I think the best way out is to think detached from the meaning of the strings of characters we use for tagging. Let's document that we have have certain values for the key "historic" that describe objects that are not historic, and not even old. After all the purpose of the wiki is to describe the tagging as is, not as it should be an ideal tagging system.
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022, 14:05 Brian M. Sperlongano, <zelonew...@gmail.com> wrote: > The main issue I have with this proposal is that there is a longstanding > controversy regarding the historic key. Namely, the question of whether it > is used for things that are historic or merely old. I don't see how a > proposal centered around this key can move forward with that fundamental > debate unaddressed. > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022, 8:56 AM Anne-Karoline Distel <annekadis...@web.de> > wrote: > >> Thanks for pointing that out, I've closed the vote again, and will open >> again tomorrow. I don't know if that it the procedure when you correct >> an oversight on the proposal page. >> >> Anne >> >> On 03/11/2022 12:16, Daniel Capilla wrote: >> > Please, >> > >> > Check the wiki talk page of this proposal before opening the voting >> > time. Some issues are not cleared resolved. >> > >> > Thank you. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > >> > Daniel Capilla >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Tagging mailing list >> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
