On Thursday 21 June 2018, Bryan Housel wrote: > > As I see it, the users of iD and the community are deciding which > presets get included. I might recommend a change in what the display > name should be, or what icon it should have, but I almost never tell > someone that they can’t add a preset or field (some examples coming > up next).
Then why do you object to Frederik's idea of separating the tagging presets from editor development and give up control over the decisions? No specifc suggestion has been made so far how such a project would be managed (and as i have already said i have concerns about one single preset collection with no alternatives under any kind of central control) but still this remains an important question here for me. I am glad you work on improving possibilities for choice of presets and this could over time be used to allow alternatives - like converting the JOSM presets (which already includes a lot of specialized add on preset collections) or managing diverse independent preset collections. This is IMO the best way to go ahead here. > I actually think being more involved in tagging discussions here is > probably the solution to educating mappers about how to design tags > in a way that is easier for software (and users) to work with. I think this comment (as well as your list of criteria for preset decisions) greatly illustrates where we differ on a very fundamental level. IMO the whole point of OSM is having a mapper centric approach to tagging, mappers decide which tags to use based on what is most convenient for them. I am all for educating mappers how to better achieve this because many new mappers struggle with that obviously. But the aim should not be to cater developers of software (or indicrectly the users of the software as you put it). Pursuing this aim on a large scale would be poison for OSM. To give you a specific example - not something with particularly high impact but still one of my favorite in this regard. Mapping an aeroway=runway with a two note way and a width tag is quite clearly the quickest, most compact, most convenient and at the same time perfectly precise method to map it. But for editor developers like you this is complicated because you have to visualize the runway width and support interactive manipulation of it. For you it is way more convenient if mappers agree to map runways with polygons. Ok, this particular case is not strictly a pure tagging problem but i hope it illustrates the difference between a mapper centric approach to tagging and a developer or data user centric approach and why i think it is highly important to stick to the former. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
