Let's not forget that this debate was started by naming disputes in Ukraine. I would vote for option 2 myself, but if that would be found impossible, I could agree with Tobias. LM
2012/8/2 Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de>: > "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" wrote: >> Tobias Knerr wrote: >>> You need to realize, though, that mappers in areas where only one >>> language is commonly used will not want to put more effort into mapping >>> names than they do today. And rightly so, imo - from their perspective, >>> it's just more work for little or no gain. >> >> Yes, I agree. This is very strong argument for Option 1 and I'm starting >> to lean towards this solution. > > Have you considered combining the options? > > For example you could use option 2 with a single additional rule: If > lang contains only one language code, treat name as name:<lang_value>. > > So if there is only one main language, lang will contain the code for > that language, and name will contain the name in that language. > > But in multilingual areas, lang contains the codes for all these > languages as per option 2, and once mappers in those areas trust data > consumers to construct the labels from several name:xx reliably, they > can begin omitting the bare name tag. > > Tobias > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
