Talk:Key:foraging

Prefix vs conditional

Why not use `foraging:fruit` (on trees and orchards), `foraging:fungi=yes`, `foraging:wood=yes`, `foraging:fruit=yes`, `foraging:berries=yes` on e.g. forests, ... This can be amended with opening-hours syntax (e.g. `foraging:berries=Aug-Oct`) to indicate a time period, or `foraging:berries= permit @ (Aug-Oct)`.

This would be easier then having a very complicated conditional-style of tagging. Furthermore, I'm a bit afraid that we'll hit the 255-character limit at some point. (e.g. "berries @ (permit and Aug-Oct)" already takes 30 characters, resulting in only 8 categories which can be listed). It makes it also very prone to errors, e.g. first the item to forage, then the conditions or vice versa? Pietervdvn (talk) 14:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This did come up in discussion elsewhere, though no solid consensus was reached. I felt conditional tagging, while complex, would be preferred to the proliferation of tags which may not be fully known to a hypothetical data consumer. But you make a good point about the character limit. I'm willing to go with either if / when use of the tag actually develops.

--Jdcarls2 (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

From the perspective of the MapComplete dev, the prefix approach would be simpler. And a data consumer might indeed not know about all the tags, but they might not know about the possible values in the conditional field as well. Pietervdvn (talk) 15:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)