[Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

2020-01-04 Thread Jake Edmonds via Tagging
In the woods around my area, there are many fire pits and picnic tables. Around 25% of the fire pits are tagged as their own object with leisure=firepit and the other 75% are additionally tagged as fireplace=yes on an amenity=shelter/shelter=picnic_shelter, tourism=picnic_site or leisure=picni

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Hauke Stieler
Hi, you may noticed the discussion "Tag for 'tax free shopping'" on this mailing list. This is the proposal for the new "duty_free" tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tax_free_shopping Basically the new tag has three values: * yes: This shop does not collect taxes at all

Re: [Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

2020-01-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Jan 2020, at 18:32, Jake Edmonds via Tagging > wrote: > > I don’t think it makes sense to use fireplace=yes as an additional tag and > they should be mapped separately as leisure=firepit. from what you have written in your introduction, other mappers in your area

Re: [Tagging] leisure=firepit vs fireplace=Yes

2020-01-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Jan 2020, at 18:32, Jake Edmonds via Tagging > wrote: > > I don’t think it makes sense to use fireplace=yes as an additional tag and > they should be mapped separately as leisure=firepit. additionally, mapping the fireplace explicitly and on its own with leisure=

[Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

2020-01-04 Thread Volker Schmidt
I have just detected the wiki page "amenity=tourist_bus_parking" It has so far only 16 uses (including one by myself a few minutes ago) I am not happy with this new tag. Agreed, we have the tags amenity=bicycle_parking and amenity=motorcycle_parking, but they have been with OSM for years, whereas t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Jan 2020, at 19:49, Hauke Stieler wrote: > > Hi, > > you may noticed the discussion "Tag for 'tax free shopping'" on this > mailing list. This is the proposal for the new "duty_free" tag. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tax_free_shopping >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Hauke Stieler
Hi Martin, > actually tax collection and exemption are not specifically related to > airports, although airports are a typical setting where duty free shops > occur, there are also different places where you can find them, so this > should be phrased more generically. I always use "e.g." or "f

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 04.01.2020 19:47, Hauke Stieler wrote: * no: All customers of a shop with duty_free=no have to pay normal taxes. I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU, everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax refund. However, since this requires

Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

2020-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I agree, I had the problem on motorway service areas, where parking is segregated between HGVs and cars. I solved it with access tags for the respective vehicle class. On 04.01.2020 22:10, Volker Schmidt wrote: I have just detected the wiki page "amenity=tourist_bus_parking" It has so far only

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Hauke Stieler
Hi, > I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU, > everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax > refund. you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service (prepared forms, memberships in organizations, etc.) for an tax-exemp

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Philip Barnes
On Saturday, 4 January 2020, Hauke Stieler wrote: > Hi, > > > I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU, > > everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax > > refund. > > you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service > (

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Hauke Stieler
Hi, > Absence of such facilities surely applies to 99.% of shops. > > Nobody is going to want to start to tag the absence of such a service? Of course nobody would start to do that, but when having "=yes", then I think there should be a "=no" (even though this is the default case). And whe

Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

2020-01-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Jan 2020, at 22:12, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > My feeling is that we should not add more humanities along that line, like > RV_parking, hgv_parking, snowmobile_parking, cargo_bike_parking and so on, > but try to think,of something better. > In particular I would like

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4. Jan 2020, at 23:38, Philip Barnes wrote: > >> you're right, maybe saying that "this shop does not offer any service >> (prepared forms, memberships in organizations, etc.) for an >> tax-exemption" is better? >> > Absence of such facilities surely applies to 99.%