On Apr 16, 2023, at 2:23 PM, Jens Glad Balchen via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > On 16.04.2023 21:40, stevea wrote: >>> Isn't it a general assumption for everything that the owner is the operator >>> by default? I'm not saying "isn't it always true", but isn't that generally >>> the assumption if no other information is presented? >> An obviously dangerous slope to slip down here and may be a significant >> place where misunderstandings are rampant. There remain fundamental >> misunderstandings that owner and operator are large, difficult topics to >> distinctly assign. (I think of railways and my reaction is "Sheesh!") Yes, >> it could be said that in some contexts, "it would be appropriate to assume" >> (it might be risky, let's not call it dangerous) that the owner is the >> operator. Then, there are entire WORLDS where that is not true and you had >> darn well better look at both owner and operator tag, or you will be lost. >> Adjust one's lenses, please. > > I read this like you're saying I have advocated for disregarding the operator > tag in favour of the owner that. I haven't, if that was unclear. Tag it if > and when relevant. If the operator tag is present, obviously that is the > source.
Jens, yes, of course. I did not mean to imply that if I did. Interactions to "might be ignored in the current context" varies wildly. > If the operator tag is missing and the owner tag is present, isn't it the > general assumption that the owner is also the operator -- i.e. that the owner > information is a relevant substitute for the operator information that you > don't have? What actual harm would you do by assuming this? I would reasonably conclude I likely "don't know enough" to draw "further" conclusions. Having one tag but not the other "halts" me. Assumptions simply do not apply after that. Stop, do not cross this further, it is risky (or even dangerous) to do so. I see owner, I say "OK, that is owner." Stop. If operator (also), a whole lot more things become true. If no operator, stop. Further assumptions may be cultural, erroneous or both. I am being deliberately kind as I say this as it can be difficult as these distinctions cross cultures and boundaries. We really chop the parse up quite finely here, it a difficult topic and we best be careful. Even as we agree to English, this is a difficult topic. It isn't the language, it is how law and people interact with the land and are or are not "free to roam" and lots and lots of distinct culture that is steeped in this. It is quite complex. Humans have edges that are culturally different around these two words / tags / concepts. Keeping things to owner=* and operator=* has proven wise, so far, as difficult as the two of them together (or one at a time) has been, it is true. The distinctions about what we mean by these do sharpen, rather well in my opinion. Consensus doesn't seem far away. We've been doing a decent job of talking about this, I think we're doing fine. Please, others are welcome to step in. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
