Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Railway tracks on highway

[Nikulainen, Jukka K]

Hello all!

And sorry for the delay in my comments, I've been very busy with other work the 
past week.

Firstly, I was rethinking about the introduction a general "=yes"-value for 
this tag. It might be that some lazy mappers would prefer this kind of general 
tag, but on the other hand the "embedded_rails=*"-tag perhaps should always 
simply inherit its value directly from the "railway=*"-tag it shadows, so 
figuring out the proper specific tag should not be a problem. On the other 
hand, a "=no"-value could be useful in combination with the ":lanes=" subkey to 
explicitly mark the absence of an embedded rail on a specific lane. The :lanes 
wiki page does not require such an explicit "no"-value, but perhaps this would 
nonetheless be useful in this circumstance.

Perhaps the proposal should be changed to make it explicit that the 
"embedded_rails=*" value should always inherit the value of the "railway=*" tag 
it shadows, regardless of what that value is?

Paul also had a very good point about the problems associated with the 
"=abandoned" and "=disused"-values. It's certainly true that the lifecycle 
subtags should be used here, but also true that the disused railway lanes 
still, physically, exist in the ground, even if disused. Furthermore a quick 
search on overpass turbo shows that the "railway=disused" tag is used all over 
the place! The overpass web frontend could't even process the whole of central 
Europe at once because of the frequency of the tag. Also, with regards to the 
point I made earlier, it could make sense to have the "embedded_rails=*" tag 
always shadow the "railway=*" value. Then at least the use would be consistent, 
even if consistently "wrong" :).

Sincerely,
Jukka
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

[Mateusz Konieczny]

New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well established as
having boolean values.

intermittent=yes/no values are easy to interpret and sufficient for many uses

As someone involved a bit in using OSM data I am not against mapping extra 
detail
but I am against forcing everybody to start supporting new values in a well 
designed simple tag.

intermittent=ephemeral_dry_season is similar to 
tagging lane count with highway=motorway_with_5_lanes

Dec 13, 2018, 1:52 AM by s...@smz.it:

>
> Hello Warin,
>
>
> I think that extending the defined values for intermittent=*  could yield 
> the same result and convey the very same information > withoutadding 
> a new tag>  (> don't we have enough?> )
>
>
> Assuming (> and this is just an assumption at this time...> )  that we 
> are able to define a correct and agreed cutoff value for  the frequency 
> of an event for it to be defined > ephemeral > vs. > intermittent> , then we 
> could simply add the following keys  for intermittent=*:
>
> ephemeral_spring
> ephemeral_summer
> ephemeral_autumn
> ephemeral_winter
> ephemeral_dry_season
> ephemeral_wet_season
>
> ... and be happy with that! :-)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Sergio
>
>
>
>
> On 2018-12-13 00:14, Warin wrote:
>
>> Hi 
>>  
>>  I have reworked the ephemeral proposal. 
>>  
>>  This now demonstrates; 
>>  
>>  the difference between intermittent and seasonal - some want to  
>> combine them into one and see the ephemeral key as just another  
>> intermittent/seasonal thing so they vote no. 
>>  
>>  that ephemeral applies to more that just streams - some want it as  a 
>> sub key to streams .. that is not possible if it applies to  other 
>> things, these people too vote no. 
>>  
>>  
>>  It now draws on the seasonal page to demonstrate the use of the  
>> seasonal values. 
>>  
>>  
>>  I see this key being used by the experienced local who can draw on  
>> local knowledge. 
>>  
>>  The arm chair satellite mapper will have to stick with  intermittent as 
>> they will not be able to determine if seasonal nor  ephemeral apply, 
>> they may not even be able to determine  intermittent. 
>>  
>>  
>>  I hope this proposal page is now somewhat clearer? 
>>  
>>  
>>  >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ephemeral 
>> >>  
>>  
>>  
>>  --- 
>>  
>>  I may do a dairy entry on seasonal, intermittent and ephemeral.  Looks 
>> to me like a lot of confusion probably promoted by the use  of 
>> intermittent everywhere. 
>>  
>>  
>>  ___ 
>>  Tagging mailing list 
>>  >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>  
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
>> >>  
>>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Dec 13, 2018, 12:44 AM by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:

> “the proposed values do not seem right (ephemeral=dry_season is certainly 
> impossible)”
>

Reality is always more complicated than one expects :)

For example in inland Okavango Delta:

"The flood peaks between June and August, during Botswana’s dry winter months"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okavango_Delta#Floods 


So there are some parts of it that are ephemeral=dry_season

I would expect ephemeral=dry_season also in irrigation channels with flow
controlled by humans to balance natural seasons.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[dktue]

Hi,

I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I 
feel that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well.


