As i already pointed out, the problem is not so much fixing obvious mistakes (typos, clear misclassification) thank you for that, but wanting conformity to inconclusive results of discussions on a fairly obscure mailing list.
One of the great strengths of OSM is that you can invent tagging on the fly and trying to suppress that just so that the data consumers have it easy, is misguided. In the end the main way our tagging evolves is be contributors trying to map stuff that doesn't have a popular tagging scheme associated and not allowing that will reduce new tagging to that decided by a committee. Simon Am 09.11.2015 um 07:39 schrieb GerdP: > Hi all, > > sorry for the late reaction, I was offline for two days visiting a friend > for his 50th aniversary. > > Andrew Guertin wrote >> In my opinion, some of these changes are positive and some are negative, >> but the negatives outweigh the positives. > That's bad news for me. I tried to be very careful to improve quality, > I've asked for feedback in those cases where I was not sure what the > initial mapper tried to map and AFAIR I got only very few comments > telling me that I should better revert them. So, please comment > those changesets which you think I should revert. > And yes, during the last days I got a bit lazy asking for review, so I'll > add more comments again. > > > Andrew Guertin wrote >> As a negative example, they seem to have deemed the tag >> highway=residential_link bad, and replaced it with either >> highway=service or highway=residential. >> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/18820600/history, >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/262798921/history). > I think this should really be discussed in the tagging list. > I only know a discussion in Germany which came to the > conclusion that tags like unclassified_link, residential_link and > service_link make not much sense: > http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=26083 > The wiki doesn't mention those _link types as well, and my > understanding is that only major roads have a link (if link > in english means what we call "Abfahrt/ Auffahrt" in Germany, > I would describe it as a lane that allows to decrease/increase > speed. > > > Andrew Guertin wrote >> An in-between example: on >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38089492/history, >> highway=stepping_stones was replaced with highway=path. While this helps >> consumers use the data, it loses information that should have been kept >> (perhaps with surface=* or something similar). > I've asked for a comment from the original mapper now. I agree that a > surface tag > might be missing, I just recognized this a case of a wrongly mapped ford, so > I changed > the tag to path and added a ford=stepping_stones to the node which connects > the highway with the waterway. > > greetings, > Gerd (GerdP) > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Undiscussed-edits-removing-lesser-used-highway-tags-tp5859298p5859435.html > Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
