[Tagging] New Keys?
I photograph and then tag as many things as possible when out mapping. Today I was looking at a "light industrial area" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_industry and there are no suitable tags for factories and workshops http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workshop Options Option 1 Industrial=factory/workshop factory=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts workshop=appliance_repair/joiner/carpenter name=BIg Multinational/Joe Bloggs & Family Option 2 factory=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts workshop=appliance_repair/joiner/carpenter name=BIg Multinational/Joe Bloggs & Family Option 3 factory=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts/appliance_repair/joiner/carpenter name=BIg Multinational/Joe Bloggs & Family Option 4 open for suggestion here A large factory may consist of a number of smaller parts, some of which are workshops. Other areas may be assembly lines / bottling plants / first aid posts. A working scheme for tagging will have room for these ideas too. Please reply to this thread, especially if English is your second language, as you may have quite different ways of describing large and small manufacturing and repair facilities. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On 1 June 2010 17:58, Liz wrote: > Option 4 > open for suggestion here I'd go for sub-typing and sub-tagging and use overly broad categories and then break it down from there, eg: factory=commercial/industrial/workshop/* produces=electrical/electronic/furniture/* ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Liz wrote: Are you talking about a landuse area, a building polygon, a site relation ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
(Multiple answers) First, I'm aware that full classification of every populated places is not possible world wide with one tag only, the proposition states that clearly. administrative, interest, tourism, local concerns need to be recorded with other tags. The problem I see with actual place usage is that it is not standardazided world wide and serves merly for writing a label on a map. It makes it quite hard for newcomers to guess in wich case they should use wich place, and that proposal tries to help have a first easy step to record at least a population estimation. On jeudi 27 mai 2010, Simone Saviolo wrote: > -1, if it's exclusively population-based. The risk is that the US have > tenths of cities and smaller countries - say, dunno, Uganda - get > none. Well, this is the truth ;-) based on such a scale. I don't see any problem in uganda having no megacity, because it's what is. On jeudi 27 mai 2010, Roy Wallace wrote: > I like your motivation. But maybe it's not necessary. Using > population=* achieves the same goal. Yes it does, and it does much more precisely, this is the utimate solution. Unfortunetly, having access to this information is much harder when you are driving your car thru, than a rough estimate that gives you the "approximate size of a hamlet" (I have to admit that the upper part of the scale is kind of useless as population data is much easier to get in those cases) On vendredi 28 mai 2010, John Smith wrote: > +1 I doubt you could ever standardise cities, especially not based on > population alone. That proposition is not about standarisation of cities around the world, it's about standardisation of the place tag usage in the osm database. I don't see any problem if a place=city is actually a town in the local language usage, (let's add a common_denomination=town) just like in france we dont care that our "villes" are tagged place=town. I'm concerned about database storage and meaning of the data, and key values could just have been numbers, but it's harder to remember. On vendredi 28 mai 2010, Simone Saviolo wrote: > consequence, while it is good to see the map of France showing five > cities, Italy's map should instead contain a few tenths. Of course, > this cannot be achieved if we only look at population - especially if > we want to use a world-wide population criterion. > > I hope the idea is clear. Unfortunetly, I think I get it, you have invented/searched perfect Italian thresholds in order to make the map...@osm.org map look what you are used to see. Maybe you endeded to 47000 people max for a city In order that city X of 46999 isn't shown, because it's administrative role is not enough to apear at zoom 10 ? Wich, in other words is a way to say you addapted the tagging of places to the actual mapnik style sheet at osm.org. Is osmarender rendering the way you want ? maybe no... Will it survive the next map...@osm.org stylesheet update ? maybe no... I don't blame that need, of course, map...@osm.org is the perfect portal of the projet, and it needs to bring a decent map that every country is happy with, but that's tagging for the/a renderer. What I'm looking for is go thru a first step where maps won't be as perfect has we want them to look (population based representation of population) before we consider the need of other tags in order to render correctly. -- sly Sylvain Letuffe sylv...@letuffe.org qui suis-je : http://slyserv.dyndns.org ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Liz wrote: > > Option 1 > Industrial=factory/workshop I don't like this key. To me, that reads "this feature is an *industrial*, of type *factory*", or "the *industrial* of this feature is a *factory*". Maybe try to fill in the blank: a factory is a kind of ? I would use that as the key. > factory=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts I think you actually mean product=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Pieren wrote: > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Liz wrote: > > Are you talking about a landuse area, a building polygon, a site relation ? > > Pieren not landuse really because that wouldn't need a new Key, landuse=industrial would be a simple thing - a means to tag what i see day to day building wise so nodes or building polygons definitely site relations may be the way to go ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Liz wrote: > > Option 1 > > Industrial=factory/workshop > > I don't like this key. To me, that reads "this feature is an > *industrial*, of type *factory*", or "the *industrial* of this feature > is a *factory*". Maybe try to fill in the blank: a factory is a kind > of ? I would use that as the key. > > > factory=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts > > I think you actually mean product=furniture/cars/aircraft_parts? > Fine, I'm "thinking aloud" by writing here and however others see things will be helpful. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
