hi, cause is this contribution: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Misleading_tag_names ("protect_id is misleading ... The ID is a tool to find an unique area ...").
What do you think: would it be meaningful to rename the key protect_id to protect_class (or -type)? On a first abstractation: Affected are about 2 773 keys worldwide with 577 different values (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=11503). Therefrom some are 4- and 5-digit and some are itemizations. - they should be leave 1394 times protection_id and - wrong use or some owe values, thats to check 2385 times protection_title. - that should be a name string, no ID or class, so to leave And there is 34095 times protected. - doesn´t belong from my point of view in this case. I would change all "protect_id" with the values 1 to 99 into "protect_class" "protection_id" with the values 1 to 99 (after a check) into "protect_class" - may be in about ten days? Does anybody have futher suggestions on this protected_area-page to update in this run? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area The contribution-users missed ID-key was been declared with a key "protection_code". These has to be decorate with a ref: existing - protection_code=NSG WE 237 - protection_code_source=EUR27 ... to new - ref:protection_id=NSG WE 237 - protection_id_source=EUR27 ... anybody with further suggestions? For these update, I would download a data.osm of the key protected_area (>60MB?), change relating keys in an editor and ... upload data.osm with JOSM again - may be cut into some smaller files for uploading? If there is an old hand, because I never did somthing "big" like that, we can gladly work together ... thanks for answers, cheers, crom btw.: how to read this downloaded 2011-March.txt-file. I just see somthing like "´&¬Å@UC›¯ƒ¡ ...." or "##ìÉÌ$Ó“(Tíó¾×" _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
