DE talk:Key:marker

pipeline=marker sollte bestehen bleiben und nicht wie hier aufgeführt gegen marker=* getauscht werden. Die Ergänzung marker=* (aerial, stone, ...) ist sinvoll. ref und operator ist meist schon an pipeline=marker vorhanden. --Geri-oc (talk) 07:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I can't answer in German, but here are some opinions about this:

pipeline=marker legitimates the introduction of power=marker, telecom=marker and so on for the same thing. It's not desirable to get not-related-to-process values in power, telecom and pipeline keys. utility=* is here to define to which activity the markers refers. You can let pipeline=marker on the exitsing objects if you wish to, but guidelines should not encourage to use it as it has been reviewed. Fanfouer (talk) 20:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/PipelineExtension -> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FPipelineExtension&type=revision&diff=1117082&oldid=1117061 no comment --Geri-oc (talk) 08:58, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

That was in 2014 for a pipeline refinement tagging proposal. Now we're reinforcing more detailed tagging for a particular feature and from that point of view, there are more benefits to discourage the use of pipeline=marker. That's not because a tag is reviewed that things can't evolve towards more elaborated tagging, especially when proposals have to be concise and focused on a single point of change to ensure understanding and adoption from concerned mappers Fanfouer (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Es sollten anderen Taggingmethoden nicht als "Fehler" suggeriert werden. --Geri-oc (talk) 07:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)