Jeff Meyer writes: > - An overarching code of behavior could be very helpful to empower the less > aggressive mapper. Maybe something simple like: Pursue the truth & > agreement & do no harm. It gives the oppressed some simple question to ask > the difficult mapper. Each of the segments of the code could be defined > separately. > -- It seems to me that changing tags without a resolution of truth in a > community is clearly destructive
Right. So what do you think of the set of rules that I posted a bit ago? > - The concept of any tag being ok is exciting for many of us, but also a > little scary to many newcomers, who would like to be sure we are doing > things properly. So, I think more standardization in tag convention would > be helpful, but that's probably fodder for another (and many older) threads. There *is* standardization -- the set of Key and Tag descriptions in the Wiki. Everybody should edit the way they describe. If they are ambiguous, then you should look at the way people are using the tags, and put that into the wiki. If people aren't tagging consistently, then you should ask for help. The whole point is that everything in the database should have a clear meaning. It's okay if there are two different ways to enter the same thing. Yes, that makes life harder on data consumers, but as long as they can understand what a tag means, they can figure out what that means for their usage of the map. Chances are good that highway=path/bicycle=yes and highway=cycleway will get rendered the same way. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
