Frederik Ramm schrieb: > Hi, > > Tom Chance wrote: >> 1 – Nobody can actually agree what highway=path means so it is being used >> in different senses all over the world, which reduces its usefulness to >> near zero > > Perhaps it really *is* useless and it was good that our process > demonstrated that? > >> We currently have no process for dealing with these problems, nor with (for >> example) the evident shortcomings of natural world / countryside tagging, >> as the hopeless disagreements around forest/wood illustrate. The OSM >> community can either pretend that we live in a world of perfect information >> and emergent consensus > > In my eyes, it is not required that the same tagging rules are used all > over the world. It may be a pet peeve of mine but I think that the > majority of people take this as given without ever spending a second > thinking about whether this might not create more problems than it > solves. We solve loads of very complex problems all the time - are we > really sure that we are unable to cope with a database in which, say, > Canada uses a slightly different tagging scheme than does Scandinavia? > Do we really have to steamroll everyone in the whole world into > submission to some sort of consensus with people on the other side of > the planet?
I don't like your suggestive argumentation. With your "pet peeve of mind" and "ever spending a second thinking" you suggest that others don't think about their positions and only you have thought long enough to get the right idea. I've spend a lot more than just a second about this, and I've come to a different conclusion what will cause more problems in the long run than you do. >> or we can grow up and take a leaf out of every >> other successful open source project and set-up some processes where >> consensus is more difficult to reach. > > I think that "consensus" is totally overrated. "Rough consensus" makes > sense, but we have that, and everything else will work itself out > eventually. All this talk about OSM being useless if consensus doesn't > exist for the smallest detail is just scaremongering by people who > cannot cope with complexity or diversity. You've stated the same position already some time ago, but it turned out that the situation didn't get any better since then. People want to tag stuff and they just can't put the information in the tags in a way that its meaning is clear to others going to use the data. Not because they are too lazy to find out how, but because the same tags are used in different ways. If lot's of producers and consumer are both interested in specific details, but the osm tags can't transfer the information (because it get's "too blurred" on the way), I wouldn't call this "rough consensus", I simply call it a mess. Regards, ULFL _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
