Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Hi Dmitry I did a quick sruvey of some fast food restuarants the local Ikea, I know they all have leisure=playground outside and inside, non of these were mapped. So why haven't we mapped them as leisure=playground? On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Dmitry Kiselev dkise...@osm.me wrote: Hi We have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth for kids areas mappings. But sometimes kids area is an independant amenity. I think it would be nice to have amenity to map such features. So here is mine proposal for that http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kids_area Looking forward for any comments and suggestions. -- dkiselev Dmitry Kiselev ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)
On Tue Dec 16 2014 17:42:47 GMT+ (GMT), Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-12-16 18:16 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped. typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of cities that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in physical terms. The roads that once passed the gates are still the arterial roads, the squares are still named after the gates (typically) and the whole area often still has that name (e.g. referring here to my birth town Tübingen, where everybody would still know Neckartor (dismantled 1804), Lustnauer Tor or Haagtor (and 2 others, all of which non-existent physically but very existent in daily life/communication, e.g. to set up a place to meet)). Care needs to be taken with this statement, and an understanding of local usage. Gate is a common part of street names in parts of England which fell under the Danelaw. Gate in these towns and cities is often derived from the Norse word Gatta, meaning street. The best known examples of streets called gate exist in York, although examples also exist in my home city, Leicester. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whip-Ma-Whop-Ma-Gate Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else 2014-12-17 12:49 GMT+04:00 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com: Hi Dmitry I did a quick sruvey of some fast food restuarants the local Ikea, I know they all have leisure=playground outside and inside, non of these were mapped. So why haven't we mapped them as leisure=playground? On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Dmitry Kiselev dkise...@osm.me wrote: Hi We have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth for kids areas mappings. But sometimes kids area is an independant amenity. I think it would be nice to have amenity to map such features. So here is mine proposal for that http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kids_area Looking forward for any comments and suggestions. -- dkiselev Dmitry Kiselev ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
I meant playground:supervised=no in last message So why haven't we mapped them as leisure=playground? Playground equipement is very different for outside playgrounds and indoor facilities. Your kids will never watch tv at regular leisure=playground, while amenity=kids_area may have not only tvs not other expensive equipment. We cannot map equipment, this is insane to maintain, but we can classify between leisure=playground and kids_area=*. 2014-12-17 13:32 GMT+04:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else 2014-12-17 12:49 GMT+04:00 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com: Hi Dmitry I did a quick sruvey of some fast food restuarants the local Ikea, I know they all have leisure=playground outside and inside, non of these were mapped. So why haven't we mapped them as leisure=playground? On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Dmitry Kiselev dkise...@osm.me wrote: Hi We have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth for kids areas mappings. But sometimes kids area is an independant amenity. I think it would be nice to have amenity to map such features. So here is mine proposal for that http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kids_area Looking forward for any comments and suggestions. -- dkiselev Dmitry Kiselev ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On Wed Dec 17 2014 09:32:05 GMT+ (GMT), Никита wrote: Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else And access tags, such as access=customers. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)
2014-12-17 10:24 GMT+01:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whip-Ma-Whop-Ma-Gate Never been to York to date, but I already love it! Thanks for that ;-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)
You should visit, it is a lovely city and has a complete city wall that is lovely to walk around. Also nice pubs, a massive cathedral and the national railway museum. Phil (trigpoint ) On Wed Dec 17 2014 09:47:16 GMT+ (GMT), Martin Vonwald wrote: 2014-12-17 10:24 GMT+01:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whip-Ma-Whop-Ma-Gate Never been to York to date, but I already love it! Thanks for that ;-) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] city walls
