Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Thanks, that's all I needed to know. Às 20:43 de 21/04/2020, Martin Koppenhoefer escreveu: by looking at the combination: you query for heritage AND ref tags in combination. No need to change the tags for this. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@ope

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

sent from a phone > On 21. Apr 2020, at 22:12, António Madeira wrote: > > If you have millions of tags like ref:"whatever", how are you going to > distinguish between them if you make a query or some kind of data reading? by looking at the combination: you query for heritage AND ref tags in

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Yes, I know that Joseph, but the problem is not in the scheme itself, is between the tags of this scheme and the tags of other schemes. If you have millions of tags like ref:"whatever", how are you going to distinguish between them if you make a query or some kind of data reading? Since we're goi

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

The heritage:operator tag is needed because “operator=“ is the operator of the feature, not the operator of the heritage status. If you have an old residential building which is still in active use, the operator= is whoever manages the building now, but it might also have a heritage:operator= whic

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 02:37, António Madeira wrote: > So, what's the rationale for using heritage:operator and not heritage:ref? > It's these inconsistencies that breaks my logic... > Why are the eyes of tetrapods (fish, reptiles, birds, mammals) wired backwards? Why does the recurrent larynge

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

So, what's the rationale for using heritage:operator and not heritage:ref? It's these inconsistencies that breaks my logic... Às 22:19 de 20/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 02:10, António Madeira mailto:antoniomade...@gmx.com>> wrote: This is the main reason why I came

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 02:10, António Madeira wrote: > This is the main reason why I came up with this refinement. > For example, if I search for "ref:" at taginfo, there are *millions* of > results. I believe this has implications in data management, although I'm > by no means an expert on that

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

This is the main reason why I came up with this refinement. For example, if I search for "ref:" at taginfo, there are *millions* of results. I believe this has implications in data management, although I'm by no means an expert on that matter. Às 20:57 de 20/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: As it

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

In my experience of mapping heritage stuff (mainly in Belgium), i never found any case where i would need to re-use the scheme *ref:=* *(where the "" is the group of letter given by the other tag *heritage:operator=*) for another thing (and it was always comprehensible, as all other subtag of the h

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 00:30, António Madeira wrote: > As I already wrote before in this thread, lutz already agreed with and > supported my proposal. > Then you don't have to worry about it being rendered. That's one of your questions dealt with. My problem with the actual ref tag is that the

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

As I already wrote before in this thread, lutz already agreed with and supported my proposal. My problem with the actual ref tag is that there are many ref tags for other schemes and elements, but I don't know if this concern is pointless or not. I would like to see this scheme more organized and

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 16:47, António Madeira wrote: > So, I would like to know what would be the technical pros and cons > regarding heritage:ref:operator=* vs ref:operator=* , i.e. the database > use, rendering, consulting, exporting etc. > AFAIK, only one map makes use of heritage*. So if yo

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Con: 1) "hertiage:ref:operator" is 9 characters longer. This uses an insignificant amount of disk space and bandwidth, but it does take an extra second to type when mappers are entering tags manually. The only advantage would be if there is a different "ref:operator" for the "hertiage" designatio

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

So, I would like to know what would be the technical pros and cons regarding heritage:ref:operator=* vs ref:operator=* , i.e. the database use, rendering, consulting, exporting etc. Às 21:04 de 17/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 at 00:43, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre..

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 at 00:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I still don’t see why we would need a new tag heritage_title rather than > the established protection_title## > >From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:protection_title Requires boundary=national_park boundary=p

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Now that I've read the German wiki more carefully, I realized that they consider World Heritage not only as natural areas but also for buildings, although they clearly state "Always with *boundary

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

sent from a phone > On 18. Apr 2020, at 01:04, Paul Allen wrote: > > The fraction of heritage POIs which are > protected areas is less than 1%. I still don’t see why we would need a new tag heritage_title rather than the established protection_title Maybe protected “area” is a strange tag f

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 23:38, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: because it leads to key bloat. It makes evaluation harder or more > complicated if you have to cater for a lot of different keys which all > basically are about the same thing: the ref that an operator has assigned > to it > But the other

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

sent from a phone > On 18. Apr 2020, at 00:08, António Madeira wrote: > > I know there are many ref tags that don't follow this procedure, but if this > is useful why not starting to adopt it for some schemes like this one? because it leads to key bloat. It makes evaluation harder or more c

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Hi, Martin. Thank you for your input. Às 06:38 de 17/04/2020, Martin Koppenhoefer escreveu: Am Fr., 17. Apr. 2020 um 04:27 Uhr schrieb António Madeira via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>: After communicating with lutz from Historic.Place, he told me they didn't create this

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Am Fr., 17. Apr. 2020 um 04:27 Uhr schrieb António Madeira via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > After communicating with lutz from Historic.Place, he told me they didn't > create this heritage scheme, they just adopted it. > I took the opportunity to present him my proposal of refining this

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

After communicating with lutz from Historic.Place, he told me they didn't create this heritage scheme, they just adopted it. I took the opportunity to present him my proposal of refining this scheme and I got his support to go ahead with it, so I'm presenting it here in order to make the necessary

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Thanks, Paul. I'll contact them then. Às 17:44 de 14/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 21:02, António Madeira mailto:antoniomade...@gmx.com>> wrote: Às 10:15 de 14/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: They're the ones you'd have to convince to alter their code to han

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 21:02, António Madeira wrote: > > Às 10:15 de 14/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: > > > They're the ones you'd have to convince to alter their code to handle your > proposed change. > > > You mean this? > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Historical_Map > That's where

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Às 10:15 de 14/04/2020, Paul Allen escreveu: On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 04:33, António Madeira via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: - is ref:xxx=* a good solution to add the official reference code/number? No.  But that's what we have.  With hindsight we'd have done it di

Re: [Tagging] Refining heritage tag

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 04:33, António Madeira via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: - is ref:xxx=* a good solution to add the official reference code/number? > No. But that's what we have. With hindsight we'd have done it differently. But it's now been used so often it would be very

[Tagging] Refining heritage tag

Hi there. In the last few days, the Portuguese community has been trying to create a national standardization with the heritage tag. We came up to a possible solution which can be seen at the wiki page based on the previous information on the wik