My suggestion would be to go with craft=printer. Any opinions on that?

Cheers,
dktue

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

[Sergio Manzi]

And of course my apologies to Warin too!

On 2018-12-14 11:26, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> Hello Mateusz,
>
> On 2018-12-14 10:40, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well established as 
>> having boolean values.
>
> Sorry, you are absolutely right: in my head I had mixed up the values for 
> intermittent=* with the values for seasonal=*.
>
> My bad! Probably early onset Alzehimer...  :-/
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sergio
>


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

[Sergio Manzi]

Hello Mateusz,

On 2018-12-14 10:40, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well established as 
> having boolean values.

Sorry, you are absolutely right: in my head I had mixed up the values for 
intermittent=* with the values for seasonal=*.

My bad! Probably early onset Alzehimer...  :-/

Cheers,

Sergio



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Marc Gemis]

'craft' typically indicates small, artisanal.
I would rather go for man_made=works+product=newspaper

m.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:13 AM dktue  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I
> feel that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well.
>
> My suggestion would be to go with craft=printer. Any opinions on that?
>
> Cheers,
> dktue
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 14.12.2018 11:09, dktue wrote:

Hi,

I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I feel that shop=copyshop 
doesn't fit well.


My suggestion would be to go with craft=printer. Any opinions on that?


I'd say it depends on the size. A small printer that focuses on business cards, letterheads, 
congratulation cards, I'd tag as craft.


For a larger one, and probably for the newspapers they have larger machinery, I might go for 
man_made=works where a subtag product=* is defined. Leaving open how to describe the product.


tom

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Sergio Manzi]

Hello,

I would abstain from shop=* as a shop is a place where products can be bought: 
"/Use shop=* to mark the location of a shop and the products that it *sells*./" 
[1].

I would also abstain from craft=* as it applies to "/small production of goods 
*on demand and by order*/"  [2]

The places where newspapers are printed are called either "printing press" or 
"printing works", so I'd go for something with either "?=printing_press" or 
"?=printing_works".

As for the key to use, depending on the size of the machines involved, the 
number of copies printed, the amount of paper used on a daily basis, and the 
number of workers involved, the place could go from a small office (office=*) 
to a large industrial building (industrial=*). You know, you decide! :-)

Solutions using man_made=works leave me lukewarm, as you'll have to specify the 
kind of work performed, and (/unhapply, IMHO/) that should be done through the 
product=* key, but on one hand something like product=printing_press could mean 
the place where printing presses are actually manufactured and on the other 
product=newspaper could mean the (/possibly industrial-size/) place wher 
journalists work to compose the newspaper. It would had been easier if for a 
finer description of man_made=works we had used an activity=* keyword instead 
of product=*, but "man_made=works + product=printing_works" can probably be OK 
too...

Cheers,

Sergio

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:craft


On 2018-12-14 11:09, dktue wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I feel 
> that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well.
>
> My suggestion would be to go with craft=printer. Any opinions on that?
>
> Cheers,
> dktue
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:11 PM Tom Pfeifer  wrote:

>
> I'd say it depends on the size. A small printer that focuses on business
> cards, letterheads,
> congratulation cards, I'd tag as craft.
>

A small printer of the sort you describe would usually be described as a
jobbing printer.  I wouldn't
think of a jobbing printer as "craft" in ordinary English usage, although
that's where OSM often
puts similar trades such as joinery.  In ordinary English, calligraphy and
sculpting would be
crafts whereas printing and joinery would be trades.

