Previously I really like the flexibility of the tagging system in open street map. I used something like it for a unrelated commercial product and we have found

Previously I really like the flexibility of the tagging system in open street map. I used something like it for a unrelated commercial product and we have found we have to switch away from it. And we had very tight control over the definitions of the tagging we were using. The tools were difficult, as is mentioned in the main post. That is certainly an inconvenience but I figured we could muddle through that. The bigger problem is that the customers just never got it. They wanted a single, authoritative classification for an object. Our plan is to move to a system inspired by the model used in BIM for classification. The princicple difference is that in open street map all data identifying an object has to lie within the tags. In the alternate system, a single identifier for the object type is used, and this references external metadata that gives you additional information which does not have to be embedded in the tags on the object. An example of additional information held external to the map and tags is that a bathroom is a type of room. I don't have to include in the map data that the object is both a bathroom and a room. I should add, the external meta data also gives a strict definition of what types of tags (and maybe values) are allowed on the given type of object. If you need something a little different, you can make a new type. I am not sure how well this type of system could work in open street map. Is it too rigid? Or would there be too much proliferation of types? Classification is always hard and I am not sure people have solved that problem in any large context. And of course, changes like this would mean a new database. If people ever do think about making an OSM 2.0 maybe this, or another tagging alternative, is something to consider. (edit: typos)