On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 20:13, bkil <bkil.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I also raised this question some years ago on the talk page but went with > the flow and continued to tag webcams with contact:webcam=*. I think it > makes more sense if you see a static gallery of a venue specified under > contact:flickr=*, prerecorded videos under contact:youtube=* and you can > also check out the traffic in real time under contact:webcam=* (for example > on a beach or a pub to decide whether it would be a suitable time to give a > visit). >
None of those come under what I would consider "contact" Some youtube channels permit comments on videos but they may be ignored by the creator. I think the contact namespace is entirely without justification in the first place. Adding things that aren't mechanisms for contacting somebody merely compounds the stupidity. There are reasons for having the addr: namespace. It groups together elements which may not be meaningful unless considered as a group. Knowing the house number is not much good without knowing the street and town (in the UK the postcode and house number suffice, but you need both). Are you unable to look at somebody's facebook page unless you also know the twitter account? Do you need the instagram as well? No, because they're independent. I've yet to see any valid reason for having a contact: namespace and using it for surveillance cams is the least valid reason I've seen yet. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
