Re: [Tagging] Specialty Coffee
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 23:04, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > but regardless of that, I'd like to know what an > >> Independent, ‘Australian-style’, or artisan cafes >> > Australian-style cafe is, & how our's differ from everywhere else? > Something to do with kangaroos, is my guess. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
Both appear to be tagged as office=company, but it seems to me that there is a clear need to distinguish between (a) company office where I can walk in and buy service (or handle issues with an existing one) (b) company office closed to outsiders, where workers are not interacting with walk-ins and people attempting to get inside would be escorted out by security https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Dcompany ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 18:27, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Both appear to be tagged as office=company, but it seems to me that > there is a clear need to distinguish between > > (a) company office where I can walk in > and buy service (or handle issues with an existing one) > > (b) company office closed to outsiders, where workers are not > interacting with walk-ins and people attempting to get inside > would be escorted out by security > Maybe not ideal, but if you're looking for an immediate solution then access=customers and access=private? -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
sent from a phone > On 9. Jul 2020, at 19:27, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Both appear to be tagged as office=company, but it seems to me that > there is a clear need to distinguish between > > (a) company office where I can walk in > and buy service (or handle issues with an existing one) > > (b) company office closed to outsiders, where workers are not > interacting with walk-ins and people attempting to get inside > would be escorted out by security maybe add additional features within those companies, like service points, or counters for customers? I also have occasionally mapped turn stiles at the entrances for the opposite case, but admittedly this kind of micromapping is not the best way to tell from an automated query whether you could walk in or not. I would generally suggest adding more specific tags for offices where customer services are provided, like the above service point. We do distinguish for some features between internal administration and service oriented places (e.g. post offices, banks) while the situation is less clear for real estate agents, insurance companies, tour operators/travel agencies and more. Maybe we should create amenities for those that are for clients to walk in? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
Jul 9, 2020, 20:38 by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 18:27, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote: > >> Both appear to be tagged as office=company, but it seems to me that >> there is a clear need to distinguish between >> >> (a) company office where I can walk in >> and buy service (or handle issues with an existing one) >> >> (b) company office closed to outsiders, where workers are not >> interacting with walk-ins and people attempting to get inside >> would be escorted out by security >> > > Maybe not ideal, but if you're looking for an immediate solution then > access=customers and access=private? > I like it, but it is a bit tricky as I can walk into many offices without being a customer (though typically it is done as someone wants or considers being one). Maybe something along amenity=customer_service? Though access=private seems perfectly fine to mark office as internal to a company (or covering restricted set of clients). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
Jul 9, 2020, 21:21 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 9. Jul 2020, at 19:27, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging >> wrote: >> >> Both appear to be tagged as office=company, but it seems to me that >> there is a clear need to distinguish between >> >> (a) company office where I can walk in >> and buy service (or handle issues with an existing one) >> >> (b) company office closed to outsiders, where workers are not >> interacting with walk-ins and people attempting to get inside >> would be escorted out by security >> > > > maybe add additional features within those companies, like service points, or > counters for customers? > Do we have any existing tags for that? Or should I start using amenity=customer_service or something similar? > I also have occasionally mapped turn stiles at the entrances for the opposite > case, but admittedly this kind of micromapping is not the best way to tell > from an automated query whether you could walk in or not. > I would generally suggest adding more specific tags for offices where > customer services are provided, like the above service point. We do > distinguish for some features between internal administration and service > oriented places (e.g. post offices, banks) while the situation is less clear > for real estate agents, insurance companies, tour operators/travel agencies > and more. > Maybe we should create amenities for those that are for clients to walk in? > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Specialty Coffee
