[Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

just realized there's a "great" new feature in ID editor,
lots of senseless service tags in this format :
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=service%3Avehicle%3A

Seems to be over a year ago that someone decided to avoid conflicts
between the "street" and the "car" services :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:vehicle

They just forgot to check whether it had some influences on existing
tagging schemes
and didn't even adjust the "shop=car" wiki page (whose tagging scheme
apparently lead to this decision).

This leads to entries like this one :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/44809

Thoughts ?
Ideas how to fix that ?
At least this opulent tagging scheme should be deactivated ASAP in ID.

Cheers,
Thilo


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

[Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

8X--
Bryan Housel bhousel at gmail.com
Thu Jan 3 04:39:03 UTC 2019We discussed it here on this list last year.
You started the thread even, so you can’t pretend like you "just
realized” it.

I even asked people to update the wiki.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036095.html

 
Anyway, be nice & happy new year.
8X--

Thanks for mentioning that, I really forgot about it.
At the time I obviously didn't realize the dimension of this
(implementing it in ID, and in which opulence).
Meanwhile it's destroying established tagging schemes and it's still not
documented
nor did someone take care to avoid further entries in the format which
triggered this decision (shop=car service=*).
And I'm afraid if I do there will be a lot of whiners crying "where has
this been discussed" ?

There was an appropriate comment at the time,
but it seems it's been ignored:

8X--
Martin Koppenhoefer
    dieterdreist at gmail.com
  
    Sun May  6 20:07:50 UTC 2018

introducing undocumented and formerly unused tags via preset without any
discussion or proposal process
is something I didn’t expect from the main osmf endorsed editor.
Are there more tags that have been introduced this way,
and if yes, have they been documented in the meantime?
8X--

So which ACTION should we take now ?
At least those who introduced it should be in charge.


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

[Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Forgot to mention :
" it follows what `service:bicycle:*` does."
is not true.

And if you introduce a new system,
you should also explain the namespace structure.
And not just create a hard to find "notice"
which isn't linked to from the affected existing tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:vehicle

8X---

Bryan Housel bryan at 7thposition.com
Sun May 6 12:27:15 UTC 2018

    Previous message: [Tagging] service:vehicle: prefix
    Next message: [Tagging] service:vehicle: prefix
    Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hey all, this is something I added to iD because we can’t support
reusing the `service=*` tag to also store values for vehicle services. 
The tag is already overwhelmingly used to hold values for
`highway=service` and `railway=service`.

So we added `service:vehicle` for users to tag these, and it follows
what `service:bicycle:*` does.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036107.html

8X---


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

[Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

8X-
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Fri Jan 4 12:29:34 UTC 2019

Hi,

I agree there seems to be a problem here that needs careful discussion &
consideration, but:

On 03.01.19 16:47, Thilo Haug OSM wrote:
> So which ACTION should we take now ?
> At least those who introduced it should be in charge.

The ACTION should definitely not be you mass-editing things back to how
you think they should be tagged. This can be discussed here and we can
make a change AFTER that, not while.

Bye
Frederik
8X-

I agree, but last time this wasn't very successful :
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036095.html

8X-

Sérgio V. svolk2 at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 4 11:54:17 UTC 2019

Even if the tag keys were not propper, you've just removed many specific
information about services that were in the values, such as batteries;
brakes; electrical; inspection; muffler; oil_change.
Without preserving them in any other usefull, or more propper tag if needed.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66006238
Simply removing true info is not a good deal.
Where and how would someone find those specific infos about car services
again?
Are you considering the validity of those previously tagged specific
infos, and the efforts of who did it to put valuable info in to OSM, in
your large-scale re-tagging?

Sérgio

8X-

Yeah, this should be discussed beforehand,
whether we then also tag all items in a supermarket,
or instead use more generic tags like food/non-food.

I'd suggest :

batteries; brakes:
car:parts=yes         OR         car:parts=batteries;brakes (if only)

electrical :
unclear what is meant, electrical repair or electric cars ?
either :
car:repair=yes        OR         car:repair=electrical (if only)
OR
car:type=electric

inspection
car:repair=inspection (if only, such as pitstop and similar)

muffler; oil_change
car:repair=muffler;oil_change (if only)

I think it's vital to follow those principles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization#Effect_on_consumers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle

Cheers,
Thilo

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

[Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

8X-

Sérgio V. svolk2 at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 4 15:59:48 UTC 2019

As talking on tools, standards and principles, I think what is vital is
to follow "OSM principles":

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice

*Don't remove tags that you don't understand*

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map

*Do not engage in large-scale "cleanups" without securing the agreement
of the relevant community or talking to the people whose work you aim to
"clean".*
8X-

Possibly you didn't notice I (first) tried to do so in May 2018 ?

8X-
Fri Jan 4 14:35:57 UTC 2019
...but last time this wasn't very successful :
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036095.html

8X-

And did they ?
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036119.html

Nothing happened, last mail :
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036275.html

So please be try to be constructive,
look forward and tell us which scheme you prefer and why

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

Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

did I miss the
"consensus with the community, after long and detailed discussions"
here ?
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-October/033760.html

There are two guys which appear to me like religios bigot on an Inquisition,
but maybe the definitions in the wiki are just unclear / too interpretable :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rtfm

Please let me know what you think of this definition
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like#When_to_create_a_proposal
and whether it applies to the "motorcycle_friendly" tag.

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 05.10.2017 um 23:19 schrieb Warin:
> On 05-Oct-17 10:41 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>>
>>
>> In my understanding, we would not map the personal preferences and
>> hobbies of individuals. 
>
> ? We all map our personal preference and hobbies!
> Walkers map public rights of way and bicycle riders map bicycle paths,
> bicycle parking, bicycle repair stands, drinking water sources and so on.
>
> Why should motorcycle riders not do the same?
> Or pet owners?
>
> The motivation of a business owner to provide specific services is for
> profit, if they have specific knowledge of a particular market, such
> as motorcycling, then they may use it to advantage.
> I don't see any harm in that - after all OSM is mapping crafts and
> shops where the people concerned have skills in those areas.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Cycling "service area"

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi Volker,

the way I understand the current syntax,
underscore is more for spaces (in terms)
and colon for namespaces (to separate the "subcategory").

So I'd use vehicle:type=* rather than vehicle_type=*
(leaves room for vehicle:anythingelse=*)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 17.02.2018 um 14:44 schrieb Volker Schmidt:
> I would prefer a tag structure of the type
> highway=service _area (or highway=services ?)
> vehicle_type=bicycle; motorcycle; car; agricultural; hgv;
> motor_vehicle (with default vehicle_type=motor_vehicle?)
> attendant=yes|no
>
> I have come across a number of (manned) service places where different
> vehicles are attended to, including bicycles.
>
> On 17 February 2018 at 11:52, nwastra  > wrote:
>
> I also find the highway=cycle_service_area tag is both useful and
> specific enough to be a widely used tag if documented on the osm
> cycling pages.
> nev
>  
>> On 17 Feb 2018, at 8:40 PM, John Willis > > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Javbw
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2018, at 11:54 AM, Dave Swarthout
>> mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> think the highway=cycle_service_area tag is both useful and
>>> specific enough.
>>
>> I will make a draft page for it and start using it for the very
>> rare places here. I assume the rest area in the OSM question
>> thread is a sun protection or picnic shelter with name=Cycle Rest
>> Area. 
>>
>> Javbw 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> 
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Shops that sell printer ink cartridges

[Thilo Haug OSM]

I didn't get the point of this comment,
do you got an example ?

