Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[bkil]

Some Fablabs also offer tool lending, although it is much more common
to see in place use
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:42 PM Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:
>
> In California, several cities have a community “Tool Library”, a type of 
> lending “library” where you can check out hand tools and power tools for 
> garden or construction projects. I believe the ones in Portland and Berkeley 
> have no fee, and rely on volunteer labor.
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 6:13 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick  
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Paul Allen  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd go with amenity=toy_library and the sub-tags, or maybe not even bother 
>>> with the sub-tags.
>>
>>
>> Not arguing!, but going back to my question about Family History libraries, 
>> I wonder whether a lot of the confusion about "what's in this "library"" 
>> wouldn't be sorted by the name?
>>
>> Assume for one moment that everything is tagged as amenity=library, with 
>> sub-tags lending=yes, toys=no, games=yes, family_history=no etc.
>>
>> I can see that just the standard "book" library icon showing would cause 
>> some confusion, but if this library is named "Southport Public Library", 
>> while this one a bit further down the road is "Fun & Games", then I at least 
>> know which one I'm going to go into to to borrow some books to read, & which 
>> one has games!
>>
>> 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

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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Highway=road and building=yes are used when adding features based on
satellite imagery.

If you know that a shop sells “food”, you can also say if it sells fresh
food or nonperishables or prepared food, no?

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:42 PM Daniel Koć  wrote:

> W dniu 11.10.2018 o 05:08, John Willis pisze:
> > the definition of shop=food is way way way to vague to have meaning.
> > it needs to be much narrower.
> >
> > it is like shop=goods. we don’t need that either.
>
> It's much more precise than shop=yes (which is used a lot) and I know
> what food is, even if I don't know shop type details.
>
> We also use building=yes and highway=road and we need them. They are
> very useful to not cheat that a mapper knows more than she really does.
> It's always better to have more precise data, but declining more general
> categories is not a way to achieve this, it's just sweeping problem
> under the rug.
>
> --
> "Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel]
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Arboretum - how to tag?

[Warin]

On 11/10/18 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



sent from a phone

On 10. Oct 2018, at 15:10, Tobias Zwick > wrote:



Well, an Arboretum is a "botanical tree garden", is it not? So why not
leisure=garden (+ maybe additional tags, see wiki article)?




if it is seen as garden, I would use garden:type=arboretum
From actual usage, the only tag in use is arboretum=yes 38 times
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/arboretum


The use of that is confined to a small area.

There is also use of landuse=arboretum.

So I might just use both;

landuse=arboretum
leisure=garden
garden=arboretum



https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:garden:type




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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 11.10.2018 o 05:08, John Willis pisze:
> the definition of shop=food is way way way to vague to have meaning.
> it needs to be much narrower. 
>
> it is like shop=goods. we don’t need that either. 

It's much more precise than shop=yes (which is used a lot) and I know
what food is, even if I don't know shop type details.

We also use building=yes and highway=road and we need them. They are
very useful to not cheat that a mapper knows more than she really does.
It's always better to have more precise data, but declining more general
categories is not a way to achieve this, it's just sweeping problem
under the rug.

-- 
"Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel]



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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[John Willis]

the definition of shop=food is way way way to vague to have meaning. it needs 
to be much narrower. 

it is like shop=goods. we don’t need that either. 



> On Oct 11, 2018, at 1:10 AM, Jmapb  wrote:
> 
> 
> Amen! I wrote a whole spiel about this on the wiki talk page for shop=deli 
> .


"Also, I am clueless as to how to enter a "gourmet food store" to begin with. 
Any help or clarification in this matter would be greatly appreciated”

(from the talk page)

I think this is the interesting bit - and one tagging shop=food is trying to 
solve. 

By being a catch-all, it has no set value. 

Carve off specialty import/foreign goods into it’s own tag, and perhaps 
shop=gourmet for fancy specialty foods (though perhaps those are shop=deli ?? I 
dont know). 

the continued discussion for take-n-bake shops (still feels like fast food to 
me, but I will defer to the group) also removes a lot of those uses. 

What is left? probably a bunch of mis-tagged shops. 

somewhere out there is Jimbo’s turnip store and Taro’s Mochi shop, but those 
can probably filter into other tags as well (greengrocer, dessert, etc). 

I don’t think we should have shop=food + food=turnipor   shop=food + 
food=mochi. 

Honey shops? Miso Paste?

we use shop=yes and sells=* for those (as I understand it)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/36.29292/139.53096 


for the oddball shops, this seems to be the solution to me.

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

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

[yo paseopor]

>
> Tagging is for discussing the development and meaning of tags.
>
So this list is about the meaning but has no power or decision about how to
apply the decisions about we write here?
Is it correct?

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Joseph Eisenberg]

In California, several cities have a community “Tool Library”, a type of
lending “library” where you can check out hand tools and power tools for
garden or construction projects. I believe the ones in Portland and
Berkeley have no fee, and rely on volunteer labor.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 6:13 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd go with amenity=toy_library and the sub-tags, or maybe not even
>> bother with the sub-tags.
>>
>
> Not arguing!, but going back to my question about Family History
> libraries, I wonder whether a lot of the confusion about "what's in this
> "library"" wouldn't be sorted by the name?
>
> Assume for one moment that everything is tagged as amenity=library, with
> sub-tags lending=yes, toys=no, games=yes, family_history=no etc.
>
> I can see that just the standard "book" library icon showing would cause
> some confusion, but if this library is named "Southport Public Library",
> while this one a bit further down the road is "Fun & Games", then* I* at
> least know which one I'm going to go into to to borrow some books to read,
> & which one has games!
>
> 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] Dispensing vs vending (Was: Combined waste/recycling bins)

[bkil]

You should create a wiki page for your extension proposal and perhaps
submit an RFC.

