2010/11/8 Tom Chance <t...@acrewoods.net>: > On 8 November 2010 13:14, Richard Welty <rwe...@averillpark.net> wrote: >> >> a gallery doesn't have to be a building by it self, it doesn't have >> to be focused on selling (a false distinction in my book), it can >> be 2 or 3 walls in a library > > For the moment Martin's proposal doesn't offer anything for those cases.
I disagree: as culture is orthogonal to amenity (or food / drink) you could combine culture=art_gallery with all of the mentioned (besides arts_centre, which might already be comprising a gallery aspect). And of course it doesn't have to be a building, noone ever suggested this in this discussion AFAIR. > As > with all features, it's important to remember that we are concerned with the > primary purpose or use for a feature. Just because museums have cafes, > shops, toilets, libraries, etc. doesn't necessarily mean we should add all > of those sub-features. don't know how you do this in your area, but I think it is general practise in the area where I have been to do it: why not map a public toilet or a cafe inside a museum? Simply draw a polygon to locate it (and hope there is no need for a 3D-modell to understand what it's about). >> different things, whereas from experience i can tell you it's a >> fuzzy continuum. > > As somebody with experience curating and organising art exhibitions, music > festivals and similar, I agree! Of course I plainly agree as well --- as long as we want to add more information than amenity=fuzzy_continuum this doesn't really help us though. Cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
