On 21-Aug-17 08:07 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
I am bemused by this thread.
I know that when I am sent to the grocers to get peppers I’ve never been asked
to get a “chili pepper”. Depending on the desired dish it might be a “Anaheim”,
“Chipotle”, “Jalapeño”, “Serrano”, “Habaneros” or other type of the spicy
peppers. Those are just a few of the types of peppers we might use in the
Southwest United States for a Mexican inspired dish. For Asian inspired dishes
there are another whole host of spicy peppers available in the local stores. If
a “Bell pepper”, I will usually be requested to get a “yellow Bell pepper” or
“red Bell pepper” rather than just a “Bell pepper”. So it seems altering a top
level “produce=pepper” into “produce=chili_pepper” and “produce=bell_pepper”
would not be a good fit for my part of the world.
Looking at Wikipedia, there are something like 50,000 varieties of peppers but
they can be be broken into two general classes “sweet” and “chili”. So if it is
desired to be more specific than just “pepper” it would seem that
“chili_pepper” and “sweet_pepper” would be better. But better yet in my mind
would be leaving the top level as “pepper” and adding a “variety=*” tag
detailing the more specific vulgar (non-latin) name. The world is awash in
varieties of common items. I don’t think we want to put all the variations into
a top level tag.
The term 'vulgar' can be insulting and is rather technical .. 'common' would be
more understood.
The concept would be to use variety to distinguish produce or products based on
the commonly used local names. From taginfo it seems that a “variety” tag is
already in undocumented use for wine. Why not embrace and extend that to cover
other food stuffs, e.g. “produce=apples”, “variety=jonathan”. I suppose that
the British word for corn is maize, so you might have “produce=maize”,
“variety=sweet|field|whatever”. Driving by a field I’m pretty sure I can decide
if it has corn (maize) in it. But I won’t be able to tell if it is field or
sweet corn. Let me tag the top level as “produce=maize” and be done with it.
Likewise, I can recognize a few varieties of peppers when they are being grown
but far from all. Let me tag the field as “produce=pepper” and if I am
confident of the variety I can also add that tag.
I'd not use "variety=" but simply use "apple=jonathan".
The scheme of using an additional variety tag could even be used to cover the
other items called peppers in English, e.g. black pepper corns could be
“produce=pepper”, “variety=black_corn”.
On Aug 20, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> wrote:
On 20.08.2017 22:48, Kevin Kenny wrote:
The English word 'pepper' also applies to several plants in the genera
Aframomum, Capsicum, Pimenta, Schinus, and Zanthophylum (plus others
that are used in traditional herbal medicine but not for the kitchen). > I
think that the original poster wanted to disambiguate among these,
Yes of course, that's why he proposed produce=bell_pepper;chili_pepper.
which would make the Linnæan names the best option - there isn't any easy way to
clarify it using only vulgar names.
Well there is an easy way: Clearly describing in the wiki that produce=pepper
means the fruits of 'piper nigrum'. Introducing an inconsistent language scheme
will confuse all occasional mappers. Latin names should remain reserved for
genus=* and species=*, and you can add species:en=* for all languages as well.
Using that approach there then need to be a 'clear description that apples means
jonathans", and all the others will have to have another tag!
I don't think so, it would be more complex that using a sub tag to describe the
specific variety.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
