadi still have more than 5000 uses. Even highway=unsurfaced still have some uses.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
