At 03:34 PM 1/24/2008, Jo wrote: >Dermot McNally wrote: > > My favourite suggestion so far is that a second key be introduced - > > either for the "original" measurement (my favourite, since it retains > > the traditional meaning of the existing key) or for the normalised > > equivalent. > > >This is what I was thinking all along. On the one hand you want the info >as it is indicated in situ. On the other hand you want to be able to >parse it efficiently. A second field seems like the most obvious >solution. Maybe name spaced: maxheight:imperial = 3 ft. > >Polyglot
Or maxheight= 3 ft - original-easy-to enter "folksomomic" key (defaults either to metric or local usage, there are arguments for both) maxheight:metric = 0.912 - added either by power users or by post-processing That is the sort of conclusion I've been coming to with the is_in tag. It is useful to have an easy to remember but fairly free-form tag to capture mass observations and then gain extra value from it by by post-processing and name-spacing for more systematic/rigorous catagorisation. Mike Stockholm _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