Am 24.02.2018 um 00:51 schrieb marc marc:
> Listing all possible values in shop=* means that each tool
> must provide a sorting by category if it wants to organize
> the data and make life harder for the majority of shop that
> have more than one product..
> a schema like shop=first_level + first_level=second_level etc.,
> avoiding the need for each application to do so.
Regarding
"I am against turning OSM into a shop inventory or an ontology of all
products on the planet. I agree with Frederik below and his
shop=printer_ink favourite." :

I didn't want to propose to list all products (or even variants of them)
of a shop=supermarket, shop=doityourself or shop=electronics,
just to give a possibility to mention another "main shop" is also
providing this "service" (or product) of a "specialised" one
(In OSM usually done by a namespace, example : social_facility).
I think the number of shops that are specialised in only one
product/service is much lower than that of shops providing several.
Example : shop=seafood (may be sold by a variety of other shops).

So IMHO the goal of this discussion is to find those attributes (or
services) which apply to several shops and are of general interest.

In the "seafood" example it's the question whether this needs to be
split up in types of seafood or not, but time will show if people feel
the need.
But this might be solved by simply offering seafood:type=* (not to make
a subtag for every type).
In non-food cases, there will mainly be the offer of selling, renting,
repairing and (spare) parts,
so this could be used for a "general" scheme.

In the printer example, it is obvious that there might be more than ink
which could be interesting,
there's even the tag amenity=printer (doesn't make sense to me).




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

[Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

instead of debating every single shop (details),
I'm in favor of using a name scheme which applies to all (kind "grammar"
for it).

In the context of the printer_ink shop discussion I stumbled on the
"service" tags of
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcopyshop

IMHO service:computer=yes/no or service:phone=yes/no
doesn't make sense at all, as nobody knows WHICH "service" is meant.
It would be better to take the "main" tag (of shop=*) as the leading item,
such as
computer:sales=yes/no
computer:parts=yes/no
computer:repair=yes/no
computer:rental=yes/no
computer:[whateverrismeantby"service"]=yes/no

...and to use this scheme for all shop services.

Cheers,
Thilo



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

Re: [Tagging] discrepancy in shop definition and "wholesale" value

[Thilo Haug OSM]

I agree with those statements :

What they sell (e.g. clothes, groceries, only in bulk packaging) or if
access is restricted (specific times, only certain group of people) are
separate concerns
*and should be tagged separately*.

Am 06.03.2018 um 18:55 schrieb Paul Allen:
We already make a distinction between shops (selling goods) and offices
(selling services, though other types of office exist).  I'd go with
wholesaler=*.  *And maybe expand* access to access=trade (wholesaler
deals only with registered traders) and access=public (anyone can shop
there).  Something along those lines.

Of course, there will always be grey areas.

-- 
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] Tag:shop=shotball

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi,

there's already
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dweapons

How about a subtag
weapon:type=*

The corresponding sport is here :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dshooting

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 08.03.2018 um 13:00 schrieb Александр Львов:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:shop%3Dshotball 
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Identifying language regions

[Thilo Haug OSM]

An example, good luck :
56 TSKM, 39 Languages
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Togo
41 TSKM, 4 languages :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland

(Germany : 357 TSKM)

Am 18.04.2018 um 21:49 schrieb Vao Matua:
> I would suggest that OSM is probably not the best place for this. 
> There are many countries that have many or even hundreds of
> languages.  The lines between the places where languages are commonly
> spoken can be quite fuzzy and often do not follow any other features.
> A year ago I was living in a place where people living there spoke 3
> different languages in addition to the "official" language.
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Yuri Astrakhan
> mailto:yuriastrak...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> What would be the best tags to use for mapping language regions? 
> I would like to create a map of primary languages spoken in an
> area. This will greatly help with multilingual maps, allowing data
> consumers to calculate which language name tags to use for which
> locale. This will also give OSM community a much greater control
> over such maps.
>
> Proposal (relations only, must have closed polygons):
> type=language
> primary=xx   (required)
> secondary=yy;zz;...  (optional)
>
> A relation may span multiple countries (e.g. US and most of Canada
> for English), or split countries (e.g. EN and FR regions in
> Canada). In some cases, the relation will reuse country border ways.
>
> What do you think?
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] musical_instrument tag for publicly available musical instruments

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

i think that subtags are necessary for all types of shops
but may be the same for every (non-food) type of shop,
as all of them usually offer the same (besides sales),
so the following may apply :

musical_instrument:sales=*
musical_instrument:rental=*
musical_instrument:repair=*
musical_instrument:parts=*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmusical_instrument

I case of the bars,
it could be
amenity=bar
musical_instrument:rental=piano
fee:piao=no @ customers
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fee

So the keys for the shop
could also be used for other "main" tags such as amenities.
Any standardisation would IMHO ease the tagging of more complex cases.

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 29.04.2018 um 10:36 schrieb José G Moya Y.:
> I think this is a good idea, but, in the suggestion of Thorsten, I
> find problematic the use of "access=" tag when instruments are in a
> bar. Imagine a bar with a private piano is tagged as a point:
>
> amenity=bar
> amenity=musical_instrument
> musical_instrument=piano
> access=private
>
> It does not make clear if either access to bar or access to piano is
> private. 
>
> Also, since bars are amenities, a duplicate "amenity" tag arises. You
> have to either put two points or tag the bar as an area.
>
> Yours,
>
> José
>
>
> El dom., 29 de abril de 2018 7:51,  > escribió:
>
> The musical_instrument *key* is generally used to name the
> specific type of musical instrument:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/musical_instrument
>
> You are correct that it's mostly used in combination with
> shop=musical_instrument (a place selling them) or
> craft=musical_instrument (a place making them).
>
> But there are also a (very) few cases tagged as
> amenity=musical_instrument (a place where a musical instrument is
> available for use) and playground=musical_instrument (similar, but
> generally a more robust "toy" instrument aimed at a younger
> audience). Neither one of which is currently specifically
> documented on the wiki, but that shouldn't stop you from using them.
>
> So a piano in a bar that is available for people to play on should
> probably be tagged:
>
> amenity=musical_instrument
> musical_instrument=piano
> access=permissive (or access=customer in some cases)
>
> Either way, the piano is privately owned and the owner is
> currently making it available to other people, but may revoke that
> permission at will in the future.
>
> Cheers,
> Thorsten
>
> P.S. is there a preference on this mailing list for top or bottom
> posting?
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: e1k mailto:emilea...@protonmail.ch>>
> > Sent: Sunday, 29 April 2018 15:12
> > To: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> > Subject: [Tagging] musical_instrument tag for publicly available
> > musical instruments
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > (first post, plz be gentle!)
> > i'd love to see if there can be consensus on the use of the
> > 'musical_instrument' tag for publicly available musical instruments.
> > a growing number of bars, train stations and or other public places
> > have musical instruments around where i live (Amsterdam area), and
> > i've started noticing and collecting these places, and would love
> > to tag them in openstreetmap.
> > use case: as a musician that travels around a bit, i'd love to know
> > where i can find a piano or guitar to play on.
> > i see the musical_instrument tag is mostly (only?) used for place
> > that create and/or sell musical instruments, but i'm wondering what
> > the appropriate form of tag would be for a publicly available
> > musical instrument.
> > (if this has been discussed before, plz point me at it, i coudln't
> > find it)
> >
> > best regards,
> > emile
> >
> >
> > ​---
> >
> > All revolutions are impossible until they happen. Then they become
> > inevitable -- Albie Sachs​
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] musical_instrument tag for publicly available musical instruments

[Thilo Haug OSM]

perhaps

musical_instrument:usage=

?

