Talk:Just map

Rweait twittered about this page, sayying that it was from my mind. Not quite true. I had some help from folks on the talk@ list. In particullar, they changed my mind about tagging. Ib was of the mind that you should stick to mapping map features. So then, to write this page we went through several revisions on the list. RussNelson 02:31, 12 August 2010 (BST)

I meant no slight to your collaborators on talk@ I only saw this page pop up in recent changes. Great idea. Rw 03:06, 12 August 2010 (BST)

Re: "edit the page for the tag you disagree with"

The fourth point currently reads:

"If you disagree with the definition of the key or value, then create a new key or value with a different name, use it in your editing, document it in the wiki, AND (this is important) edit the page for the tag you disagree with so that it mentions your tag as an alternative so that people understand that there is disagreement. Link to Taginfo so that people can find out which is more often used in practice."

I don't think this is recommended practice, or perhaps it is not clear what it is meant by "If you disagree with the definition of the key or value". In what way would someone disagree with a definition?

While users are free to use new tags and document them without a proposal, it is not appropriate to add links to your new tag pages on the pages of commonly-used features without discussion. --Jeisenbe (talk)