Steve Hill wrote: > On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Chris Hill wrote: > >> Yes, because tags are applied to a node or a way and collectively the >> tags make sense for that node or way. > > What if an object needs to be tagged with multiple tags? I can think > of various reasons for doing this. For example, a building might > contain a postoffice and a supermarket, so you want to tag it as > both. You might then have specific tags which relate to just the > postoffice bit and just the supermarket bit - to avoid collisions and > make it clear which you are referring to it would make sense to have > them in separate namespaces. I simply don't see namespaces as necessary. In this case I'd draw the building and label it as a supermarket, then add a node for the post office. The building is a supermarket, the post office is only part of it. The nodes and ways involved then can have any extra tags they need. >> This is, however, the *Open* Streetmap and you are free to tag >> climbing routes anyway you want to. > > Well yes, but having many completely inconsistent ways of tagging the > same data seems rather counter productive. This is, afterall, why we > have the likes of the Map_Features page on the wiki, to try and give > guidance on well throught through methods of tagging things.
If namespaces are adopted by OSM contributors as the norm, then I'll reluctantly use them, to ensure my contributions appear on rendered maps but don't expect they will because they are not needed. Cheers, Chris _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