Am 30.04.2018 um 11:22 schrieb Marc Gemis:
> Besides the arguments from Martin,
>
> how do you differentiate the "rental" in a bar, where you can only
> play on the instrument, and not take it away from the room/building
> from a real rental company that deliver instruments to play somewhere
> else ?
>
>> musical_instrument:sales=*
>> musical_instrument:rental=*
>> musical_instrument:repair=*
>> musical_instrument:parts=*
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmusical_instrument
>>
>> I case of the bars,
>> it could be
>> amenity=bar
>> musical_instrument:rental=piano
>> fee:piao=no @ customers
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fee
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

[Tagging] service:vehicle: prefix

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

what is the service:vehicle: prefix good for,
and where is it documented ? (1 223 occurrences)

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service%3Avehicle%3Acar_repair#overview

Cheers.
Thilo



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

Re: [Tagging] tagging LPG only station

[Thilo Haug OSM]

fuel:diesel=no
fuel:octane_91=no
fuel:octane_95=no
fuel:octane_98=no
fuel:e10=no

Am 06.05.2018 um 18:52 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> How to tag fuel station with only LPG fuel?
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dfuel and
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:fuel:lpg
> failed to help with that.
>
> amenity=fuel
> fuel:lpg=yes
>
> is a good start but how one may explicitly add that
> no other fuel type is sold there?
>
> I encountered https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1282285 and now
> I have no idea how to improve tagging there (and I prefer to know that
> before I
> check that anonymous reporter was right)
>
>
> ___
> 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] service:vehicle: prefix

[Thilo Haug OSM]

How about leaving away both,
the prefix service:vehicle is IMHO needless

car:repair
car:parts
car:rental

etc., same for bicycle,
would express the same ?

Am 06.05.2018 um 14:27 schrieb Bryan Housel:
> Hey all, this is something I added to iD because we can’t support
> reusing the `service=*` tag to also store values for vehicle services.
>  The tag is already overwhelmingly used to hold values for
> `highway=service` and `railway=service`.
>
> So we added `service:vehicle` for users to tag these, and it follows
> what `service:bicycle:*` does.
>
> For more details see:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5008
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4497
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/3535
>
> Please update the wiki, thanks!
> Bryan
>
>
>
>> On May 6, 2018, at 12:35 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> So ... no documentation. Nor discussion visible on the wiki.
>>
>> But follows the practice of service:bicycle:repair=yes which is
>> poorly documented on
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:bicycle:repair
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/05/18 13:42, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>> As part of shop=car_repair
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcar_repair
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Graeme
>>>
>>> On 6 May 2018 at 09:51, Thilo Haug OSM >> <mailto:th...@gmx.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> what is the service:vehicle: prefix good for,
>>> and where is it documented ? (1 223 occurrences)
>>>
>>> 
>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service%3Avehicle%3Acar_repair#overview
>>> 
>>> <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service%3Avehicle%3Acar_repair#overview>
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>> Thilo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] service:vehicle: prefix

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

instead of discussing everything from scratch,
let's create a general guideline for shop suffixes.
There has already been a former short dicussion
with some nice examples, but no productive outcome :

General namespace (syntax) for shops :
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-September/033385.html

Proposal :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop_subtags

Please write your input to the proposal's discussion page,
otherwise everyone has to search all the old emails in the tagging
mailing list's archive.

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 06.05.2018 um 22:07 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 6. May 2018, at 14:27, Bryan Housel  wrote:
>>
>> Hey all, this is something I added to iD because we can’t support reusing 
>> the `service=*` tag to also store values for vehicle services.  
>
> introducing undocumented and formerly unused tags via preset without any 
> discussion or proposal process is something I didn’t expect from the main 
> osmf endorsed editor. Are there more tags that have been introduced this way, 
> and if yes, have they been documented in the meantime?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Martin 
> ___
> 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] Removing helpful information in wiki pages

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi,

IMHO the picture helps understand the process of starting and landing,
as not everyone heard about the recent development.
I thought this would be helpful to get an overview at a glance.
(talking about the spacex schematic picture, not the " long exposure" one,
which should only show the "real world"- version of the above).

What I dont't understand is how these pictures may be disturbing or
irritating ?

Illustrations in general are usual to help understand a topic,
especially if one isn't already a specialist in it.
Those were just a bit bigger, but this could be solved by using
"thumbnails",
means smaller versions you have to click on to see the full size.

An alternative would be to link to an wikipedia article which explains it,
but if I can get this general understanding with just some pictures,
I think this is more effective ("a picture is worth a thousand words").

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 12.05.2018 um 13:15 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> Why would you think it is not, and what is the content you believe is
> contained that could help understanding the tags in question?


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 105, Issue 26

[Thilo Haug OSM]

I think what Mark wanted to express
is more about some general guidelines which could be established.

The  tagging systems are very inconsistent, just have a look at the
different "service" syntax (namespaces)
of a car vs. bicycle vs. motorcycle shop (and none for others).
There could be a system of different levels of discussions, for example.
I'm personally not keen on reading every single mail of every topic,
but there's no possibility to choose some topics.

To stay with the "shop" example :
There should be a consensus first what all shops have in common,
THEN the single shops may be discussed, not bottom-up.
Same for the namespace syntax.

It would be good to have some simple voting system
without having to edit the page code.
So when people are able to choose their topics
and an easy way to vote, more will participate
and the "consensus" of currently some dozens
which are willing to withstand the current mess
would be on a broader base (really democratic).

So let's discuss the possible structural enhancements
instead of presuming political opinions
(he didn't really mention "strong leadership, did he ?)

Ideas ?

