Amenity template revert
Beste Cartinus ,
ik ben het niet eens met het terugdraaien van mijn toevoeging en wijziging betreffende amenity=doctor(s) op de pagina Template:Map_Features:amenity.
from the history of amenity :
25 jan 2009 - Paulbe (correction amenity=doctor (not doctors))
26 jan 2009 - Cartinus (Undo revision 215621 by Paulbe - See the mailinglist archives and tagwatch about why this was wrong.)
I do not agree.
"See the mailinglist archives" is not a very contructive remark. Furthermore, just the mailinglist archives and Tagwatch can not count as authorative documentation.
To start with the last: Not really. The page it redirects to is titled "Proposed features/Doctor" and was created 29 october 2008. This is a rather inane proposal. Why propose a "new" tag for something that is already tagged since several years. This page should probably be replaced by something that really describes what is being used.
There is only one thing in OSM that is really authoritative and that is the database itself. The easiest way to see the results of that is Tagwatch. In Europe amenity=doctors is used 739 times and amenity=doctor is used 177 times. In other words any tool/application better accept the fact that there are two different tags that describe the same thing. But one of them is used ~4 times as much as the other.
One (technical) problem of tagwatch is that it can only show you how often a tag is used, not what it means. Here is where the wiki could help us. But now we encounter a social problem. In stead of (only) filling the wiki with pages that describe what is used, a number of people consider the wiki a normative platform. The norms they try to "force" on the others alas don't coincide with what is actually used. Again see the mailinglist archives for multiple discussions about this.
The way you changed the amenity template, made it look like the tag that is used the most is somehow wrong. This is simply not the case. It is a perfectly valid tag, that is used many times, by many different people, over several years time.
--Cartinus 05:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)