It is also displayed in the red banner here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddog_bin

Some more references:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:vending%3Dexcrement_bags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Animals
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dog_off-leash_area
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:dog
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:amenity%3Dwaste_basket

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:55 PM SelfishSeahorse
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 00:50, Martin Koppenhoefer
>  wrote:
> >
> > > On 9. Oct 2018, at 21:19, bkil  wrote:
> > >
> > > amenity=waste_basket
> > > waste=dog_excrement
> > > vending=excrement_bags
> > >
> > > I've also seen waste_basket:excrement_bags=yes and fee=no, but I don't
> > > see much value in these at this point in time.
> >
> > while vending=* with fee=no is some kind of open contradiction, without the 
> > fee tag the contradiction is implicitly still there in many instances.
> >
> > Shouldn’t that better be „dispensing“ rather than vending?
>
> I've used dispensing:excrement_bags=yes several times, in combination
> with either amenity=dispenser (example [1]) or amenity=waste_basket
> (example [2]).
>
> [1]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cézy-FR-89-toutounet-01.jpg
> [2]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dogs_excrements_A.jpg
>
> Now that i checked Taginfo, these tags have all gone away, obviously
> been 'corrected' -- very annoying ...
>
> https://images.says.com/uploads/story_source/source_image/405030/1ae1.png
>
> Markus
>
> ___
> 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] Game and toy library

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Paul Allen  wrote:

>
> I'd go with amenity=toy_library and the sub-tags, or maybe not even bother
> with the sub-tags.
>

Not arguing!, but going back to my question about Family History libraries,
I wonder whether a lot of the confusion about "what's in this "library""
wouldn't be sorted by the name?

Assume for one moment that everything is tagged as amenity=library, with
sub-tags lending=yes, toys=no, games=yes, family_history=no etc.

I can see that just the standard "book" library icon showing would cause
some confusion, but if this library is named "Southport Public Library",
while this one a bit further down the road is "Fun & Games", then* I* at
least know which one I'm going to go into to to borrow some books to read,
& which one has games!

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

[bkil]

Just a reminder, that a bus stop which has a waste_basket, shelter and
bench should be mapped as a single node with the respective tags added
(bin, shelter, bench=*):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:12 PM SelfishSeahorse
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 19:46, Paul Allen  wrote:
> >
> > If I do it as one node or a single area, that is about the best that can be 
> > done with existing
> > tags.  The problem is it will get the icon for a waste bin, with no 
> > indication it's also for
> > recycling.  Fine if you use the query tool, but not many people would do 
> > that.
>
> That's true.
>
> > If I tag it as adjacent nodes or areas it's unlikely (with current 
> > tile-based rendering) to display
> > both icons, and it's not possible to guarantee which one will show up.
>
> It would be nice if openstreetmap-carto would offer more zoom (at
> least zoom level 20). There are also bus stops hidden by shelters or
> shops hidden by other shops ...
>
> ___
> 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] simply documenting tags WAS Re: hydrants

[SelfishSeahorse]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 09:39, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
> Map feature pages are for the documentation of established tags, I hope we 
> can agree on this?
>
> IMHO we should clarify that documenting ad hoc tags in the wiki (link above) 
> means either putting this documentation in your user space of the wiki, or in 
> the proposal space.

+1

Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 21:22, yo paseopor  wrote:
> 
> But I have to say I'm sorry for the misunderstanding of what a consensus is 
> in a tagging list... but What is a consensus in this list?


actually the automated edits (which explicitly includes search and replace with 
tools like josm) must be documented beforehand and discussed on talk or imports 
according to the guidelines:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Tagging is for discussing the development and meaning of tags. 

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:37 PM SelfishSeahorse 
wrote:

> AFAIK ludothèques are just called 'toy libraries' in English.
>

Looks like it.  Although I only learned of my local toy library less than a
year ago and had no
idea such things existed prior to that.  I see the French came up with a
more sensible name
for these things.  As they did with discothèque (it would have been called
a music and dance library
if the English had named it).

Therefore i suggest tagging them amenity=toy_library (already 125 uses
> by the way).
>

According to that reliable source (!) Wikipedia, toy libraries lend out
toys, puzzles and games.
But my local toy library has only toys and puzzles (so its online catalogue
claims).  So either
amenity=toy_library with sub-tags toy_library:toys=yes/no,
toy_library:games=yes/no etc or
amenity=toy_library, amenity=toy_and_games_library, and all the other
permutations (6 in
total with just toys, games and puzzles, perhaps more as toy libraries
become more inventive).

I'd go with amenity=toy_library and the sub-tags, or maybe not even bother
with the sub-tags.

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:13 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 20:01, Paul Allen  wrote:
> >
> > The rendering tools
> > can be changed to accommodate this but, as I understand it, such changes
> may greatly
> > increase the processing time to render map tiles whether or not they
> contain a library.
>
> not true. It makes evaluation more complex though.


I was going by my unreliable memory of a youtube video from a few years ago
where the
rendering chain was explained.  It was very complex and, at least back
then, even minor changes
could cause it to go a lot slower.  It could have changed since then (there
were many transformation
stages) or I could be misremembering.


> If you stand on the position that a toys library is a kind of library,
> subtagging is the way to go, if you think it is different to a library and
> has just the library in the name, you make a new main tag.
>
> I am tending to the second,


Me too.  It may have "library" in the name but books are not its primary
focus.  And "library" was only
included in the name because somebody thought that "library" meant
"lending" because all the
libraries he/she visited were lending libraries not reference libraries.


> but we’ll probably also have to introduce a property because some normal
> libraries will have also a games department.
>

No games in my local library, but they do have CDs and DVDs.  And also
computers for accessing the
Internet.  A look at the online catalogue for my local toy library does not
show any games or books.

Another point.  My local library does not charge for books, but does charge
for CDs and DVDs.  The
toy library charges for all the toys, so it's more of a toy rental shop.
Of course, there may be some
book libraries that charge and some toy libraries that do not.

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[ChameleonScales]

Here's the proposal wiki page (I hope I did it correctly):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/toy_and_game_library

I'll polish it tomorrow.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 10:12 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 wrote:

> sent from a phone
>
> > On 10. Oct 2018, at 20:01, Paul Allen pla16...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The rendering tools
> > can be changed to accommodate this but, as I understand it, such changes 
> > may greatly
> > increase the processing time to render map tiles whether or not they 
> > contain a library.
>
> not true. It makes evaluation more complex though. You would have to be aware 
> that not all amenity=library are libraries for books, and if you aren’t you 
> will interpret some of them incorrectly as places where you can borrow books.
>
> If you stand on the position that a toys library is a kind of library, 
> subtagging is the way to go, if you think it is different to a library and 
> has just the library in the name, you make a new main tag.
>
> I am tending to the second, but we’ll probably also have to introduce a 
> property because some normal libraries will have also a games department.
>
> 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] Game and toy library

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 20:01, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> The rendering tools
> can be changed to accommodate this but, as I understand it, such changes may 
> greatly
> increase the processing time to render map tiles whether or not they contain 
> a library.


not true. It makes evaluation more complex though. You would have to be aware 
that not all amenity=library are libraries for books, and if you aren’t you 
will interpret some of them incorrectly as places where you can borrow books.

