On 29/08/2018 20:44, Toby Speight wrote:
0> In article <fc640df8-7391-5fe8-049c-a61c64517...@btinternet.com>,
0> Dave F. <URL:mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> ("Dave") wrote:

Dave> Point about OSM wiki: IMO giving multiple options for the same
Dave> entity leads to confusion & errors so should be avoided.

That's exactly what's problematic about "highways_authority_ref": it
creates a tag that contains the same information as belongs in "ref".

Based on the name, the similarity to ncn_ref and the like suggests a
non-authoritative alternative identifier.

Hi Toby

Let's deal with the last point first. Unsure how you could describe 'highways_authority_ref' as 'non-authoritative'.

'ncn_ref' isn't 'non-authoritative' or similar to it's a label given to an assigned highway by Sustrans, many miles of which are maintained by local authorities.

OK, main point: 'ref' was used almost from the start of OSM when Steve C. mapped the first ways. As the database evolved it became clear 'ref' was too ambiguous & so other 'ref' tags evolved. Please remember there were no focus groups meetings laying out a pathway concept. OSM is a truly organic development. Things change, evolve. As the database becomes more detailed so the tags become more detailed. Contributors should be expecting change & willing to adapt. Being fearful of change is not a reason for the status-quo.

I've used 'highways_authority_ref' as it was suggested as a more specific tag to the alternatives. As I said in my OP I'm wiling to amend that, but only after I've amalgamated all the relevant tags & someone comes up with a better alternative. So far no one has done so.

Getting all contributors to use 'highway_authority_ref' will be problematic, in *exactly* the same way it is for so many other tags. That is *not* a reason to not improve OSM's database.

General point to all: Others here & on private email appear to think I, & I alone, conceived this proposal. I did not. This is clearly evident from reading the links in my OP. If anyone wishes to criticize the proposal, please have the common decency to base it on facts & evidence.

Cheers
DaveF

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Reply via email to