Hi, Slight tangent on the edit war (which has morphed into a discussion of what to do with the ever-growing list of map features on the wiki)...
We don't want to tag to the renderer, but knowing what clients utilize what tags is important. In my experience with user-collected data in X-Plane I have found that there is a huge difference in data quality between data that is heavily validated by the tool-set while/soon after the user works and data that is collected for use much later or never. Applying that to OSM, I would expect that the one-way information in OSM should be relatively good because users will see if they got their one-way or way-direction wrong as soon as mapnik or [EMAIL PROTECTED] rebuild the tile image. By comparison, errors in the height of antennas/masts would be harder for users to detect because there isn't visual feedback of this (at least that I know of in the main map layers). So in trying to answer the question about what are "good" and "bad" tags for the purpose of making a short listing of the "most important tags" and a longer listing of less important ones, I think that: - renderer and toolset support is very important because it will impact data quality. - use of data by a particular client projects (the main map or other efforts) are important because they naturally group tags and provide warm bodies to detect problems. - frequency of tag usage on the actual map is probably a good indicator of how general a tag is. To throw out a straw man for reorganizing the Wiki (and I think having good docs on tag schemes is important), perhaps it would make sense to have: 1. "core" tags, including tags drawn in the main map renderings, tags that are widely used, and tags that are subject to error checking. 2. "all" tags, a huge laundry list. 3. per-usage/client/project lists of used tags for a given application, so that map makers who are targeting that application can be sure they are doing "complete" work. (E.g. if someone is working on an aeronautical map, not having the height of all masts is a completeness problem...but that's perhaps a lot more important to aero-map folks than the general community.) I think we have to accept in a wide-spread crowd-sourced project that there is going to be a huge range of data quality and tag completeness...regarding the "smoothness" tag if most roads don't have smoothness data, that's a cost of the form of OSM...a sub-project cannot mandate that all map makers provide all possible information to all client efforts. But conversely that doesn't make "smoothness" wrong - it just makes it of narrow interest. (If there are problems with the actual proposed smoothness tag, that's a separate issue...) (If someone working on a client project needs a particular tag, that person can gain leverage by adding tool support for the tag, making it easier to use and less error prone for everyone...) cheers Ben -- Scenery Home Page: http://scenery.x-plane.com/ Scenery blog: http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/ Plugin SDK: http://www.xsquawkbox.net/xpsdk/ X-Plane Wiki: http://wiki.x-plane.com/ Scenery mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk