On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 2:24 AM, Dave Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Nic Roets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > According to the wiki redirects, barrier=gate is replacing > highway=gate. > >> > According to tagwatch, the latter is 10 times more popular than the > >> > former. > >> > >> Yes, because the barrier=gate people decided it makes more sense. I'm > >> not sure a wiki redirect is the correct way of going about it... but > >> they're essentially the same thing. Obviously highway=gate has been > >> around much longer. > >> > >> > > >> > Is the community OK with this ? > >> > >> Meh. > >> > >> > If yes, why aren't we running a bot to perform the changes ? > >> > >> Because that would imply the One True Way is to tag gates with > >> barrier=gate. Because it would break every existing gate out there > >> relying on a "legacy" renderer. To get 1/10th already suggest to me > >> shenanigans though. > >> It's not completely impossible to have two tags for the same thing you > >> know. Just leave it be. > >> > >> Dave > > > > This is one of the major problems with the OSM community. Someone > proposes > > or just starts using a particular tagging scheme which has some flaws. > When > > those flaws are pointed out, the OSM pragmatists just say "Oh, we can > always > > change it later. It's a Wiki, after all." But the truth is, you can't > change > > it, because when someone does come up with an alternative tagging scheme > > (like barrier= or path= or crossing=) that shows some merit over the > > original, those same pragmatists come back and say "What!? That tag is > > wrong/invalid/stupid because the database already has ten thousand > entries > > of X. And besides, you'll break everything!" > > > > There's a difference between coming up with a new tagging scheme, and > changing every existing instance in the database. > Note that I haven't actually at any point said that you shouldn't use > barrier=gate. I've actually used it a few times myself, and it's not > destructive on highway=gate. With path and crossing the proposals are > somewhat incompatible with what was there already, and the merit in > not making it compatible wasn't ever obvious. > > But there's an expectation here (or more lack of one): I know that if > I use barrier=gate it's not going to get rendered on a lot of stuff. > Fine, my choice, when enough data collects someone will probably patch > the renderer. > > On the otherhand if I bot change everything immediately, I'm doing two > things: I'm forcing everyone to do what *I* say, and also I'm making > damn sure that gates won't be rendered. As a render author I have two > choices... patch my renderer, or accuse you of blatent vandalism and > revert your bot... which probably isn't somewhere we want to go. > > Dave > My point is it's disingenuous to say "There is no right or wrong or recommended tags" on one hand, and then say "Don't change X, you'll break everything." Karl
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