If you stand on the position that a toys library is a kind of library, 
subtagging is the way to go, if you think it is different to a library and has 
just the library in the name, you make a new main tag.

I am tending to the second, but we’ll probably also have to introduce a 
property because some normal libraries will have also a games department.

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 19:11, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
> When I read the Wikipedia text on the osm wiki,  it seems that you can 
> consider a car rental place as a library. This does not match the definition 
> of the Dutch word bibliotheek which restricts it to books and .  They can be 
> in electronic form though.  I guess all languages the use a word derived from 
> the same Greek origin will have the same meaning. 
> 
> It would be very unnatural in those languages to say that something is a 
> bibliotheek,  but you will only find toys and games. 



it is exactly the same situation with the word “library”, which is derived from 
Latin librarium (book case). It doesn’t matter, the creator of the new word was 
either ignorant or didn’t care, if this word is now established I would use it. 
Everybody knows libraries, so it apparently made sense to borrow from this 
established word for a similar concept (but different “product”).
Cheers, Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] simply documenting tags WAS Re: hydrants

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 18:25, bkil  wrote:
> 
> The main tag wiki pages are
> cross linked from taginfo.


you could make a proposal and link the key/tag page via redirect, afaik taginfo 
follows those redirects 


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

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

[yo paseopor]

I will explain the things from my point of view.

There was a discussion about direction in traffic signs because a problem
in major online editor iD.

32 messages that starts Fri, Sep 28, 4:52 AM (12 days ago) and finnish Oct
3, 2018, 12:04 AM (7 days ago) . Five days of discussion.

-In the first message Bryan Housel comments a problem "While reviewing a
pull request to add Traffic Sign presets to iD, I came across a tagging
issue with how traffic sign directions are tagged.
The details are here https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/5333;

-On 4th message Simon Poole comments "I actually mentioned the issue in
Milano. "

-On 9th message Simon Poole says "There are a total of 37'000 forward /
backward variants that would have to be migrated to  traffic_sign + a
suitable sub tag, not an awful lot in the grand scheme of things, but needs
to be done."

So the need for a big change in existing traffic signs was written in
tagging list, and nobody's says "No, it is not a good idea". Well, I did
not agree with that.

I have talk for first time in message number 21. Instead I manage 40
presets ,3 styles and more than 10 configuration files for Kendzi3D plugin
in JOSM, and 3 projects in taginfo with more than 24000 pairs (key=value) I
don't talk. Until I want to justify the nowadays proposal because if you
read it is assumed the change will be done in iD - major online editor of
OSM. Also I was thinking: I don't like changes but what can I do? Fight
against iD solution(the major editor) (Remember the Mapsme subway solution,
isn't it) ?
In 28th message I have said Ok, make you the changes -ironically- (there
was a way to say Hey! There are a lot of changes to do, are you sure?
Changing 3+ nodes, are you nuts?)

Weekend arrives . I have a little free time so...Really Do I have to fight
against iD proposal? (I see the pull request merged in their github). Or
say the opposite to Simon Poole? Ok, I will give up. Discussion is ended
(there were no more messages). iD pull request was applied so it is
imminent the edition of traffic signs...with two different schemes.
It is better to help, so I have edited all the presets (I'm not a
programmer so for me it is a difficult thing, a pain in the ass if you want
to tell it) , the styles, taginfo (goodbye to the forward backward subkey ,
but hey! traffic signs now will be edited via iD so a lot of people would
edit them .

And after the tool work...why I can't help more? There is more than 24000
nodes (reading taginfo). Ok, but for not having problems the changeset
message will be very clear: "#fastag #traffic_signs Apply
traffic_sign:direction tag to avoid problems with new iD editor as an
agreement on tagging list". The way to do is simple: I would have only made
a simple translation: traffic_sign:forward=* to traffic_sign=* and
traffic_sign:direction=forward, and the same for backward.Traffic signals
have also this solution so It can not be so bad after all. And now traffic
signs will be edited by iD. It is a win-win thing.

I have made the first changes in nodes and then check presets, styles -the
day after I have checked taginfo- and it works. Also I have checked my
email and OSM profile and there was not any message. So I think I was in
the good way - I was helping to do this big change at all.
And going zone by zone making specific overpass queries to make the things
the best as I could with a little computer and low programming knowledge.
When I put the new tags style were working and it shows every traffic sign
different in every country. It was a hard task : 55 changesets with about
16000+ traffic signs modified to the new scheme. Heavy work done.

Then "shit happens" . Mknight says "Wäre es nicht irgendwie sinnvoller, ein
issue für iD zu schreiben, statt etabliertes Tagging zu ändern?" Well, I'm
not German so I have used Google Translator to guess the idea was not of
his agreement. Well, in tagging there is not more messages at all and
people are agree with the change proposed by iD people. In a big thing like
OSM not every one can be agree with it and Mknight does not participate on
the discussion. I hope some people of their community explain to him the
possibility to edit with iD thanks to this change.

But then Mueschel says something similar...D'Oh! "The discussion ended with
your question about the change, not a single answer approving it. Mass
edits should be announced and agreed on in a broader community, and not in
the depth of a thread without anybody noticing."

What? The discussion was ended without nobody against it, Simon Poole
saying there is big change to do, people congrats and making petitions to
iD people...and I assuming before or later I would have to change all the
JOSM stuff. Ok. In +16000 and 55 changesets there were some errors surely,
but what percentatge? How many nodes do I have modified by
error...because...ways does not have a traffic_sign key, isn't it ?

Well. I want to publish the messages people says to me on the changesets:

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:12 PM SelfishSeahorse 
wrote:

It would be nice if openstreetmap-carto would offer more zoom (at
> least zoom level 20). There are also bus stops hidden by shelters or
> shops hidden by other shops ...


Not practicable with the current tile-based rendering (unless you'd like to
buy some Cray
supercomputers for OSM to use as servers).  It is supposed to be possible
with vector
rendering, and perhaps one day that will be deployed by OSM carto.  And
then all the people
who complain that their micro-mapped stuff isn't rendered will be able to
complain that their
nano-mapped stuff isn't rendered. :)

-- 
Paul

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] Game and toy library

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:10 PM bkil  wrote:

>
> We could decompose the functions of a library as a repository and
> rental/lending for books and other media, usually operating on a
> monthly subscription model, sometimes sponsored by local authorities.
>

That would be a sensible way to do it.   But we can't do an automated
replacement as it's
not a one-to-one mapping: most amenity=library will be lending libraries
but some will be
reference libraries.  The current scheme doesn't make a distinction so is
incomplete information.
Doing an automated change would lead to the small number of reference
libraries being incorrectly
tagged as lending libraries, or the large number of lending libraries not
being marked as such.

