Hi,
On 25.03.20 11:19, Phake Nick wrote:
> My guess is that about 5% of name:xx tags in OSM actually represent a
> unique name in its own right; all others are either copies of the name
> tag ("this city does not have its own name in language XX but I want
> every city to have a name:xx tag so I'll just copy the name tag"), or
> transliterations (or, worst case, even literal translations).
>
> Isn't that the function of the key?
Unsure which of my list items you mean - copying the original name is
not the function of the key; a data user can simply fall back to the
name tag if no name:xx is given. Making a transliteration is also not
the the function of the key, since transliterations can be automated.
Making a translation is *certainly* not wanted!
> Adding Klingon name would not cause copyright issue since vocabularies
> are not copyrightable.
If someone adds a name and specifies a source web page, and the source
web page says "all rights reserved", then I will not start a legal
discussion.
> That is just the same problem with TIGER map data. I don't think anyone
> have ever proposed removing United States data from the OpenStreetMap
> database due to lack of maintainers back then?
Thank you for this comparison. People certainly use TIGER as an example
for not adding more of the same, and a lot of thought has gone into
identifying "TIGER deserts" and how to handle the stale data. If we can
start seeing the name inflation as a problem, stop adding "more of the
same", and develop strategies to deal with stale and possibly incorrect
names, that would already be a huge gain!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
