On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 at 18:36, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 01:39 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < > [email protected]>: > >> > A blanket rule that anything with "Square" in the name must be mapped as >> place=square is as defective as one saying that anything with >> "Maes" in the name must be mapped as a field. >> >> Right, and it only works for languages that have a shared cultural >> heritage (European languages). > > > maybe. It works here. Perfectly. > Says you. You may well be right. But all I can know with certainty is that your personal definition of place=square works perfectly for you. Others seem less happy with your definition. place is inherently about toponyms. That's what it is for. > Labels on the map are toponyms. The place key is a way to get a toponym rendered as a label. But the value describes what that thing is (and, incidentally, may affect font and type size of the label, as well as the zooms at which it is rendered). If place=* were ONLY about toponyms then we would have just place=yes + name=*. If we need a tag for an open air area where people can gather, let's invent > another word for it. Square is not the tag for it. > in your opinion, based upon your definition, which perfectly matches how you choose to use it. I might even agree with you that, in hindsight, that was not the best value to use for an open-air, unvegetated area where people can gather. But it has been documented, interpreted and used (by people other than yourself) to mean the public place you do not want it to mean. It would be nice to be able to learn from all our past mistakes and fork OSM (and its data) but using better choices for tag names and values. But when Fred Brooks wrote "Plan to throw the first one away; you will anyhow." we didn't have open-sourced continuous development. There are no major and minor versions of OSM, there is just a continuously-evolving OSM where only minor changes can occur at any one time. > > Maybe you do not have to use the tag at all, if there is no concept for it > ("streetname" for objects that are not directed, linear streets but squares > = undirected, public open space in a street context)? > Maybe you don't have to use it at all for your purposes. Maybe you should be the one who cannot tag things of interest to him. Normally I wouldn't even think of suggesting something like that as an option, but somebody else suggested it first. Actually, I think that "You can't tag something because I don't see a need for it" is not a very good idea, but apparently some people think otherwise. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
