I am against transforming OSM into an etymological dictionary. While etymological research is of
course valuable, such results are not easily verifiable for other users, and overload the tagging of
objects that have plenty of tags in current languages already.
There are systems like wiktionary.org suitable for these details, which can be sufficiently linked
with wikidata references. Thus there is no reason to duplicate that in OSM.
tom
On 24.01.2020 06:43, Phake Nick wrote:
You can consider using BCP 47 extension T as language tag in OpenStreetMap follow BCP 47 practice.
The extension T is for denoting content that have been transformed from one language into another,
so if you write fr-t-frm then it would denote the content is transformed fron Middle French
(15th-17th century) to Modern French (with frm being the ISO 639 code for Middle French, and thus
you can write name:fr-t-frm=X into the object. You can read the BCP47 original document for more
information.
05:51，marc marc
Hello,
some words in the name of some street is not understood by some people.
these are often old notations, sometimes borrowed from another language
but used in the official language to name this street.
street sign have those "one-name-but-in-mixed-language" and only that.
a contributor spends time trying to find the meaning of these words and
replaces the name with a modern version, absent both from the ground and
from use, in favour of a name that is the one that could have been
written if this street had been created today.
it's a bit as if this contributor added to Big Ben name:fr="Grand Ben"
or "Nouveau York" for "New York"
it's obviously wrong. but how could we keep track of the meanings
of the words from the old days?
I thinking about a kind of tag name:fr-modern-not-used or a kind of
name:etymology but which does not inform a person but an object, a
building, a profession, ...
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
