While it is a good idea to address the issues around name=* and name:<lg>=* tags, this proposal is a necessary first step before we can do anything else. Frederik's perferred solution and Christoph's idea both require there to be a default language format tag.
I would recommend approving this proposal in some form first, then we can have a separate discussion about the name tags. So I have removed a couple of short comments from the proposal to avoid this confusion. Tags for official languages should also be a separate discussion (though I also think this idea has merit). -Joseph On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:19 AM Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote: > On Wednesday 26 September 2018, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: > > > * allow mappers to accurately document information on names of > > > features in all situations that might exist world wide where there > > > are verifiable names with as little effort and in the least error > > > prone way as possible. > > > * allow data users to interpret this data without constraints due > > > to intransparent preprocessing performed by the mappers. > > > > I'm not sure that all the participants in this discussion and all the > > supporters of the draft proposal (and previous proposals) do really > > agree on the ultimate aim of that proposal. > > Yes, of course i should have mentioned that this is just my personal > opinion. I did not mean to imply to speak for anyone else. > > > Hence my suggestion to > > explore the problem space first and find out what problem(s) > > different people try to solve with that proposal, then identify the > > constraints that reduce the possible solutions space and the "nice to > > have" properties that we'ld like to see in the solution. > > Yes, you can try to systematically develop a solution after defining > requirements and quantifying priorities. But you need to keep in mind > that in OSM you have no centralized decision making process as you > usually have in engineering disciplines. So you would already have > trouble finding agreement on what exactly the problem is. And > experience tells that the solution space is typically much smaller than > the problem space when it comes to tagging in OSM. Long story short: > Finding consensus on the solution is often much easier than on the > problem. > > Still you are right, systematically collecting all the problems related > to name data recording in OSM would be quite useful - even if just from > a single person's perspective. But that is already quite a huge amount > of work. > > -- > Christoph Hormann > http://www.imagico.de/ > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