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 23:33, Paul Allen wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 23:04, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> >> but regardless of that, I'd like to know what an >> >>> Independent, ‘Australian-style’, or artisan cafes >>> >> Australian-style cafe is, & how our's differ from everywhere else? >> > > Something to do with kangaroos, is my guess. > Check 1:53 & a few seconds after! :-) I know it's wine, not coffee, but the same principle applies :-) Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 22:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > > > Jul 9, 2020, 20:38 by pla16...@gmail.com: > > > Maybe not ideal, but if you're looking for an immediate solution then > access=customers and access=private? > > I like it, but it is a bit tricky as I can walk into many offices without > being > a customer (though typically it is done as someone wants or > considers being one). > "Customers" is rather broad, though. I think some of us apply access=customers to church car parks. Then again, one could argue they're buying after-life insurance. If I walk into a shop and look around then walk out without buying anything, does that mean I wasn't a customer in the OSM sense? I take "customers" to mean "non-employees who may access the facility because of interactions with the controlling organization." Not staff. Private means that nobody but staff (excepting emergency services, plumbers who have been called in to deal with a problem, etc.) have access. > > Though access=private seems perfectly fine to mark office as internal > to a company (or covering restricted set of clients). > If there are restrictions on who may be a client, then it's more of access=designated, or opening hours with "appointment required" or some such. I think we can handle these things with existing tagging. A bit clunky, but it can be done. Is it worth doing it more explicitly for the sake of carto or overpass queries? I haven't given it enough thought to say one way or the other on more explicit handling. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Specialty Coffee
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 22:54, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > Something to do with kangaroos, is my guess. >> > > Check 1:53 & a few seconds after! :-) > You seem to have forgotten to give a URL. No problem. There's a timestamp, so it's going to be youtube. All I have to do is google for youtube, kangaroo and wine - there aren't going to be many videos matching that. There are hundreds of the damned things! What is it about wine and kangaroos? And which video did you mean? -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Specialty Coffee
On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 08:07, Paul Allen wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 22:54, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> >> Something to do with kangaroos, is my guess. >>> >> >> Check 1:53 & a few seconds after! :-) >> > > You seem to have forgotten to give a URL. > Damn! Obviously need more coffee! Here you go: https://vimeo.com/387880227 Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Distinguishing closed office spaces and client service locations?
Jul 9, 2020, 23:58 by pla16...@gmail.com: > > > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 22:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> Jul 9, 2020, 20:38 by >> pla16...@gmail.com>> : >> >>> >>> Maybe not ideal, but if you're looking for an immediate solution then >>> access=customers and access=private? >>> >> I like it, but it is a bit tricky as I can walk into many offices without >> being >> a customer (though typically it is done as someone wants or >> considers being one). >> > > "Customers" is rather broad, though. I think some of us apply > access=customers to church car parks. Then again, one could argue they're > buying after-life insurance. If I walk into a shop and look around then > walk out without buying anything, does that mean I wasn't a customer > in the OSM sense? > > I take "customers" to mean "non-employees who may access the > facility because of interactions with the controlling organization." Not > staff. Private means that nobody but staff (excepting emergency > services, plumbers who have been called in to deal with a problem, > etc.) have access. > Good point, I also used access=customers for churchgoers-only parking lot. >> >> Though access=private seems perfectly fine to mark office as internal >> to a company (or covering restricted set of clients). >> > > If there are restrictions on who may be a client, then it's more of > access=designated, or opening hours with "appointment required" or > some such. > > I think we can handle these things with existing tagging. A bit clunky, > but it can be done. Is it worth doing it more explicitly for the sake of > carto or overpass queries? I haven't given it enough thought to > say one way or the other on more explicit handling. > I was thinking mostly about other mappers, access tag on office may be a bit unclear in the intended meaning. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names
On 9/7/20 12:44 am, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 8. Jul 2020, at 16:17, Matthew Woehlke wrote: Really? If Alice and Bob each own 50% of "Fairview Heights Apartments", you would expect that there are legal property records indicating exactly which half of said complex is owner by Alice and which half is owned by Bob? (Note that the *tenants* don't own *any* of it.) both is possible, each one can own a precise list of apartments, or both can own 50% of all apartments. Here apartments are usually sold separately, each as a title dead. Other than 100% ownership it would be highly unusual for a 50% ownership other than by the entire thing being owned by a firm and an individual/firm owning 50% of the 100% owning firm. For condominiums, AFAIK, the *definition* of condominium vs. townhouse is that you only own a specific *interior* space and *not* the exterior. welcome to OpenStreetMap, mapping the whole world. You are looking at the details in a specific jurisdiction. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
