I think it would be useful to see just how big the confusion is, how many mappers are involved, etc. I hope to be able to give a reasonable summary of those tomorrow. A cursory inspection of power=station in southern California shows it having been applied numerous times to both power plants and substations imported from gnis.
At 2010-01-19 04:27, Steve Bennett wrote: >On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com> >wrote: > > I'm not saying this is a good thing, but: > > > > a) It doesn't really matter for most mappers. > > > > b) It doesn't really matter for almost anyone else ;-) > >Why not? We have a situation where two tags are being used pretty >indisciminately because people haven't understood their flawed >definitions. Sure, it's only two tags, but their uses are in the >thousands. > > > > > c) The definitions of these tags were done in ~december 2007 probably by > > germans and the native english speakers didn't even care to correct > > these definitions till now. Since december 2007 it doesn't seemed to > > matter for most people how the actual wording is. > >Because no one noticed. Because it's hard to notice. That's exactly >the kind of thing I'm trying to fix: raising the visibility of tags >and their usage, so we can spot these problems earlier. And we haven't >even got to power=cable, which you objected to me making visible on >the map features page... > > > d) I don't think it's a good idea to change a tag description two years > > after it was documented, because the wording is "slightly" wrong for > > some parts of the english speaking world. > >The wording is *completely* wrong for the *entire* english speaking world. > >Definition of power=generator: "power station" >Definition of power=station: "substation" >Definition of power=sub_station: "transformer" > >I don't think you can get much wronger than that. And it doesn't >appear to be a US english vs other english problem. Although "power >station" (to mean power=generator) is more common outside the US, I >don't think they use the term there to mean "power=sub_station" (as >implied). Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. > > > > Because doing so is an > > annoyance for anyone involved and the wording will *always* be slightly > > wrong for someone. > >I understand what you're saying, and you're right in many instances. >But there's a big difference between this siutuation, and say, >"service=alley" (we say "laneway" here, but we can live with "alley"), >or "rcn" (we don't have a regional cycling network, but we can >understand what it means and use it appropriately). This situation is >wrong for everyone (possible exception of Germans - but even then, a >German term would be vastly preferable to an exactly incorrect English >term), and not "slightly" wrong at all. It's so bad that when you see >"power=sub_station" you actually have no idea what the tagger meant. >Did they mean a "substation" or a "sub_station"? Did the mapper who >used "power=station" mean a "power station" or a "power=generator"? > > > Not to mention that a lot of people won't > > notice/ignore any changes here, as these definitions are "old enough" in > > OSM terms. > >Which people are you talking about? Newcomers? Old timers? > > > My approach: Stick to the wiki definitions even if you don't > > like it and go on mapping :-) > >That response isn't even logical. It's as though I complained to the >council that people keep ignoring the parking signs, and your answer >is "My approach: Keep obeying the parking signs." By all means, don't >help find a solution (there are plenty of bigger fish to fry, after >all), but advising other people to ignore the problem is...unhelpful. > > > e) Unless someone develops a nice "open power distribution map", this > > discussion is pretty much pointless and will continue or "flare up > > again" endlessly, regardless of what we'll end up with it now. So if you > > are really interested in fixing this "power wording problem", go and > > develop such a map. This will motivate the mappers much more to "do it > > right" than to conform to whatever rules set/changed in the wiki. > >Renderers already render power=* tags. True, they probably don't >distinguish much between the different kinds yet, but it's very >plausible. > >Anyway, let's talk solutions. The obvious problem is that although the >status quo is bad, changing is difficult. If we spontaneously redefine >"power=station", we will a) change the meaning of existing tags, and >b) cause confusion amongst people who know the current tags. But at >least we eventually end up at a situation which makes sense and won't >cause so much mistagging. > > >This will motivate the mappers much more to "do it > > right" than to conform to whatever rules set/changed in the wiki. > >So, you essentially say it's easier to keep drilling these bad >definitions into people's heads, now and forever, than to fix them. >Are you saying also that we should never change the definitions of any >tags? > >Steve > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net> _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
