sent from a phone
> On 18. Aug 2019, at 23:06, Morten Lange via Tagging > <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > I am skeptical as that makes finding them less straightforward, if you are > looking for [ a place where I can get my bicycle repaired or receive some > help]. it will require you look for them explicitly or the app you are using would take them into account. On the other hand from my experience these aren’t places “to get your bicycle repaired”, they are rather places you can go to and hang out with other bicycle enthusiasts of a certain political orientation and repair your bike yourself. > Many potential users will not know about bicycle kitchens or that other > community centres offer bicycle repairs. again, these places around here don’t “offer bicycle repairs”, they offer enabling you to do the repairs yourself > But I think they should be searchable also as somethings separate form the > ordinary bicycle shop. Additional tags can do the trick. > > For bicycle kitchens I guess > service:bicycle:diy:yes > might cover it. while it isn’t factually wrong, it isn’t useful as a distinction from forprofit places where you pay to use a space to adjust your bike > Here follow some new ideas that just popped out: > > > Perhaps add something like > shop:bicycle:type=bicycle_kitchen yes, if it _is_ a kind of bicycle shop. An idea that is not universally shared. > > > Other values for that tag could be > with_pub > with_cafe > job_training > in_community_centre IMHO no. We do not need tags of an is_in fashion for this, we can model this universally by making use of implicit spatial relationships (i.e. put the bike kitchen inside the community centre or pub, or the other way round, according to our interpretation of the situation) Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
