You can probably have tags amenity=driving_school_category_b,
amenity=dancing_teaching_center and other purely descriptional tags and
it would be a mess and headache to sort and retrieve information. IMHO,
it is much better to have alternative advanced tagging system from which
data users can b
I wouldn't go that far, but I assume that in 1 country the majority of
driving schools have the same system: begin course based, and with a
parttime-regime and you can get all common driver licenses.
So for some uses amenity=driving_school is more than sufficient. I
understand that when you want t
This is a continuation of a discussion started in the devel list. The
issue is the definitions of "tower" and "mast".
The two terms are used interchangeably in both UK & US english,
resulting in a lack of consensus for tagging.
Perhaps we should define a "for use in OSM tagging" definitions o
There is the problem, not all educational institutions in country are
the same. Even in countries that have very strict standards there are a
lot of institutions that do not fit in current system. Some has
specialities, some provide special education for people with
disabilities, some provide f
Шишкин Александр (Shishkin Aleksandr) wrote:
> IMHO, it is much better to have alternative advanced tagging
> system from which data users can benefit much (e.g. search
> by school's speciality).
As a general point, could I please encourage people not to second-guess what
data users might "benef
On 15/04/2016 11:31, Шишкин Александр (Shishkin Aleksandr) wrote:
This all similar to power=* group of tags,
That's pretty much the poster child for "how not to design a tagging
system", in a couple of different areas*.
I'm sure that you had nothing to do with that mess, but I wouldn't use
I think you had better make the requirements for tower less strict. Most of
what I consider radio towers have no accommodation in them. It's the shape
and structure of the tower that makes the difference.
Here is the wiki page concerning towers:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtower
We had a discussion here in March about introducing a new value for the
service=* sub-tag of a highway=service, classifying it as a generic major
service way category, in contrast to minor values such as
service=parking_aisle or service=driveway or service=drive-through.
Data consumers already mak
On 15/04/2016 12:39, Dave Swarthout wrote:
I think you had better make the requirements for tower less strict.
The whole point of my definitions is to *NOT* use the word "tower" for
communications masts. I am trying to resolve the ambiguity by choosing
one in preference to the other, even tho
You want to retag communication towers that are identical in structure to
the power towers on the Wiki page as masts? I would disagree totally with
that idea. A mast does not have legs in common American usage.
Is that your thrust or do you have another term in mind?
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 6:53
Maybe before discussing if some structure is better named tower or mast
you/we should reflect why we should make a distinction at all:
Is the difference whether...
1) the structure is free-standing or not?
2) the structure has one contact point to the ground or several?
3) there are rooms/accomm
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 15 apr 2016, alle ore 17:26, Tobias Wrede ha
> scritto:
>
>
> So what's the point in distinguishing mast from tower at all?
there's clearly a difference in meaning (the words are not synonymous), so why
would we want to remove this distinction?
cheers,
Mart
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 15 apr 2016, alle ore 13:53, Malcolm Herring
> ha scritto:
>
> The whole point of my definitions is to *NOT* use the word "tower" for
> communications masts
do you agree to use tower for communication towers?
cheers,
Martin
_
Am 15.04.2016 um 17:43 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
there's clearly a difference in meaning (the words are not synonymous), so why
would we want to remove this distinction?
If there clearly was a difference in meaning or better if there was a
clear difference in meaning we wouldn't have the
On 15/04/2016 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
do you agree to use tower for communication towers?
Yes. My suggestions relate to the form of the structures, not their
usage. Those would be defined by secondary tags.
___
Tagging mailing list
Taggi
On 16/04/2016 3:21 AM, Malcolm Herring wrote:
On 15/04/2016 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
do you agree to use tower for communication towers?
Yes. My suggestions relate to the form of the structures, not their
usage. Those would be defined by secondary tags.
___
>If there clearly was a difference in meaning or better if there was a
clear difference in meaning we wouldn't have the discussion. I got confused
myself in the past when trying to find the right tag.
There is a clear difference in meaning:
The word mast derives from Old English and German and mea
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 16 apr 2016, alle ore 00:23, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> The contention comes from 'common use' of the word 'tower' to refer to things
> that are a single pole (mast).
but in these cases there would typically be a room in the tower, i.e. the
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 15 apr 2016, alle ore 12:35, Richard Fairhurst
> ha scritto:
>
> As a general point, could I please encourage people not to second-guess what
> data users might "benefit much" from, unless they themselves are those data
> users.
>
> It was that sort of thinking
19 matches
Mail list logo
