On 12/06/2011 05:04, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
(cut/paste from Serge's posts)
Wow! I wasn't expecting anyone to get their knickers in twist over my Q.
"You, Dr. Who, are proposing changing shop=pets to now:
shop=pets
animals:fish=yes"
No, that's not changing, that's adding, which makes OSM more
What about this tagging schema:
shop=pet_supplies for shops that don't sell pets
shop=pets for shops that do sell pets, and if you want to go in detail, you
can tag it
animals=fish;dog;cat;horse;whale (or in the plural form if you like to)
While you can give it the same amount of detail, it has s
On 12 June 2011 14:04, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> I'll elaborate on why this is a bad idea:
>
> 1. It's a lot of tags
Only if you want it to be, just like some people tagging trees, most
won't so this isn't an issue
> 2. It won't get used in real life
Never assume this, after all how many trees
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:04:34 Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 10:31 PM, John Smith
wrote:
> >> The logical conclusion is:
> >>
How about shop=pet and shop=pet_supplies?
I am not actually sure that it is necessary to tag things in such detail. I
think it is sufficient in OSM
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 10:31 PM, John Smith wrote:
>> The logical conclusion is:
>>
>> shop=pets
>> animals:cats=yes
>> animals:reptiles=gecko;snakes
>> supplies:cat_food=dry;canned
>> supplies:fish=block;flakes;filters;nets
>> supplies:fish:treasure_chest=no
>> ...
>
> I don't see a problem wit
On 12 June 2011 02:33, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> The problem with these types of proposals, of N levels of depth of a
> tag, is that they quickly become complex, and thus get unused.
>
> You, Dr. Who, are proposing changing shop=pets to now:
>
> shop=pets
> animals:fish=yes
>
> and
>
> shop=pets
>
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:56 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 11 June 2011 06:16, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Dave F. wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Is there a specific tag for pet supplies (food, collars, chew toys etc)
>>
>> I'm used to pet stores being ambigious, and don' hav
On 11 June 2011 06:16, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Dave F. wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Is there a specific tag for pet supplies (food, collars, chew toys etc)
>
> I'm used to pet stores being ambigious, and don' have a problem with
> that. But I'd say shop=pet_supplies is be
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is there a specific tag for pet supplies (food, collars, chew toys etc)
I'm used to pet stores being ambigious, and don' have a problem with
that. But I'd say shop=pet_supplies is better than animals=no.
Still, I think that the distinction
Hi
Is there a specific tag for pet supplies (food, collars, chew toys etc)
or would it be best to go with something like:
shop=pet
animals=no
Cheers
Dave F.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/t
10 matches
Mail list logo