Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
67 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Tagging mailing list

      I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be successful we need to standardize to the contact:
 prefix. No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
different names! Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that mappers
don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take action and
 to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.


Having two keys for the same purpose (the current behaviour) has no advantages but many disadvantages:
 * Data customers need to be aware of both tags to cover all
requested and available information. So to get telephone numbers they
need to look for Key:phone and Key:contact:phone . This makes a bad
impression.

 * Normalisation of that data is required. Key:phone must be
translated to Key:contact:phone or backwards. It is good to prevent the
need of normalisation through standardisation as far as possible to
prevent errors and misinterpretations from happening.

 * Having two schemes leads to confusion of mappers (especially
for newbies) which they should use. Some need clear guidance ( e.g. On
request I created a translation table for mappers of the old diaper key
to help them to switch to the new Key:changing_table as you can see
here: ​https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:changing_table#Comparison_with_the_deprecated_diaper.3D.2A_key . I also notified some of the mappers and stakeholders about that change) 

See also:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/7566
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/19184
OpenStreetMap contact schema unification

--
~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


Developer (not Founder) of the Babykarte: https://babykarte.github.io
Participating in "MapDiscover" project: https://mapdiscover.org
"Community Support" for Trufi Association:
https://trufi-association.org
Documentation for Trufi Communities on mapping bus routes:
https://github.com/trufi-association/mapping-documentation


Ein Gag zu Hamsterkäufen: https://klopapier.mapdiscover.de


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

alexey.zakharenkov
 
04.05.2020, 13:54, "Valor Naram via Tagging" <[hidden email]>:


      I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be successful we

 
I agree that phone and contact:phone denote the same thing and should be collapsed into one. But a website doesn't always contain contact information like websites devoted natural/man-made features. IMO, noone should convert 'website' tag for this memorial https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1416386078 into 'contact:website', so global automatic tag replacement would be an error in this case.
 
Best regards,
Alexey

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Marc Gemis
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Are you planning on repeating this request every 5 months?

I thought https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone
failed.
Wasn't the outcome about 50-50? How will you ever convince half of the
voters to accepts the other scheme?


regards

m

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:55 PM Valor Naram via Tagging
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>       I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be successful we need to standardize to the contact:
>  prefix. No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
> different names! Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
> experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that mappers
> don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take action and
>  to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.
>
>
> Having two keys for the same purpose (the current behaviour) has no advantages but many disadvantages:
>  * Data customers need to be aware of both tags to cover all
> requested and available information. So to get telephone numbers they
> need to look for Key:phone and Key:contact:phone . This makes a bad
> impression.
>
>  * Normalisation of that data is required. Key:phone must be
> translated to Key:contact:phone or backwards. It is good to prevent the
> need of normalisation through standardisation as far as possible to
> prevent errors and misinterpretations from happening.
>
>  * Having two schemes leads to confusion of mappers (especially
> for newbies) which they should use. Some need clear guidance ( e.g. On
> request I created a translation table for mappers of the old diaper key
> to help them to switch to the new Key:changing_table as you can see
> here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:changing_table#Comparison_with_the_deprecated_diaper.3D.2A_key . I also notified some of the mappers and stakeholders about that change)
>
> See also:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/7566
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/19184
> OpenStreetMap contact schema unification
>
> --
> ~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram
>
>
> Developer (not Founder) of the Babykarte: https://babykarte.github.io
> Participating in "MapDiscover" project: https://mapdiscover.org
> "Community Support" for Trufi Association:
> https://trufi-association.org
> Documentation for Trufi Communities on mapping bus routes:
> https://github.com/trufi-association/mapping-documentation
>
>
> Ein Gag zu Hamsterkäufen: https://klopapier.mapdiscover.de
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Marc M.
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Hello,

Le 04.05.20 à 12:53, Valor Naram via Tagging a écrit :
> replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys

although I totally agree with the idea, I can't imagine a global mass
agreement to make it happen.
as in the previous version, you're going to have opinions against it:
- because too much use (saying that a problem that's too big doesn't
need to be solved is pretty absurd).
- because some will feel that A and contact:A are not the same thing

Regards,
Marc

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Valor Naram
In reply to this post by Marc Gemis
I didn't heard any good reason why not to change to `contact:` scheme.


