On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 12:35, Lukas via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > 1. covered=booth for closed phone-boxes, but some mappers do not really > like that. > The author of iD is one of the mappers who doesn't like it. So much so that he removed that option from the preset for phone=*. Unless you can persuade him to change his mind (you can't) then you can forget using covered=* because unless editors support it, few mappers will use it. To be fair, he has a fairly sensible reason for his opposition. The values for covered=* for phones and for other things are wildly different. Since he populates those values from the wiki (or associated wikidata) the list presented to mappers is confusing. You're not going to change his mind on that, so forget about using covered=*. I think covered=booth and booth=* to specify the type of booth (or to tag > that there is a booth at all, both variants are used) were added to the > wiki 2010 without discussion. > You can thank the author of iD for that. He needed something after removing covered=* from the preset for phone=* and that's how he decided to do it (after a little discussion on github). > > 2. Some mappers say "booth" is not really a good key name for phone boxes. > I agree. It's also more American than British usage. But it's probably too late to change now. > > My suggestion here would be to add something like covered=closed_phone_box > (instead of covered=booth), covered=phone_hood and covered=roof for these, > but the question is whether key covered=* is suitable for this. Or should > we stay with a stricter covered=yes/no and maybe add something like > covered_by=phone_hood or something? > Forget covered=*. It won't fly. I don't think we need closed_phone_box unless you have an example of an open_phone_box, so phone_box would be fine. Hood is probably better than roof, because most of these are acoustic hoods. In the few case where there is a sloped roof, then building=roof mapped as an area may be better. Namespacing it would avoid having to put "phone_" everywhere, and avoid possible future key collisions. So how about phone:enclosure=box|hood|yes|no? And to answer my own question, it's probably too late to make a change like that given the number already in use. > > 4. And what are we going to do with phones like this: > https://farm2.static.flickr.com/1177/539646770_464dffea77_b.jpg ? The > phone itself is covered, but the user of it will be not. Is that > covered=yes or covered=no? > I'd say no. From the viewpoint of somebody looking for the nearest phone he or she can drive to that will provide protection from the rainstorm, that isn't suitable. Calling it covered would be misleading. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