If we were to start again and incorporate all we've learned, the tagging
scheme would look very
different.  That isn't a realistic prospect, though.  We could try running
the two schemes in
parallel and deprecate the old one, but old tags never die and rarely fade
away.

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

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

[SelfishSeahorse]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 19:46, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> If I do it as one node or a single area, that is about the best that can be 
> done with existing
> tags.  The problem is it will get the icon for a waste bin, with no 
> indication it's also for
> recycling.  Fine if you use the query tool, but not many people would do that.

That's true.

> If I tag it as adjacent nodes or areas it's unlikely (with current tile-based 
> rendering) to display
> both icons, and it's not possible to guarantee which one will show up.

It would be nice if openstreetmap-carto would offer more zoom (at
least zoom level 20). There are also bus stops hidden by shelters or
shops hidden by other shops ...

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[bkil]

Indeed, the Hungarian word for library ("könyvtár") can be literally
translated as "book repository".

We could decompose the functions of a library as a repository and
rental/lending for books and other media, usually operating on a
monthly subscription model, sometimes sponsored by local authorities.

amenity=repository
repository=print_media;ebook;music
lending=yes
fee:subscription=only
internet_access=terminal;wlan
...

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:02 PM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:12 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>> Yes,  that is the process that you should follow.  Please keep in mind the 
>> it is easier to introduce a new tag than to redefine one. Requiring that all 
>> current amenity=library have to be updated with a subtags library= book will 
>> likely get some comments.
>
>
> There are other problem.  The icon for amenity=library is a book.  Until the 
> rendering tools are
> modified, using subtags like library=toys (the toy library near me doesn't 
> have any games in its
> catalogue, only games) and library=toys_and_games will get a book icon.  The 
> rendering tools
> can be changed to accommodate this but, as I understand it, such changes may 
> greatly
> increase the processing time to render map tiles whether or not they contain 
> a library.
>
> It's also worth pointing out that "library" derives from a word meaning books 
> (or chest for books).
> It's is incorrect to say that a toy library is like a library but for toys, 
> it's like a LENDING library but
> for toys.  I hate it when marketers misappropriate words, but it's far too 
> late to do anything about it.
> ___
> 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] Game and toy library

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:12 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:

> Yes,  that is the process that you should follow.  Please keep in mind the
> it is easier to introduce a new tag than to redefine one. Requiring that
> all current amenity=library have to be updated with a subtags library= book
> will likely get some comments.
>

There are other problem.  The icon for amenity=library is a book.  Until
the rendering tools are
modified, using subtags like library=toys (the toy library near me doesn't
have any games in its
catalogue, only games) and library=toys_and_games will get a book icon.
The rendering tools
can be changed to accommodate this but, as I understand it, such changes
may greatly
increase the processing time to render map tiles whether or not they
contain a library.

It's also worth pointing out that "library" derives from a word meaning
books (or chest for books).
It's is incorrect to say that a toy library is like a library but for toys,
it's like a LENDING library but
for toys.  I hate it when marketers misappropriate words, but it's far too
late to do anything about it.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Dispensing vs vending (Was: Combined waste/recycling bins)

[SelfishSeahorse]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 00:50, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 21:19, bkil  wrote:
> >
> > amenity=waste_basket
> > waste=dog_excrement
> > vending=excrement_bags
> >
> > I've also seen waste_basket:excrement_bags=yes and fee=no, but I don't
> > see much value in these at this point in time.
>
> while vending=* with fee=no is some kind of open contradiction, without the 
> fee tag the contradiction is implicitly still there in many instances.
>
> Shouldn’t that better be „dispensing“ rather than vending?

I've used dispensing:excrement_bags=yes several times, in combination
with either amenity=dispenser (example [1]) or amenity=waste_basket
(example [2]).

[1]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cézy-FR-89-toutounet-01.jpg
[2]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dogs_excrements_A.jpg

Now that i checked Taginfo, these tags have all gone away, obviously
been 'corrected' -- very annoying ...

https://images.says.com/uploads/story_source/source_image/405030/1ae1.png

Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:30 PM SelfishSeahorse 
wrote:

> What about
>
> amenity=waste_basket
> recycling:cans=yes
> recycling:paper=yes
> recycling:plastic=yes
>

If I do it as one node or a single area, that is about the best that can be
done with existing
tags.  The problem is it will get the icon for a waste bin, with no
indication it's also for
recycling.  Fine if you use the query tool, but not many people would do
that.

If I tag it as adjacent nodes or areas it's unlikely (with current
tile-based rendering) to display
both icons, and it's not possible to guarantee which one will show up.

Many of the large recycling receptacles in my town don't have a waste bin
nearby.  Most waste
bins don't have a small recycling receptacle nearby.  I wouldn't assume
that one implies the
other unless the icon made clear that it did.  So the current solutions are
not capable of
adequately representing what appears to be a growing trend of combined
waste/recycling
points.

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

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

[SelfishSeahorse]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 16:32, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> A village a few miles from me (but in a different county) recently got one of
> these combined litter/recycling bins:
> https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2241627292737699=1632021387031629&__tn__=C-R
>
> How to tag?

What about

amenity=waste_basket
recycling:cans=yes
recycling:paper=yes
recycling:plastic=yes

?

Regards
Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Marc Gemis]

Yes,  that is the process that you should follow.  Please keep in mind the
it is easier to introduce a new tag than to redefine one. Requiring that
all current amenity=library have to be updated with a subtags library= book
will likely get some comments.

When I read the Wikipedia text on the osm wiki,  it seems that you can
consider a car rental place as a library. This does not match the
definition of the Dutch word bibliotheek which restricts it to books and .
They can be in electronic form though.  I guess all languages the use a
word derived from the same Greek origin will have the same meaning.

It would be very unnatural in those languages to say that something is a
bibliotheek,  but you will only find toys and games.

