This is arguably incorrect (as I’ll make the case for in a moment), and in 2018 board:title=* was introduced as a possible replacement for this practice, after some discussion.
However, as of right now name is still about 10x more common in combination with information=board than board:title=*, and tools like StreetComplete still use the former tagging scheme.
My understanding is that the name of an entity is intended to be a proper noun that represents what a typical person on the ground would call that specific entity. Most information boards do not have a name in that sense. Almost no one would refer to a sign by the title written on it, and if they did they would probably call it “The sign that says <title>” not just “<title>”, which in my mind means that’s not really the sign’s name in the sense meant by the name tag.
For this reason, I would like to get community feedback on the idea that, when tagging the title of information boards, board:title=* should be preferred over name=*. Note I am not currently proposing mass re-tagging existing entities at this time (though if someone wants to advocate for that I wouldn’t be opposed), just recommending that new tags use the more specific board:title tagging scheme when appropriate.
Poll below to track community sentiment. I would recommend reading the rest of this thread before voting, as others may have different opinions than me.
Should the wiki be updated to recommend using board:title instead of name where the former is appropriate?
I agree that information boards don’t have proper names and that board:title is more correct.
On the other hand, since nobody expects boards have proper names, there is no doubt that whats in the name key is actually the board’s title. Do we want that corrected, just for correctness?
If so, I would probably add the board:title tag redundantly until most of the relevant data consumers have had time to get and process the information, and probably they, too, would use both tags as synonyms (for information boards). Then what would we have won?
Just FYI: besides the short discussion linked above in the mailing list (2021), this topic has also been discussed here (several times?), though perhaps only in German. It might still be worth reading, though, for example: Name vs board:title / StreetComplete (2025). And when discussing board:title, one shouldn’t forget stele:title (when information=stele) and the case of information=map! Because this is essentially always the same problem with the name tag.
Indeed, the comparison with information=map is one of the things that has discouraged me from using board:title. For me they are often very similar things and I sometimes change my mind about whether an object is more map-like or board-like. If I map something as a board and decide it is better as a map, what should I do with board:title?
I wonder if it would have been better to propose title or information:title rather than the narrow board:title. As that didn’t happen, maybe name being understood as the title for information objects (other than offices) is actually ok, even if semantically not very elegant. Does it cause specific problems?
An information board does not have a name in the sense of “names” as described in the wiki and in the real world it is very much the same. The object described on a board may have a name but the board has not. The same applies for an information stele or a map.
Using board:title does not only fit better, it also has the advantage of allowing user to tag 2 levels. Many widespread object like the German Green Belt are covered by hundreds or thousands of information boards and maps, all with the title “Grünes Band” and a subtitle referring to the local section. One can simply tag this as
board:title=Grünes Band Deutschland
board:subtitle=Der Musterwald bei Dingensdorf
I am using this approach since long and I am not going to change that.
As these maps usually have the same appearance like a board, I don’t worry about using board:title and board:subtitle for maps as well. Anyhow I agree that a simple tag title would have been a better idea.
I see it similarly: For me, the most obvious problem (besides the fundamental question of whether a board/stele has a name or whether the heading can be called a name) with using name=* for boards/steles (and maps) is that, for example, the name of a landmark is then used multiple times—for the landmark itself, and also for the plaque/stele that provides information about it. This has been frequently mentioned as a problem in other discussions as well. If someone then searches for this name, they might find a board (or several!) about it, and not (only) the landmark itself. Of course, one could also consider this a minor issue…
I thought about proposing inscription:title instead, since that seems much more broadly applicable to other situations. But for information boards specifically board:title already exists, and it seems harder to get consensus on a whole new tag than consensus on a tag that’s already in widespread use. Baby steps.
title: Berliner Mauer 1961-1989
subtitle: Ulrich Steinhauer
“Berliner Mauer” ist definitely not the name of this stele, but of the object the stele is informing about. Using board:title and board:subtitle for a information stele like this may not be 100% correct (although the stele incorporates a small board) but still better than misusing the name tag for it.
Is that different from searching for a town name and finding the town, a railway station with assorted stops and platforms, a bus stop and a motorway junction?
In general I think anything that returns search results has to distinguish between different types of objects.
Well exactly. title would be semantically more correct than name, but name has been widely over-used and this is not going to change. At least it is obvious what name means in this case whereas it never made much sense for ATM’s and other objects that clearly do not have proper names.
[board:title seems a mistake. We don’t tag things like shop:name.]
I want to ask by a comparison with =fitness_station on fitness trails. The station naming or numbering, vs exercise, can be different. There can be both name==Station 4 (on top of ref=4 ) / =Fit-Trail (similar to brand= ) + board:title==Bar Jump / =Fit-Trail , depending on interpretation and use. File:Cayuga Waterfront Trail sign.jpg - Wikimedia Commons
It’s a similar problem, but at least in those cases the railway station and bus stop actually do have the name of the town as (part of) their name. Additionally, those features may have a word like “Station” or “Junction” in their name to distinguish them from the actual town. See the wiki section on names with generic terms. (Though I’m not sure how common this is in practice.) This is not the case when you’re just using the name tag to record the literal text printed on a thing.
I think data consumers might end up wanting to include a special code path to support this case even if everything were standardized under name=*, for the reason I just described above: the thing we’re tagging as the board’s name currently is not actually it’s name, and incorrectly treating an inscribed title like it’s a name can cause issues (with search, rendering, etc.) albeit usually only minor ones.
