The statement I disagree with is that "We shouldn’t be in a situation where there is no approved way to map a mapable feature just because the community doesn’t agree completely on how to map it."
Nobody needs approval to map anything in OSM, so approval only really matters when there is a conflict, and I agree that conflicts are better resolved by discussion and consensus (with confirmation by the yes/no vote) than by voting between competing options. If a stalled discussion means that multiple tags coexist, that's ok by me - clearly the stakes weren't high enough in that case for compromise to achieve coherence to be valued over the "right" tag... On Tue, 13 Oct 2020, 11:09 am stevea, <stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > Majorities can be built with reason and well-written proposals. They > really can. This is where and when OSM can be at its best. > > Am I saying "rig an election" or "throw votes in an unethical manner"? Of > course not. I'm talking about building real grass-roots support for good > ideas that are well-stated and agreeable. That actually happens. And when > it does, good for us. > > SteveA > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