Am 09.06.2018 um 02:22 schrieb EthnicFood IsGreat:
>     Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:29:25 +0200
>> From: Frederik Ramm 
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a
>> top-level    tag
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it is a gut reaction by people when forced with difficult issues to call
>> for strong leadership to solve them once and for all. OSM is no
>> exception.
>>
>> On 08.06.2018 01:29, EthnicFood IsGreat wrote:
>>> I wouldn't mind if all the existing tags were replaced tomorrow with a
>>> brand new set of "intelligently-designed" keys.
>> Designed by... a visionary leader? A board of experts? A random draw?
>> And if something turns out to be designed wrongly, how will it be
>> challenged?
>
> Of course any system would have to have a means of making revisions,
> as better ways of tagging things become apparent over time.  There
> could still be innovation.
>
>>
>>> And I wouldn't mind if
>>> these keys were enforced from now on.
>> Not having an enforced set of keys and values was definitely a big part
>> of OSM's success (there *were* competing projects which got stuck trying
>> to define the one true set of keys and values that would work for
>> everything).
>>
>> Some people say that while this may be true, the time has now come to
>> get rid of the old ways that got us where we are, and change tack to
>> something more conservative. This is a valid argument but I am not
>> convinced; a lot of innovation is still going on with tags, and strict
>> enforcement would run the risk of killing that.
>>
>>> Someone some time ago on one
>>> of the OSM mailing lists summed up the current situation by stating,
>>> "It
>>> seems OSM is incapable of moving forward."
>> OpenStreetMap is becoming a larger group of more diverse people with
>> more diverse interests, and since we don't - and don't aim to - have a
>> dictator at the top, things need to be done by consensus. These people
>> who take to the internet complaining about how OSM is incapable of
>> moving forward usually are people who are unwilling, or unable, to
>> convince the "great unwashed" their idea of "forward" is a good thing.
>> So they lament the lack of leadership and complain about "gatekeeping",
>> but it's really just them being unable to do the work required to
>> establish consensus in a large project.
>>
>> Because that takes much more than a couple of blog posts (cf. the
>> license change).
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>
>
> I have been editing in OSM for almost four years, and I've been a
> member of this mailing list almost since then.  I read every single
> post.  During that time I have never seen what I would consider a
> consensus reached on anything.  I'm not sure it's even possible.
> Whenever someone proposes a way to tag something, you can be
> guaranteed that people will bring up every possible angle and nuance
> concerning the meaning of the tag, and nobody wants to compromise.
> Consequently there is never a consensus.  Eventually people get tired
> of the debate, when they see it's a no-win situation, and the debate
> just dies away, until somebody brings it up again next year. Case in
> point:  the current issue of landuse versus landcover. There was no
> consensus the last time this was brought up and there is none now.
>
> I've seen several tags debated more than once in four years.  I can
> only assume that each time, a different group of people get drawn in
> to the discussion, unaware that the issue has been debated before,
> with no resolution.  This cycle is doomed to repeat itself over and
> over, as long as OSM proceeds the way it is.  A waste of time and effort!
>
> I don't see how OSM can work well when mappers are free to tag however
> they want.  Different people have diametrically opposed ideas about
> how things should b

[Tagging] transport=* -key

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

what is the meaning of the transport=* -key ? 

I couldn't figure it out because it's often on buildings (possibly
"reachability" ?)
There's a total of 4 013 usages, but no wiki description :
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/transport


There are 833 entries of transport=subway,
this would fit into the "public transport" tagging ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Cleanup/Public_transport

Are there any other similar wiki entries ?

Cheers,
Thilo

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

Re: [Tagging] horse rental

[Thilo Haug OSM]

And what if a touristic item (farm, hotel, shop...)
offers several things to rent ?
Let's say horses, bicycles, jetski ?

Am 01.09.2018 um 16:25 schrieb Hufkratzer:
> On 1.9.2018 02:55, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 09:03, Hufkratzer > > wrote:
>>
>> I think a better alternative would be to use
>> amenity=horse_rental, this
>> is currently used 5 times, this would be analogous to
>> amenity=car_rental, amenity=bicycle_rental and amenity=boat_rental. 
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure if horse rental would really be an appropriate term?
>>
>> If you rent a car, bike or boat, then you decide where to go, but if
>> you're "renting" a horse, you're paying to join an organised trail
>> ride of some form, you're not renting a horse to ride off into the
>> sunset & return it tomorrow!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>  
> One can rent a horse for trail riding, guided or unguided, or for
> riding inside of an enclosed area, with or without a teacher. One can
> do this for just an hour or for several days and also with 
> horse.drawn caravans, see these example webpages:
> -  http://www.sombrerohorses.com
>  - http://www.irishhorsedrawncaravans.com/Horses.htm
>
> What else than "horse rental" is there to call it?
>
>
> ___
> 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] horse rental

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi,

I don't have a general preference about the format,
but I think it should be possible to express several things to rent
(buy/repair etc.)
and it should be easily be possible to filter for all these items
(regardless whether it's a shop/hotel/farm).

So the format should be flexible enough to allow this.
I think it's easier to read (for humans) when the "subject" is in front,
so all the related characteristics are "listed".

There are several existing namespaces using this format :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr#Commonly_used_subkeys
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility:for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:generator:output
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:parking:lane#Examples

An example for the underscore format :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Seamark_Objects

The current namespace article doesn't mention underscores :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace#Example_namespace_uses

The amenity=* version is IMHO the worst possibility (in case of several
"amenities")
as you could just work with semicolon separator,
which isn't recommended :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#When_NOT_to_use
I think this is an overcome way to express simple things from a time
when POIs weren't in focus
(which meanwhile changes with OsmAnd, maps.me, komoot
and other popular apps which allow to use the data not only for pure
navigation).

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 02.09.2018 um 15:37 schrieb Hufkratzer:
> It looks like you didn't understand me. I am sorry that my English is
> so bad. I am trying to express my question in a different way:
>
> We have some differnet ways to tag a bicycle rental:
> a) amenity=bicycle_rental (30k uses), bicycle_rental=yes (< 20 uses)
> b) rental=bicycle (< 300 uses) (rental:bicycle=yes not used)
> c) bicycle:rental=yes (< 40 uses) (links to shop=rental)
>
> ... and a boat rental;
> a) amenity=boat_rental (2k uses), boat_rental=yes (< 10 uses)
> b) rental=boat (< 50 uses) (rental:boat=yes not used)
> c) boat:rental=yes (< 20 uses) (links to shop=rental)
>
> Now we are looking for the best way to tag a place where horses are
> for rent.
>
> The corresponding current numbers for horse rentals are:
> a) amenity=horse_rental : 5 uses, horse_rental=yes : 1 use
> b) rental=horse : 5 uses (rental:horse=yes not used)
> c) horse:rental=yes : 1 use (links to shop=rental)
>
> I wrote that I think the best way would be
> a) amenity=horse_rental or horse_rental=yes (if secondary activity)
> and wrote I don't like
> c) horse:rental=yes
> for the following reasons:
> - horses are usually not sold nor rented in shops
> - horses are no vehicles and no equipment and shop=rental is for these
> - amenity=horse_rental is like how car, bicycle. and boat rentals are
> usually tagged
>
> Why doyou nevertheless prefer to tag a horse rental with b)
> rental=horse rather than with a) amenoty=horse_rental or with
> horse_rental=yes? Why should we propose to tag them in a differnt way
> than bicycle or boat rentals? I think this would be unnecessarily
> confusing. Thanks.
>
>
> ___
> 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] horse rental

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi,

"Doesn't need a semicolon, only the main activity gets amenity=*, see
examples"
is fine.

The principle should be described in general (not only for rental and
not only for one shop),
as there's currently a mess with different formats (compare car /
bicycle / motorcycle shops).