2010/5/28 sly (sylvain letuffe) : > First, I'm aware that full classification of every populated places is not > possible world wide with one tag only, ...The problem I see with actual place > usage is that it is not > standardazided world wide ... IMHO place is a rough estimate where in the local/regional/national settlement hierarchy a place is located. This does not have to be standardized worldwide (at least not with the same population figures). Just add additional tags like population and ignore place if you don't like it (or use it as fallback). > It makes it quite hard for newcomers to guess in wich case they should use > wich place, and that proposal tries to help have a first easy step to record > at least a population estimation. as others have pointed out: use est_population (or sth. similar, or use population=x and source:population=estimated) for this scope. I actually don't think it is hard for newcomers to choose the right tag (they know in their local language if a place is a hamlet, village or town). The main problem might be that current definitions of some values are not corresponding to real world (hamlets are places with up to 1000 inhabitants in OSM WIki but in the real world most places with more than 100-200 inhabitants will be villages, hamlets with 999 inhabitant IMHO don't exist). Also this classification (settlements) is usually (at least in the regions I know) not done by mere population but by settlement _structure and form_ and available facilities - at least to differentiate between village and hamlet. Cities (at least in Europe) are mostly historically cities, not by population, and it does make sense to use this status, as it has influence on the structure of the territory, while the importance deducted from population is highly dependent on the context (density of the area, size of other settlements nearby). cheers, Martin I suggest reading of these articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_privileges http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_status_in_the_United_Kingdom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_town_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_status_in_Sweden If you can read German I also suggest this one, which is not comparable to the English version: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadt And for the intensely interested an IMHO very interesting (standard) book: http://openlibrary.org/books/OL4622521M/Storia_della_citta%CC%80 (Italian Version, Original) http://openlibrary.org/works/OL2291022W/Histoire_de_la_ville (French Version? Has only half the pages) http://openlibrary.org/books/OL4436809M/history_of_the_city (English Version) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
2010/6/1 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer : > If you can read German I also suggest this one, which is not > comparable to the English version: > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadt How about this approach? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_place_theory German: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_der_Zentralen_Orte -Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
2010/6/1 Martin Simon : > 2010/6/1 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer : > >> If you can read German I also suggest this one, which is not >> comparable to the English version: >> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadt > > How about this approach? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_place_theory > German: > http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_der_Zentralen_Orte why should we use a theory of spacial planning of the 1930ies that is loosing importance, and that is (as far as I understand it) less useful on the lower end of the scale (where our problems actually are mostly arising)? On the other hand it could IMHO be useful to differentiate town and city in more detailed levels (if this is wanted). Personally I'm less interested in hypothetical "ideal/neutral" situations and theories and more in real and actual conditions, in the case of settlements highly depedent on geographic setting, culture, history, society and politics. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
2010/6/1 Liz : > A large factory may consist of a number of smaller parts, some of which are > workshops. Other areas may be assembly lines / bottling plants / first aid > posts. of course, it might also have its own fire department, police, shops, restaurants, traffic enforcement, railway station (goods), bus routes, sports facilities, energy and heating/cooling plant, ... see for instance here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.69906&lon=8.99198&zoom=15&layers=B000FTF > A working scheme for tagging will have room for these ideas too. most of the features can be mapped just like anywhere else, that is landuse=industrial for the landuse, then probably a site-relation, all pois and areas as usually, ... Do you suggest to add specific tags for factory "components" like assembly lines, soldering facilities, bottling plants, ...? This will become very extensive for all kind of factories that exist, but why not? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Keys?
