On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed on the 'control'. But the change of the tagging status? Maybe the > tagging group (here) is a good place to start a discussion on changing the > status of a tag? And it needs to be a formal process with voting on the > wiki? Thus others outside the tagging group can participate? A 'request for > status change (RFSC)' followed by 'Status Voting' ? The core problem for this tag: the people using the tag were not involved in the deprecation. The wiki pretends to be the voice of consensus, but it's not. *http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features>* ------- A far better process might be: *1) Announce an intent to deprecate.* *2) Issue a notice on changesets involving the old tag (once per mapper ID to avoid spam).* *3) Take debate. Build a retagging plan (as appropriate).* *4) Take vote, if and only if there is controversy. Many deprecation efforts are good proposals and may not need votes.* *5) Announce the deprecation on a data consumer list.* *6) Delay for 2-8 weeks. Execute a retagging.* Anything short of this leaves out the people who most care about a tag, and it leaves fragmented tagging which is bad for data consumers and rendering software. --- For waterway=water_point, I have an open mechanical edit proposal (retagging to amenity=water_point in caravan sites). It's the cleanup that never happened before, effectively burring dozens of perfectly good places to get fresh water.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
