Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=clothes subtags

[Marc Gemis]

You forgot to merge shop=jewelry with shop=clothes (*)

Maybe the next tags we can merge are shop=car, bicycle, truck,
motorcycle, car_repair, car_parts, tires.
After all they are all vehicle related. something like shop=vehicle;
vehicle:type=car; ... perhaps ?


Do we really want to merge shop=clothes with shop=shoe ? All editors
have to be adapted, data consumers will have to support both tagging
methods for quite some time, validators need to be adapted.
And what do we gain ? That a data consumer that does not want to
differentiate between the two, only has to use 1 query to get both
types of shops ? Or is it because some shops sell both ?

I can understand that would have been an issue if you got lot's of
questions and complaints about shop=clothes; shoes; boutique &
fashion. But I haven't seen it brought up before. And yes, I too have
problems to distinguish between boutique & fashion. But I'm not
expert. But I do see the difference between shoe and clothes in most
cases. And of course there will be shops that sell both, that is
because the world is not black & white. Whatever classification (tags)
you choose,  there will be exceptions.

I think this mailing should focus more on what cannot be mapped yet
and on unsettled issues such as multi-valued values, proper tags for
unpaved roads in developing countries, landuse vs. landcover, etc.;
rather that merging 2 shop types.


regards

m.

(*)  At least this would have solved the UK-GB / US-GB language problem


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> I have created a proposal for sorting things out with clothes and shoes
> shops according to our discussions on this list:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags
>
>
> --
> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
> Muzalyev]
>
>
> ___
> 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 - shop=clothes subtags

[Marc Gemis]

what do we gain with those changes ?
Why should a shoe store be a sub tag of a clothes store ?

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> I have created a proposal for sorting things out with clothes and shoes
> shops according to our discussions on this list:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags
>
>
> --
> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
> Muzalyev]
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

Yeah, but in Australia they do not use "boutique" to refer to any shop
neither. Still people think it should be removed for this reason.

Tagging is done in British-English, if the word used in the tagging
means something else in your language, too bad. You have to make sure
that the editors have a proper translation for the tag in your
language.

Furthermore tagging is open. People should be able to use the word
they feel describes the feature the best. Preferably they should
document the value as good as possible. But there should not be a
committee of X people saying, we do not understand the difference,
let's get rid of it.

regards

m

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick
 wrote:
>
> On 30 August 2017 at 13:20, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>>  A cafe is a place where they sell
>> beer, not ?
>
>
>  Not in Australia, no!
>
>>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On 30 August 2017 at 13:20, Marc Gemis  wrote:

>  A cafe is a place where they sell
> beer, not ?
>

 Not in Australia, no!


> Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

Does this mean that we will drop/change amenity=cafe as well ? Because
it is confusing in Dutch & French. A cafe is a place where they sell
beer, not ?


m.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Severin Menard
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
> tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>
> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
> More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not very large
> ("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells to his/her family
> after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I will open the boutique
> now". We have an expression for "boutique de" (literally shop of) something,
> that can be used for clothes from which I guess derivates the shop=boutique
> concept. Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or
> also in other cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far as I know people do not
> use boutique, while they are quite fond of French words (like maison meaning
> house) for shops that want to be considered as "chique".
>
> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively used
> for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store, selling food
> and non food items all over the walls, up to the ceiling, where you ask at a
> desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk, even if many are not
> separate shops but taking one part of the basement of a building. And they
> are not chic at all. And they are very, very numerous: in a large city you
> find one every 50 or 100 meters. For sure there are more African boutiques
> in the world than the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new
> African contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for
> their own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
> false-cognates.
>
> So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as possible,
> not reflecting only one specific cultural context and avoiding using
> boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate ready-to-wear and hand-made
> would fit. What do you think?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
>> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>>
>> Her take:
>>
>> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping centres /
>> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>>
>> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>>
>> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
>> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>>
>> Hope that helps?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

>>
>> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)
>>
>> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique &
>> =fashion, leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's
>> etc
>>

-1, there are shop that sell clothes and jewelry and accessoires beside clothes.
They do not fit in the "pure" shop=clothes category imho. So we need
to keep at least one other, be it boutique or fashion.

Furthermore I find that non-experts should not discuss dropping a tag.
What's the problem having 3 different tags ? Any data consumer can
take them together if they do not want to differentiate. And maybe a
lot of people understand the difference, but do not participate in
this discussion.

If you don't  know the difference, just use shop=clothes, maybe
another mapper will turn that into boutique/fashion later on.

regards

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[wille]

I also agree with dropping shop=boutique and fashion.

2017-08-29 20:42 GMT-03:00 Graeme Fitzpatrick :

> Hi Daniel
>
> Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely
>
>
>> In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also
>> drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.
>>
>
>
>
>>
>> And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is?
>>
>
> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)
>
> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique &
> =fashion, leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's
> etc
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Wille
http://wille.blog.br
http://maption.com.br/
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=clothes subtags

[Daniel Koć]

I have created a proposal for sorting things out with clothes and shoes 
shops according to our discussions on this list:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi Daniel

Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely


> In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also
> drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.
>



>
> And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is?
>

Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)

>From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique & =fashion,
leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's etc

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi Severin

Thank you for that very detailed explanation! :-)

Looks like yet another time when the same word means different things in
different languages

Thanks

Graeme

On 30 August 2017 at 03:27, Severin Menard  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
> tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>
> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 29.08.2017 o 19:27, Severin Menard pisze:
IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most 
confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.


Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or 
also in other cultural contexts?


In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also 
drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.



shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping
centres /
towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market

shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores

shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc



And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is? 
What about luxury chain stores and cheap second-hand by a single person 
with shiny clothes which try too look as luxury?


