Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

[Marc_marc]

Hello,

Le 29.09.22 à 19:11, Anne-Karoline Distel a écrit :

I don't have a number of 3-4 friends with me when I'm mapping to test the bench


really ?
sitting in the middle of the bench, I have an idea if the bench
is 2-3-4 seats, in the same way that a friend of yours could see
for himself if he has room to sit, without having to do so.

Of course, this does not allow you to choose between a 42 or 43 seat 
bench, but I think that this is relatively unimportant, as these cases 
are rare (and there is nothing to prevent you from measuring the width 
in these exceptional cases).


Regards,
Marc



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

[Marc_marc]

Hello,

Le 29.09.22 à 18:26, martianfreeloader a écrit :
I am considering two groups of mutually exclusive   
proposals to settle this issue


propose, withdraw, re-propose in 24 hours, that's a bit fast.
give time for ideas to mature.

I've done some research on how the tag is used, (I'm leaving
out the twisted cases and obvious mistakes)
I classify them in 2 groups:

group 1 : those where merging the two tags would not matter:
amenity=restaurant
tourism=picnic_site
amenity=table
amenity=cinema
leisure=picnic_table
leisure=outdoor_seating
amenity=theatre
for these objects, seat and capacity are the same thing and we could 
debate which term is better, but let's see the other group


group 2 : those where the use of capacity adds confusion
amenity=shelter
amenity=toilets
amenity=cafe
amenity=bar
amenity=fast_food
amenity=events_venue
amenity=pub
shop!=baker (with the possibility of eating on site)
in these cases, there is often a standing capacity
and a sitting capacity and replacing seat with capacity
only degrades the information (because with a tag as
generic as capacity, there will inevitably be someone
who uses it for the other meaning (don't hope that people
'll read the wiki every time they encounter an ambiguous tag,
sometimes you don't even realise there are two meanings)
For these objects, it therefore seems relevant to me
to keep the tag seat=*
and from the moment we keep the seat tag, I don't think
it's relevant not to use it everywhere where it has
the same meaning
e.g. a bench with 2 seats should not have a different tag depending
on whether it is simply an amenity=bench or an amenity=shetler
like at a bus stop.

Regards,
Marc



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

[Samson Ngumenawe via Tagging]

I think a bench is one seat with a given capacity. Therefore, it's prudent
to map it and tag capacity=*, rather than seats=*.

Wish you a mappy end of month.

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022, 5:09 AM  wrote:

> Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
> tagging@openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (martianfreeloader)
>2. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps (Davidoskky)
>3. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (Martin Koppenhoefer)
>4. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (martianfreeloader)
>5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (Anne-Karoline Distel)
>6. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (Peter Elderson)
>7. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
>   (stevea)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:58:35 +
> From: martianfreeloader 
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
> by capacity
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion
> that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.
>
> I thus decided to retract it.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:10:25 +0200
> From: Davidoskky 
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps
> Message-ID: <693129da-c6e8-cb0b-5e3d-8992db7b3...@yahoo.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> I have added a few comments in the wiki.
>
>
> Davide
>
> On 29/09/22 10:18, Martin Fischer wrote:
> > Hey everybody,
> >
> > I just drafted a proposal to formalize app:* which is currently used
> > in Sweden to link Android & iOS apps of pharmacies.
> > My proposal also addresses the inconsistency between the currently in
> > use app:apple, app:google, payment:app:android and payment:app:ios.
> >
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Mobile_apps
> >
> > Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
> >
> > Best,
> > Martin
> >
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:19:51 +0200
> From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> 
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
> by capacity
> Message-ID: <01e0cfda-c88f-4032-9e81-cbfc7936e...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 29 Sep 2022, at 14:10, martianfreeloader <
> martianfreeloa...@posteo.net> wrote:
> >
> > Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion
> that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.
> >
> > I thus decided to retract it.
>
>
> as you are interested in consistency, have you considered proposing the
> opposite, retagging of the 1000 capacity on benches to seats?
>
> Cheers Martin
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 16:26:59 +
> From: martianfreeloader 
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
> by capacity
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> I personally find it more consistent to reduce the number of synonymous
> keys across all objects.
>
> But yes, I am considering two groups of mutually exclusive proposals to
> settle this issue. Something along these lines:
>
> -
> ISSUE 1
> Should the capacity of a bench be tagged on all benches or only on those
> which have clear seat separation? This is independent of issue 2.
>
> Proposal 1A) Only on benches with have clear seat separation.
>
> Proposal 1B) On all benches.
>
> Question to be resolved:
> Can a thing that has individual seats be considered a bench at all?
>
> ---
>
> ISSUE 2:
> Which key should be used to tag the capacity of a bench? This is
> independent of issue 1.
>
> Proposal 2A) Use seats=* on all benches.
>
> Proposal 2B) Use capacity=* on all benches.
>
> Proposal 2C) [Only if 1B is approved] Use seats=* on benches with clear
> seat separ

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

[Warin]

On 30/9/22 13:01, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:

I expanded https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tap
based on discussion here and what I researched while implementing
https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/pull/4423
("How is drinking water provided here?")