~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme
From: Marc Gemis
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
CC:


Are you planning on repeating this request every 5 months?

I thought https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Discussions/tagging/contact:phone_or_phone
failed.
Wasn't the outcome about 50-50? How will you ever convince half of the
voters to accepts the other scheme?


regards

m

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:55 PM Valor Naram via Tagging
wrote:
>
>
> I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be successful we need to standardize to the contact:
> prefix. No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
> different names! Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
> experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that mappers
> don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take action and
> to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.
>
>
> Having two keys for the same purpose (the current behaviour) has no advantages but many disadvantages:
> * Data customers need to be aware of both tags to cover all
> requested and available information. So to get telephone numbers they
> need to look for Key:phone and Key:contact:phone . This makes a bad
> impression.
>
> * Normalisation of that data is required. Key:phone must be
> translated to Key:contact:phone or backwards. It is good to prevent the
> need of normalisation through standardisation as far as possible to
> prevent errors and misinterpretations from happening.
>
> * Having two schemes leads to confusion of mappers (especially
> for newbies) which they should use. Some need clear guidance ( e.g. On
> request I created a translation table for mappers of the old diaper key
> to help them to switch to the new Key:changing_table as you can see
> here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:changing_table#Comparison_with_the_deprecated_diaper.3D.2A_key . I also notified some of the mappers and stakeholders about that change)
>
> See also:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/7566
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/19184
> OpenStreetMap contact schema unification
>
> --
> ~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram
>
>
> Developer (not Founder) of the Babykarte: https://babykarte.github.io
> Participating in "MapDiscover" project: https://mapdiscover.org
> "Community Support" for Trufi Association:
> https://trufi-association.org
> Documentation for Trufi Communities on mapping bus routes:
> https://github.com/trufi-association/mapping-documentation
>
>
> Ein Gag zu Hamsterkäufen: https://klopapier.mapdiscover.de
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Marc M.
In reply to this post by alexey.zakharenkov
Le 04.05.20 à 13:48, Alexey Zakharenkov a écrit :
> noone should convert 'website' tag for this memorial
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1416386078 into 'contact:website'

indeed, it's not contact:website and but also not a website
it's just a picture and 2 lines of text as there are probably
a lot of them. it's not THE website of this object.
so the problem with this object is that it shouldn't have
a website tag at all :) image=* ?

vehicle=boat is also wrong. vehicle is an acces tag.
maybe memorial=sculpture or memorial=boat.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by Valor Naram
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 13:37, Sören alias Valor Naram <[hidden email]> wrote:
I didn't heard any good reason why not to change to `contact:` scheme.

Because too many people disagree with you.

I'm not saying that they're right.  I'm not saying that you're wrong.  I'm
saying that they will vote against your proposal as they did before,
and it will fail (again).

It's not for them to convince you that they have a good reason not to
change it, it's for you to convince them that they are wrong.  You failed
the last time and I doubt you'll do any better this time.  Not unless
you have better arguments than you had last time, but if you do
I haven't seen them.

However irrational you think they are, however irrational they may
actually be, too many people disagree with you for this to happen.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Richard Fairhurst
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Soren Reinecke wrote:
> I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed
> versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email.
> Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like
> Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website

As someone with admin access over this mailing list, I request that you do
not keep bringing back proposals which were extensively debated beforehand
and generally rejected. It wastes everyone's time.

I don't particularly want to start banhammering people from the list but
will do so if necessary.

Thank you.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Sebastian Dicke
In reply to this post by alexey.zakharenkov
The non prefixed tags should be replaced manually to avoid such
problems. When a website is not a contact website then it should be
prefixed with another suitable namespace. It would be more useful than
just use always website.


