On Monday 27 April 2015, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I think that is wrong to colour-code the whole box red for
> "deprecated" feature, for the usual reason - it only takes a handful
> of people to "deprecate" something and this could easily lead to
> widely used tags being shown in red, leading people to believe that
> there is something wrong about them.
Yes, the proposal process is simply unsuited in a meritocratic system
like OSM for tags that are currently in significant use. It makes a
lot of sense to discuss and evaluate new tags from scratch or to
decommission tags that have gone out of use almost completely.
Unfortunately these applications of the proposal system are rare these
days and it is too often used to push a certain tagging scheme against
competing ideas.
Or to phrase it differently - the opinion of mappers using a tag should
weight at least as much as those of people voting on a tag proposal and
it is a problem when a tag that is actively used by 100 people is
deprecate by votes of just a few. Same goes the other way round of
course - a proposal rejection despite a lot of people following it does
not really mean that much.
Instead of a deprecatation proposal on a actively used tag the arguments
against it should be put up in the tag documentation to convince
mappers not to use it rather than discouraging them by use of signal
colors. There is for example the {{Verifiability}} template that can
be used to indicate tags that are vague in definition.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
