2014-08-25 15:53 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> I also don't like
> man_made=aquarium
> because I'd expect that to describe a single aquarium, i.e. a water filled
> container with fish etc. in it, while here we are discussing a structure
> like a zoo with footways, service ways, a ticket offi
> Il giorno 25/ago/2014, alle ore 13:14, John Packer
> ha scritto:
>
> Now that you mentioned I just remembered.
> There is a proposal that uses the key attraction=* for describring objects
> from theme parks, zoos, etc.
+1
I also don't like
man_made=aquarium
because I'd expect that to des
>
> And I feel like most of the values would better fit with a key like
> amusement _ride= or amusement _ride:xxx=yes.
Now that you mentioned I just remembered.
There is a proposal that uses the key attraction=* for describring objects
from theme parks, zoos, etc.
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.or
+1, tourism=attraction is a poor scheme from the early days, maybe we should
deprecate it all together, either without alternative or in favor of a flag
like attraction=yes (or level0 - level 3 etc), or tourist_attraction=*
I also just see it ending up in 2x tagging everything. leisure=waterpa
2014-08-24 12:00 GMT+02:00 Fabrizio Carrai :
> Hi Lorenzo,
> my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium.
>
I don't like attraction=aquarium, I'd rather have
tourism=attraction+man_made=aquarium.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
Il giorno dom, 24/08/2014 alle 17.03 -0500, John F. Eldredge ha scritto:
> Just to let you know: there is no letter C in the English word
> aquarium.
>
I've been careful. I always write it wrong too :)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.
Just to let you know: there is no letter C in the English word aquarium.
On August 24, 2014 5:00:29 AM CDT, Fabrizio Carrai
wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
> my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium.
> My
> rationale comes from a potential utilization of the tag and tags
> comb
> Il giorno 24/ago/2014, alle ore 12:00, Fabrizio Carrai
> ha scritto:
>
> my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium.
Have a Look at current values, this doesn't fit into our system IMHO:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/attraction#values
Cheers,
Martin
__
2014-08-24 20:11 GMT+02:00 John Packer :
> I don't agree with the tourism=attraction argument.
>
> Isn't a museum a touristic attraction too?
> At least as much as an aquarium.
> Yet we don't tag it as tourism=attraction + attraction=museum
>
> As long as it is documented on the wiki, it shouldn't
Il giorno dom, 24/08/2014 alle 20.29 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer ha
scritto:
>
> > Il giorno 24/ago/2014, alle ore 20:11, John Packer
> > ha scritto:
> >
> > I don't agree with the tourism=attraction argument.
>
>
> +1, tourism=attraction is a poor scheme from the early days, maybe we should
> Il giorno 24/ago/2014, alle ore 20:11, John Packer
> ha scritto:
>
> I don't agree with the tourism=attraction argument.
+1, tourism=attraction is a poor scheme from the early days, maybe we should
deprecate it all together, either without alternative or in favor of a flag
like attracti
I don't agree with the tourism=attraction argument.
Isn't a museum a touristic attraction too?
At least as much as an aquarium.
Yet we don't tag it as tourism=attraction + attraction=museum
As long as it is documented on the wiki, it shouldn't be a problem for
people making queries in OSM.
201
The two-tag solution is definitely better
Volker
On 24 August 2014 12:00, Fabrizio Carrai wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
> my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium. My
> rationale comes from a potential utilization of the tag and tags
> combinations. If I wants to query for a
The acquarium, like the zoos, are touristic attraction. See Tripadvisor if
you want to have a "reference". It also make sense to use attraction=animal
instead of attraction=zoo or acquarium. Doing that you continue the
progressive level of definitions. So, in my opinion you could describe the
Acqua
I'm not sure that would be right to categorize a feature like this as an
attraction. I see most of the attraction=* are used to tag singular
things like amusement park games. There are many attraction=animal that
is vague but I assume refer to more specific things than a zoo.
What i want represent
+1 for tourism=attraction + attraction=aquarium
I agree with Fabrizio on the use of the two-tag structure for aquaria.
Cheers
Dave
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Fabrizio Carrai
wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
> my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium. My
> rationale comes
Hi Lorenzo,
my personal opinion is for tourism=attraction + attraction=acquarium. My
rationale comes from a potential utilization of the tag and tags
combinations. If I wants to query for all and only acquariums, a query on
"attraction=acquarium" will work. Viceversa, if we rise one step above and
17 matches
Mail list logo
