Talk:Cryptocurrency
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Tag points, not ways
"What this means in practice is that we advice using the currency=* on a point" who's this we? Where was this discussed? --Ivanbranco (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- "Where was this discussed?". No idea at all. That comment was here when I first looked here earlier this year. Is this bad advice? --Nathan_Day (talk) 17:16, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with the observation that we indeed advice that using currency=* on a point is preferred. Which is what years of actual usage reflects (see the taginfo at the bottom). Kaartjesman (talk) 17:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- Most of shops and amenities and ATMs are mapped as nodes, this is no news. But this doesn't mean the Wiki should wrongly suggest to map nodes over areas. taginfo had a peak of nodes also because of the "BTC Map" project imports in which this same rule is stated in their Github Wiki. But again, who's "we"? --Ivanbranco (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- If you disagree with the rule, please make a case why it should be different. Are there consumers out there that tolerate using something other than points? If not, that is a good reason to keep the rule, no? Kaartjesman (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- We shouldn't sacrifice detail for the consumers. Anyway, the consumers I know all render ways, what are the consumers you are referring to, apart from BTC Map? --Ivanbranco (talk) 10:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain what you mean with "detail being sacrificed"? With OSM having switched to points for stores and areas for buildings (no one to one relation needed), this seems to be a solved issue, what is the exact issue you are having? Please be precise, a discussion is useless if there is no actual problem being solved. Then it would be a chat, and while this is the talk page, I don't plan on replying until there is an actual issue people are actually seeing that actually needs attention. Kaartjesman (talk) 10:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- The point is this "rule" wasn't discussed, you decided it on your own because you think you rule the "Cryptocurrency wiki stuff" (as the wiki edit war with another user shows https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Adamant1 ). You still didn't reply to who "we" is in that sentence. You speak about consumers not tolerating something other the points, I prove you wrong and you start saying the discussion is "useless". Please read: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/shadowy-supertaggers/ and this: https://github.com/teambtcmap/btcmap-data/issues/933 which is about the same issue. --Ivanbranco (talk) 10:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for finally getting to the point. So, you accuse me of not discussing it while I went into this discussion expecting to discuss the points-vs-shapes. Similarly to how all this was made open for discussion on the Tags mailinglist in April. I hope I showed that I'm more than willing to discuss any actual issues with the page. On a personal note: I would like to ask you to not blame any people interested in crypto for what only some people in crypto do... Please. To be clear: I'm not involved in any mass tagging or anything like that. Personally never actually use Bitcoin myself. Never used BTC-map. This one is in my bookmarks: https://where2.cash. It uses overpass and doesn't show buildings. Kaartjesman (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- The point is this "rule" wasn't discussed, you decided it on your own because you think you rule the "Cryptocurrency wiki stuff" (as the wiki edit war with another user shows https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Adamant1 ). You still didn't reply to who "we" is in that sentence. You speak about consumers not tolerating something other the points, I prove you wrong and you start saying the discussion is "useless". Please read: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/shadowy-supertaggers/ and this: https://github.com/teambtcmap/btcmap-data/issues/933 which is about the same issue. --Ivanbranco (talk) 10:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain what you mean with "detail being sacrificed"? With OSM having switched to points for stores and areas for buildings (no one to one relation needed), this seems to be a solved issue, what is the exact issue you are having? Please be precise, a discussion is useless if there is no actual problem being solved. Then it would be a chat, and while this is the talk page, I don't plan on replying until there is an actual issue people are actually seeing that actually needs attention. Kaartjesman (talk) 10:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- We shouldn't sacrifice detail for the consumers. Anyway, the consumers I know all render ways, what are the consumers you are referring to, apart from BTC Map? --Ivanbranco (talk) 10:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- If you disagree with the rule, please make a case why it should be different. Are there consumers out there that tolerate using something other than points? If not, that is a good reason to keep the rule, no? Kaartjesman (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Most of shops and amenities and ATMs are mapped as nodes, this is no news. But this doesn't mean the Wiki should wrongly suggest to map nodes over areas. taginfo had a peak of nodes also because of the "BTC Map" project imports in which this same rule is stated in their Github Wiki. But again, who's "we"? --Ivanbranco (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- on a point [of interest] --VlIvYur (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2023 (UTC)