I think namespaces with : are more usual,
but technically it makes no difference.

And the question is whether the "main amenity" makes sense in this case.
Let's say I search a service which is usually already part of something
else (main key shop=* or similar)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcar_rental
--> then you'd need to search for several values, amenity=car_rental and
car_rental=*
shop=car
or
shop=rental
with
car:rental=yes
would IMHO be more stuctured.

I also don't understand what the prefix "service" in bicycle is good for
(to distinguish it from which other key "without service" ?)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbicycle#Additional_keys

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 03.09.2018 um 12:19 schrieb Hufkratzer:
> On 2.9.2018 22:06 Thilo Haug OSM wrote:
>> {...]
>> The current namespace article doesn't mention underscores :
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace#Example_namespace_uses
>
> I think it doesn't have to, the underscore can just be a part of a key
> or a value like any letter [a-z] can.
>
>> The amenity=* version is IMHO the worst possibility (in case of several
>> "amenities")
>> as you could just work with semicolon separator,
>> which isn't recommended : [...]
>
> Doesn't need a semicolon, only the main activity gets amenity=*, see
> examples:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3880444689 :
> amenity=restaurant
> horse_rental=yes
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1563976033 :
> amenity=fuel
> car_rental=yes
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2356973972 :
> amenity=boat_rental
> bicycle_rental=yes
> dinghi_rental=yes
> motorboat_rental=yes
> pedalboat_rental=yes
>
> If you want to search for all car_rental's you have to search for
> amenity=car_rental (main activity) and for car_rental=yes (secondary
> activity). This is uncomfortable, but the  rendering
> depends on the main activity, therefore the distinction is necessary.
> Isn't it?
>
>
> ___
> 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] horse rental

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Such as in the bicycle shop example ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbicycle#Additional_keys

This one has been discussed :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/service:bicycle

And it's totally different to the car version :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcar#Tags_used_in_combination

That's why I think the (namespace) principle / "grammar" should be discussed
instead of inventing the wheel from scratch for every shop
(and having endless discussions about differences between slightly
different shops
instead of letting people express the details with an easy "grammar" /
"subkeys").

Am 03.09.2018 um 15:49 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
>
> 2018-09-03 15:18 GMT+02:00 Thilo Haug OSM  <mailto:th...@gmx.de>>:
>
> The principle should be described in general (not only for rental and
> not only for one shop),
> as there's currently a mess with different formats (compare car /
> bicycle / motorcycle shops).
>
>
>
>
> speaking about "mess"; it is the result of people creating new
> webpages for unexisting features without discussion or notice, so that
> the result is often similar to what you created on the skateboarding
> page: board:type for skateboards where all existing values are
> actually typos for board_type of information boards.
>
> Discussing with other mappers prior to writing new stuff into the
> wiki, using the established procedures (proposal process), searching
> the wiki and taginfo before inventing tags, all this can help to avoid
> the mess.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> 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] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

I think this should be discussed here (centrally) :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:WikiProject_Emergency_Cleanup#amenity.3D.2A_vs._emergency.3D.2A

Generally I don't understand why the parameters can't be "mixed"
(a police station is a police station, whether for emergency or not,
same for ambulance).
Then you could add the offered "services" ("below" the "main" tag).

So the discussion shouldn't be in which case to use amenity or emergency
(how to differentiate them),
but how to establish a namespace which allows to express all of the
possible "mixtures".
In any language the meaning of a sentence is based on the context in
which words are used,
so why not a structured mixture of possible expressions instead of too
generic ones ?

I think we should broaden the usage of namespaces
and define the way how they should be used (in general),
also expand the examples of already used namespaces :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace#Example_namespace_uses

This might IMHO avoid a lot of discussions about "generic" tags
as it would provide a kind of "grammar" to express details.

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 22.09.18 um 10:11 schrieb dktue:
>
>
> Am 22.09.2018 um 00:29 schrieb Warin:
>> On 21/09/18 23:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>>
>>> sent from a phone
>>>
 On 21. Sep 2018, at 11:28, dktue  wrote:

 but: it's not amenity=ambulance_station we're using at the moment.
 We're using emergency=ambulance_station -- so: How do we solve this?
>>>
>>> I’m not sure what an ambulance station is, but not all of the
>>> features I have in mind (a place where ambulances and their staff
>>> are parked and waiting for orders, usually with a coordinating
>>> office and radio unit) are emergency related. Some organizations
>>> only provide ambulance transports for people with special requirements.
>>>
>>
>> Here 'patent transport' is provided by the same organisation that
>> provides ambulances.
>>
>> They are co-located and have very similar vehicles, different colours
>> and lettering. The staff that man them have less training.
>>
>>
>> If they were completely separate then I'd use different tags. But
>> what tags to use?
>> Not emergency as they are scheduled and not urgent. Amenity?
>> amenity=patient_transport?
>>
> Same here -- some organisation provide emergency medical services
> _and_ patient transport, some do only emergency medical services and
> some do only patient transport. I think there really is a need to
> differentiate that.
>
> ___
> 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] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

[Thilo Haug OSM]

You just forgot to mention the table would solve this :-)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Default_speed_limits#The_table

And there should be a link to it on these pages :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Speed_limits#Country_code.2Fcategory_conversion_table
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed

Perhaps there should also be a new value maxspeed=default,
to express the road's speed limit refers to this table
(where "default" links to the wiki page) ?

