On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 17:31, Janko Mihelić <jan...@gmail.com> wrote:
My idea was to expand the general "part:wikidata=*" to more specific tags. > For example, give all peaks and ridges of a mountain the > mountain:wikidata=* tag, instead of part:wikidata=*. Part is just the > first, nondescript step. If we decide on a better tag, we replace the > part:wikidata with the new XXX:wikidata=* > Firstly, I see no reason for mountain:wikidata=*. It's a wikidata tag for a wikidata item about a mountain applied to an object which is a mountain. So wikidata=* is fine. The "mountain:" bit is redundant and causes more work for data consumers that already support wikidata. Secondly, having interim tagging schemes is a REALLY bad idea. I'll explain exactly why a little further on. Thirdly, don't force square pegs into round holes. If we've mapped a peak and there's a wikidata item for that exact peak, then wikidata=*. If there's no wikidata item then wait for somebody to write it or write a stub article yourself. If there's a wikidata item for a peak but it has not yet been mapped then map it (provided you can confirm it independently because wikipedia articles may use sources that are incompatible with the ODbL) and add wikidata=*. Similarly if we've mapped a mountain range with natural=mountain_range and there's an exact match with a wikidata item. Don't try to force a peak without a wikidata item into a range as part:wikidata=*: map the range or write a stub wikipedia article about the peak (or both). [Roman roads] > I think the only sensible solution is to delete the wikidata tags from >> *all* of them. >> > I definitely agree with this. But I'm not going to be the one who does it > :) It's bad mapping, but it's still somewhat useful information. > And THAT is why interim tagging schemes are a really bad idea. Somebody did that, for whatever reason, and now there is reluctance to remove or fix it. This would be compounded by the fact that somebody, somewhere will announce "In my country, my local mapping group decided to use part:wikidata this way..." Your ideas for part:wikidata are so vague that it will end up being a complete mess. Not even useful for holding a wikidata item pending invention of a redundant XXX:wikidata tag (there's still no reason for the XXX), because a fixme would do the same and also call attention to somebody who might actually fix it. BTW, a better way for marking Roman roads would be to use historic=roman_road. It's a lapsed proposal, and doesn't show even on lutz's historic places map, but it would allow a simple overpass-turbo query and might even let you map them with uMap (going by the amount of data in just one Roman road, that's probably impracticable, though). It's been used 2000 times, so you could probably use it without a formal proposal. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
