Talk:Tag:roof:shape=equal mansard

Status

@Marc marc: Hi, since it's only used 7 times so far, I wouldn't call it a "de facto" tag nor "in use". IMHO it is "undefined" or "proposed". --Chris2map (talk) 16:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Chris2map: I used de facto because it's the de facto tag to use for this shape, in the sense that there's no other candidate for this shape.

But if you want to change it to give it another meaning, I don't mind.

However, I don't know how you're going to describe the fact that some tags are not unique for the same meaning

Marc marc (talk)

I don't want to change any meaning or the tag. "de facto" is used in the wiki to label tags that are not approved but in widespread use and/or with widespread acceptance among mappers. So no matter how suitable or unique the tag is, it cannot be called "de facto" as long as it is not widespread, IMHO. That's why I'm looking for a different status. --Chris2map (talk) 08:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

the meaning of my use of defacto :)

when I see that landuse=forest and natural=wood are in de facto status even though they have at least 6 different meanings documented, I think that the de facto status isn't as precise as it seems, but it's probably not the right way to resolve this here

I don't really see the point of duplicating the number of occurrences in the status, but as I said in the previous message, if it's important to you, it's fine, do it Marc marc (talk)

I agree with you that "de facto" status does not have a precise definition, rather a weak one. And I don't think it will ever have one. But in order to be able to deal with it somehow, I try to define it and differentiate it from, e.g., "in use". And for me, widespread is one logical dimension. This is not so easy to define. But the number is an obvious factor. – I don't think it's completely wrong to describe a seemingly logical tag as "de facto" regardless of the number. But with such a small number, the minimal definition I use would also be lost. So I don't see it as right or wrong, but rather, based on my understanding of the prevailing current behavior in the Wiki, I see it as the lesser evil or the better compromise not to choose "de facto" but "in use", "proposed" or "undefined". – That's why I wanted to discuss it, because it's really difficult to weigh up between how one see the tag and having as uniform a procedure as possible in the wiki. To comply with your polite request, I do it and set the status to "in use" for now. --Chris2map (talk) 17:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)