Am 22.09.18 um 14:32 schrieb Colin Smale:
>
> Well said, I agree wholeheartedly. A local, anecdotal view is in
> itself not enough to produce a data model that works for everyone.
>
>  
>
>
> On 2018-09-22 14:22, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
>> Tagging an implicit speed limit explicitly for example in town with
>> maxspeed=50 is straightforward enough for Germany. It seems natural that
>> no specialist knowledge is required for that kind of thing. For a German.
>>
>> But let's look at some other countries for the default urban speed limit.
>>
>> Spain (ES):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:hazmat=40
>>
>> Chile (CL):
>> maxspeed=60
>> maxspeed:bus=50
>> maxspeed:hgv=50
>>
>> Hungary (HR):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:tricycle=40
>>
>> Kerala in India (IN-KL):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:conditional=40 @ (weight > 7.5)
>> maxspeed:trailer=40
>> maxspeed:bus_articulated=40
>> maxspeed:hgv_articulated=40
>> maxspeed:bus:conditional=40 @ (weight > 7.5)
>> maxspeed:hgv:conditional=40 @ (weight > 7.5)
>> maxspeed:tricycle=30
>>
>> Punjab in India (IN-PB):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:trailer=35
>> maxspeed:bus_articulated=30
>> maxspeed:hgv_articulated=30
>> maxspeed:hgv=45
>> maxspeed:hgv:conditional=40 @ (weight > 6)
>> maxspeed:conditional=40 @ (weight > 6)
>> maxspeed:trailer:conditional=30 @ (weight > 6)
>> maxspeed:motorcycle=35
>> maxspeed:goods=45
>> maxspeed:goods:conditional=40 @ (weight > 6)
>>
>> Malta (MT):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:bus=40
>> maxspeed:hgv=30
>> maxspeed:goods=40
>> maxspeed:goods:conditional=30 @ (weight > 3)
>>
>> Poland (PL):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:conditional=60 @ (23:00-05:00)
>>
>> Zambia (ZM):
>> maxspeed=50
>> maxspeed:conditional=40 @ (weight > 2.275)
>> maxspeed:trailer=40
>> maxspeed:hgv=40
>>
>> Because the maxspeed tag applies to all vehicles except overridden for a
>> specific vehicle type or a conditional, specifying only maxspeed=50 in
>> any of the above cases has to be considered wrong or at least
>> incomplete. In other words, the tags you see above would need to be
>> added in the case the speed limit is given explicitly. It is not so
>> straightforward then anymore.
>>
>> So, maybe not for Germany, but as you see, in other places, this *is*
>> specialist knowledge. No regular car driver in Punjab will be able to
>> enumerate all these maxspeed rules. And, taking a less extreme example,
>> I think the Polish OSM contributors wouldn't want to add this
>> maxspeed:conditional=60 @ (23:00-05:00) to every single unsigned street
>> in urban areas.
>>
>> Also, note this is only the urban speed limit, trust me, the default
>> speed limit "for all other roads" (=rural) can be much more complex.
>>
>> Actually, don't trust me, see for yourself in the document I link all
>> the time in the hope people would read it:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Default_speed_limits
>>
>> We can not get to any results or any progress on the matter of default
>> speed limits (or for any topic, for that matter) if everyone just keeps
>> arguing out of his best knowledge about his home region or country only.
>>
>> "It works for me" is simply not good enough for a global project.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Tobias
>>
>> On 22/09/2018 01:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> sent from a phone
>>>
 On 19. Sep 2018, at 21:16, Tobias Zwick >>> > wrote:

 This is a good argument against tagging an explicit maxspeed=X when
 there is actually no speed limit sign around (X is what the OSM mapper
 by his knowledge about the law thinks should be the default limit
 here).
>>>
>>>
>>> everything that you map will be according to your understanding of
>>> it, I cannot see a good argument for not tagging implicit limits,
>>> even more as there is judgement needed based on the situation
>>> (something humans can do much better than computers). Every holder
>>> of a driving license should have the requisites to recognize the
>>> speed limit on a given piece of road in their local area, so it
>>> doesn't require specialist knowledge.
>>>
>>> We already have a reliable way to distinguish implicit from explicit
>>> limits (we even have several of them), if you want to treat them
>>> differently in your app, you can do it.
>>>
>>> There actually is a speed limit on most roads, including those
>>> without explicit signage. Omitting it will leave us in the situation
>>> that it really becomes unclear whether there is no sign or nobody
>>> has bothered to enter it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martin
>>> ___

Re: [Tagging] Vertical farming vs. other vertical plants

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

regarding vertical plants,
some examples against air pollution came to my mind.
it's not really "farming", but at least an "artificial" way to grow plants,
so it doesn't really fit with "natural"
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural

Do you think this should be considered ?

I could imagine to extend this tag for it :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dvillage_green
Something like this ? :
landuse=village_green
landuse:type=vertical
landuse:horticulture=lichen,moss

Existing keys :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:plant_community
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trees

In the press :
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/world/americas/vertical-gardens-in-mexico-a-symbol-of-progress.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/toby-nwazor/new-yorks-biggest-ever-gr_1_b_12450500.html
http://www.dw.com/en/stuttgart-builds-moss-covered-wall-to-fight-air-pollution/a-37866760

Some more links :
https://www.witpress.com/Secure/elibrary/papers/AIR15/AIR15025FU1.pdf
http://www.iasp.asp-berlin.de/bilder/poster1302.pdf
http://ccap.org/green-walls-living-walls-green-roofs-courtesy-of-epa-pnc

Selling plant walls :
http://www.plantsonwalls.com/Default.asp
http://plantwalldesign.com/eng/home.html

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 15.03.2017 um 07:32 schrieb Warin:
> On 15-Mar-17 05:14 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> On 15 Mar 2017, at 04:39, Dave Swarthout > > wrote:
>>
>>> I've seen this list run on and on with discussions about how to tag
>>> wastebins and such but for this one, an arguably important future
>>> tagging construct, hardly a ripple. And members who are usually so
>>> vocal about tagging issues are strangely quiet.  Martin? Warin?
>>> John? Marc? What's up?
>>
> Simple.
> What are you tagging?
>
> The farm?
> landuse=farmland
> produce=?
>
> The factory where the produce is turned into product
> Landuse=industrial
> building=factory
> product=?
>
> The shop where the product is sold
> landuse=commercial
> shop=?
> sells=?
>
>>
>> I don't see a big difference between growing grass and growing
>> marijuana, similarly corn. At least if it's grown outdoors without
>> the help of artificial lighting.
>> Have a look at the key crop: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crop
>> Well, besides that it is quite rare, mostly illegal with the
>> exception of some fields operated for the pharmaceutical industry
>> (the high THC concentration one). Then there's also kind of a
>> comeback of hemp for fibre production (low THC concentration, legal
>> in the EU).
>>
>> Vertical farming sounds interesting, but isn't something I've yet
>> seen in the real. There have been some projects in Europe as well,
>> but AFAIK have not been realized, see e.g. this one by dutch
>> architects MVRDV:
>> https://www.mvrdv.nl/projects/181-pig-city#/archive
>> http://www.alternet.org/story/135410/high_rise_farms_the_new_model_for_sustainable_cities
>>
>>
>>
>> cheers,
>> Martin 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drying:*=*

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

please check this proposal and comment on the discussion page :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/drying

This is thought for all kinds of sport accommodations
which offer a possibility to dry your equipment.

Thanks in advance,
Cheers,
Thilo


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

Re: [Tagging] office=therapist??

[Thilo Haug OSM]

I think it's similar to :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmassage

"office" is really strange


Am 13.04.2017 um 23:23 schrieb John Willis:
>
>
> Javbw
>
> On Apr 14, 2017, at 4:42 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Looking through the current list of documented office values I came
>> across so that really sound odd to me, e.g.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3Dtherapist
>>
>> wouldn't this be much better suited for the amenity tag?
>>
>> cheers,
>> Martin 
>>
>> sent from a phone
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> I'm guessing it is a catch-all for offices (businesses) of therapists,
> psychologists, and other guidance/counselor people. 
>
> Therapists have offices, so perhaps similar to shop=* , people are
> using office=* to define various companies that you would find in
> building=office, similar building=retail, because the idea of
> "amenity" can be really confusing and is full of all kinds of things
> now...  
>
> Javbw. 
>
>
> ___
> 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 - (office=courier)"

[Thilo Haug OSM]

In Germany this is the same :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Post


Am 15.04.2017 um 17:04 schrieb Marc Gemis:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>> How is it not a post office that just happens to have an operator other than
>> the state?
> So if I ask you "where is the nearest post office?" , it is possible
> that you send me to a DHL office ?
>
> m
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

[Tagging] aeroway=spaceport

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi all,

I'm astonished there isn't a description for spaceports yet,
therefore the tagging differs widely :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Aeroways#aeroway.3Dspaceport

- Proposals / Opinions ?

IMHO amenity doesn't fit well,
as it's just another kind of airport.

Cheers,
Thilo



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

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=spaceport , aeroway=launchpad

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi Frederik,

I think the main difference is
that spaceports already exist (and are "on the ground") :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceport
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rocket_launch_sites

In case of the skyhook I'm not so surprised of the denial,
given the culture of denial without constructive criticism
which isn't controlled a.t.m. by an appropriate social rule.
Will IMHO get worse the more people participate,
imagine all facebook-users commenting proposals...

What do you think about aeroway=spaceport ?
I'm not a specialist in spaceport infrastructure,
but I'd generally like to be able to filter for them in OSM,
which isn't possible if they are tagged as
"amenity=space_centre/spaceport/cosmodrome/..."
See the examples mentioned here :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Aeroways#aeroway.3Dspaceport

For further details I could imagine using
aeroway=launchpad
(similar to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dhelipad)

The rest of the buildings should IMHO be similar to an airport,
or standard tags may be used :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aeroways
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dbunker

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 28.04.2017 um 20:45 schrieb Thilo Haug OSM:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm astonished there isn't a description for spaceports yet,
> therefore the tagging differs widely :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Aeroways#aeroway.3Dspaceport
>
> - Proposals / Opinions ?
>
> IMHO amenity doesn't fit well,
> as it's just another kind of airport.
>
> Cheers,
> Thilo
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] wikipedia links and copy + paste in tag definitions

[Thilo Haug OSM]

> Do not falsely conflate "complex" with "worse". You original complaint
> was, in effect, that there was a lack of complexity, now you complain
> that there is.
In the OSM Wiki there's enough complexity
(and not everything is "orthogonal").

If you'd like to tag tourism POIs,
you should check several wiki pages :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity#Sustenance
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sport#Core_values
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:leisure

All of those are interesting when on holidays
but there's no overview about that and the pages aren't linked.
Quite complex for a beginner
(what will an OSM navigation app user be interested in first ?)

Sometimes it's not clear why an item is in a certain category,
for example : why is this an "amenity" and not a "shop=vending_machine" ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dvending_machine
(or an own key vending_machine=).

You will always have differences in definitions, especially in different
countries.
There's a nice example in the German Duden dictionary / Duden
Fremdwörterbuch (foreign word dictionary) :
"intellectual" is in one defined as someone with higher education,
in the other one as someone who questions things critically "in a mental
creative way".
Doesn't exclude each other, but quite different.

I agree that in some cases it might be difficult (just) to link to
wikipedia,
but I'm pretty sure that it helps to get some background information
about the "big picture"
in case you personally just know certain aspects of this item.

Cheers,
Thilo

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

Re: [Tagging] wikipedia links and copy + paste in tag definitions

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

so what is the principle of the "organisation of information" in OSM ?

Up to now, I couldn't find a documentation that explains
the general philosophy how to tag items.

Cheers,
Thilo

> different organisation of information.
> will very likely not be what we want.



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

[Tagging] aeroway=spaceport, aeroway=launchpad, aeroway=landingpad

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

as aeroway=spaceport was already in use,
I created a wiki description for it :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dspaceport

Launchpad is also in use :
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/oL2

I case you feel this should be further discussed,
please leave your comment here :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:aeroway%3Dspaceport

Cheers,
Thilo


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

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=spaceport, aeroway=launchpad, aeroway=landingpad

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Am 01.05.2017 um 22:34 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> surely their performer didn't follow the automated edits code of conduct.
O really, which case applies ?

  * changes made by Bots ,
which by definition act autonomously from human intervention.
  * data imports , including
both fully automated imports and ones where a standard editor is used;
  * other scripted changes made to the database;
  * [...]  changing without reviewing cases individually

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct


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

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=spaceport, aeroway=launchpad, aeroway=landingpad

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi Martin,

I have no clue what you mean with "downloaded the other day all objects",
I just adjusted a couple of objects (~5) whose tagging was very erratic.

In a lot of wiki descriptions is mentioned to "just act" if necessary.
I've taken the most common parameters and combined them with the most
obvious (existing) key.
That's not rocket science... ;-)
If someone feels that this should be documented more specific he/her is
free to do so.

I think we will discourage a bunch of potentially interested
contributors to add anything
if some request a discussion / proposal ("doctorate") for every slight
adjustment/documentation update.
There are some (older) opinions here, I think this should be followed up:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposal_process#Cleanup_Request
One example :
Yeah. The mailing list is kind of daunting. It seems to get a zillion
messages a day, but if I want to cut to the chase and discuss a new
feature I feel it will be lost in the noise. Meanwhile the wiki has
perfectly adequate features around watchlists and discussion pages that
don't require me to parse all that noise just to hear the one
conversation that I am interested in. Karora 10:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 02.05.2017 um 13:04 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
> 2017-05-01 23:14 GMT+02:00 Thilo Haug OSM  <mailto:th...@gmx.de>>:
>
> [...]  changing without reviewing cases individually
>
>
>
> this one?
>
> It leaves a bit of a bad taste if you declare on the mailing list 'I'm
> getting tired of this "discussion and proposal" stuff' and then it
> gets discovered you downloaded and modified the other day all objects
> of a certain kind to unify their tagging with a previously
> undocumented and hardly used tag, and then modify the wiki to document
> this style of tagging. And then write an announcement here without
> telling anybody that you modified these objects to fit your documentation.
>
> On the other hand, I don't think it is completely harmful what you
> have done, because there are so few of these objects and we would all
> benefit from uniform tagging. The main issue is with the key you
> chose, of which the general definition is in contradiction with the
> specific tag you added, but I am trying to fix tis by extending the
> key definition with a proposal.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] Missing oneway:bicycle=no / Wiki editing

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hi André,

according to this documentation,
the tagging mailing list is the wrong platform to address this  :
"*If you have ideas for the wiki, you can generally just do them, by
editing the wiki! *
If you need any assistance the *wikiteam* are here to help."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wiki#Wikiteam

Unless some always ask for a proposal to edit /amend anything in the wiki.
IMHO this leads to the result you mentioned :
"Unfortunately, I'm very sorry to say, OSM is often much of a chaos."
There seem to be very few people which first like to request a request form
to be able to help the community to improve *.

A "code of conduct"** would be helpful in which cases
you may just add a minor specification, unfortunately I couldn't find
such up to now.