Even so, the primary distinction between a jobbing printer and a
newspaper/book printer is not
the equipment used or the size of the operation but the type of output.
That said, jobbing printers
tend to be smaller than newspaper/book printers and the older/smaller
jobbing printers tend to use letterpress rather than offset litho.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Erkin Alp Güney]

amenity=press anyone?

Yours, faithfully
Erkin Alp

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:28 PM Erkin Alp Güney 
wrote:

> amenity=press anyone?
>

"Should we go to the park today?  Or how about the landscape gardens?  Or
watch a game of
football?  Nah, lets go to the press.  That will be a lot of tun.

Oh damn, this is no fun at all.  I thought it was going to be a wine press
but it turns out to be a
printing press.  Now I have ink all over my feet and impressions of letters
in the soles of my feet.
Next time we'll have to find a different amenity to have fun at."

I know there is some use of amenity as a miscellaneous category but I don't
want to encourage it
and prefer that it be restricted to objects which fit this definition:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/amenity
If we need a miscellaneous category (I don't think we do, it's just
laziness to use one) then let's be
honest about it and call it "miscellaneous" or
"I_am_too_lazy_to_come_up_with_a_better_key"
rather than abuse amenity.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Adam Franco]

I have a question about `name=` and variants of names. I've been reading a
lot of local history and in the architecture/history world, houses are
generally named for the first resident that they were built for. E.g.
"Johnson house" and are referred to in this way even after many generations
of new owners. After adding a few of these names to the `name=
` tag I realized that this
might be problematic as `name=` seems to be given higher rendering priority
than house number (at least on openstreetmap.org and Maps.me), potentially
causing wayfinding confusion as addresses disappear and long-dead owners
names start popping up.

For some of these buildings they are commonly referred to by the public
using this historical-owner name. For example the "Osborne house"
  in my town was referred to
as such in public meetings and newspapers several years ago when it was
picked up and moved. It now has a new address as a result of this move.

In many other cases buildings are locally referred to by their current
address or current occupant. Especially in the case of a building taken up
by a single business, locals will simply refer to the building as the
" building".  The historical-owner name is still valid
and interesting for cross-referencing historical materials, but it likely
isn't well known and in many cases and wouldn't be useful for wayfinding as
it would not be found on signage.

What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building names when
they aren't well-known? Should they go in a `description=
` tag, `alt_name=
`, or some other tag?

Thanks for any insight you can provide.
Adam
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-12-14 15:23, Paul Allen wrote:

> Even so, the primary distinction between a jobbing printer and a 
> newspaper/book printer is not 
> the equipment used or the size of the operation but the type of output.  That 
> said, jobbing printers 
> tend to be smaller than newspaper/book printers and the older/smaller jobbing 
> printers tend to use letterpress rather than offset litho.

A better distinction would be that newspaper presses are web-fed (the
paper comes on huge rolls) not sheet-fed. They also have fully automated
collation and other post-press processing. 

Not sure about book printers... Most likely they use sheet-fed presses
for smaller runs, and web-fed for best sellers.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Marc Gemis]

and you  forget the digital sign printers that use inktjet printers.
Don't try to compare them to the printer on your desk though.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:45 PM Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> On 2018-12-14 15:23, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Even so, the primary distinction between a jobbing printer and a 
> newspaper/book printer is not
> the equipment used or the size of the operation but the type of output.  That 
> said, jobbing printers
> tend to be smaller than newspaper/book printers and the older/smaller jobbing 
> printers tend to use letterpress rather than offset litho.
>
>
> A better distinction would be that newspaper presses are web-fed (the paper 
> comes on huge rolls) not sheet-fed. They also have fully automated collation 
> and other post-press processing.
>
> Not sure about book printers... Most likely they use sheet-fed presses for 
> smaller runs, and web-fed for best sellers.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Allan Mustard]

