On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 04:20:22PM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > Am 07.05.2015 um 13:50 schrieb Richard Z. <[email protected]>: > > >> then contact:twitter is also flat > >> out wrong, because many companies will not reply and maybe not even read > >> what you tweet them. > > > > this is one of the reasons why contact:twitter is much better then > > twitter=* because the first one explicitly says it can be used for > > contacting while the other could mean anything else that you can > > do with twitter. > > > people will not be more inclined to respond to enquiries via a certain medium > if we put a contact prefix in osm, or did I misunderstand you and you propose > to use both tags, one for their Twitter account and the other if they react > to Twitter messages?
indeed my intention was to use "contact:twitter" exactly when a company explicitly recommends it as a way to contact them whereas twitter=* could be used to mean anything else. > > In addition most companies will have > > different web pages for different purposes and website=* would be > > typically the main page and not the contact form. > > > wouldn't contact:url or contact:webpage then be a better tag for this? That is what I was trying to say:) Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