Regards

m

Op wo 10 okt. 2018 18:36 schreef ChameleonScales <
chameleonsca...@protonmail.com>:

> Just found out about the proposal process:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process. Should I create a
> wiki page and follow the steps there?
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 4:24 PM, ChameleonScales <
> chameleonsca...@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---
> >
> > Indeed, fixed.
> >
> > > we do not want data consumers that does not understand the
> library-subkey to treat a toys_and_games as a book-library.
> >
> > That's partly why I proposed to rewrite the definition of the library
> tag and make it correspond more to the wikipedia definition, as it would
> allow to differentiate all sorts of libraries (e.g. library=books) but if
> you think there's no benefit in doing that in comparison to having full
> single values like toys_and_games_library, then I won't oppose.
> >
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:43 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> >
> > > --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---
> > > AFAIK, we do not use a colon in the values. If you want to indicate a
> > > subcategory, it goes in a subkey.
> > > so amenity=library;library=toys_and_games
> > > But in this case we do not want data consumers that does not
> > > understand the library-subkey to treat a toys_and_games as a
> > > book-library.
> > > hence the idea to place it in the main key, as
> amenity=toys_and_games_library
> > > m.
> > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:37 PM ChameleonScales
> > > chameleonsca...@protonmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not sure why "amenity=library:toys_and_games" is not a good idea
> but being new to this I'll leave that to more experienced contributors.
> > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > > > On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:29 PM, Marc Gemis
> marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > 2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these
> establishments are already suffering the misconception that they are only
> there for children, so reducing their name to "toy libraries" would hardly
> make it better. If we used french language there would be nothing to argue
> about but since the "smart language" people decided that game mostly means
> video-game in the 21st century, I have no better idea than using
> "toys_and_games" to keep it clear enough. Do you see it differently?
> > > > >
> > > > > with "toys_and_games" I think the place can easily be mistaken for
> a
> > > > > shop that sells toys and games. A key differentiator is the lending
> > > > > part, not ?
> > > > > It's my feeling that amenity=toys_and_games_library is more
> > > > > understandable for people not familiar with the concept. Hopefully
> > > > > this will also prevent incorrect translations.
> > > > > m.
> >
> > 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] Game and toy library

[ChameleonScales]

Just found out about the proposal process: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process. Should I create a wiki 
page and follow the steps there?

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 4:24 PM, ChameleonScales 
 wrote:

> > --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---
>
> Indeed, fixed.
>
> > we do not want data consumers that does not understand the library-subkey 
> > to treat a toys_and_games as a book-library.
>
> That's partly why I proposed to rewrite the definition of the library tag and 
> make it correspond more to the wikipedia definition, as it would allow to 
> differentiate all sorts of libraries (e.g. library=books) but if you think 
> there's no benefit in doing that in comparison to having full single values 
> like toys_and_games_library, then I won't oppose.
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:43 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---
> > AFAIK, we do not use a colon in the values. If you want to indicate a
> > subcategory, it goes in a subkey.
> > so amenity=library;library=toys_and_games
> > But in this case we do not want data consumers that does not
> > understand the library-subkey to treat a toys_and_games as a
> > book-library.
> > hence the idea to place it in the main key, as 
> > amenity=toys_and_games_library
> > m.
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:37 PM ChameleonScales
> > chameleonsca...@protonmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not sure why "amenity=library:toys_and_games" is not a good idea but 
> > > being new to this I'll leave that to more experienced contributors.
> > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > > On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:29 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > 2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these 
> > > > > establishments are already suffering the misconception that they are 
> > > > > only there for children, so reducing their name to "toy libraries" 
> > > > > would hardly make it better. If we used french language there would 
> > > > > be nothing to argue about but since the "smart language" people 
> > > > > decided that game mostly means video-game in the 21st century, I have 
> > > > > no better idea than using "toys_and_games" to keep it clear enough. 
> > > > > Do you see it differently?
> > > >
> > > > with "toys_and_games" I think the place can easily be mistaken for a
> > > > shop that sells toys and games. A key differentiator is the lending
> > > > part, not ?
> > > > It's my feeling that amenity=toys_and_games_library is more
> > > > understandable for people not familiar with the concept. Hopefully
> > > > this will also prevent incorrect translations.
> > > > m.
>
> 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] Combined waste/recycling bins

[bkil]

Not sure, I'm only browsing taginfo and found this to be the most
common tagging.

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:50 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 9. Oct 2018, at 21:19, bkil  wrote:
> >
> > amenity=waste_basket
> > waste=dog_excrement
> > vending=excrement_bags
> >
> > I've also seen waste_basket:excrement_bags=yes and fee=no, but I don't
> > see much value in these at this point in time.
>
>
>
> while vending=* with fee=no is some kind of open contradiction, without the 
> fee tag the contradiction is implicitly still there in many instances.
>
> Shouldn’t that better be „dispensing“ rather than vending?
> ___
> 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] simply documenting tags WAS Re: hydrants

[bkil]

I agree that similar to Wikipedia, we shouldn't put random, incorrect
or misleading stuff in the main namespace of the OSM wiki.

However, I view it as a harsh restriction to only allow documenting of
established tags the the main namespace. The main tag wiki pages are
cross linked from taginfo.

In the wiki pages I edit, I usually put less common attributes in
separate sections with extra warnings to avoid mistakes. Also, if you
create respective subpages of each property with the standard template
containing taginfo statistics and status enum, it becomes obvious how
established each property is.

We should of course have a clear and friendly process of handling
clashes - so it should not happen that two users would like to
advocate their two incompatible tagging scheme on the same page,
leading to edit wars. Two separate proposals need to be opened in this
case with strong-consensus voting for both. (However, in the case of
hydrant opening direction for example, I've checked beforehand and
validated that no applicable alternative scheme or proposal exists
other than the one noted and mention on a Hungarian page some years
back.)

The problem of (complicated) proposal pages is that they "rot" easily.
RFC and voting sometimes seems to be stuck. Some downvoted proposals
start to be taken up by mappers some years later (with an unfixed,
partially buggy/broken schema). Surely the correct life cycle of a
proposal should be that if it is dismissed, the proposer should
immediately clone the wiki page, increment a version number, correct
the problems highlighted by the voters and resubmit for RFC/voting.
Unfortunately, most of the volunteers seem to be overwhelmed by this
process and give up usually after the first attempt.

I sometimes take up the task of documenting random established, almost
established or emerging things I encounter in taginfo that I deem
useful for the community (or me). Why should I put these under my own
namespace? It would leave the impression that I "want" to do something
with the outlined tagging or that I want to "own" the tag. However, in
most of these cases, I simply want to be done with it and move on to
another tag or just be mapping instead of submitting proposals for
others. I did submit one (two) recently just to get the hang of it,
but I feel already that it takes up a lot of energy for little
"return". I feel that if I document trending clear-cut tags according
to my best knowledge, someone else can take up from there and improve
it (submit for RFC/Proposal).

This should be the ideal mechanism of the wisdom of the crowds - no
single person should bear an unreasonable burden, unless of course
that person finds enjoyment in this.

Of course this is only my personal view on the issue without much
context - I'm open for other points of view if others would like to
share.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:39 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 10. Oct 2018, at 08:07, bkil  wrote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_Practice#Document_your_custom-tags
>
>
>
> I believe this paragraph needs some clarification, currently it reads “When 
> you use tags yourself that aren't on map features, give other mappers a 
> chance to understand (and maybe adopt) them by documenting them in the wiki.”
>
> Yes, it is a good thing to document custom tags, but the question is where in 
> the wiki should you put a tag that is not (yet) established.
>
> Some tags work better than others, sometimes there are already alternative 
> tagging methods established (and you might not be aware of it), simply adding 
> a feature page for a tag which isn’t generally used, wasn’t discussed with 
> the community and may be problematic is not a good idea.
>
> People also document tags on their user pages, and this is much better as the 
> things are still searchable but there isn’t the risk of mistaking them for 
> well established tags. Another way to make this clear is setting up a 
> proposal page for documentation. A lot of tags have become established simply 
> because there was a proposal and people were adopting it in their mapping (no 
> formal voting).
>
> Map feature pages are for the documentation of established tags, I hope we 
> can agree on this?
>
> IMHO we should clarify that documenting ad hoc tags in the wiki (link above) 
> means either putting this documentation in your user space of the wiki, or in 
> the proposal space.
>
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> 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] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Jmapb]

On 10/10/2018 6:14 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:


shop=food. This tag has not yet been approved
Approved by whom?

I approved it yesterday!


Those should be 1. shop=deli,

Have you done a survey? Adding "Deli" to a shop name does not make it
a delicatessen.


Amen! I wrote a whole spiel about this on the wiki talk page for 
shop=deli .


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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[bkil]

Then there's also
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Ashop%3Dnutrition_supplements
depending on main profile
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:17 PM Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 03:33, Joseph Eisenberg
>  wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > shop=food. This tag has not yet been approved
>
> Approved by whom?
>
> > I checked overpass turbo in London, New York, and San Franciso. The
> > latter had no uses; London has the most. The first few shop=food on
> > the list are
> >
> > 1. “Nana’s Deli“,
> > 2. “The Chelsea Cake Shop”,
> > 3. “Green Apple”
> > 4. “Holland And Barrett”
> >
> > Those should be 1. shop=deli,
>
> Have you done a survey? Adding "Deli" to a shop name does not make it
> a delicatessen.
>
> > 3. shop=greengrocer(?).
>
> You give neither coordinates nor a link, but depending on the
> location, Google finds "Green Apple Supermarket", a convenience store.
> Again, this should not be changed without a survey.
>
> > The fourth sells vitamis, herbal supplements and "health food", so could
> > be shop=health_food.
>
> This is part of a, international chain. What are other branches tagged as?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Game and toy library

[ChameleonScales]

> --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---

Indeed, fixed.


> we do not want data consumers that does not understand the library-subkey to 
> treat a toys_and_games as a book-library.

That's partly why I proposed to rewrite the definition of the library tag and 
make it correspond more to the wikipedia definition, as it would allow to 
differentiate all sorts of libraries (e.g. library=books) but if you think 
there's no benefit in doing that in comparison to having full single values 
like toys_and_games_library, then I won't oppose.



‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:43 PM, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> --- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---
>
> AFAIK, we do not use a colon in the values. If you want to indicate a
> subcategory, it goes in a subkey.
>
> so amenity=library;library=toys_and_games
>
> But in this case we do not want data consumers that does not
> understand the library-subkey to treat a toys_and_games as a
> book-library.
> hence the idea to place it in the main key, as amenity=toys_and_games_library
>
> m.
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:37 PM ChameleonScales
> chameleonsca...@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure why "amenity=library:toys_and_games" is not a good idea but 
> > being new to this I'll leave that to more experienced contributors.
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:29 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > 2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these 
> > > > establishments are already suffering the misconception that they are 
> > > > only there for children, so reducing their name to "toy libraries" 
> > > > would hardly make it better. If we used french language there would be 
> > > > nothing to argue about but since the "smart language" people decided 
> > > > that game mostly means video-game in the 21st century, I have no better 
> > > > idea than using "toys_and_games" to keep it clear enough. Do you see it 
> > > > differently?
> > >
> > > with "toys_and_games" I think the place can easily be mistaken for a
> > > shop that sells toys and games. A key differentiator is the lending
> > > part, not ?
> > > It's my feeling that amenity=toys_and_games_library is more
> > > understandable for people not familiar with the concept. Hopefully
> > > this will also prevent incorrect translations.
> > > m.



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

Re: [Tagging] Arboretum - how to tag?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 15:10, Tobias Zwick  wrote:
> 
> Well, an Arboretum is a "botanical tree garden", is it not? So why not
> leisure=garden (+ maybe additional tags, see wiki article)?



if it is seen as garden, I would use garden:type=arboretum
From actual usage, the only tag in use is arboretum=yes 38 times
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/arboretum

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:garden:type


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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Marc Gemis]

--- You only send this to me (probably by accident). ---

AFAIK, we do not use a colon in the values. If you want to indicate a
subcategory, it goes in a subkey.

so amenity=library;library=toys_and_games


But in this case we do not want data consumers that does not
understand the library-subkey  to treat a toys_and_games as a
book-library.
hence the idea to place it in the main key, as amenity=toys_and_games_library

m.


On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:37 PM ChameleonScales
 wrote:
>
> I'm not sure why "amenity=library:toys_and_games" is not a good idea but 
> being new to this I'll leave that to more experienced contributors.
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 3:29 PM, Marc Gemis  
> wrote:
>
> > > 2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these 
> > > establishments are already suffering the misconception that they are only 
> > > there for children, so reducing their name to "toy libraries" would 
> > > hardly make it better. If we used french language there would be nothing 
> > > to argue about but since the "smart language" people decided that game 
> > > mostly means video-game in the 21st century, I have no better idea than 
> > > using "toys_and_games" to keep it clear enough. Do you see it differently?
> >
> > with "toys_and_games" I think the place can easily be mistaken for a
> > shop that sells toys and games. A key differentiator is the lending
> > part, not ?
> > It's my feeling that amenity=toys_and_games_library is more
> > understandable for people not familiar with the concept. Hopefully
> > this will also prevent incorrect translations.
> >
> > m.
>
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Marc Gemis]

> 2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these establishments 
> are already suffering the misconception that they are only there for 
> children, so reducing their name to "toy libraries" would hardly make it 
> better. If we used french language there would be nothing to argue about but 
> since the "smart language" people decided that game mostly means video-game 
> in the 21st century, I have no better idea than using "toys_and_games" to 
> keep it clear enough. Do you see it differently?

with "toys_and_games" I think the place can easily be mistaken for a
shop that sells toys and games. A key differentiator is the lending
part, not ?
It's my feeling that amenity=toys_and_games_library is more
understandable for people not familiar with the concept. Hopefully
this will also prevent incorrect translations.