I would suggest

name:=*

e.g.,

name:1887-1960=Osborne House

Same as for old names of streets.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 14, 2018, at 10:34 AM, Adam Franco  wrote:
> 
> I have a question about `name=` and variants of names. I've been reading a 
> lot of local history and in the architecture/history world, houses are 
> generally named for the first resident that they were built for. E.g. 
> "Johnson house" and are referred to in this way even after many generations 
> of new owners. After adding a few of these names to the `name=` tag I 
> realized that this might be problematic as `name=` seems to be given higher 
> rendering priority than house number (at least on openstreetmap.org and 
> Maps.me), potentially causing wayfinding confusion as addresses disappear and 
> long-dead owners names start popping up.
> 
> For some of these buildings they are commonly referred to by the public using 
> this historical-owner name. For example the "Osborne house"  in my town was 
> referred to as such in public meetings and newspapers several years ago when 
> it was picked up and moved. It now has a new address as a result of this move.
> 
> In many other cases buildings are locally referred to by their current 
> address or current occupant. Especially in the case of a building taken up by 
> a single business, locals will simply refer to the building as the " business> building".  The historical-owner name is still valid and 
> interesting for cross-referencing historical materials, but it likely isn't 
> well known and in many cases and wouldn't be useful for wayfinding as it 
> would not be found on signage.
> 
> What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building names when they 
> aren't well-known? Should they go in a `description=` tag, `alt_name=`, or 
> some other tag?
> 
> Thanks for any insight you can provide.
> Adam
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:36 PM Adam Franco  wrote:

> What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building names when
> they aren't well-known? Should they go in a `description=
> ` tag, `alt_name=
> `, or some other tag?
>

If there is only a single old name and it is different from the current
name, we have the established tag old_name=* as explained here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:old_name
This wiki page also suggests other formats like old_name:1921-1932=* if the
name is valid in a particular period.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Jmapb]

On 12/14/2018 11:20 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:36 PM Adam Franco > wrote:


What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building
names when they aren't well-known? Should they go in a
`description=
` tag,
`alt_name= `, or
some other tag?


If there is only a single old name and it is different from the 
current name, we have the established tag old_name=* as explained 
here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:old_name
This wiki page also suggests other formats like old_name:1921-1932=* 
if the name is valid in a particular period.


IMO it's fine to use old_name=* even without name=* -- to record the 
fact that it used to be known as the Johnson House, but there's no 
current name in common use. J


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Markus]

I wouldn't use shop=* or craft=* either. man_made=works seems to fit
best, although i'm not very comfortable with using man_made ('man made
(artificial) structures' [1]) for a business (which a factory is). As
for the kind of factory, some people use works=* (867 uses so far)
[1], which i think makes quite sense.

Therefore, i'd suggest to tag a printing works man_made=works +
works=printing (+ product=printed_matter).

[1]: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/works

Regards
Markus

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 15:42, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 2:28 PM Erkin Alp Güney  
> wrote:
>>
>> amenity=press anyone?
>
>
> "Should we go to the park today?  Or how about the landscape gardens?  Or 
> watch a game of
> football?  Nah, lets go to the press.  That will be a lot of tun.
>
> Oh damn, this is no fun at all.  I thought it was going to be a wine press 
> but it turns out to be a
> printing press.  Now I have ink all over my feet and impressions of letters 
> in the soles of my feet.
> Next time we'll have to find a different amenity to have fun at."
>
> I know there is some use of amenity as a miscellaneous category but I don't 
> want to encourage it
> and prefer that it be restricted to objects which fit this definition: 
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/amenity
> If we need a miscellaneous category (I don't think we do, it's just laziness 
> to use one) then let's be
> honest about it and call it "miscellaneous" or 
> "I_am_too_lazy_to_come_up_with_a_better_key"
> rather than abuse amenity.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Volker Schmidt]

> I have a question about `name=` and variants of names. I've been reading a
> lot of local history and in the architecture/history world, houses are
> generally named for the first resident that they were built for. E.g.
> "Johnson house" and are referred to in this way even after many generations
> of new owners. After adding a few of these names to the `name=
> ` tag I realized that this
> might be problematic as `name=` seems to be given higher rendering priority
> than house number (at least on openstreetmap.org and Maps.me),
> potentially causing wayfinding confusion as addresses disappear and
> long-dead owners names start popping up.
>
> if a house has a name as part of the address (in place or in addition to
the number) this should be tagged as addr:housename=.
What you seem to be referring to is the house's name like name=Villa
Giovanelli Colonna, which is not part of it's street address.
This is a rendering "problem".
In the standard OSM rendering, if a building has a 'name' tag this takes
precedence over it's 'addr:number' and 'addr:housename' tags. A building
that has no 'name' tag, but has both 'addr:housenumber' and
'addr:housename' tags is rendered, correctly, with both the house number
and the house name.
The precedence of the 'name' over the 'addre:xxx' tags could be debatable.
However if you put the 'addr:housenumber' and 'addr:housename on a separate
node and 'name' on the building it depends on the geometry and zoom level.
Unless the address tags and the name tag compete for space, all tags are
rendered, otherwise the name tag takes precedence (overrides the address
tags).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Allan Mustard]

