There is already disambiguation within the shop=clothes object with over 10'000 uses of the clothes tag. and I'm not quite sure were your stipulation shop=fashion is cheaper than shop=boutique comes from.
Simon On 26.08.2017 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch > <mailto:si...@poole.ch>> wrote: > >> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses) >> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with >> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not >> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to >> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page >> (but without a conclusion). > > > I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is > not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too > generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion > cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-) > > What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt > (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a > "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a shop=bags? Or > shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many > places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the > material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or > multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of > clothing (underwear, shirts, etc. > I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a > clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some > edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that > shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current > situation in the clothes key is not working: > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values > There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target > group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses > (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type > (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in > this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant). > > cheers, > Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