Regards


Sebastian


Am 04.05.20 um 13:48 schrieb Alexey Zakharenkov:
>
> I agree that phone and contact:phone denote the same thing and should
> be collapsed into one. But a website doesn't always contain contact
> information like websites devoted natural/man-made features. IMO,
> noone should convert 'website' tag for this memorial
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1416386078 into 'contact:website',
> so global automatic tag replacement would be an error in this case.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
Am Mo., 4. Mai 2020 um 15:16 Uhr schrieb Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]>:
As someone with admin access over this mailing list, I request that you do
not keep bringing back proposals which were extensively debated beforehand
and generally rejected. It wastes everyone's time.


Thank you Richard! I much appreciate the way you exercise your admin privileges here. Only in the extreme cases a call to reason.

Cheers
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by Sebastian Dicke
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 15:05, Sebastian Martin Dicke <[hidden email]> wrote:
The non prefixed tags should be replaced manually to avoid such
problems. When a website is not a contact website then it should be
prefixed with another suitable namespace. It would be more useful than
just use always website.

I'm trying to think of any website I have ever seen that ONLY provided
contact details.  I've seen web pages that are contact details only,
but those might better be tagged as URL.  Websites are the whole
enchilada, in my opinion.  A page of contact details is a page within
a website.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Sebastian Dicke


Am Mo., 4. Mai 2020 um 16:05 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Martin Dicke <[hidden email]>:
The non prefixed tags should be replaced manually to avoid such
problems. When a website is not a contact website then it should be
prefixed with another suitable namespace. It would be more useful than
just use always website.


if there was general agreement to add the prefix, there would be more efficient means to do it. For example to my knowledge, both of the most used editors, iD and JOSM, apply the shorter version of these tags in their presets. Also many contributors add these shorter tags manually. The last voting on the issue has demonstrated that there isn't a majority supporting a transition to contact:-prefix. Your suggestion would only contribute to more tag fragmentation.

Cheers
Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Shawn K. Quinn
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
On 5/4/20 05:53, Valor Naram via Tagging wrote:

> I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of
> the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be
> replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone,
> Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms
> our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be
> successful we need to standardize to the contact: prefix.> No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
> different names! Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
> experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that
> mappers don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take
> action and to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.

As an alternative, why not get rid of the contact:* versions since most
people are not using them?

--
Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Valor Naram
> As an alternative, why not get rid of the contact:* versions since most
people are not using them?

I tried this in the first round and people rejected it with the reason that this is the newer one which should be used

~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme
From: "Shawn K. Quinn"
To: [hidden email]
CC:


On 5/4/20 05:53, Valor Naram via Tagging wrote:

> I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of
> the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be
> replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone,
> Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms
> our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be
> successful we need to standardize to the contact: prefix.> No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
> different names! Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
> experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that
> mappers don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take
> action and to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.

As an alternative, why not get rid of the contact:* versions since most
people are not using them?

--
Shawn K. Quinn
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Valor Naram
In reply to this post by Marc M.
> - because too much use (saying that a problem that's too big doesn't need to be solved is pretty absurd).

A mechanical edit could convert them to their respective `contact:` subkey sisters and solves that big problem. Also editor and customers changing their presets is not that difficult because in OSM new schemes are approved all the time and some others deprecated and translated to a new scheme (if possible and if it can be done securely then via mechanical edit)

> because some will feel that A and contact:A are not the same thing

Well, the specification says that they are the same thing by mentioning both are used to tag contact information. If they're not the same thing then the ones saying that should explain why and name some examples so we can discuss and find a solution for these cases (if any). But also from these people I did not get any input.

