On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:20:42PM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2015-05-05 17:21 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. <[email protected]>: > > > the verbosity may be unneeded for very simple things like phone > > but is that true for everything covered by "contact*" ? > > key:fax? key:twitter? key:vhf? > > > > > have you seen taginfo? > 906 vhf > 182 vhf_channel > 73 waterway:vhf_channel > 36 lock:VHF_channel > 32 VHF > 16 contact:vhf
imho key:vhf is pretty poor choice of a tag name and the usage count is overall not so large. > http://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=vhf > > twitter and fax are less clear, but the "contact:"-form is always less in > use. still sceptical. If someone wants to write an app displaying contact info he could blindly output "contact:.*" or put together a list of many dozens of tags like phone,fax,email,facebook,vk,xing and still won't be able to retrieve contact of a site that has more exotic means of communication like smoke signals or drums. Even collecting all the existing tags looks like a huge pain in the b..t if they are not documented or prefixed by "contact:". The usage of the four most popular "contact:" entries reaches almost 200,000 which is not too bad. Also I am not quite sure how many of those entries are actually valid, taginfo is not a great help here: http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/phone#values http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/contact:phone#values Btw anyone knows what phone=3631 is ? Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