So far I have never come across razed. What's the difference between razed and dismantled, if any? On 17 December 2014 at 07:04, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Razed would be much better for this kind of object (though I am not a big fan fan of razed, sooner or later completely mundane things without any kind of recognition are tagged this way). But at least it is not misrepresenting things. 2014-12-16 22:20 GMT+01:00 Zecke z...@saeuferleber.de: interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped. typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of cities that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in physical terms. The roads that once passed the gates are still the arterial roads, the squares are still named after the gates (typically) and the whole area often still has that name (e.g. referring here to my birth town Tübingen, where everybody would still know Neckartor (dismantled 1804), Lustnauer Tor or Haagtor (and 2 others, all of which non-existent physically but very existent in daily life/communication, e.g. to set up a place to meet)). Actually we recommend to map such objects with the razed: prefix for objects that once existed but now there are only barely remnants or even indirect indications thereof. As long as there is a historical interest in them and there is a slight indication of its position we are willing to map them in the historic map. Cheers, Zecke ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Volker SCHMIDT Via del Cristo 28 35127 Padova Italy mailto:vosc...@gmail.com personal mobile+39 340 1427 105 skype: volker.schmidt ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] city walls
2014-12-17 11:52 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com: So far I have never come across razed. What's the difference between razed and dismantled, if any? there are lots of discussions on this topic and lots of different proposals and wiki pages. You can find some documentation here, but AFAIK there is no consensus which tags to use (there are parallel schemes in use): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Then I like kids_area when you are mapping a private playground that is closed off without direct public access, mainly because I wouldn't map them as a leisure=playground. About supervision vs. childcare, we have lots of free supervised playgrounds here which do not offer child care, and and I have no experience with staffed child care facilties at malls etc. But for me amenity=kindergarten seems to be an good match to child_care you would have in a mall. On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: On Wed Dec 17 2014 09:32:05 GMT+ (GMT), Никита wrote: Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else And access tags, such as access=customers. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Erik, this gets really messy here. Not mapping a playground as a playground just because of the access? We don't map amenity=parking differently just because of access=customers. We have all the tools already without the need for a new tag, and definitely these shopping centre playgrounds should not be tagged as kindergarten, the latter is a more institutional amenity. leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes or playground:outdoor=yes playground:supervised=yes or no (referring to staff supervision) access=customers Никита wrote on 2014-12-17 10:40: We cannot map equipment, this is insane to maintain Yes we can, see playground=* as approved, e.g. playground=swing tom Erik Johansson wrote on 2014-12-17 14:57: Then I like kids_area when you are mapping a private playground that is closed off without direct public access, mainly because I wouldn't map them as a leisure=playground. About supervision vs. childcare, we have lots of free supervised playgrounds here which do not offer child care, and and I have no experience with staffed child care facilties at malls etc. But for me amenity=kindergarten seems to be an good match to child_care you would have in a mall. On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: On Wed Dec 17 2014 09:32:05 GMT+ (GMT), Никита wrote: Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else And access tags, such as access=customers. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance
2014-12-17 1:29 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com: I tag an adit as a node, the opening through which you enter the underground part of a cave or mine. +1, I take that back, was confusing it with access which could be either a spot or a linear feature, while entrance is supposedly a spot (said the dictionaries I have consulted in the mean time). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Am 17.12.2014 um 15:11 schrieb Tom Pfeifer: Erik, this gets really messy here. Not mapping a playground as a playground just because of the access? We don't map amenity=parking differently just because of access=customers. We have all the tools already without the need for a new tag, and definitely these shopping centre playgrounds should not be tagged as kindergarten, the latter is a more institutional amenity. +1 leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes or playground:outdoor=yes playground:supervised=yes or no (referring to staff supervision) access=customers indoor=yes and supervised=yes/no work. No need for the subtag construction. We can still think about playground:type=* if we want to distinguish between different subtypes. cu fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-17 15:26 GMT+01:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: +1 leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes or playground:outdoor=yes playground:supervised=yes or no (referring to staff supervision) access=customers indoor=yes and supervised=yes/no work. No need for the subtag construction. We can still think about playground:type=* if we want to distinguish between different subtypes. I also know a place that might fall into this category: indoor streetview: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8462111,12.4869449,3a,75y,151.95h,69.96t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sq3Z8vG9t0TkAAAQfCNjLlg!2e0!3e2 some pics: http://lnx.gommolandiaroma.it/portal/galleriafoto On the other hand, it might maybe also qualify as theme park? What is the distinction? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