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Do you suggest to add specific tags for factory "components" like > assembly lines, soldering facilities, bottling plants, ...? This will > become very extensive for all kind of factories that exist, but why > not? > Whatever is decided should be extensible to cover those things whether implemented or not. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
On 1 June 2010 19:41, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > why should we use a theory of spacial planning of the 1930ies that is > loosing importance, and that is (as far as I understand it) less I think he was making a point about others already trying to standardise cities and how they weren't able to do it either and they probably spent a lot more time and effort on the problem. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
2010/5/28 Roy Wallace : > Right idea, but from my perspective landuse=* shouldn't be used to > describe an individual feature (like an orphanage), but to describe > the use of an area of land. If you want to do tiered tags like this > you'd use something more like amenity=residential_home + > residential_home=orphanage. > > I.e. an orphanage is a type of residential_home is a type of amenity. > NOT a childrens_home is a type of residential is a type of landuse. +1, definitely. It's very consistent. Anyway, I moved orphanage proposal to 'rejected' status, We can continue discussion at 'residential_home' proposal (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Residential_home). RFC is open since 2009 but there are still things we need to solve: * name: 'residential_home' or 'assisted_living' (maybe sth. else)? * sub-tagging: 'residents' or main tag value (residential_home=*/assisted_living=*) * sub-tags value 'children'/'seniors'/etc. or 'orphanage'/'nursing home'/etc. (hospice maybe?) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Base transceiver station
Although voting should be ended last year ;) most of votes were added after vote end. So I think it's finally time to end the voting: I'll close it after weekend. If someone want to vote, please do it asap. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Base_transceiver_station Regards, Paweł Marynowski User:Yarl ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
On Friday 28 May 2010 13:14:30 sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote: > First, I'm aware that full classification of every populated places is not > possible world wide with one tag only, the proposition states that clearly. > administrative, interest, tourism, local concerns need to be recorded with > other tags. No, no, no, no. In the list: service level, administrative level, history, tourism, local concerns, population population is actually the least important factor to determine the importance of a place. And as everybody else participating in this thread has already told you. Place is about something determined by several factors. If you want to put data related to a single factor into OSM call it what it is: population. -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 1:58 AM, y...@o2.pl wrote: > > We can > continue discussion at 'residential_home' proposal > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Residential_home). > RFC is open since 2009 but there are still things we need to solve: > > * name: 'residential_home' or 'assisted_living' (maybe sth. else)? amenity=assisted_living, because (if?) in all cases you are describing a place where people *live* with *assistance*. > * sub-tagging: 'residents' or main tag value > (residential_home=*/assisted_living=*) > * sub-tags value 'children'/'seniors'/etc. or 'orphanage'/'nursing > home'/etc. (hospice maybe?) IMHO, the "cascading" style (A=B + B=C) should ONLY be used when C is a type of B and B is a type of A. Therefore, these two options are both valid: amenity=assisted_living + assisted_living=orphanage, OR amenity=assisted_living + residents=children. I prefer the second, however, you could allow both simultaneously if you see a need for it. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Base transceiver station
2010/6/2 y...@o2.pl : > Although voting should be ended last year ;) most of votes were added > after vote end. So I think it's finally time to end the voting: I'll > close it after weekend. If someone want to vote, please do it asap. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Base_transceiver_station I recently imported 2,152 locations, that have between them 7,633 transmitters. Most of the towers had multiple transmitters so these were added using a relation linked to the tower node, eg this location has 17 transmitters: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/740881798 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
On 2 June 2010 11:48, Roy Wallace wrote: > > amenity=assisted_living, because (if?) in all cases you are describing > a place where people *live* with *assistance*. I like assisted_living as well. Be aware, though, that it is starting to be used as a marketing term for those places which are not nursing homes, but rather a collection of small houses or apartments, which supply gardening services, maybe a central hall, canteen/restaurant etc, and usually with a minimum age limit. We would have to make sure we cover them as well if we use this term, or we're just going to create confusion. > amenity=assisted_living + assisted_living=orphanage, OR > amenity=assisted_living + residents=children. Hmm - not all homes for children are for orphans. There is a home near me that is for children/youth with very heavy caring needs, that cannot be handled by their families. Some of the residents stay there all the time, some come for visits when their carers are unavailable (ill, away, or just need a break). If you want to differentiate between one of these and an orphanage, residents=children won't do it. I don't know if we do need to tell the difference, however. Stephen ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
On 2 June 2010 12:21, Stephen Hope wrote: > Hmm - not all homes for children are for orphans. There is a home > near me that is for children/youth with very heavy caring needs, that > cannot be handled by their families. Some of the residents stay there > all the time, some come for visits when their carers are unavailable > (ill, away, or just need a break). If you want to differentiate > between one of these and an orphanage, residents=children won't do it. > I don't know if we do need to tell the difference, however. You'd use the length of stay, temporary or permanent to differentiate between them, although some could have facilities to handle both? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Beauty parlour
Hi , I am looking for an appropriate tag for a place where women/girls go to get some facial/hair/eyebrows done . They are called beauty parlours . I could find something for hair dressers . But here I am looking for * Beauty fixes * sex=male/female *Type=normal/herbal There are many such places in the town I am mapping . Regards, Pavithran -- pavithran sakamuri http://look-pavi.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Beauty parlour
On 2 June 2010 13:53, pavithran wrote: > Hi , > I am looking for an appropriate tag for a place where women/girls go > to get some facial/hair/eyebrows done . They are called beauty > parlours . I could find something for hair dressers . If the shop=hairdresser tag can't be extended enough to be suitable, use a new one, shop=beauty for example. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > >> amenity=assisted_living + assisted_living=orphanage, OR >> amenity=assisted_living + residents=children. > > Hmm - not all homes for children are for orphans. There is a home > near me that is for children/youth with very heavy caring needs, that > cannot be handled by their families. residents:caring_needs=heavy residents:can_be_handled_by_their_families=no Obviously this is tongue-in-cheek, but I hope you see my point. > Some of the residents stay there > all the time, some come for visits when their carers are unavailable > (ill, away, or just need a break). Is this a characteristic of the feature (that should be tagged), or of the residents (that shouldn't be tagged)? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Base transceiver station
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 11:59 AM, John Smith wrote: > > I recently imported 2,152 locations, that have between them 7,633 > transmitters. Most of the towers had multiple transmitters so these > were added using a relation linked to the tower node, eg this location > has 17 transmitters: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/740881798 I'm not sure if I should start a new thread for this, but John: shouldn't the node's role be "tower", not "transponder"? i.e. the *relation* represents the transponder (hence type=transponder), but the *node* represents the *tower*, so should have role=tower. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population
2010/6/1 John Smith : > On 1 June 2010 19:41, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> why should we use a theory of spacial planning of the 1930ies that is >> loosing importance, and that is (as far as I understand it) less > > I think he was making a point about others already trying to > standardise cities and how they weren't able to do it either and they > probably spent a lot more time and effort on the problem. Well, actually I think the idea is not that bad at all, as it describes how "important" a place is to its surroundings, based on how broad and specialised the services it offers are. For example, I've been in a Croatian Island for mapping, er, vacation last year. The "capital" of this island has half the population of the village in Germany where I lived in my childhood, but it's a real town, offering far more services than a typical German village in the middle Rhine valley. ;-) But I don't know how to implement something like this in osm without running into a discussion on how important or unimportant single services are (in different cultures, of course). -Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Beauty parlour