That’s good, too.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 14, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Jmapb  wrote:
> 
>> On 12/14/2018 11:20 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:36 PM Adam Franco  wrote:
>>> What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building names when 
>>> they aren't well-known? Should they go in a `description=` tag, 
>>> `alt_name=`, or some other tag?
>> 
>> If there is only a single old name and it is different from the current 
>> name, we have the established tag old_name=* as explained here: 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:old_name
>> This wiki page also suggests other formats like old_name:1921-1932=* if the 
>> name is valid in a particular period.
> IMO it's fine to use old_name=* even without name=* -- to record the fact 
> that it used to be known as the Johnson House, but there's no current name in 
> common use. J
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 20:13, dktue  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I
> feel that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well.
>

How about the established office=newspaper?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3Dnewspaper

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 10:21 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 20:13, dktue  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I
>> feel that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well.
>>
>
> How about the established office=newspaper?
>

30 or 40 years ago that would have been workable.  Back in those days every
major newspaper
had a building, or complex of buildings, which housed the journalists and
the presses at a single
location.  Even then, office=newspaper would have been sub-optimal since
the journalists were
in an actual office but the presses (and typecasters, etc.) were not in an
actual office.

These days the journalists and presses are often in different locations.
Several newspapers
serving different localities may share an owner and a single printshop.
Many newspapers may,
independently of each other, contract the printing to an independent press
(which may have no
journalists of its own).  There are even more complex financial
relationships than those, but
the result is still that the presses may be in a building far removed from
the journalists (and
advertising, and management).

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

[Warin]

On 14/12/18 21:29, Sergio Manzi wrote:


And of course my apologies to Warin too!


No need here, I have too many of my own to worry about :(


On 2018-12-14 11:26, Sergio Manzi wrote:


Hello Mateusz,

On 2018-12-14 10:40, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well 
established as having boolean values.


Sorry, you are absolutely right: in my head I had mixed up the values 
for intermittent=* with the values for seasonal=*.


My bad! Probably early onset Alzehimer...  :-/

Cheers,

Sergio




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Building names, historical/original owner?

[Warin]

I'd put it in OHM rather than OSM. OHM could develop tools that would 
allow scrolling through dates to 'see' things as they were.


On 15/12/18 02:34, Adam Franco wrote:
I have a question about `name=` and variants of names. I've been 
reading a lot of local history and in the architecture/history world, 
houses are generally named for the first resident that they were built 
for. E.g. "Johnson house" and are referred to in this way even after 
many generations of new owners. After adding a few of these names to 
the `name= ` tag I 
realized that this might be problematic as `name=` seems to be given 
higher rendering priority than house number (at least on 
openstreetmap.org  and Maps.me), potentially 
causing wayfinding confusion as addresses disappear and long-dead 
owners names start popping up.


For some of these buildings they are commonly referred to by the 
public using this historical-owner name. For example the "Osborne 
house"   in my town was 
referred to as such in public meetings and newspapers several years 
ago when it was picked up and moved. It now has a new address as a 
result of this move.


In many other cases buildings are locally referred to by their current 
address or current occupant. Especially in the case of a building 
taken up by a single business, locals will simply refer to the 
building as the " building".  The historical-owner 
name is still valid and interesting for cross-referencing historical 
materials, but it likely isn't well known and in many cases and 
wouldn't be useful for wayfinding as it would not be found on signage.


What are folks thoughts about these historical-owner building names 
when they aren't well-known? Should they go in a `description= 
` tag, `alt_name= 
`, or some other tag?


Thanks for any insight you can provide.
Adam


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging