Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread Bryce Nesbitt
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Andrew Chadwick (lists) < a.t.chadwick+li...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is better because access=private already carries the "you must > inquire" meaning. As the Key:access page states, access=private means > "only with permission of the owner on an individual basis"

Re: [Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes

2013-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am 24/lug/2013 um 20:42 schrieb Peter Wendorff : > natural=water, leisure=fishing (I think that was your example) > natural=water, leisure=swimming > natural=water|heath|grassland|..., leisure=nature_reserve > natural=water, leisure=wildlife_hide on a side note some of the values above like sw

Re: [Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes

2013-07-24 Thread Peter Wendorff
Hi André, I agree with you that this Keepright error message is not useful, but my "solution" is different from yours: I tend to think that KeepRight is wrong here. Something CAN be natural=water and leisure=whatever in common - and why not? Your example is perfectly valid, and others are as well.

Re: [Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes

2013-07-24 Thread André Pirard
On 2013-07-24 16:54, Ronnie Soak wrote : > > On 24 Jul 2013 16:44, "Janko Mihelić" > wrote > > > > > I don't think we should be so inflexible with the "object vs > attribute". It depends on the context. > > > > If you are a data consumer, and are making a list of all addre

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread Andrew Chadwick (lists)
On 24/07/13 14:14, Ronnie Soak wrote: > While I can see your intention here, that is the most counter-intuitive > way to tag this I've ever seen. > You would tag a PUBLIC toilet with access=PRIVATE just because you have > to ask for a key first? Let's agree that permissive is probably more useful.

Re: [Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes

2013-07-24 Thread Ronnie Soak
On 24 Jul 2013 16:44, "Janko Mihelić" wrote > > I don't think we should be so inflexible with the "object vs attribute". It depends on the context. > > If you are a data consumer, and are making a list of all addresses in a town, then the addr:housenumber + addr:street is your object, and buildin

Re: [Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes

2013-07-24 Thread Janko Mihelić
2013/7/24 André Pirard > > An object is the physical thing. It's unique. > An attribute is the different forms, usage etc... of the object. It can > be multiple. > I don't think we should be so inflexible with the "object vs attribute". It depends on the context. If you are a data consumer, a

Re: [Tagging] new tagging scheme for detailed information.

2013-07-24 Thread John F. Eldredge
The equivalent term in American English is operating room. Steve Doerr wrote: > On 24/07/2013 06:56, amrit karmacharya wrote: > > > Here, it is commonly called operation theater and even the hospital > > have board written operation theater. As for operating theater, even > i > > am hearing i

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread Andrew Chadwick (lists)
On 15/07/13 07:52, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Open for voting is > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dtoilets > Which includes toilets:position and toilets:disposal, to allow tagging > of squat facilities > and pitlatrines. Capacity tagging needs to be added. This migh

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread Ronnie Soak
2013/7/24 Andrew Chadwick (lists) > > As described in the proposal, "inquiry" is partly about practical > locking mechanisms so a better way which factors out those concerns is > > access=private > locked={yes|}[1] (or some other tag) > While I can see your intention here, that is the mo

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread SomeoneElse
Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Something could be both inquiry and customer. Is there a better way? FWIW, it'd be "enquiry" not "inquiry" in English (rather than in American). Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.o

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

2013-07-24 Thread Andrew Chadwick (lists)
On 20/07/13 00:29, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Something could be both inquiry and customer. Is there a better way? "Inquiry" is expressed as "you must inquire to receive a key or code for the toilet". This is a combination of concerns, and it should be expressed more atomically. As described in the

Re: [Tagging] new tagging scheme for detailed information.

2013-07-24 Thread Steve Doerr
On 24/07/2013 06:56, amrit karmacharya wrote: Here, it is commonly called operation theater and even the hospital have board written operation theater. As for operating theater, even i am hearing it called so for the first time. I love the diversity of English as a world language! Anyway,

Re: [Tagging] new tagging scheme for detailed information.

2013-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am 24/lug/2013 um 07:56 schrieb amrit karmacharya : > Here, it is commonly called operation theater and even the hospital have > board written operation theater For osm we agreed on using the British version of words, which is theatre in this case, even if on a global level the other variant