On 2 June 2010 09:49, John Smith wrote: > If the shop=hairdresser tag can't be extended enough to be suitable, > use a new one, shop=beauty for example. There are shops called 'Fancy shops' which sell fancy items like ribbons,bangles,sticker other items used by girls . It also needs a tag . Added to the above fancy shop there are some shops ( Like Boots in UK ) which sell lot of cosmetics and other beauty stuff with medicines . I think this should be tagged like service=beauty ? I heard that amenity tag is over used . Regards, Pavithran -- pavithran sakamuri http://look-pavi.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Orphanage
On 2 June 2010 14:37, Roy Wallace wrote: > Is this a characteristic of the feature (that should be tagged), or of > the residents (that shouldn't be tagged)? I'd say both... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Beauty parlour
On 2 June 2010 15:36, pavithran wrote: > There are shops called 'Fancy shops' which sell fancy items like > ribbons,bangles,sticker other items used by girls . I think you are describing boutique shops, in which case I'd simply use shop=boutique ? > It also needs a tag . Added to the above fancy shop there are some > shops ( Like Boots in UK ) which sell lot of cosmetics and other > beauty stuff with medicines . > > I think this should be tagged like service=beauty ? I heard that > amenity tag is over used . Amenity is probably overly used, but I don't think service is applicable since they're still a type of shop, if you add booth=yes that should be adequate to describe what you are trying to tag. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Base transceiver station
On 2 June 2010 14:42, Roy Wallace wrote: > I'm not sure if I should start a new thread for this, but John: > shouldn't the node's role be "tower", not "transponder"? > i.e. the *relation* represents the transponder (hence > type=transponder), but the *node* represents the *tower*, so should > have role=tower. I'm open to redoing them, and this probably should be in another thread. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Beauty parlour
On 2 June 2010 11:12, John Smith wrote: > On 2 June 2010 15:36, pavithran wrote: >> There are shops called 'Fancy shops' which sell fancy items like >> ribbons,bangles,sticker other items used by girls . > > I think you are describing boutique shops, in which case I'd simply > use shop=boutique ? Oops missed that tag . yeah boutique would be appropriate ( missed the tag because in Indian english we rarely hear the word 'boutique' ) > Amenity is probably overly used, but I don't think service is > applicable since they're still a type of shop, if you add booth=yes > that should be adequate to describe what you are trying to tag. > I think I better tag it as shop=beautyparlour but still would argue that its a service which the beauty parlour employee performs rather than selling beauty items. Adding to that Hair dressing is also a service rather than 'selling' to call it a shop . BTW I can't find booth in OSM wiki . What does it signify ? Regards, Pavithran -- pavithran sakamuri http://look-pavi.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Beauty parlour
On 2 June 2010 15:58, pavithran wrote: > Oops missed that tag . yeah boutique would be appropriate ( missed the > tag because in Indian english we rarely hear the word 'boutique' ) At a first glance it looks French origin... > I think I better tag it as shop=beautyparlour but still would argue > that its a service which the beauty parlour employee performs rather > than selling beauty items. Adding to that Hair dressing is also a > service rather than 'selling' to call it a shop . Not all shops sell physical products, some sell services, but they're still shops. >From the shop page on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop A place selling a retail product or service. These may range from the obvious shops such as supermarkets and places to buy food to video rental and car dealerships to places offering some kind of retail service such as paying electricity bills. > BTW I can't find booth in OSM wiki . What does it signify ? I didn't say they exist, I'm suggesting tags that might be applicable... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
