2009/6/4 Nop <ekkeh...@gmx.de>: > This may be true from an archeological point of view, but a tag does not > have to be a scientifically exact term.
I don't see the point. It was proposed a tag for a sub-feature that occurs just in areas where English is not the native language, with an internationally recognised term. It is there (quite a long time) in the wiki. Why should it be changed? > Most common tags are not exact matches (e.g. motorway, secondary) or even they are well defined and therefore used. Why should motorway not be an exact match? > If we can make non-scientific tags work everywhere else why deviate for > building types? to avoid confusion about certain building types. This is not even about the main tag (historic=castle) which everyone without special knowledge can apply to all "big houses", you are complaining about a sub tag (castle_type). I really don't see the problem. I think by changing this you would destroy the work already done in this field for OSM. Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
