sylvain letuffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The place for an "approved" tag which is not widely used is Approved >> features, not Map Features. > > That could be a solution. And I think that's where we need to go anyway as > the > map feature page is just too big. > What you seams to propose here is keep "the good tags well in view" and > the "bad tags hidden somewhere" > I would agree with the idea, but what is bad or wrong ?
I would see the Approved Features more like a staging area. Features that are "approved" are added there. Features that really establish themselves should eventually be added to Map Features. > > Since it's hard to answer, it seams to be "in the air" that a used tag is > good, and an unused tag is bad. But I don't agree with that. That would bo too simple. There are a couple more criteria like: - is there an alternative way of tagging - which of the alternatives are used more - which have been used more recently - ... There seem to be a number of people who are really enthusiastic about tagging schemes. I would welcome if they would get together to form the "Tagging Committee" and create their own wiki page with their recommendation for a concise and consistent tagging scheme for the world. If that has its merits it will be adopted by the mappers. Matthias _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk