If I understand things correctly, the original poster is reverting perfectly fine changes to an equivalent, accepted, current tagging scheme, because they do not want to update their own local code that uses the data.
I can only imagine if HOT or another group started doing that. "Our scripts were written to use the original tagging scheme from 10 years ago, and this new tagging scheme means I would have to change my scripts, so I am just going to change all the tags back to what they were." lol. Someone would write another directed editing policy just to make sure that didn't happen. Cheers, Blake On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:23 AM Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com> wrote: > > > > > 29 Jun 2019, 11:59 by tomasstrau...@gmail.com: > > 2019-06-29, št, 11:58 Mateusz Konieczny rašė: > > (2) I see significant benefit of natural=water + water=* > > > This is your personal opinion. Opinion of OpenStreetMap community is > expressed by those who map - in the data. > > > All "I prefer tag Y over X" are "rule Z is good way to deciding which tag is > better" is > a personal opinion, so I am not sure why you are pointing this out. > > I even started from "I see (...)". > > 29 Jun 2019, 11:59 by tomasstrau...@gmail.com: > > Opinion of OpenStreetMap community is expressed by those who map - in the > data. > > See https://taghistory.raifer.tech/ > https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/899988/60383077-c001ce00-9a6c-11e9-9aa8-ed43c7851a36.png > for a quick check. > > (1) most of lead of landuse=reservoir for areas is a result of a bot edit, > maybe an import > (2) since 2016 water=reservoir is growing much faster than landuse=reservoir > > This quick check is a bit better than just checking total usage count, but > obviously > it is not worth much. It may be useful to investigate actual usage among > mappers > who are actually selecting tagging scheme used. > > As water tagging is very prominent > > This concern tagging details of body of water what is actually not prominent. > > I already had to revert a number of such changes and > explain people to ignore such "advices" or switch to a better editor). > > "had to revert" is untrue. > > Are you manually checking every single part of such edits? Otherwise you > are making automated edits in violation of automatic edits code of conduct. > > It is also not too useful, most what you achieve is to confuse other mappers > and > likely scare away some of them. > > Please stop doing that. > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- ---------------------------------------------------- Blake Girardot OSM Wiki - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Bgirardot HOTOSM Member - https://hotosm.org/users/blake_girardot skype: jblakegirardot _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
