The current “status” field of the Description Template (which is used for the info boxes for keys, tags and relations) still has the “ideal” in mind that every tag goes through the proposal process. For example the “approved” value has a strong green background rendered while “inuse” and “defacto” have light or nor green.
It is clear that many tags have been introduced without a proposal. As a result there exists a side-by-side of status values based on presence in database and based on proposal status:
status of feature based on de facto presence in db, users and software:
inuse: the feature is in use
defacto: the tag is in widespread use, but no formal proposal process has taken place
obsolete: feature (without proposal) obsolete by newer feature proposal
discardable: feature will be discarded by major editors
the approval status of this feature (based on Proposal process results):
draft: the feature has a draft proposal being written
proposed: the feature has been formally proposed
abandoned: the approval process for this feature has been terminated before completion
voting: the feature is currently being voted on as part of the approval process
approved: the feature has successfully competed the approval process
rejected: the feature was rejected during the approval proces
This leads to many contradictions:
- An “approved” tag can still be heavily debated (example: relation type=parking)
- An “approved” tag which is used less than a “inuse” tag after years (example: shop=estate_agent vs office=estate_agent or healthcare=dentist vs. amenity=dentist or natural=water vs. landuse=reservoir)
- An “inuse” tag can be universally accepted but the status sounds less successful than “approved” (example: highway=footway)
- A “rejected” tag can still used widely accepted among mappers (example: designation=*)
- An “abandoned” tag can still be used widely (example: man_made=gasometer and railway=station)
I propose to separate the “proposal” and “usage” status in the template.
If this idea has positive feedback we can go into fine-tuning the “usage” list. For example “defacto” can probably be removed, “obsoleted” should go from usage to proposal status and “deprecated” is missing from documentation.