"curated, simple information on themain tags that are _used_" Originally this was maintained at Map Features (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features), and this page is still somewhat "curated"; not just any tag can be added, most of the very common tags are included, and many people are watching the page for changes
But this is a wiki page, so sometimes rare or proposed tags are added without discussion. I've removed a few of these over the past few months. In theory new tags should be added either because they are already "de facto" accepted, as shown by frequent use in many places mappers, and support by database users, but tags can also be added to Map Features through the Proposal Process with discussion on the mailing list and wiki. Changing to a github-like system of version management would require some people to serve as "maintainers" or "moderators" of the new, curated list of Map Features / Tags, wouldn't it? While this could be an improvement in the quality and consistency of how decisions are made, it would also limit participation and centralize decision-making. I've recently tried to start discussions about how new tags should be added to Map Features and have asked specifically about adding some "in use" / "de facto" tags. Perhaps the current wiki-based system is fine, as long as enough people are invested in maintaining it. It might be helpful to agree that Tag: and Key: pages on the Openstreetmap wiki should document "de facto", actual mapping practice rather than what a particular person thinks should be done - this being reserved for Proposal pages. - Joseph On 9/11/19, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote: > On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> >> The main thing we're missing is curated, simple information on the >> main tags that are _used_. > > Indeed. And i would go even further: Any documentation of the de facto > use of tags written by humans (i.e. that goes beyond automatic analysis > like taginfo), written and maintained in a way that ensures it actually > does document the de facto situation, would be immensely useful and > important. > >> It needs an >> editor/curator/whatever, to have clear editorial guidelines, and >> probably to run on the pull request model rather than open editing. > > Is there any mature and writer centric software that implements this > kind of model? I mean that from the perspective of a documentation > author offers a wiki like functionality with decent preview and > formatting but at the same time comes with a kind of version management > and functions to facilitate editorial review and discussion. > > -- > Christoph Hormann > http://www.imagico.de/ > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
