Hi,
> There are a number of features listed as "approved" without being on map > features. This should alse be tha case for smoothness, as long as: I disagree. A tag should be IMHO on the feature page as long as it's potential use covers a lot of object in the database where a lot of mapper might be in touch with. tracktype and smoothness are in this case for example. sac_scale, mtb:scale, mtb:type, piste: and other confidential tags should be kept on separated pages related to their activity. ( And if it was only me, I would severly move things from shop, amenity, power, military, sport, ski, hiking that are far far from openSTREETmap ) > - It is not supported by any renderer. Well, now it is : http://beta.letuffe.org/?zoom=16&lat=45.60807&lon=6.04033&layers=0000000B0000 > - Hardly used at all. Any starting tag can only be unused in the bigining. Putting it appart only leads to FUD, as it is the case with key:smoothness's first chapter. Saying every where it is bad, putting it appart, describing it as bad can only lead to hard adoption. And that is FUD. Telling me it is so because there were great objections reminds me of highway=path. There were many people against, with an end result of 22 VS 9 votes, but the tag finaly made it's way on map features without comments that it is bad. That tag is now used 50000 times in europe, for the simple reason that it was found usefull by people. It is crazy to base a tag's quality to it's number of use withing it's first month of existence. amenity=bench is used 10 times in europe, while in map features, does that mean it's a bad tag ? Do I need to comment on it saying it's a bad tag to scare people's usage of it ? > - It is rather hard to understand how to use. This is your point, I don't have problem using it, and I'm happy to see I'm third in usage of that tag ;-) -- sly sylvain letuffe _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
