Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Please check changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Please check changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Further discussion in changeset #97231709: changeset/97231709

Hi Andy,

the "paradox of tolerance" cannot applied on this case.

Your premise based on "official" information. If this was the case, countries should only be have an "official_name:*" without any "name:*" tag.

The name:fr "Allemagne" is the accepted name of the majority of French speakers. So it is an information which could be added to OSM. If we have a further look to other languages which significantly less speakers, like Lojban. The relation #51477 have a name in this language ("name:jbo"), which is accepted. Where do you draw the line? Klingon have speakers like Lojban, Lojban and Klingon are both constructed languages, there is an accepted name in Klingon for Germany, like in Lojban. So were is difference?
name:tlh=DoyIchlan is real existing information of Germany. It is "fictional" like any other name. Languages are always a human construct.

> In the case of OSM, the problem with adding _fictional_ data is that it devalues the _factual_ data already here.
Let's take your argument further, you devalued the work of Marc Okrand compared to James Cooke Brown.

On the last point, which shows that your changes have no basis whatsoever. The tag "name:tlh" was not my idea. The tag was already in use and is still in use, please check https://taginfo.osm.org/keys/name%3Atlh#overview. What were the requirements to get in this check-up process? I miss this discussion on other changesets like changeset/116850726 and changeset/107736434.

Best regards,
Chriss

Hi MonteAlbert,

thanks for your scrutinizing view.
I change my workflows to split those changes in sets which are group by cities or regions, but in any case by countries.

Greetings,
Chriss

Hi Polarbear,

no I changed the syntax of the tag "opening_hours" not by checking the information itself. (syntax no content)
The change was part of a project to develop a AI assistant and we used the harmonized data as a base.

With a few years of distance and more experience I developed another view on this and would do this type of change in this way. So if you found any issues, please feel free to change it without consideration of this changeset.

Best regards,
Chriss

Hi Andy,

this change is not directly connected the the reason of this changeset. But it was a simple correction, which I included in the complete process.
I removed the tag "direction=down", because it duplicates the information of "incline=down", which is the accepted schema.

Best regards,
Chriss

Hi maro21,

thanks for the information.
I changed my workflows to split those changes in sets which are group by cities or regions, but in any case by countries.

Greetings,
Chriss

Hi aquarix,

thanks for your attention.
I changed my workflows to split those changes in sets which are group by cities or regions, but in any case by countries.

Best regards,
Chriss

Hi Amegaz,

thanks for your vision.
I changed my workflows to split those changes in sets which are group by cities or regions, but in any case by countries.

Best regards
Chriss

Hi zluuzki,

thanks for this information. I change my workflows to split those changes in sets which are group by cities or regions, but in any case by countries.

Greetings
Chriss

You're welcome @JeroenHoek

Which kind of Copy & Paste issue do you mean?

You're welcome @markbegbie