~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme
From: "Marc M."
To: [hidden email]
CC:


Hello,

Le 04.05.20 à 12:53, Valor Naram via Tagging a écrit :
> replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys

although I totally agree with the idea, I can't imagine a global mass
agreement to make it happen.
as in the previous version, you're going to have opinions against it:
- because too much use (saying that a problem that's too big doesn't
need to be solved is pretty absurd).
- because some will feel that A and contact:A are not the same thing

Regards,
Marc

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

dieterdreist
Am Mo., 4. Mai 2020 um 17:46 Uhr schrieb Sören alias Valor Naram <[hidden email]>:
> because some will feel that A and contact:A are not the same thing

Well, the specification says that they are the same thing by mentioning both are used to tag contact information. If they're not the same thing then the ones saying that should explain why and name some examples so we can discuss and find a solution for these cases (if any). But also from these people I did not get any input.



please read up the former discussion, this was already discussed. It is clear that "contact:" despite what the wiki says, will always mean "contact", while websites, facebook pages and whatever else is suggested to be put under "contact" will not always have a contacting possibility (and will often have a broader scope than just "contact").

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Hi

  I request to replace all occurrence of the prefixed versions of the
contact keys, as it adds no quality to the OSM database



On 04/05/2020 11:53, Valor Naram via Tagging wrote:
>        I request to replace all occurrence of the non-prefixed versions of the contact keys like Key:phone, Key:email. Key:website to be replaced with the prefixed ones like Key:contact:phone, Key:contact:email, Key:contact:website . The current situation harms our database in a way that makes our data less useful. In order to be successful we need to standardize to the contact:
>   prefix. No more multiple keys for the exact same purpose with just
> different names!

But there would still be "multiple keys" (contact:phone, :contact:email etc)

>   Make tagging more orthogonal! As someone who has
> experience in database and normalisation it hurts to see that mappers
> don't know how to take care of a database. It is time to take action and
>   to clean up so OSM data gets more useful.
>
>
>   * Normalisation of that data is required. Key:phone must be
> translated to Key:contact:phone or backwards.

No it doesn't

>   * Having two schemes leads to confusion of mappers (especially
> for newbies) which they should use.

Then get rid the the 'contact' schema

DaveF

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
> It is clear that "contact:" despite what the wiki says, will always mean "contact", while websites, facebook pages and whatever else is suggested to be put under "contact" will not always have a contacting possibility (and will often have a broader scope than just "contact").

Then we can deprecate contact:facebook, contact:twitter and the other social media platforms inside the `contact` prefix? If they have a broader scope than just "contact" this should be fine no? And then deprecating Key:phone, Key:email and Key:website in favor of their sisters should be no problem. The keys can be translated via a mechanical edit.

~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme
From: Martin Koppenhoefer
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
CC:


Am Mo., 4. Mai 2020 um 17:46 Uhr schrieb Sören alias Valor Naram <[hidden email]>:
> because some will feel that A and contact:A are not the same thing

Well, the specification says that they are the same thing by mentioning both are used to tag contact information. If they're not the same thing then the ones saying that should explain why and name some examples so we can discuss and find a solution for these cases (if any). But also from these people I did not get any input.



please read up the former discussion, this was already discussed. It is clear that "contact:" despite what the wiki says, will always mean "contact", while websites, facebook pages and whatever else is suggested to be put under "contact" will not always have a contacting possibility (and will often have a broader scope than just "contact").

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

s8evq-2
In reply to this post by Richard Fairhurst
I think you're exaggerating here. Just press 'delete' on you mail client if the discussion doesn't interest you and that's it.

On Mon, 4 May 2020 06:13:42 -0700 (MST), Richard Fairhurst <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As someone with admin access over this mailing list, I request that you do
> not keep bringing back proposals which were extensively debated beforehand
> and generally rejected. It wastes everyone's time.
>
> I don't particularly want to start banhammering people from the list but
> will do so if necessary.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Richard
>

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

Marc M.
In reply to this post by Paul Allen
Hello,

Le 04.05.20 à 14:48, Paul Allen a écrit :
> I haven't seen them.

the two reasons are:

- avoid having 2 tags for the same thing.
it's bad for both contributors and data-uses.

- using namespace for contact: (like we do with addr:) it's useful for
the use of the data (you can group them without having to hard-code
all the possible variants that may exist in the world).
it's obviously also useful for an editor (it could display a preset
listing all the contact keys:* without having to hard-code them in
the preset).

Regards,
Marc

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
1234