There are likely some currently-living scholars, tour guides, etc. who
think of Dublin by all of the old names you mentioned, so, by your logic,
all of these old names should be included in tags.
--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot
drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
On September 8, 2015 10:59:17 AM moltonel 3x Combo <molto...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08/09/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
Am 08.09.2015 um 14:46 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@gmail.com>:
But I would not add old_name that is currently completely unused.
there's one area where old names will be used for sure: old documents,
books, film, signs, ...
There is no such thing like a currently completely unused old name,
otherwise it wouldn't be an old name.
Or maybe I don't understand "currently". Everything I may encounter now?
If you go that route, there's no limit to how far back an old name can
go. That'd mean that we should add, for example, all of [Dublin's old
names][1] to the osm object, since they are well documented. It would
be a silly thing to do, as these names definitely are not a current
property of Dublin.
IMHO the cuting point should be that the name is used by a living
person, with "used" defined as "when he thinks (out of some document
context) about that place, he (at least sometimes) thinks of it using
that name". It sounds really convoluted when you try a formal
definition, but I hope the ide is clear ? If some joking friend offers
to meet me in "Lutèce" I'll know in which city to go, but I certainly
don't expect OSM to know.
[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin#Toponymy
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
