Hi Frederik, Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012, 14:36:40 schrieb Frederik Ramm: > You have to work on your expectations then. Has it occurred to you that > some people don't find extended conditions important enough at all? > > Personally, I think that most of the extended conditions that the > proposal tried to address were not worth having a tagging scheme for; > they were stuff that only a few perfectionists would want to map anyway.
Yeah, e.g. those quixotic perfectionist geeks from Synyx. > And while I am not against perfectionists mapping stuff they like, I am > against elevating this to the state of an "accepted proposal" because > that would convey too much mindshare to such a marginal issue. In constrast to *really* important features like diet meals, clocks or fire hydrants… > The proposal is driven by a geek-y desire to convert every last bit of > information contained in a road sign into an OSM tag. But I don't think Okay, I repeat it one more time for you: this is not about some stuff geeks want to add to the database, this is serious stuff that some companies actually want to use (and other companies like MapQuest and Tele Atlas sell this kind of information). If you don't believe me then just have a look at GDF, which is an industrial standard that specifies exactly the same "geek-y" stuff (IIRC you can find some older versions of the standard on the internet). > that this is what people will usually want to do, and I fear that giving > this idea more mindshare will in the end lead to our editors being > burdened by special restriction composer preset tabs where you can > generate stuff like time and weather dependent speed limits for disabled > persons with children. Yeah, like the UI-cluttering turn restrictions plugin in JOSM… wait, what? Yes, it is a *plugin*. If you do not like it, just do not download it. > I don't think that the proposal is the "de facto standard" either. I > think some of its parts will probably be used - e.g. I could see > "maxspeed:wet" being of use. I think it is likely however that this will > be interpreted like a normal, fixed tag, […] I cannot find any wiki entry for - maxspeed:wet - maxspeed:hgv:forward - maxspeed:motorcycle - toll:hgv - toll:forward - access:hgv:forward (just to pick a few). If those are all fixed tags, then where are the wiki entries for them? On the other hand, the Extended Conditions proposal explains *all* of them, just in one page instead of thousand pages. > […] and I don't believe anyone will > actually implement a restriction parser that understands any combination > of restrictions on any tags. It's not that difficult to implement, trust me. > I have no problem whatsoever if the mapping of speed limits that only > apply to HGV at night happens by way of a "note" tag. It's just not > frequent enough to even discuss. For something that's not worth discussing, the discussion is quite lengthy. About that note tag proposal of yours: this is the most stupid proposal I have heard so far. I have a better one: why not stuff everything we ever want to tag into one big note tag, that would make all editors a *lot* simpler. (On the other hand, it would make using the data impossible, but as you already stated, the mapper is the only person that is important.) Eckhart _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