Cheers,
Thilo

* For those who don't know the concept of sarcasm :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

** Certainly this will also leave some (border) cases which are disputable,
but at least there would be SOME agreed guideline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct

Am 10.05.2017 um 15:10 schrieb André Pirard:
> Hi,
>
> In this thread, I said, in agreement with others,
> that oneway:bicycle
> =no (click to
> open that page) is the tag to be used *to tell routing
> software**(GPS)* that *oneway*=yes
> does not apply to bicycles
> that cycleway
> =opposite* has
> noting to do with routing and contraflow but indicates that *there is
> a cycleway* that *happens* to be "opposite".
>
> Could you please make the wiki documentation more clear about that?
> Because mappers often believe that cycleway=opposite means to indicate
> bicycle contraflow oneway:bicycle=no.
> Unfortunately, sometimes contradictory sentences about the same
> concept are often spread all over the wiki.
> Find them all!
>
> I have written this script
> 
> to find where many cycleway=opposite* exist without oneway:bicycle=no
> and even without oneway=yes.
>
> Look at this street  to
> which GRi added cycleway=opposite without oneway:bicycle=no, to which
> JanFi added oneway:bicycle=no  probably after reading this thread
> (thank you!) and from which I removed cycleway=opposite because there
> is no cycleway at all.
>
> The worst of all is that the map
> http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/%7Eligfietser/fiets/ shows
> "cycleway=opposite or oneway:bicycle=no" ways, hence neither
> identifying the cycleways  nor the contraflow correctly and not
> testing in its bugs tag that cycleway=opposite must contain
> oneway:bicycle=no.
> That is pitiful complete misinformation and the author did not even
> reply to my message.
>
> Unfortunately, I'm very sorry to say, OSM is often much of a chaos.
>
> Hoping this will help,
> Cheers
>
> André.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Voting: expand the aeroway key with aeroway=spaceport, aeroway=landingpad, aeroway=launchpad

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Another reminder :
Vote end: 2017-05-30 (in 4 days)

Cheers,
Thilo

Am 16.05.2017 um 10:28 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> Just a reminder: today voting for the aeroway key redefinition is
> starting, please vote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/include_spacecraft_in_aeroway
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> 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 - shop=* subtags

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Thanks for the really exotic examples,
I'd say this is :

optician also selling delicatessen

shop=optician
deli:sales=yes
deli:type=?

---

bookshop in Paris, whose best known feature is the bánh mì sandwiches

shop=books
fast_food:sales=yes
cuisine=sandwich

---

sexshop for women, but also selling books and operating a cafe/bar

shop=books
amenity=cafe
erotic:sales=yes

not so sure which one of those (or both ?) :
erotic:clothes=yes
clothes:type=erotic ?

erotic:books=yes
books:type=erotic; ?

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


Tuba is a sexshop for women, but also selling books and operating a
cafe/bar:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/258081023
As the sexshop property is not very prominent in the shop I decided to
classify it as a bookshop and cafe.
Am 06.09.2017 um 13:50 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 13:40:16 +0200
> Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> my favorite one is this:
>> http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/7089481?album_id=4237494
>> An optician also selling delicatessen (or maybe a delicatessen store
>> also selling glasses).
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2217707756 - Khai Tri is a Vietnamese
> bookshop in Paris, whose best known feature is the bánh mì sandwiches
> stand at the back of the shop... For now in Openstreetmap it is only a
> bookshop.
>
> ___
> 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] Proposed deletion of wiki pages about motorcycle_friendly=*

[Thilo Haug OSM]

You're talking about things like this ?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dinsect_hotel

Have those all been discussed ?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seamarks/Seamark_Object_Usage

When is it "low usage" ?
And how should usage appear (in a structured way),
if it's not documented ?
There's also low usage on those
(as there aren't many yet)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dspaceport
There was a bunch of different values before,
as everybody mapped it the way he/her thought it might be right.

I didn't understand how those (motorcycle) tags might cause others to be
"not identifiable any more".

There weren't "various comments of other mappers",
there were mainly various comments by Warin61 :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/motorcycle_friendly


Am 03.10.2017 um 11:52 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
>
> 2017-10-03 11:34 GMT+02:00 Thilo Haug  >:
>
> Please describe which 'problems' you fear to appear if it's not
> deleted.
>
>
>
> If everybody creates feature pages for his personal, low usage
> features, the wiki looses it's function of documenting the generally
> used and established features, as they are not identifiable any more.
> You already have the proposal page, which states that this is a
> proposal, and documents the tags, no need to create confusion and
> clutter with a feature page that is not justified at this point.
>
> In the discussions about this tag, there have also been various
> comments of other mappers, that explained why they think that these
> tags are not suitable, so it should probably considered disputed.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> 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=maisonette(s)

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

here it's defined as :

"A set of rooms for living in, typically on two storeys of a larger
building and having a separate entrance."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/maisonette

HTH


Am 02.12.2017 um 23:21 schrieb Warin:
> On 03-Dec-17 09:09 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>
>> On 3 December 2017 at 04:58, marc marc > > wrote:
>>
>>
>> In french, a "maisonette" is a small detached house or a tiny
>> house or a
>> shed.
>> Did this word also exist in english
>>
>
> English has stolen many words from other languages. This may well be
> one of them.
> My dictionary says "maisonette"; 1) small house 2) semi-detached house
> 3) self contained flat over 2 floors
>>
>>  Have heard the term in Australia but not for many years.
>>
>> These days, it's apparently been replaced by "Granny Flat", which is
>> a similar concept of a self-contained flat attached to a house, but
>> with it's own entrance.
>>
>
> Granny flats can be attached (or semi-detached) or completely separate
> from the main residence.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Vandalism ?

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Was there any consensus about this topic ?

8X---
Gîtes les terres noires. (525407874)
OSM data: remove 12 occurrences of 'proprietor:motorcyclist' after
discussion on the Tagging list
that OSM should not map personal preferences, and is not a vehicle registry
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/525407874
8X---

I can't see how this tag may do any harm to OSM,
based on this description :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like#Syntactic_conventions_for_new_tags


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

Re: [Tagging] shop - clothing_repair

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Maybe a namespace ?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace

I think this statement isn't true :
" It's impossible to cover all types of shops."'
further, it's mentioned :
"If you discover new shop types, you may invent your own values"
I think this should be standardized,
similar namespaces may apply to most of the shops.


Am 16.12.2017 um 22:36 schrieb Philip Barnes:
> Maybe craft=tailor?
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dtailor
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> On 16 December 2017 20:44:30 GMT+00:00, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Yet another type of shop?
>
> There are 'car_repair' shops but no clothing repair shops ...
>
> For example www.venusrepairs.com.au  
> provides specialised repairs for 
> leather and goretex clothing.
>
> So I have tagged them as shop=clothing_repair.
>
>
> Someone has shop:repair=yes .. does not work for me, could be a repair 
> of a wheelbarrow.
>
>
> 
>
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] lunch_specials or lunch:specials ?

[Thilo Haug OSM]

Hello all,

I stumbled on a bakery which serves warm meals for lunch
which is quite unusual (whereas it's common for butchers in Germany)
http://www.schmidbeck.de/aktuelles.html

There are currently 5 occurrences of lunch_specials on taginfo :
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=lunch_specials

I think it would be better to use the namespace of Key:lunch instead :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lunch

Now for the description of the tag :
To me, the "lunch special" is a warm meal
for a reduced price that might be offered by a
butcher
restaurant
cafe
pub
bar
biergarten
and others

Usually, there's just a reduced choice
compared to "a la carte" (1-3 meals),
but it's available immediately (similar to fast food).
Not necessarily for takeaway, but there are already tags to indicate if
this applies.

Any additional comments ?

Cheers,
Thilo


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