About supervision vs. childcare, we have lots of free supervised playgrounds here which do not offer child care, and and I have no experience with staffed child care facilties at malls etc. But for me amenity=kindergarten seems to be an good match to child_care you would have in a mall. I know this tag has been at times contentious in the past, due to cultural and linguistic issues, but some people at least are starting to use amenity=childcare. According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dchildcare, it's for a place where amenity=kindergarten doesn't seem appropriate, for example because there's no educational component. I think staffed child care at malls (or at Ikea) would be a case where this would apply. Brad ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Yes we can, see playground=* as approved, e.g. playground=swing Most likely because you have no idea what objects will be mapped with new tag kids_area=*. Well please show, show me these tags then: playground=pcroom playground=tv playground=activitytable playground=activitytable playground=globe playground=blackboard playground=mat Go on. Map them. You can map playground=pencil (not pencils) I dare you. But leave kids_area=* tag alone. kids_area=* is not about access, it is clearly separable from leisure=playground by it's equipement. If you cannot separate more advanced playgrounds for kids with tvs, globes, pencils, pc from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Playground_Equipment, that not kids_area problem... 2014-12-17 18:39 GMT+04:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-17 15:26 GMT+01:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: +1 leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes or playground:outdoor=yes playground:supervised=yes or no (referring to staff supervision) access=customers indoor=yes and supervised=yes/no work. No need for the subtag construction. We can still think about playground:type=* if we want to distinguish between different subtypes. I also know a place that might fall into this category: indoor streetview: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8462111,12.4869449,3a,75y,151.95h,69.96t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sq3Z8vG9t0TkAAAQfCNjLlg!2e0!3e2 some pics: http://lnx.gommolandiaroma.it/portal/galleriafoto On the other hand, it might maybe also qualify as theme park? What is the distinction? 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
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
Sorry, the German examples don't mean much to me. Do the examples below show what you're proposing? name=Chicago, admin_title=city, admin_level... name=California, admin_title=state, admin_level On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: This is about a new attribute for administrative devisions. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/admin_title -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
2014-12-17 16:25 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at: This is about a new attribute for administrative devisions. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/admin_title isn't this already covered by name and its variants? e.g. name=Bezirk Zwettl short_name=Zwettl or name=Zwettl official_name=Bezirk Zwettl ? And another question, is this also aiming at city titles, e.g. Universitätsstadt, Freie und Hansestadt? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
On 17.12.2014 16:56, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: isn't this already covered by name and its variants? e.g. name=Bezirk Zwettl short_name=Zwettl or name=Zwettl official_name=Bezirk Zwettl ? No, because the official name is just Zwettl. But in most cases when you talk about Bezirk Zwettl (district of Zwettl), you say Bezirk Zwettl, in order to make it clear that you are not talking about the city of Zwettl. And another question, is this also aiming at city titles, e.g. Universitätsstadt, Freie und Hansestadt? No. There are plenty of these bogus titles for each city. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
So what do you do with Berlin? State? City? Stadtstaat (Citystate)? __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki - contact: Map Features
actually the idea to prefix phone etc. with contact: was never more popular than the simple form. The contact:-form was proposed later and never set actually foot compared to the simple version. I have also tried in the past to convince mappers by sending them messages, to not use the prefix in order to avoid sprawl, but they have demonstrated themselves patient and insistent ;-) I know, that what makes it so frustrating. It's a few dozen people bascially fighting a already lost war. And I could spend my time on the wiki so much better than having edit wars over and over again. Not to mention that their arguments don't really convince me at all... __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Why should we map something, with different kind of activity and different name (at least in russian, serbian and many other cyrillic languages) as a playground? For example hr (sr the same but with cyryllic alphabet): playground https://translate.google.com/#hr/en/igrali%C5%A1te play room https://translate.google.com/#hr/en/igraonica ru, same story: https://translate.google.com/#ru/en/%D0%B8%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8F%20%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0 https://translate.google.com/#ru/en/%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F%20%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%89%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B0 play room is word by word google translation, it's netter then playground indor=yes but still isn't good enough because in many cases subj. isn't a room. Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:43:40 + от Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: On Wed Dec 17 2014 09:32:05 GMT+ (GMT), Никита wrote: Probably we should define kids_area as: leisure=playground playground:indoor=yes playground:supervised=yes - supervised by parents, not by somebody else And access tags, such as access=customers. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
