[Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

[Jake Edmonds via Tagging]

In the woods around my area, there are many fire pits and picnic tables. Around 
25% of the fire pits are tagged as their own object with leisure=firepit  and 
the other 75% are additionally tagged as fireplace=yes on an 
amenity=shelter/shelter=picnic_shelter, tourism=picnic_site or 
leisure=picnic_table object.

Here is an example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5610200725 

Photo of the object: 
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Picnic_Table_-_Ko%C5%A1ice_-_mestsk%C3%A1_%C4%8Das%C5%A5_Sever.jpg
 


The wiki page for fireplace refers to a structure with a chimney (as is 
commonly used in English).

The page for tourism=picnic_site does list fireplace=* as a possible additional 
tag and 'Alternatively, map separate features: leisure=firepit’

The pages for leisure=picnic_table and amenity=shelter do not mention 
fireplace=*.

I don’t think it makes sense to use fireplace=yes as an additional tag and they 
should be mapped separately as leisure=firepit. If I understand correctly, 
additional tags should be used to describe the object itself, but fire pits and 
tables/shelters can be used independently. If I’m planning a trip and I want to 
make a fire, I am going to search for fire pits.

Is there something I haven’t considered? ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Hauke Stieler]

Hi,

you may noticed the discussion "Tag for 'tax free shopping'" on this
mailing list. This is the proposal for the new "duty_free" tag.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tax_free_shopping

Basically the new tag has three values:

* yes:
This shop does not collect taxes at all. This usually happens at
airports in "duty-free stores".

* refund:
For shops outside an airport. Foreign travelers shopping in a shop with
duty_free=refund can get an additional receipt which can be -- e.g.
later at the airport -- exchanged so that the traveler gets the taxes back.

* no:
All customers of a shop with duty_free=no have to pay normal taxes.

Feel free to comment :)

Hauke



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 4. Jan 2020, at 18:32, Jake Edmonds via Tagging 
>  wrote:
> 
> I don’t think it makes sense to use fireplace=yes as an additional tag and 
> they should be mapped separately as leisure=firepit.


from what you have written in your introduction, other mappers in your area do 
think it makes sense to use a fireplace property, so even if you don’t like it 
you’ll probably have to accept it.

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

Re: [Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 4. Jan 2020, at 18:32, Jake Edmonds via Tagging 
>  wrote:
> 
> I don’t think it makes sense to use fireplace=yes as an additional tag and 
> they should be mapped separately as leisure=firepit.


additionally, mapping the fireplace explicitly and on its own with 
leisure=firepit does not make the addition of fireplace=yes for the containing 
picnic area wrong. It’s not necessarily an either or.

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

[Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

[Volker Schmidt]

I have just detected the wiki page "amenity=tourist_bus_parking"
It has so far only 16 uses (including one by myself a few minutes ago)
I am not happy with this new tag. Agreed, we have the tags
amenity=bicycle_parking and amenity=motorcycle_parking, but they have been
with OSM for years, whereas the tourist_bus parking is new (from Feb 2019)
and has so far very few uses.

My feeling is that we should not add more humanities along that line, like
RV_parking, hgv_parking, snowmobile_parking, cargo_bike_parking and so on,
but try to think,of something better.
In particular I would like some tagging scheme that allows you to identify
a parking facility, and within that same facility (which carries the name)
the parking sub-facilities for cars,  buses, HGVs, motorcycles, ...That
would make more sense.The parking I have just inserted has two separate
areas and separate entrances for cars and tourist buses, but it has only
one name. Another frequent situation are motorway stations where parking is
usually split into cars, busses, and HGVs.
Hopefully it's just my ignorance and someone else has already implemented
the prefect tagging scheme somewhere.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 4. Jan 2020, at 19:49, Hauke Stieler  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> you may noticed the discussion "Tag for 'tax free shopping'" on this
> mailing list. This is the proposal for the new "duty_free" tag.
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tax_free_shopping
> 
> Basically the new tag has three values:
> 
> * yes:
> This shop does not collect taxes at all. This usually happens at
> airports in "duty-free stores".
> 
> * refund:
> For shops outside an airport. Foreign travelers shopping in a shop with
> duty_free=refund can get an additional receipt which can be -- e.g.
> later at the airport -- exchanged so that the traveler gets the taxes back.
> 
> * no:
> All customers of a shop with duty_free=no have to pay normal taxes.
> 
> Feel free to comment :


actually tax collection and exemption are not specifically related to airports, 
although airports are a typical setting where duty free shops occur, there are 
also different places where you can find them, so this should be phrased more 
generically.

Cheers Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Hauke Stieler]

Hi Martin,

> actually tax collection and exemption are not specifically related to 
> airports, although airports are a typical setting where duty free shops 
> occur, there are also different places where you can find them, so this 
> should be phrased more generically.

I always use "e.g." or "for example" to make clear that airports are not
the only places for this. However, I changed the examples and hopefully
made them better/more general.

Hauke



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 04.01.2020 19:47, Hauke Stieler wrote:


* no:
All customers of a shop with duty_free=no have to pay normal taxes.


I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU,
everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax refund.

However, since this requires to provide evidence and send complicated forms
to the revenue office of the country of the purchase, this process is taken over
by a company that has booths in major airports. Thus participating shops
prepare a special receipt, and the airport office refunds the tax while 
retaining
a fee for themselves, and finally claims it from revenue.

IIRC a similar scheme exists for US sales taxes.

tom

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

[Tom Pfeifer]

I agree, I had the problem on motorway service areas, where parking is segregated between HGVs and 
cars. I solved it with access tags for the respective vehicle class.


On 04.01.2020 22:10, Volker Schmidt wrote:

I have just detected the wiki page "amenity=tourist_bus_parking"
It has so far only 16 uses (including one by myself a few minutes ago)
I am not happy with this new tag. Agreed, we have the tags amenity=bicycle_parking and 
amenity=motorcycle_parking, but they have been with OSM for years, whereas the tourist_bus parking 
is new (from Feb 2019) and has so far very few uses.


My feeling is that we should not add more humanities along that line, like RV_parking, hgv_parking, 
snowmobile_parking, cargo_bike_parking and so on, but try to think,of something better.
In particular I would like some tagging scheme that allows you to identify a parking facility, and 
within that same facility (which carries the name) the parking sub-facilities for cars,  buses, 
HGVs, motorcycles, ...That would make more sense.The parking I have just inserted has two separate 
areas and separate entrances for cars and tourist buses, but it has only one name. Another frequent 
situation are motorway stations where parking is usually split into cars, busses, and HGVs.
Hopefully it's just my ignorance and someone else has already implemented the prefect tagging scheme 
somewhere.



tom

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Hauke Stieler]

Hi,

> I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU,
> everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax
> refund.

you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service
(prepared forms, memberships in organizations, etc.) for an
tax-exemption" is better?

Regarding companies/organizations, there's a discussion about that on
the discussion-page of the proposal.

Hauke



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Philip Barnes]

On Saturday, 4 January 2020, Hauke Stieler wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU,
> > everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax
> > refund.
> 
> you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service
> (prepared forms, memberships in organizations, etc.) for an
> tax-exemption" is better?
> 
Absence of such facilities surely applies to 99.% of shops. 

Nobody is going to want to start to tag the absence of such a service?

Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Hauke Stieler]

Hi,

> Absence of such facilities surely applies to 99.% of shops. 
> 
> Nobody is going to want to start to tag the absence of such a service?

Of course nobody would start to do that, but when having "=yes", then I
think there should be a "=no" (even though this is the default case).

And when I think of Reykjavik: Many souvenir-shops will give you
prepared tax-reund-forms and information leaflets, but not all (I don't
know, maybe 50/50). Reykjavik is not that large, so tagging the one half
with "=refund" (or whatever it might be) and the other half with "=no"
would make sense to me.

Hauke



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 4. Jan 2020, at 22:12, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> 
> My feeling is that we should not add more humanities along that line, like 
> RV_parking, hgv_parking, snowmobile_parking, cargo_bike_parking and so on, 
> but try to think,of something better.
> In particular I would like some tagging scheme that allows you to identify a 
> parking facility, and within that same facility (which carries the name) the 
> parking sub-facilities for cars,  buses, HGVs, motorcycles, ...That would 
> make more sense.


it depends. When a parking has dedicated subareas (parking lot/s / groups of 
them) it doesn’t seem perfect to tag them as tI don’t see a problem with RV 
parking (apart the abbreviation, but it’s generally introduced in OpenStreetMap 
as in real life), if they exist (as RV only parking), and I don’t see a benefit 
if we’d tag all parkings the same and shift meaningful principal distinctions 
to a second level.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 4. Jan 2020, at 23:38, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> 
>> you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service
>> (prepared forms, memberships in organizations, etc.) for an
>> tax-exemption" is better?
>> 
> Absence of such facilities surely applies to 99.% of shops.


I agree tagging of the absence of services only makes sense where you’d 
typically expect that they would be provided. This isn’t the case here 
(although your 99,% seem quite off, just ask in any bigger store, and you 
might be surprised that they could indeed help you, e.g. with providing the 
required forms). Generally, most issued receipts have the information that is 
required (VAT is indicated separately, VAT rate is indicated, name address and 
VATIN of seller, date, etc) to get your VAT back.

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