For me all this is really not working.

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] shop=fashion

[Severin Menard]

Hi,

IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.

Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not very large
("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells to his/her family
after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I will open the boutique
now". We have an expression for "boutique de" (literally shop of)
something, that can be used for clothes from which I guess derivates the
shop=boutique concept. Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word
boutique means this or also in other cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far
as I know people do not use boutique, while they are quite fond of French
words (like maison meaning house) for shops that want to be considered as
"chique".

In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively used
for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store, selling food
and non food items all over the walls, up to the ceiling, where you ask at
a desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk, even if many are not
separate shops but taking one part of the basement of a building. And they
are not chic at all. And they are very, very numerous: in a large city you
find one every 50 or 100 meters. For sure there are more African boutiques
in the world than the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course,
new African contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for
their own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
false-cognates.

So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as
possible, not reflecting only one specific cultural context and avoiding
using boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate ready-to-wear and
hand-made would fit. What do you think?

Sincerely,

Severin


Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> 
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
> Message-ID:
>  x...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi
>
> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>
> Her take:
>
> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping centres /
> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>
> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>
> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>
> Hope that helps?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

[Vao Matua]

Christoph,

The Deva river is a great example, thanks.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Tuesday 29 August 2017, Ilya Zverev wrote:
> >
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rivers_Classifi
> >cation
>
> I originally thought i'd stay out of these discussions on importance
> tags for rivers (because in the end i don't think there is anything to
> be gained from it) but this is just too good an opportunity, in
> particular to ask a former Saint-Petersburg resident:
>
> So the Neva:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neva_River
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2811903
>
> should be tagged river=small?
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> 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 - River Classification

[Christoph Hormann]

On Tuesday 29 August 2017, Ilya Zverev wrote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rivers_Classifi
>cation

I originally thought i'd stay out of these discussions on importance 
tags for rivers (because in the end i don't think there is anything to 
be gained from it) but this is just too good an opportunity, in 
particular to ask a former Saint-Petersburg resident:

So the Neva:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neva_River
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2811903

should be tagged river=small?

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

[Frederik Ramm]

Ilya,

please don't use the word "subjective" for this. Subjective tagging has
no place in OSM because it is not verifiable; we don't want that and we
shouldn't let people think we do.

What you seem to propose does however not look "subjective" since you
are keying your suggested tags to the length of the river, so they are
verifiable (and if two people don't agree then there is one "correct"
way to do it, not "two differing opinions").

I do see an issue with using the length as a decision making property
because it is not something you can necessarily "see" from aerial
imagery (or if you are actually at the location) - you need external
sources to determine the length. (Sometimes two rivers merge and you
cannot really say which one continues and which one ends - it is kind of
arbitrary but at least it is recorded somewhere and known.)

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

[Vao Matua]

Ilya,

This seems to make sense as a way to help differentiate rivers. It is also
good because in will work with intermittent=yes.
I have a couple of comments: 1) When a mapper is looking at a river to
trace in a localized area they know the river is big or small only by
looking at the width of the watercourse, not the length, 2) It seems that
there should be consideration given to the social and economic importance
of a river. There are many populations and even cities in Africa that are
dependent on rivers even though they may not meet your definition of
major/big or even small. 3) More than likely a major river should also have
a polygon that represents the area as well.

Perhaps just river=big and river=small are the only tags needed?

Thanks for your work.

Emmor
(Palolo)

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Ilya Zverev  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> After a proposal about waterways classification by Daniel Koć, I decided
> to make an alternative one. To me, using subjective values and criteria for
> classifying rivers is a better way, since it can work in any country
> regardless of the official classification. It could be adjusted for any
> country, like we do with the place=* tag. And it is inherently
> understandable by casual mappers.
>
> So I propose a river=* tag with the following values:
>
> * river=major for longest rivers
> * river=big for big rivers
> * river=small for all other rivers
>
> See the proposal page for details on these values and rationale:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/
> Rivers_Classification
>
> Thanks,
> Ilya
> ___
> 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] ferry relations

[wille]

Thank you, David!

I tried to contact the user that made that change in the wiki page. As he
didn't answered, I reverted partially his edit.

2017-08-17 12:33 GMT-03:00 David Groom :

> -- Original Message --
> From: "wille" 
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> Sent: 17/08/2017 16:06:39
> Subject: [Tagging] ferry relations
>
> Hello!
>
> The wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry says
> that "
>
> *No relation should be used even if the key route
> =* suggests this.".*
> However more or less 10% of the route=ferry objects are relations, the
> routers and renderers seems to deal well with it and there are very long
> routes that shouldn't be a unique way.
>
> Does that wiki recommendation make sense nowadays? Should we update it?
>
> Thank you,
> --
> Wille
> http://wille.blog.br
> http://maption.com.br/
>
>
> I note the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry  
> was
> only changed in June of this year to remove the suggestion that relations
> could be used.  Might be a good idea to see why the wiki editor changed the
> page
>
> David
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Wille
http://wille.blog.br
http://maption.com.br/
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

[Ilya Zverev]

Hi everyone,

After a proposal about waterways classification by Daniel Koć, I decided to 
make an alternative one. To me, using subjective values and criteria for 
classifying rivers is a better way, since it can work in any country regardless 
of the official classification. It could be adjusted for any country, like we 
do with the place=* tag. And it is inherently understandable by casual mappers.

So I propose a river=* tag with the following values:

* river=major for longest rivers
* river=big for big rivers
* river=small for all other rivers

See the proposal page for details on these values and rationale:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rivers_Classification

Thanks,
Ilya
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging