You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The int_name=* key is commonly used on places and boundaries. This issue tracks adding a field for the key, as originally proposed in openstreetmap/iD#5314.
In theory at least, this key indicates the accepted form of the name for an international audience. For example, Vietnam is normally spelled “Viet Nam” in international diplomacy, even though most dialects of English spell it “Vietnam” colloquially, if not also officially. In practice, a great many features use this key to indicate a romanized name or the name in English specifically. This practice is probably controversial in some regions, but in regions that use non-Latin writing systems, it’s extremely common.
I omitted this key from #215 because the divergent uses, even within a given region, are difficult to capture succinctly in a single field. If we implement this field, we’ll need to be careful not to imply that the main Name field is or is not also international. This is a point of disagreement when it comes to large geographic features like mountain ranges and seas.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The
int_name=*
key is commonly used on places and boundaries. This issue tracks adding a field for the key, as originally proposed in openstreetmap/iD#5314.In theory at least, this key indicates the accepted form of the name for an international audience. For example, Vietnam is normally spelled “Viet Nam” in international diplomacy, even though most dialects of English spell it “Vietnam” colloquially, if not also officially. In practice, a great many features use this key to indicate a romanized name or the name in English specifically. This practice is probably controversial in some regions, but in regions that use non-Latin writing systems, it’s extremely common.
I omitted this key from #215 because the divergent uses, even within a given region, are difficult to capture succinctly in a single field. If we implement this field, we’ll need to be careful not to imply that the main Name field is or is not also international. This is a point of disagreement when it comes to large geographic features like mountain ranges and seas.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: