Re: [Tagging] Bannered/Special routes (Business, Alternate, etc.) in ref tags

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Albert Pundt  wrote:

> Sometimes bannered routes like business and alternate routes are tagged
> with, for example, ref=US 1 Business, spelling it out fully, and other
> times they abbreviate it, e.g. ref=US 1 Alt. Which is considered the best
> practice? We already abbreviate the US, I, etc., so it's not a stretch to
> abbreviate the banner word as well. And while we shouldn't tag only for the
> renderer, it also has the advantage of not being too long for the current
> Carto style.
>

I would generally go without abbreviation, eg, ref=US 1 Alternate, though
in the long term, I really think it's long overdue to kill the dinosaur of
tagging refs for routes on ways and just describe routes via relations, in
which case, the relation would be...

relation=route
route=road
network=US:US:Alternate
ref=1
modifier=Alternate

In the interim, do both for now.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Bannered/Special routes (Business, Alternate, etc.) in ref tags

[Albert Pundt]

Sometimes bannered routes like business and alternate routes are tagged
with, for example, ref=US 1 Business, spelling it out fully, and other
times they abbreviate it, e.g. ref=US 1 Alt. Which is considered the best
practice? We already abbreviate the US, I, etc., so it's not a stretch to
abbreviate the banner word as well. And while we shouldn't tag only for the
renderer, it also has the advantage of not being too long for the current
Carto style.

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Apr 2018, at 11:08, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> 
> amenity = cafe
> operator = Foobar
> 
> We don't have specific tags for other types of operators (public
> company private company, sole trader, cooperative, charity, etc); why
> would we need one in this case?


My tagging suggestion was not about the company type, but about the fact it was 
classified as an outreach by the OP. After checking the meaning of “outreach” 
I’m not sure anymore the term does apply.

The question is about a cafe where the waiters are people with disabilities, I 
also know 2 of such places. I believe they could be classified as sort of 
social facility, but I’m not sure outreach applies. The closest description for 
the documented values is in “workshop” but I don’t see it fitting completely.
I guess the property social_facility:for=disabled applies, but we might need a 
new value for the social_facility=* key


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

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Apr 2018, at 11:28, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
> So what are you going to use/propose ? landcover or man_made ?


if I had to choose a value for landcover I would use “flowers”, similar to 
“trees” or “grass”

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Marc Gemis]

For the case at hand, it's an n.v (naamloze venootschap). A limited
company. Says nothing at all about the area in which the company
operates.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> NGO is not the correct term.
> The Italian social cooperatives are, normally, small companies. That is much
> different form NGO [1], I think. In particular they are for-profit
> businesses.
> My earlier point was that if you put the operator's name in the "operator"
> tag, this would, in Italy, normally include the term "cooperativa sociale"
> as part of the name
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization
>
> On 12 April 2018 at 11:37, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>> So I will add
>>
>> social_facility=outreach (and hope no-one thinks it is only accessible
>> for people in an outreach group)
>> operator=Foobar
>> operator:type:ngo
>>
>> for now. In case new/better ideas pop-up, feel free to let me know.
>>
>> m.
>>
>> p.s. @Volker: I totally understand your viewpoint. I was wondering
>> myself whether it is sensible to do, but since their website states it
>> as well, I see no harm to add the information.
>> As I wrote in an earlier their might be projects that are more
>> secretive (is that the correct word to use?) in which case we should
>> not map it, but I guess if the people serving you have some disability
>> you will notice soon enough.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:09 AM, marc marc 
>> wrote:
>> > for the tag : operator:type=ngo
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type
>> >
>> > for the "publicly available" : for the two establishments of this type I
>> > know, being a "outreach project" is a part of the goal. we also go there
>> > to help the project and not just for the poi itself, so it seems very
>> > positive to me to add the information.
>> > it's over the time when helping someone different was shameful.
>> >
>> > Le 12. 04. 18 à 10:26, Marc Gemis a écrit :
>> >> In both cases I encountered, the website clearly states it:
>> >>
>> >> (In Dutch)
>> >> http://widar.be/widar/beleven/den-bayerd-het-casino/ clearly states
>> >> "people with an handicap"
>> >> https://www.mechelen.be/eetcafe-t-ass-2   It mentions people with a
>> >> form of autism (it is worded more nicely in Dutch)
>> >>
>> >> there is nothing hidden in the two cases I wanted to map. But indeed,
>> >> I can imagine that not all projects are so open about it.
>> >>
>> >> m
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Volker Schmidt 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to
>> >>> publicise
>> >>> that fact.
>> >>> We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by
>> >>> social
>> >>> cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the
>> >>> Wikipedia
>> >>> article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
>> >>> In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the
>> >>> operator in
>> >>> the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording
>> >>> "cooperativa
>> >>> sociale"
>> >>>
>> >>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative >> Marc Gemis
>> >>> marc.gemis at gmail.com
>> >  >> Thu Apr 12 05:23:32 UTC 2018
>> >  >>> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part
>> >  >>> of an outreach project ?
>> >  >>> The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
>> >  >>> outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).
>> > ___
>> > Tagging mailing list
>> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Cafe run as outreach project

[Volker Schmidt]

NGO is not the correct term.
The Italian social cooperatives are, normally, small companies. That is
much different form NGO [1], I think. In particular they are for-profit
businesses.
My earlier point was that if you put the operator's name in the "operator"
tag, this would, in Italy, normally include the term "cooperativa sociale"
as part of the name

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization

On 12 April 2018 at 11:37, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> So I will add
>
> social_facility=outreach (and hope no-one thinks it is only accessible
> for people in an outreach group)
> operator=Foobar
> operator:type:ngo
>
> for now. In case new/better ideas pop-up, feel free to let me know.
>
> m.
>
> p.s. @Volker: I totally understand your viewpoint. I was wondering
> myself whether it is sensible to do, but since their website states it
> as well, I see no harm to add the information.
> As I wrote in an earlier their might be projects that are more
> secretive (is that the correct word to use?) in which case we should
> not map it, but I guess if the people serving you have some disability
> you will notice soon enough.
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:09 AM, marc marc 
> wrote:
> > for the tag : operator:type=ngo
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type
> >
> > for the "publicly available" : for the two establishments of this type I
> > know, being a "outreach project" is a part of the goal. we also go there
> > to help the project and not just for the poi itself, so it seems very
> > positive to me to add the information.
> > it's over the time when helping someone different was shameful.
> >
> > Le 12. 04. 18 à 10:26, Marc Gemis a écrit :
> >> In both cases I encountered, the website clearly states it:
> >>
> >> (In Dutch)
> >> http://widar.be/widar/beleven/den-bayerd-het-casino/ clearly states
> >> "people with an handicap"
> >> https://www.mechelen.be/eetcafe-t-ass-2   It mentions people with a
> >> form of autism (it is worded more nicely in Dutch)
> >>
> >> there is nothing hidden in the two cases I wanted to map. But indeed,
> >> I can imagine that not all projects are so open about it.
> >>
> >> m
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Volker Schmidt 
> wrote:
> >>> This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to
> publicise
> >>> that fact.
> >>> We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by
> social
> >>> cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the
> Wikipedia
> >>> article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
> >>> In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the
> operator in
> >>> the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording
> "cooperativa
> >>> sociale"
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative >> Marc Gemis
> marc.gemis at gmail.com
> >  >> Thu Apr 12 05:23:32 UTC 2018
> >  >>> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part
> >  >>> of an outreach project ?
> >  >>> The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
> >  >>> outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> 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] Cafe run as outreach project

[gppes_osm]

> for the tag : operator:type=ngo
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type

> for the "publicly available" : for the two establishments of this type I
> know, being a "outreach project" is a part of the goal. we also go there
> to help the project and not just for the poi itself, so it seems very
> positive to me to add the information.
> it's over the time when helping someone different was shameful.

I also find the operator=* tag the best solution. I gathered some experience on 
this topic and found out the following: _Everyone_ likes to have a "normal" 
job. "Helping" isn't about "lets have a coffee at this cafe, because these 
(poor) people need help" it is about support for a independent and 
self-determined existence.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/382639

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

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Marc Gemis]

So I will add

social_facility=outreach (and hope no-one thinks it is only accessible
for people in an outreach group)
operator=Foobar
operator:type:ngo

for now. In case new/better ideas pop-up, feel free to let me know.

m.

p.s. @Volker: I totally understand your viewpoint. I was wondering
myself whether it is sensible to do, but since their website states it
as well, I see no harm to add the information.
As I wrote in an earlier their might be projects that are more
secretive (is that the correct word to use?) in which case we should
not map it, but I guess if the people serving you have some disability
you will notice soon enough.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:09 AM, marc marc  wrote:
> for the tag : operator:type=ngo
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type
>
> for the "publicly available" : for the two establishments of this type I
> know, being a "outreach project" is a part of the goal. we also go there
> to help the project and not just for the poi itself, so it seems very
> positive to me to add the information.
> it's over the time when helping someone different was shameful.
>
> Le 12. 04. 18 à 10:26, Marc Gemis a écrit :
>> In both cases I encountered, the website clearly states it:
>>
>> (In Dutch)
>> http://widar.be/widar/beleven/den-bayerd-het-casino/ clearly states
>> "people with an handicap"
>> https://www.mechelen.be/eetcafe-t-ass-2   It mentions people with a
>> form of autism (it is worded more nicely in Dutch)
>>
>> there is nothing hidden in the two cases I wanted to map. But indeed,
>> I can imagine that not all projects are so open about it.
>>
>> m
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>>> This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to publicise
>>> that fact.
>>> We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by social
>>> cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the Wikipedia
>>> article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
>>> In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the operator in
>>> the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording "cooperativa
>>> sociale"
>>>
>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative >> Marc Gemis 
>>> marc.gemis at gmail.com
>  >> Thu Apr 12 05:23:32 UTC 2018
>  >>> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part
>  >>> of an outreach project ?
>  >>> The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
>  >>> outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).
> ___
> 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] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Marc Gemis]

So what are you going to use/propose ? landcover or man_made ?
Curious, because I want to correct my mapping.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:01 AM, John Willis  wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 12, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
>> wrote:
>>
>> landuses don’t refer to features like a house or a supermarket, they refer 
>> to a purpose/activity class like retail, residential, industrial or 
>> commercial.
>
> Yea, you got me on that one. You are right about the landuse tag being wrong 
> for flowerbed. I somehow got mixed up on this one.
>
> I understand the reasoning against usng landuse now.
>
> I think we should have some more landuse categories, but I got mixed up 
> somehow, equating usage with category.
>
> Thanks for the continued discussion and comments from everyone.
>
> Javbw.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Cafe run as outreach project

[Volker Schmidt]

Marc,

to be clear, if a project clearly advertises it, they indicate they wish it
to be known.
My point was only to be cautious about adding it without having checked
that the project in question wishes this to be known. Unfortunately our
society includes all sorts of weird people. I am German and I hope to be
only overcautious, but a cousin of mine with mental handicap was suppressed
as a young girl by the German Aktion T4 [1] during the German occupation of
Alsace (during World War II), and many places that are supposed to house
immigrants in Germany suddenly burn down (today).

Volker

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Andy Mabbett]

On 12 April 2018 at 06:23, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part of an
> outreach project ?

amenity = cafe
operator = Foobar

We don't have specific tags for other types of operators (public
company private company, sole trader, cooperative, charity, etc); why
would we need one in this case?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[marc marc]

for the tag : operator:type=ngo
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type

for the "publicly available" : for the two establishments of this type I 
know, being a "outreach project" is a part of the goal. we also go there 
to help the project and not just for the poi itself, so it seems very 
positive to me to add the information.
it's over the time when helping someone different was shameful.

Le 12. 04. 18 à 10:26, Marc Gemis a écrit :
> In both cases I encountered, the website clearly states it:
> 
> (In Dutch)
> http://widar.be/widar/beleven/den-bayerd-het-casino/ clearly states
> "people with an handicap"
> https://www.mechelen.be/eetcafe-t-ass-2   It mentions people with a
> form of autism (it is worded more nicely in Dutch)
> 
> there is nothing hidden in the two cases I wanted to map. But indeed,
> I can imagine that not all projects are so open about it.
> 
> m
> 
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>> This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to publicise
>> that fact.
>> We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by social
>> cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the Wikipedia
>> article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
>> In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the operator in
>> the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording "cooperativa
>> sociale"
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative >> Marc Gemis 
>> marc.gemis at gmail.com
 >> Thu Apr 12 05:23:32 UTC 2018
 >>> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part
 >>> of an outreach project ?
 >>> The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
 >>> outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

> On Apr 12, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> landuses don’t refer to features like a house or a supermarket, they refer to 
> a purpose/activity class like retail, residential, industrial or commercial.

Yea, you got me on that one. You are right about the landuse tag being wrong 
for flowerbed. I somehow got mixed up on this one. 

I understand the reasoning against usng landuse now. 

I think we should have some more landuse categories, but I got mixed up 
somehow, equating usage with category. 

Thanks for the continued discussion and comments from everyone. 

Javbw. 




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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-04-12 7:23 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part of an
> outreach project ?
> The cafe is available to everyone, but the employees are part of an
> outreach project (e.g. people with disabilities).




amenity=cafe
social_facility=outreach
?

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

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[John Willis]

> On Apr 12, 2018, at 4:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> I thought you also agreed they could be seen as a kind of garden? It isn’t 
> the only possibility, one might also see them as a kind of park, or maybe 
> even a kind of meadow, but my choice, from what I imagine, would be kind of 
> garden.

I assume a basic flower park is a garden, and a big "spectacle" like a huge 
field of flowers (non-farm, grown and marketed for tourism) is a garden as 
well, but should be defined with a new garden:type=* tag of some kind. 

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Marc Gemis]

In both cases I encountered, the website clearly states it:

(In Dutch)
http://widar.be/widar/beleven/den-bayerd-het-casino/ clearly states
"people with an handicap"
https://www.mechelen.be/eetcafe-t-ass-2   It mentions people with a
form of autism (it is worded more nicely in Dutch)

there is nothing hidden in the two cases I wanted to map. But indeed,
I can imagine that not all projects are so open about it.

m

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to publicise
> that fact.
> We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by social
> cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the Wikipedia
> article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
> In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the operator in
> the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording "cooperativa
> sociale"
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Apr 2018, at 02:54, John Willis  wrote:
> 
> A flower park is not a farm either. The purpose of the land is still to grow 
> ornamental flowers for enjoying their beauty there.


I thought you also agreed they could be seen as a kind of garden? It isn’t the 
only possibility, one might also see them as a kind of park, or maybe even a 
kind of meadow, but my choice, from what I imagine, would be kind of garden.

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

Re: [Tagging] Flower fields as tourism attraction

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Apr 2018, at 02:54, John Willis  wrote:
> 
> You can't nest landuses? We nest every other type of area.


we don’t nest every type of area, for example we don’t nest buildings,  nor do 
we nest admin boundaries of the same admin level.

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Volker Schmidt]

This is a tricky issue. I expect not all of them to be happy to publicise
that fact.
We have here in Italy many businesses or amenities that are run by social
cooperatives [1] that employ people with special needs.  From the Wikipedia
article it seems that similar forms are common in Belgium.
In Italy we could deal with this by putting the full name of the operator
in the "operator" tag. That full name would include the wording
"cooperativa sociale"

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cooperative
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging