2012/1/24 Jonathan Bennett <openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk>: > On 24/01/2012 11:22, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> I wonder if this kind of tagging should be tolerated. In the wiki I >> found no documentation regarding this tag, and therefore this data >> seems unusable for most mappers. > > Perhaps not, but systematically removing it won't improve anything > (since most apps will just ignore the tags), and will actually increase > the amount of storage needed (since a new version of the objects in > question will be created). > > We have (or at least, should have) a simple principle in OSM: Ignore > what you don't understand. That applies to mappers and to applications > using the data. The alternative is edit wars where one mapper things a > particular tag -- that otherwise does them no harm -- is "wrong" and > starts removing them and their creator puts them back.
While I understand the idea behind (deletions also occupy space/need computing power, at least if performed via the API), I still feel that we should have a policy to request tags and values to be human readable. How would you improve / modify (say split) an object where you don't understand part of the tags applied to it? Imagine that this tendency grows stronger and a few imports later our db would have more crypted keys then "readable" ones. If osm is about open data, it should be really open, not only freely available but unusable because crypted. Why should we use free and open ressources to distribute free-but-not-open content? cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk