(I am replying to the message which appears last in the longest stack in the web listing)
Thanks, everyone, for your thoughts. I gave this some additional thought over the past day. My initial concern was from a provenance point-of-view; I work with semantic web technologies inside a corporation and we're starting to tackle the provenance issue, which essentially boils down to attributions at the triple-level, which is analogous to the source annotation at the object level, especially when you start digging down into source:name, source:name:date and source_ref:name ... that sort of thing. I see, however, that changesets provide a package level which is not generally available in the triple-store; named graphs could be used for the same thing if you were to have a name domain where graphs are auto generated by upload processes; that's not the approach most semantic folk take, though (but it's worth thinking about). The association of a changeset identifier provides a linkage between a group tag and the members of that group. The only problem I see is in management of multiple changesets as you are doing complex data addition to the map. JOSM has pretty good separation between multiple active changesets, but it could be cleaner. I'm thinking that maybe if I use separate layers for different sources and make sure to load in proper order (i.e. don't load the name of a building before you load the building, for instance), that could be workable. I'll give that a try and see how it goes. Regards --ceyockey -----Original Message----- >From: SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> >Sent: Jan 2, 2013 11:59 AM >To: tagging@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Tagging] Source tag - deprecated for use on objects? > >Serge Wroclawski wrote: >> There are many people (myself included) who believe that source /on >> objects/ is not useful, and most OSMers have moved away from using it, >> and toward source on changesets. >[citation needed] > > >> So then what do we do? We could have a source tag for every tag... >> >> source:cuisine ? > >No, you'd only have a source for tags that aren't obvious from survey. > >Taking your building example, if an armchair mapper adds it it makes >sense for them to use e.g. "source=Bing" - it tells local mappers that >it has not properly being surveyed. > >Once it has, it'd probably end up as "source=survey" (or perhaps >"source=survey;Bing"). If there was some legal designation that isn't >visible on the ground but could only be obtained from some other source >then perhaps that deserves a separate tag. > >If you're only an armchair mapper and only mapping from one source then >changeset source tags might be ideal. However if so, (unless you're >mapping e.g. the Central African Republic *) you probably need to get >out more :-) . > >Cheers, >Andy > >* http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20889136 > > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
