Proposal talk:Documentation of key prefixes & suffixes
Data items
![](/w/images/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
What new data items have to be created? Looking at e.g. Item:Q5313 (the data item for key:disused:). I think we would need:
- a data item for key prefix (to be used with instance of)
- a data item for key suffix (to be used with instance of)
- a property for permanent key prefix ID
- a property for permanent key suffix ID
Am I missing something?
--Push-f (talk) 07:28, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
How the data items for prefix und suffix keys should be named (labeled)? With ":" or without ":"? - Consistently when we remove the ":" of the key description page name and replace it by namespace, the data item should also have no ":" in naming. But I'm not sure with this. Technical we could have two items identically labeled (in cases where there is usage as a key and a prefix). They would be distinguished by the item and property listed above (instance of and permanent ID). On the other hand keeping the ":" might be more handy to humans. --Chris2map (talk) 08:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
- Good thinking! Yes I agree that adding ":" would be more human-friendly, I added it to the proposal. --Push-f (talk) 09:10, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Template parameters
![](/w/images/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
Which template parameters of Template:KeyDescription make sense for key prefixes/suffixes and which don't?
E.g. drink=* currently describes onWay=no
which does make sense for the drink namespace.
--Push-f (talk) 07:28, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
What about the transport modes?
![](/w/images/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
There are many transport modes (they are listed under Key:access#Transport mode restrictions, see also Talk:Wiki#Introducing Category:Transport modes) e.g. foot=*, bicycle=* and motorcar=*.
While the keys for these describe access restrictions, they can also be used as suffixes for restriction tags such as oneway=*, maxspeed=*, maxwidth=* and maxweight=*, e.g. oneway:bicycle=* and maxspeed:hgv=*.
I don't think that we should actually create KeySuffix:* pages for all these >50 transport modes because the way these transport modes can be used as suffixes is always the same (and duplicating all these description & image parameters would be quite the maintenance nightmare).
I think it might make sense to document how transport modes may be used as key suffixes at a singular page and redirect all the specific transport mode suffixes like KeySuffix:foot, KeySuffix:bicycle and KeySuffix:motorcar there.
--Push-f (talk) 07:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Distinguishing just prefix and suffix is not sufficient
![](/w/images/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
We have many different key parts that can be combined in quite complicated ways. Defining some as prefix and some as suffix doesn't help establishing an order. E.g. :lanes and :backward would both be suffixes, but the order of the two matters. We only use :lanes:backward, but not :backward:lanes. Add another suffix: :conditional. Where does it go? Some time ago I started documenting which order of key parts we actually use according to Taginfo usage statistics which turned out to be astonishingly consistent: User:Mueschel/OrderOfKeyParts. --Mueschel (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree that we should also document the order of suffixes are meant to be combined. Namespace would be a good place for that. I don't think that we should drop the prefix / suffix distinction completely just because it doesn't explain everything. --Push-f (talk) 21:10, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Same for `playground:`
![](/w/images/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
When I first looked at those pages, took me way too long to understand the difference between https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:playground: and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:playground. --Tordans (talk) 08:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I added it to the Affected pages section. (I don't think that it's necessary that we list all pages there, the list there is just for people to get the idea.) --Push-f (talk) 09:07, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Good idea
Overall, it is a good idea and I support this proposal. Thanks for making it! Hopefully you will continue working on it @Push-f: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2022 (UTC)