Ben Laenen wrote:
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:49:00 Gerard Vanderveken wrote:
We want to tag for the people and for usabillity.
The current reasoning is flawed.
-The route between 2 points in a network has no name, so we do not tag a
name in OSM.
Congratulations. Now if only we can end the discussion here...
The problem is that the discussion starts here. It is not because there
is no sign of it, that there is no name for these routes.
Internally the managing people of the network uses also this 'route from
12 to 34' name in one or other form for the route segments to list
their equipment (signposts) and to identify problems etc (See eg
routedokter)
-People can't work well with unnamed objects, so we give the route a
name by using start point number - end point number
I must be some kind of superhuman apparently since I was able to map these
routes for years using Potlatch 1?
Maybe, but we (and certainly I) aren't.
But I think that you are no longer working in Potlatch for relations, as
seeing the names in JOSM. is much more handy
Errors were made, some of which could be prevented if the name was in
its name tag.
Eg Check out how many duplicated routes were removed by Polylot's edits
during the last weeks.
The point is that now the note tag is used to store the name of the route.
-Since the route has no name, we can't use the name tag and so we put
the name in the note tag.
It's a note helping editors to describe what the relation actually is. The
note has always been there to help fellow mappers and yourself later to get a
bit more information on the object.
It is only helping in JOSM, were it is displayed in lists.
The others are and will stay out of luck.
They have to check all objects one by one to find out which is which and
that is not very practical.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1698153
Which one is 186-246?
In Potlatch, when you want to add a way to a relation, you get exact the
same meaningless list of id numbers.
Which one to pick?
A purist point of view is made, which is then compromised in the wrong
way and this leads to these discussions over and over again.
Do simply what is needed and have this name where it belongs. In the
name tag.
This will be the end of this ever recurring discussion.
And if you start using the name tag, you'll find that you have to write
exceptions for everything using the data since it suddenly has routes with a
name which it shouldn't present as its name. See what happens with the Lonvia
map. And there is no simple way to solve this, you'll have to sort it out
manually.
I'm quite pleased with the result on the Lonvia hiking map. Thank you.
http://hiking.lonvia.de/?zoom=14&lat=50.80698&lon=4.62237
If you don't want to use the name tag, because that name might be
rendered, and then put it in the note tag, you are also tagging for
(against) the renderers.
Exactly as the objection of Eimai is in the trac
https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/4017#comment:9
" Using the name tag would be an abuse. These routes simply don't have
names, the networks do. Sure we can invent some pretty names to be shown
in the relation lists, but then we'd need to special case every renderer
that wants to actually render these routes to discard names of just these
networks. That's not the better option. "
It is also tagging for the renderer, because one might not be pleased
with the rendered result.
If it is purity that has to come first, then we should have no note tag
as well and those note tags should be deleted?
Why is the note tag not appropriate for this usecase?
If your only issue is helping with the editing of data, invent some other tag
(mapper_and_editor_friendly_description=* or whatever) and try to get support
for that in the editors.
Suppose you have some exotic object you want to tag and there's no way to map
it yet, would you also put its description in the name tag? (Bad example
perhaps, as some actually do this.)
It's not a name, and for some reason you agree that it's not a name, yet you
still want to tag it as a name. (*)
(*) where "it" is some predefined arbitrary description which follows some
rules on the wiki which would also be subject to some discussion: should we
use abbreviations? Should it include what kind of network it is? What language
should it be in?
The fact that you have to invent a name first is reason enough for me to not
tag it as such.
12-34 is a name. It is maybe not the best name or the only name
possible, but it is one. People who read it know over which route
relation we are talking. And so it should not be in the note, but in the
name tag.
We don't need support for some additional tags that might or might not
get supported. The name tag is appropriate and always supported.
The language is no issue as they are simply in the language of the
'operator'
Strictly speaking, the bus routes don't have a name either.
There is a bus with a number that follow the route from A to B, but that
is it, yet all routes are named in the 'operator number from via to' scheme.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1708295
Why should the routes on node networks be different and may not have
their name?
We are lucky that JOSM supports this note tag, otherwise there was no
way of managing those networks in a decent way.
(Maybe a feature request to 'unsupport' this tag in JOSM is in order?)
With the note tag as it is now, we can also not differentiate the routes
from the different networks, because eg 12-34 can be part of a walking
or biking network.
The current practice is from the time that only one
node network existed. Now that ways or regions can be part of several
networks, an update is needed.
There are other tags in the relation, you know. And who says that the note tag
can only have these numbers, write whatever you want in it, there's no agreed
form for the note tag. As long as it somehow helps you and other people later
to understand what the object is.
And for that matter, "Scheldeland 12-13" also won't tell you if it's a bicycle
route or a walking route.
How to make up the name for the note tag is clearly described in the Wiki.
The point is not that you can tell if it is a walking or biking network,
but that you can see that with 'XXX 12-34' and 'YYY 12-34', there are
two different networks involved and you can make the right selection.
Regards,
Gerard.
Greetings
Ben
_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
