> "And please do not claim that everyone will look in the wiki what the values > actually mean. Please stay realistic ;-)"
Hmm, mappers or end users ? Honestly, i don't consider either numeric or two or three word tags can be expected to convey enough info. So i would suggest most "primary" users do need to look at the wiki. Given that, numeric tags would be better at forcing people to look at the wiki ! Words easier to guess and perhaps get wrong ! But I'd not promote that as a model, rest assured. I don't feel strongly about numeric or word based values. Happy with either. So i will start a new thread to flush out who does. David . Martin Vonwald <imagic....@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi! > >2015-03-13 2:06 GMT+01:00 David <dban...@internode.on.net>: > >> > No, numeric values are not a good choice - really not. I also don't like >> the values much, but at least it's clear that "good" is better than "bad". >> >> But Martin, its not a "good" or "bad" situation, thats the point. Some >> people seek out extremely challenging roads to traverse. While dead smooth >> is good while getting there, why bother to go there if its going to be >> smooth all the way ? >> > >That's not what I meant. If someone has no idea about the meaning of the >values and just look at the existing tags, one may guess correctly, that >"good" means smoother than "bad". But what is smoother? grade1 or grade5? > >And please do not claim that everyone will look in the wiki what the values >actually mean. Please stay realistic ;-) > >And to answer the next argument: but if people don't know the exact meaning >and also don't look in the wiki, we can not be sure that they use the >values correctly. Yes. We can also not be sure that they use the values >correctly IF the look in the wiki. But the chances that we get more >appropriate values is much higher with smoothness=good than with >smoothness=grade97, because a "good smoothness" will have a much wider >common understanding than "smoothness=31415whatever". > >Best regards, >Martin > >P.S: I'm aware that we will not reach consensus about this on this mailing >list ;-) > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
