Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 8:20 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick
 wrote:
> But there are camp sites with luxury onsite tents = glamping; while other 
> camp sites also have onsite tents that only offer basic accommodation = 
> camping.

Aa very modest hotel and an extremely luxurious hotel are both tourism=hotel
It would make sense to have the same criteria for tourism=camp_site

Maybe stars https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:stars#Camp_sites
could be used to distinguish the different camping sites classes?

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

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

But there are camp sites with luxury onsite tents = glamping; while other
camp sites also have onsite tents that only offer basic accommodation =
camping.

Think it would come down to either
tourism=camp_site
luxury / glamping=yes

or

tourism=glamping

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Sergio Manzi]

Good, thank-you!

I wasn't aware of that, but I'm not an EE and that's why I've asked to ask one: 
this kind of things are much better handled by experts in the field.

But anyway I have the strong feeling that that wasn't the meaning the person 
who described transformers had in is head: "/Tertiary, quaternary and further 
sides are intended for lower voltages auxiliary services inside power plants or 
substations/", which, in the description you pointed at, is _at most_ a 
"by-product" of using a tertiary .

Sergio


On 2018-12-20 14:05, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:36, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> 
> wrote:
>
> The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting 
> part and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK.
>
>
> Power transformers can have tertiary windings:
> https://www.electrical4u.com/tertiary-winding-of-transformer-three-winding-transformer/
> although it may not be sensible to map the ratings of a tertiary.
>
> Some transformer-isolated voltage converters may make use of a feedback 
> winding which is
> (at least informally) referred to as a tertiary winding.
>
> -- 
> Paul
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:36, Sergio Manzi  wrote:

The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting
> part and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK.
>

Power transformers can have tertiary windings:
https://www.electrical4u.com/tertiary-winding-of-transformer-three-winding-transformer/
although it may not be sensible to map the ratings of a tertiary.

Some transformer-isolated voltage converters may make use of a feedback
winding which is
(at least informally) referred to as a tertiary winding.

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

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Sergio Manzi]

That's about windings, and of course in the primary of a 3 phase transformer 
you'll generally (/there are exceptions.../) have 3 windings, but those 3 
windings together make up the primary side of the transformer.

The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting part 
and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK.

Sergio


On 2018-12-20 13:27, Xavier wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:00:20PM +0100, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>> I *never *heard of a transformer's /tertiary/, thus: try asking an 
>> electrical engineer...
>
> In general, a transformer can have 1..N primary windings and 1..N secondary 
> windings:
>
> https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/transformer/multiple-winding-transformers.html
>
> The most common is the 1:1 (single primary, single secondary) transformer, 
> followed next by a 1:N style (one primary, multiple secondary, this is 
> usually used to provide plural output voltages from the same single 
> transformer).
>
> But in the general case (which is what OSM would, at some point, want to be 
> able to cover), a transformer is N:N with each N being 1..X.
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Xavier]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:00:20PM +0100, Sergio Manzi wrote:
I *never *heard of a transformer's /tertiary/, thus: try asking an 
electrical engineer...


In general, a transformer can have 1..N primary windings and 1..N 
secondary windings:


https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/transformer/multiple-winding-transformers.html

The most common is the 1:1 (single primary, single secondary) 
transformer, followed next by a 1:N style (one primary, multiple 
secondary, this is usually used to provide plural output voltages from 
the same single transformer).


But in the general case (which is what OSM would, at some point, want 
to be able to cover), a transformer is N:N with each N being 1..X.



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

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 13:03 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :

> This is definitely a luxury establishment. It's located near a famous stud
> farm. I expect visitors to that place to be their main clientèle. It is
> formally an Agriturismo. Definitely not a camp site.
>


a luxury camp site obviously, not what you'd generally expect from a camp
site (which btw. already is very inclusive in OSM).

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

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Volker Schmidt]

This is definitely a luxury establishment. It's located near a famous stud
farm. I expect visitors to that place to be their main clientèle. It is
formally an Agriturismo. Definitely not a camp site.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:52, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 12:49 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt <
> vosc...@gmail.com>:
>
>> That's the one I have come across:
>> https://www.glampingcanonici.com/en/
>>
>
>
> this one could also be seen as kind of hotel (or kind of camp site)
> ___
> 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] Glamping

[Volker Schmidt]

I now see that Booking.com have a dedicated portal for Glamping in the UK

That should provide examples.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:46, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> That's the one I have come across:
> https://www.glampingcanonici.com/en/
>
>
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:13, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:53 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt <
>> vosc...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> How to tag an acommodation that offers hotel-type accommodation in
>>> semi-permanent tents?
>>> How to tag the single tents?
>>> (See Wikipedia) 
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> is it "hotel type" or "hostel type"? We could either invent a new tag or
>> use one of the tourism classes that are already there. I could see adding
>> them as camp sites or maybe even chalets and add a subtag for the "glamour"
>> part? It would be good to know whether they are permanent.
>> Single tents would usually not be considered "building" I guess. Maybe an
>> exception could be made if they are permanent.
>>
>> 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] Glamping

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 12:49 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :

> That's the one I have come across:
> https://www.glampingcanonici.com/en/
>


this one could also be seen as kind of hotel (or kind of camp site)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Volker Schmidt]

That's the one I have come across:
https://www.glampingcanonici.com/en/


On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:13, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:53 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt <
> vosc...@gmail.com>:
>
>> How to tag an acommodation that offers hotel-type accommodation in
>> semi-permanent tents?
>> How to tag the single tents?
>> (See Wikipedia) 
>>
>
>
>
> is it "hotel type" or "hostel type"? We could either invent a new tag or
> use one of the tourism classes that are already there. I could see adding
> them as camp sites or maybe even chalets and add a subtag for the "glamour"
> part? It would be good to know whether they are permanent.
> Single tents would usually not be considered "building" I guess. Maybe an
> exception could be made if they are permanent.
>
> 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] Benefits of namespaces

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:53 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi :

> ... unless we start putting columns (":") into keys according to a
> different logic.
>


it really doesn't matter, unless we would actually need those namespaces
(i.e. they would collide by using the exact same string on the left side,
to express something different), it would not be a problem if some mappers
tag voltage:secondary and others secondary:voltage.

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

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:53 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :

> How to tag an acommodation that offers hotel-type accommodation in
> semi-permanent tents?
> How to tag the single tents?
> (See Wikipedia) 
>



is it "hotel type" or "hostel type"? We could either invent a new tag or
use one of the tourism classes that are already there. I could see adding
them as camp sites or maybe even chalets and add a subtag for the "glamour"
part? It would be good to know whether they are permanent.
Single tents would usually not be considered "building" I guess. Maybe an
exception could be made if they are permanent.

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

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Sergio Manzi]

... unless we start putting columns (":") into keys according to a different 
logic.


On 2018-12-20 11:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Claudius Henrichs 
> mailto:claudiu...@gmx.de>>:
>
> It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how namespaces 
> are defined as a model in information technology and remaining economically 
> shorter to be readable to humans. And there's not much of a compromise to 
> make. It's either or.
>  
>
>
> actually not, you can do both in most cases, as they use different keys. It 
> isn't generally desirable to do it, but it would be possible.


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Glamping

[Volker Schmidt]

How to tag an acommodation that offers hotel-type accommodation in
semi-permanent tents?
How to tag the single tents?
(See Wikipedia) 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Claudius Henrichs <
claudiu...@gmx.de>:

> It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how namespaces
> are defined as a model in information technology and remaining economically
> shorter to be readable to humans. And there's not much of a compromise to
> make. It's either or.
>
>



actually not, you can do both in most cases, as they use different keys. It
isn't generally desirable to do it, but it would be possible.

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

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

[Claudius Henrichs]

It's not ideal, but I copied your replies over to the forum.

