On 10/11/15 10:08, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 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. > > +1, very well put. I have in the past seen this more than once: invented > a new tag to try something out, someone else comes along (typically a > remote mapper with no knowledge whatsoever about the place) and tries to > "normalize" the new tag into something common (but not applicable). Even > fixing "typos" has to be done very carefully and hesitant, limited to > actual typos like "highway=residental" and not extending to assumed > synonyms.
Plus and minus on that ... Yes adding tags has to be flexible, but there are still a few areas that we need perhaps a tighter control, and adding highway types that do not then get displayed is probably one? As with the current discussion, key elements need a few ground rules, but that does not prevent additional data being added via extra tags. The rule about not tagging for renderer or router works both ways since one may need to add information that can't easily be accessed or simply does not exist on the base tagging? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
