sent from a phone
> On 4. Feb 2019, at 00:42, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Correct. In fact documenting tags - even little used ones should be > encouraged. > > Further the documentation does not need to be placed in the proposal space, > particularly if the person has no intention of making a proposal. IMHO tag/key pages are for documenting established tags. Documenting undocumented tags is fine, and if there is significant usage and few doubt about the intended meaning of these tags, I am all for adding documentation in the key/tag namespace (although I would suggest dropping a note nonetheless on e.g. [tagging], as you never can be sure to know what people actually intended, unless you ask them). But creating such a page or adding such tags to map features overview pages is misleading when there is basically no or very few usage. These tags should be documented as well, but the right place to do it is in the proposal namespace. It doesn’t necessarily mean you intend to bring the tag to voting, but you don’t leave doubt about the status. Any documentation about unused or hardly used tags is a “proposal”, regardless of the intention of its inventor/s. A proposed tag becomes an actual (established) tag through adoption by fellow mappers, and not all tags that someone makes up will ever make it to this level. Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