I've tried to move to my concrete example so we could test out the application of what each of you are suggesting in my reply: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=730429#p730429

 

It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how namespaces are defined as a model in information technology and remaining economically shorter to be readable to humans. And there's not much of a compromise to make. It's either or.

 

Best regards,

Claudius

 

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. Dezember 2018 um 04:01 Uhr
Von: "Sergio Manzi" 
An: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces



François,

The discussion about this has also been brought to the forum, here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64825

I'm unsure if it is better to continue it here in the ML, there in the forum, or in both places...

 

On 2018-12-20 01:04, François Lacombe wrote:


 

Le mer. 19 déc. 2018 à 22:26, Richard  a écrit :

the OSM tag chain should be imho used only for very common things because each member
of the chain will turn up as a "top level" tag in the database and taginfo.

 

We are using such chains in Power, Pipeline and Telecom groups. It works well :

power=transformer + transformer=distribution + voltage:primary=2 + voltage:secondary=400

man_made=street_cabinet + street_cabinet=telecom + telecom=exchange + telecom:medium=copper + operator=Orange




 

"Transformers" is a perfect example of "namespacing done backward". Why "voltage:secondary=220"? In a correctly namespaced world it would be "secondary:voltage=220".
I understand that in spoken English you can say "the voltage of the secondary is 220 Volt", and that's probably why those keys have been built with the terms in that particular order. (BTW, logic and wording is very different in different cultures and languages. I think it wouldn't had been in that order in, say, German: can a german speaker please confirm that?)

Transformers can have and very often have more than one secondary: you have dealt with that using things like "voltage:tertiary=*" and the likes (windings:tertiary=*, I suppose...). And what if the transformer has 3 secondaries? Or 4?

Isn't "secondary:1:voltage=200" better? Don't you see that's more logical and expandable? Don't you see that here we assign a quantity (220) to something that has the correct dimensions (voltage), like in the previously globally defined key "voltage=*"? Don't you see how with that syntax everything related to the first (second, third, fourth,... nth) secondary (wingdings, current, whatever...) would be grouped under "secondary:n:*="?

And if transformers weren't  meant to be a "namespaced thing", why using the columns? Why not voltage_secondary=* ?

Don't you see that with the transformers a new first level keyword, "rating=*" have been implicitly defined and documented in the transformers page and how that keyword can be useful in other contexts... or namespaces, if you prefer?

 

BTW, what is that telecom:medium=copper thing (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:telecom:medium)? "Telecoms" do not have a medium:  local loops have.  Is that meant to be a namespaced thing? Have this being debated/approved? I have seen it applied to buildings: what is the meaning of that?

 




Adding power: and telecom: prefixes would be seriously bad to encourage for contribution and extremely redundant.




 

To the contrary! Please read in the forum my rationale explaining exactly how that would be beneficial...

 




 

Furthermore, refining of well used tags often get discouraged because of their usage.

This dosn't include the redundancy in namespaces' prefixes which is worse.

 

If used extensively for attributes I would consider it polution of the database.
It is also much less flexible as you can specify only one attribute at a time.

If you have to define more than one attribute with the same name it may be the attribute isn't weel defined.

 

Have you examples please?

 

All the best

 

François




 

Sorry, I'm really now on the verge (less than 24 hours...) of a small journey, so I would probably be unable to answer/contribute anymore until January, 6.

Cheers,

Sergio
___ 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] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 09:58 Uhr schrieb Michael Patrick <
geodes...@gmail.com>:

> ...'Soft_storey' is part of a rapid VSM ( Rapid Visual Screening) process
> ( see Table 3 at https://bit.ly/2S60CE6 for a global list of these, The
> U.S.A. FEMA https://bit.ly/2QKVhp5 )
> In the western United States, designating a building as a 'soft_story'
> visually with the intended meaning that it was at seismic risk, you
> would be off base. Many seismic retrofits, especially in historic
> buildings are invisible. And many with visible mitigation have
> other characteristics in the coding scheme which make them
> seriously at risk. The FEMA RVS is 388 pages because the
> assessment is not trivial. Seismic vulnerability is the sum total
> of many aspects.
>


indeed, that's what I was suspecting. Would it be possible to give mappers
summary advice on a short wikipage how to identify potential soft storey
buildings? Or is this something that requires expert training?