I don't see a need for a new key here. The properties can be easily modelled with sub-tagging of playground: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no I agree in general, but the main issue with tagging like this is that I bet most data consumers will just look for leisure=playground and that's it. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
In the UK designation= is in wide usage for this. I don't know if it is typically a UK thing (it wouldn't surprise me) but local governments sometimes have the right to change their style - for example a civil parish can choose autonomously to call itself a community council. It can also choose to call itself a town council although I suspect this needs cooperation from its parent authority. And a council can become a city council basically only through a central decision. Some districts (admin_level=8) have the status of borough. All this doesn't change the legal powers and responsibilities of the council, it's all about what they are called. There's a lot of snobism involved as well... I have tried to summarise a tagging scheme for UK local authorities here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Csmale/ukboundaries It is not official in any way, they are only my own notes at present - based on current usage and my thoughts to keep my work on these boundaries consistent. I expect the system in Germany is a bit less variable, although the different Länder seem to have very different local government structures. Colin On 2014-12-17 16:25, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: This is about a new attribute for administrative devisions. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/admin_title [1] Links: -- [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/admin_title ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute with user over changing wiki page
Hi, On 11/08/2014 04:47 PM, Pee Wee wrote: We are writing to you for advice on what steps we should or could take next. The situation is best summarized as: [...] After some consideration I have today asked user ulamm to refrain from making any edits to wiki pages unless he has first proposed the edit on the matching talk page and found broad support. Any edit activity not conforming to this rule will lead to an account ban. Data Working Group does not usually get involved in wiki edit wars but in this case the wiki edit war has a direct connection to disputed edits going on in our database, and this has been going on for quite some time and several time-consuming attempts at talking reason into people, including personal telephone calls, have failed. This rule will remain in force until 31st January 2015, after which normal editing may resume, but as soon as there's any complaint I will extend this rule until 2016. I will also (try to) revert all of ulamm's disputed edits on the Wiki. A more detailed message, in German, is here: https://lists.openstreetmap.de/pipermail/bremen/2014-December/000493.html Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=public_bookcase
Hello, I would like to propose a feature for public bookcases, also known as Little Free Libraries in the US, and widely popular in Germany: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/public_bookcase http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/public_bookcase Here is the talk page for discussion and comments: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/public_bookcase http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/public_bookcase Thanks, Guillaume Pratte___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
usually, the purpose of visiting a playground is to, um, visit the playground. The purpose of a play area is (AFIK) a place to deposit the kids while (one of) the adults do something else, or as a amenity to a more serious or boring place place where the kids can have their attention taken away. I know there is a place like this in large facilities that have groups of parents who need to park or placate a kid for a while (while adults rest or eat), so knowing where the amenity is sounds good. Some of them are supervised by the employees, so the parents can shop (like ikea does), though I don’t know if that’s considered daycare or babysitting or whatever. And whoever suggested the kindergarten tag, I hope they were being sarcastic. If there was a new amenity tag, and the data customers ignored it, we wouldn’t be losing any kindergartens or playgrounds, so that’s a good thing, right? I don’t want playgrounds or kindergartens popping up in what turns out to be a corner of the mall filled with bright vinyl cubes and a loop of Pokemon playing on a TV. Javbw On Dec 18, 2014, at 6:41 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: I don't see a need for a new key here. The properties can be easily modelled with sub-tagging of playground: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no I agree in general, but the main issue with tagging like this is that I bet most data consumers will just look for leisure=playground and that's it. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