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] Arboretum - how to tag?

[Tobias Zwick]

Well, an Arboretum is a "botanical tree garden", is it not? So why not
leisure=garden (+ maybe additional tags, see wiki article)?

On 10/10/2018 11:47, Warin wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have an arboretum, Way: Arboretum (628753725), that is part of a
> nature reserve and within a tree covered area. I assume that there is
> more than one species of tree.
> 
> How to correctly tag it?
> 
> At the moment it has
> 
> landuse=yes (what brought it to my attention)
> 
> name=Arboretum
> 
> Clearly both these tags are incorrect.
> I have confirmed that it is anarboretum so at least that bit is true.  
> 
> ___
> 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] Game and toy library

[ChameleonScales]

Thanks for your response. I have 2 problems with this:
1: Although the OSM wiki 
[acknowledged](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=library) the 
broadness of the word "library" according to Wikipedia, it still focused [the 
tag value](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Education) on books 
only ("A public library to borrow books from"). If this term was effectively 
used in a more generic way, we could have secondary values for each type of 
library (books, documents, musics, movies, games, etc...). This would make more 
sense to me.
2: Having been a toy & game librarian, I can say that these establishments are 
already suffering the misconception that they are only there for children, so 
reducing their name to "toy libraries" would hardly make it better. If we used 
french language there would be nothing to argue about but since the "smart 
language" people decided that game mostly means video-game in the 21st century, 
I have no better idea than using "toys_and_games" to keep it clear enough. Do 
you see it differently?

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 8:58 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/10/18 09:47, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 08:04, Paul Allen  wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:24 PM ChameleonScales 
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 amenity:library=game_and_toy
>>>
>>> When I added one of these, five months ago, the most popular way of doing 
>>> it was
>>> amenity=toy_library, so that's what I went with.
>>
>> I was wondering the same question about mapping Family History libraries ie 
>> somewhere you go to study Family History, which has reference files etc
>>
>> I was thinking:
>> amenity=library
>> "something" :-)=family_history
>>
>> type / library / resource ???
>
> Family history (or genealogy) is not only researched in libraries, but also 
> government record offices, national archives, newspaper records, cemetery 
> records, wills, probate, city directories, trade directories etc.
>
> I'm not certain how to go about tagging the availability of genealogy 
> material.
> genealogy=yes/vital_records/newspapers/religious_records/* ???
>
> As a non physical tag it would have to be attached to something.. library, 
> office etc.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

[François Lacombe]

Hi,

Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 01:09, Graeme Fitzpatrick  a
écrit :

> Massive job, thanks Francois! :-)
>
> Question for you pleasse.
>

You're welcome


> Following on from the discussion re towers & masts, I've just mapped a
> couple of mobile phone towers.
>
> What should we call the base station hut / building usually adjacent to
> the base of the tower
>
> My understanding is they're not a street cabinet as you can walk inside
> them.
>

That's right it's a building and not a street_cabinet.
Except building=service, I won't add anything else for now.

The proposal only regards local loop fixed landlines, other document will
be needed to deal with mobile networks.
For me, communication:*, telecommunication=* should finally be converted to
telecom=* for physical paths and devices.

Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 12:51, Lionel Giard  a
écrit :

> In this proposal we use "telecom" key, but i would like to know what is
> the limit/definition of this key ? Does it englobe internet provider, tv
> provider and mobile provider (even if the company does only one of them
> which is rarer today) ? Or only some of those ?
>

telecom=* is proposed as follow :
"It is proposed to use telecom
=* key to map telecom
copper, fibre and coaxial local loops networks."
It doesn't cover services or logical functionalities yet but only static
physical infrastructure of networks (if Virgin uses AT network to provide
a service, then operator=AT and not operator=Virgin)


> My question come from the wiki page about street_cabinet (
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dstreet_cabinet#Street_cabinet_categories
> ) where the values of "street_cabinet" tag can be "telecom" and "cable_tv"
> as two different values. Would it be preferable to merge them into
> "telecom" ? As to me telecom means "telecomunication" which englobe TV,
> internet and mobile.
>

That may be true, but out of the scope of the proposal.
street_cabinet=cable_tv may sound inconsistent since tv is a service
provided on top of coaxial infrastructure (I didn't have the same point of
view back in 2014). Especially when Internet is also provided over the same
coaxial network.
Then, it's equivalent to map :
man_made=street_cabinet + street_cabinet=cable_tv +
telecom=connection_point + telecom:medium=coax
man_made=street_cabinet + street_cabinet=telecom + telecom=connection_point
+ telecom:medium=coax

I'll try to add such example in the proposal.
Replacing street_cabinet=cable_tv by street_cabinet=telecom +
telecom:medium=coax isn't such a big deal and can be discussed here without
requiring a proper proposal with vote.

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

[Lionel Giard]

In this proposal we use "telecom" key, but i would like to know what is the
limit/definition of this key ? Does it englobe internet provider, tv
provider and mobile provider (even if the company does only one of them
which is rarer today) ? Or only some of those ?

My question come from the wiki page about street_cabinet (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dstreet_cabinet#Street_cabinet_categories
) where the values of "street_cabinet" tag can be "telecom" and "cable_tv"
as two different values. Would it be preferable to merge them into
"telecom" ? As to me telecom means "telecomunication" which englobe TV,
internet and mobile.

Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 01:09, Graeme Fitzpatrick  a
écrit :

> Massive job, thanks Francois! :-)
>
> Question for you pleasse.
>
> Following on from the discussion re towers & masts, I've just mapped a
> couple of mobile phone towers.
>
> What should we call the base station hut / building usually adjacent to
> the base of the tower
>
> My understanding is they're not a street cabinet as you can walk inside
> them.
>
> So"
> building=hut
>
> telecom=???
>
> communication=mobile_phone???
>
> Thoughts / suggestions?
>
> 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] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 03:33, Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:

> [...]
> shop=food. This tag has not yet been approved

Approved by whom?

> I checked overpass turbo in London, New York, and San Franciso. The
> latter had no uses; London has the most. The first few shop=food on
> the list are
>
> 1. “Nana’s Deli“,
> 2. “The Chelsea Cake Shop”,
> 3. “Green Apple”
> 4. “Holland And Barrett”
>
> Those should be 1. shop=deli,

Have you done a survey? Adding "Deli" to a shop name does not make it
a delicatessen.

> 3. shop=greengrocer(?).

You give neither coordinates nor a link, but depending on the
location, Google finds "Green Apple Supermarket", a convenience store.
Again, this should not be changed without a survey.

> The fourth sells vitamis, herbal supplements and "health food", so could
> be shop=health_food.

This is part of a, international chain. What are other branches tagged as?

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

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

[Tagging] Arboretum - how to tag?

[Warin]

Hi

I have an arboretum, Way: Arboretum (628753725), that is part of a 
nature reserve and within a tree covered area. I assume that there is 
more than one species of tree.


How to correctly tag it?

At the moment it has

landuse=yes (what brought it to my attention)

name=Arboretum

Clearly both these tags are incorrect.
I have confirmed that it is anarboretum so at least that bit is true.   



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

[Tagging] simply documenting tags WAS Re: hydrants

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Oct 2018, at 08:07, bkil  wrote:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_Practice#Document_your_custom-tags


I believe this paragraph needs some clarification, currently it reads “When you 
use tags yourself that aren't on map features, give other mappers a chance to 
understand (and maybe adopt) them by documenting them in the wiki.”

Yes, it is a good thing to document custom tags, but the question is where in 
the wiki should you put a tag that is not (yet) established.

Some tags work better than others, sometimes there are already alternative 
tagging methods established (and you might not be aware of it), simply adding a 
feature page for a tag which isn’t generally used, wasn’t discussed with the 
community and may be problematic is not a good idea. 

People also document tags on their user pages, and this is much better as the 
things are still searchable but there isn’t the risk of mistaking them for well 
established tags. Another way to make this clear is setting up a proposal page 
for documentation. A lot of tags have become established simply because there 
was a proposal and people were adopting it in their mapping (no formal voting).

Map feature pages are for the documentation of established tags, I hope we can 
agree on this?

IMHO we should clarify that documenting ad hoc tags in the wiki (link above) 
means either putting this documentation in your user space of the wiki, or in 
the proposal space.


What do you think?


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

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

[Warin]

On 10/10/18 09:47, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:



On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 08:04, Paul Allen > wrote:


On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:24 PM ChameleonScales
mailto:chameleonsca...@protonmail.com>> wrote:

amenity:library=game_and_toy


When I added one of these, five months ago, the most popular way
of doing it was
amenity=toy_library, so that's what I went with.


I was wondering the same question about mapping Family History 
libraries ie somewhere you go to study Family History, which has 
reference files etc


I was thinking:
amenity=library
"something" :-)=family_history

type / library / resource ???


Family history (or genealogy) is not only researched in libraries, but 
also government record offices, national archives, newspaper records, 
cemetery records, wills, probate, city directories, trade directories etc.


I'm not certain how to go about tagging the availability of genealogy 
material.

genealogy=yes/vital_records/newspapers/religious_records/* ???

As a non physical tag it would have to be attached to something.. 
library, office etc.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

[bkil]

Yes, it was me who added that key to the wiki page, because it was
mentioned in one of our Hungarian documents some years ago and also I
wanted to use it.

I admit to my error in not noticing the latest proposals earlier. I've
just recently joined this list and I've specifically asked this here
in order to correct my error. I volunteer to fix previous tags with
whatever we come up with as a replacement.

In my defense, do note that the proposal process is only one way to
start using new tags:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Just_Map
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_Practice#Document_your_custom-tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Joto/How_to_invent_tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/New_Features

Of course, I agree that if a proposal process is underway in a
specific area, it is much more productive to pool our focus to the
given process instead of doing ad hoc extensions in parallel.

I would definitely tag this property, because it is possible to break
a hydrant with the huge keys that are used to open it if it is rusty
and you are forcing it in the wrong direction. In Hungary, I've seen
both opening directions fairly often, though I don't have exact stats
as of now. Official fire fighters here have their own (closed)
database of hydrant here and the vehicles also store a great amount of
water so OSM is not useful to them in this aspect. Pressure is not
indicated on plates, only diameter, but as that is not correlated
reliable with pressure, they usually do not decide based on that, so
this property is not useful either. I think that opening direction is
the more useful property of the two, though the local community maps
all data from the plates.

I don't have strong preferences for the exact key, but in the value
part, I would like to see something that mirrors the plate that is
depicting either clockwise or counterclockwise. I don't have a strong
preference regarding abbreviation, although I guess it would be more
accessible when typed in fully.

Regards

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:34 PM Viking  wrote:
>
> Bkill, you added fire_hydrant:opening to wiki page [0], but you should have 
> discussed it here and/or in discussion page before.
> We did many efforts to widely discuss fire hydrant extensions [1] and finally 
> approve them: you should at least discuss your proposal with people who spent 
> so much time in this project.
>
> Anyway, as a firefighter, I have to say that the opening direction is a 
> marginal tag for firefighting purposes, because you don't need to know this 
> information to choose on a map which hydrant to use to refill the fire engine.
> But if you still want to add this information, we need to refine it, for this 
> reason discussion is important.
>
> The use of handedness=right / left is prone to error.
> Normally on hydrants it is indicated the direction of opening and usually it 
> is counterclockwise. But technically these hydrants' valves have right-hand 
> threads (right handedness): you turn it clockwise to tighten the valve and 
> close the hydrant.
> So if you read on a hydrant the counterclockwise opening direction, you 
> should tag it with handedness=right. This creates confusion to a normal 
> mapper.
>
> direction=clockwise/counterclockwise has similiar problem: you can intend it 
> as the opening direction or as the thread direction (closing direction).
>
> On the other hand, fire_hydrant:opening=cw / ccw is not self-explanatory, 
> because someone can intend it as the number of openings (couplings).
>
> Personally I would not add this tag at all.
> But, if you still want to add this information, I think that something like:
>
> opening:direction=clockwise / counterclockwise
>
> As we did for most of the tags in [0], I would not use fire_hydrant: prefix 
> because we want a slim database and because  opening:direction=* is (or can 
> be) used for other objects, as doors, taps, etc.
>
> [0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Fire_Hydrant_Extensions_(part_2)
>
> Best regards,
> Alberto
>
>
> ---
> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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