Regarding the choice of tag, I was looking at taginfo and the only current
tag with some usage I have found is
building:irregularity:type

*soft_sto*ry


all instances have been added at once (i.e. either import or single
individual initiative).

The key is not bad, but could also omit the "type" and become
building:irregularity, or become a property
building:irregularity:soft_storey=yes/suspected/etc,
in case we expect more building irregularities on the same building. I also
note the word "structure" is not in the key, there might be other kinds of
e.g. geometric irregularities as well.

"story" is American English, in British spelling it should be "storey" (we
use British spelling in tag names by convention).


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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Michael Patrick]

> A few years ago, there was an effort (promoted by World Bank, it seems) to
>  map buildings in OSM for Katmandu where they used key
buidling:soft_storey=yes/no.
> They never proposed a formal tag. The results of that effort is a bit
confusing and I'm not sure it's the best approach.

Because their may not have been very many of these left after multiple
earthquakes?
Wikipedia isn't probably the most authoritative source on this subject.

First, it might be noticed that the term, even in OSM, is not used in
isolation, it is part
of an extensive internally consistent system of terms from a survey of a
particular part
of the world. i.e it only helps designates the probability of hazard when
all the other
factors in that tagging / survey scheme are also noted.

'Soft_storey' is part of a rapid VSM ( Rapid Visual Screening) process
( see Table 3 at https://bit.ly/2S60CE6 for a global list of these, The
U.S.A. FEMA https://bit.ly/2QKVhp5 )
In the western United States, designating a building as a 'soft_story'
visually with the intended meaning that it was at seismic risk, you
would be off base. Many seismic retrofits, especially in historic
buildings are invisible. And many with visible mitigation have
other characteristics in the coding scheme which make them
seriously at risk. The FEMA RVS is 388 pages because the
assessment is not trivial. Seismic vulnerability is the sum total
of many aspects.

> how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

Use on of the recognized seismic VSMs that apply to the location.
GEM ( https://www.globalquakemodel.org ) is global, and has rapid
VSM survey sheets for various countries
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/1dcea4_e0c3391c6d32439188f8969ed902f0d6.pdf

>  Question for the community: does it make sense to add soft story
> information using the key building:soft_storey=y/n (similar to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:fireproof) or should I
use
> building:structure=soft_storey?

If you intend to give meaningful accurate seismic information, it
should be the lowest level concept and only be present if the other
characteristics are included, ideally, from a survey.

> Good question. For disaster preparedness and response, it is valuable to
> have a list of soft story buildings in a neighborhood. There are multiple
> places where such buildings are mapped like 

They examples you gave make an interesting point. Who
maintains this in OSM, i.e. if a retrofit is accomplished, do you
still designate it as soft story? What about addresses which
are demo'd and new construction? Also, for various reasons,
many, many retrofits are not done under a permit, or not
specifically identified as a seismic retrofit. One of those, the city
program site, has mostly 'exempt' or 'done' entries, and those
appear on the map anyways. Same with the City of SF site,
and a quick Streetview of the few non-compliant ones show
no residential occupancy, just the ground floor retail is
open.

For disaster preparedness and response, accurate
information is important, in these cases, 'the map'
practically useless.

However, what I think what you want to do is still
possible and could be really, really useful, if it
followed a format ( like one of the VSMs) that
provided the complete set of characteristics.And
those tags should be prefaced with something like
'GEM_soft_story' that makes it clear they are part
of a set, not an end conclusion about the building's
risk. And you would have to timestamp it some way
to refresh it.

Michael Patrick

( another kind of soft story
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Tower_(San_Francisco)#Sinking_and_tilting_problem
)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging