Hi everyone ☺
OK, it seems that the discussions are going wild again in this new year.
So let’s keep feelings aside and try to answer with arguments instead ☺
Thanks everyone who does that, you are too many to thank individually ☺
@Mario: I’ve seen a lot of people saying that we shouldn’t remove the
“name” tag (and because it already led to a misunderstanding, let’s be
precise: I mean the tag whose name is exactly “name”, so we keep the
“name:en”, “name:UN:en”, etc., and I only mean that for places like
oceans and Antartica), but I haven’t seen any argument for this. Can you
elaborate on this?
The reason why I believe the “name” tag should not be placed in such
place is semantic: there is no best local name, so let’s not put any.
This then enables any renderrer to default to a language of their choice
(or to check for other, possibly more adequate tags, like “name:UN:*”).
If you put a “name” tag here, I can’t do that. I’ve been suggesting to
create a renderrer that just uses “name:eo” if present… just to be told
right away that this is not a good solution as it would basically
chooses the Esperanto name for everything instead of just these places
where there is no default language. I think that having an empty “name”
tag or not having a “name” tag would be a nice indication that there is
not best “name” tag, and leave each renderrer use their heuristics (or
just display no name).
You mentioned the cities in Morocco. This is a cool example ☺ So for
instance there is this node:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/288704798 (I’ve taken it randomly: I
really don’t know this region) It seems to be in a very similar
situation than the Baltic Sea we discussed before
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305640277 So if we can do it in
Morocco, would it make sense to do it in the Baltic Sea? (That was
basically what this changeset suggested:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78171743 just that this
changeset wasn’t done with the permission of the community.) I like how
it renders with the new line between each name ☺ The only difference is
that the Baltic Sea involves a couple more languages. Any thoughts about
this?
@Marc: You seem to understand the issue better than me, but I didn’t
understand your answer. From what you said, the osm.org styles base
themselves on the “name” tag to determine the default style? Or is this
that the way the styles are currently defined do not enable the
definition of heuristics to pick the best “name:*” tag if the “name” tag
itself is absent? I really don’t know the styling part of OSM
renderrers, but it seems to be crucial in this discussion: can you
elaborate on this? This would really help ☺
Thanks in advance! ☺
(Here follows the second part, more clumsy and probably less important
part of my message ☺)
Just to argument against some opinions that have been raised there which
made my right eyebrow raised by two centimeters:
— Yes, linguistic imperialism is a thing:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imp%C3%A9rialisme_linguistique#Les_facettes_de_l'imp%C3%A9rialisme_linguistique_dans_les_grandes_r%C3%A9gions_du_monde
The English Wikipedia for this notion is quite poor, so I’m putting the
French one. Interestingly enough its discussion page is going as wild as
this very thread ☺
— There have been a German-only message three days ago, and it didn’t
yield to any frenzy, yet, in this thread, people seems to really don’t
like multilanguage posts. The rules of this mailing list are not shown
when subscribing, so it is normal that not everyone knows about them. So
let’s be calm about it. (And maybe display some rule when subscribing
the mailing list?) ☺
— From what I remember, there is no South-America polygon in OSM. And
given that about half its population speaks Portuguese as a main
language (yes, Brazil is a big country), choosing Spanish for the name
tag may not be as natural as it might look like.
— Esperanto is not meant to be more easily understandable without
learning the language. There are languages with such goals (Interlingua,
typically). The goal of (the design behind) Esperanto (before it started
to evolve like a natural language) is to reduce the learning time to
reach fluency without hindering on the language expressiveness.
Amike,
Martin.
Hi Tomek, and everybody.
being this an English list, I'll write in English, I'm tempted to use
Spanish, or Italian. my written Latin is poor.
I'm sorry to disappoint you as an Esperanto fan, but I understand
Polish better than Esperanto.
Should I "vote" on your proposal? I consider this the wrong place for
holding even the discussion. according to me, using the English
language for naming "South America" in the standard map is bad enough,
but I do not think (many) people from South America will tell you that
**here**, because people who agree with you will not be reading you
here. If I know the locals good enough, they would want the map to be
in Spanish just as they seem to have the impression that the whole
world (around them) speaks Spanish. (I do not know many people from
Cayenne, Brazil, nor Suriname.)
I disagree that the tag 'name' should be removed, and about the
wikipedia tag, and the fact that it generally points to the english
wikipedia version, too bad. you will not solve this by removing the
tag, you may try to educate Latin speaking people to be more
assertive, but I think it's a lost cause.
I'm aware of one place in the world where they have three national
languages: Morocco, and what happens there is that the map uses the
three national languages for all names, and the map looks so clumsy
this way, in particular with the Amazigh name included (I have tested
some locals on their knowledge of the written language, and I am
fairly sure that 95% of Amazigh people can't even read it). quite
regularly, you see people editing the 'name' tag to make it less
clumsy, by removing two of the languages (those they don't like, I guess).
so, dear Tomek, I do not know what's the best option, but removing the
'name' and the 'wikipedia' tag doesn't feel like the best one to me.
proposing it here, even less. my guess is that having a language
option on the rendered map would be better than this that you
propose. for some locations, I indeed prefer the openstreetmap.fr map.
as for the replies you are getting, I've noticed a dichotomy in the
community: people focusing on the actual point, and people focusing on
the form. seems "cultural", and seems that European toes are less
easily stepped upon. "you may try to educate English speaking people
to be less assertive" ;=)
anyhow, cheers, and happy mapping,
MF
(nie piszem w twojm języku … want ik ken het niet, not enough at least.)
On 05/01/2020 20:39, Tomek wrote:
W dniu 20-01-06 o 02:25, stevea pisze:
It's easy to goof things up and we shouldn't.
EO
Pardonu, mi ne estas provokisto, mi ne kondutas malserioze.
Mi skribas en mia lingvo (pola) en internacia lingvo (Esperanto) kaj
iam en via lingvo (angla), kial vi ne estimas min kaj ne parolas en
mia lingvo?
Bonvolu koncentriĝu pri solvi la problemon pri nomoj.
PL
Przepraszam, nie jestem jakimś prowokatorem, nie wygłupiam się.
Piszę w moim języku (polskim) w języku międzynarodowym (Esperanto) i
czasami w Twoim (angielskim), dlaczego Ty nie piszesz w moim języku?
Proszę skoncentrować się na rozwiązaniu problemu nazw.
EN
I'm sorry, I'm not some kind of provocateur, I'm not fooling around.
I write in my (Polish) language in the international language
(Esperanto) and sometimes in your (English), why don't you write in
my language?
Please focus on resolving the name problem.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