Feel free to improve that wiki page (and others) if I put something
incorrect there and to expand it if needed.

Sep 28, 2022, 00:29 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

I would say that regardless of how it's operated - turn handle,
push button, lever, foot pedal, auto sensor etc - that if water
comes out, it's a tap!



I would not tag a bubbler as a tap.

"if water comes out, it is a tap" is not always the case.





Thanks

Graeme


On Tue, 27 Sept 2022 at 23:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
 wrote:




Sep 27, 2022, 14:58 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:



sent from a phone

On 27 Sep 2022, at 14:52, Georg
 wrote:

IMHO yes.



I agree, although I wouldn’t see it necessary to
characterize the feature

I see value in mapping whether given amenity=drinking_water
is a proper tap or just providing miserable jet of water making
impossible to fill water bottle.

Also, I noticed that many bare amenity=drinking_water are in
various ways quite likely to be problematic
(misplaced, used for water taps without drinkable water or
inaccessible to public and soon)
___
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] Can we assume surface=cobblestone:flattened to be an exact duplicate of surface=sett?

[Marc_marc]

Hello,

Le 30.09.22 à 04:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :

maybe it should be changed and be treated as missing surface info


I don't see how cobblestone:flattened could mean unhewn_cobblestone in 
some case, imho it's a alias for sett


but if cobblestone:flattened (as said in the surface template)
should not be used to avoid confusion with sett or unhewn_cobblestone, 
why are you willing to ask if ti's asphalt etc like any missing

surface objet ?
it seems to me that it would be better to offer 2 choices in order
to have the images in full screen, even if it means having an "other" 
button that brings you back to the general list just in case


Regards,
Marc



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

Re: [Tagging] Can we assume surface=cobblestone:flattened to be an exact duplicate of surface=sett?

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Sep 30, 2022, 10:56 by marc_m...@mailo.com:

> Hello,
>
> Le 30.09.22 à 04:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
>
>> maybe it should be changed and be treated as missing surface info
>>
>
> I don't see how cobblestone:flattened could mean unhewn_cobblestone in some 
> case, imho it's a alias for sett
>
> but if cobblestone:flattened (as said in the surface template)
> should not be used to avoid confusion with sett or unhewn_cobblestone, why 
> are you willing to ask if ti's asphalt etc like any missing
> surface objet ?
>
1) it could be repaved in meantime and actual surface be now different

2) it would require extra effort to support this
(about one day of work in total + increased maintenance effort)

3) it would be more confusing to user to have several different interfaces
depending something unclear to user, especially given that it could in
meantime changed to surface=asphalt (or badly tagged in the first place)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68 Seats or capacity ?

[St Niklaas]

Hi Anne,

By lack of friends use your elbows they wont mind.
A seat with friends is 0.50 m closely of cosey. With a 'normal' format of 
strangers its about 0.60 the length of the top of your stretch fingers up to 
the backside of your elbow. But an estimated guess would do as well or the size 
of the pavement could be helpful as well.
A tile is 0.30 x 0.30 or 0.40 x 0.60 regular size and a kerbstone is 1.00 
length. Take you’re pick.

Greetz


Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 september 2022 04:07
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (martianfreeloader)
   2. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps (Davidoskky)
   3. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   4. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (martianfreeloader)
   5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Anne-Karoline Distel)
   6. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Peter Elderson)
   7. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (stevea)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:58:35 +
From: martianfreeloader 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion
that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.

I thus decided to retract it.



--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:10:25 +0200
From: Davidoskky 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps
Message-ID: <693129da-c6e8-cb0b-5e3d-8992db7b3...@yahoo.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Hi,

I have added a few comments in the wiki.


Davide

On 29/09/22 10:18, Martin Fischer wrote:
> Hey everybody,
>
> I just drafted a proposal to formalize app:* which is currently used
> in Sweden to link Android & iOS apps of pharmacies.
> My proposal also addresses the inconsistency between the currently in
> use app:apple, app:google, payment:app:android and payment:app:ios.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Mobile_apps
>
> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



--

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:19:51 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: <01e0cfda-c88f-4032-9e81-cbfc7936e...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii



sent from a phone

> On 29 Sep 2022, at 14:10, martianfreeloader  
> wrote:
>
> Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion that my 
> proposal is not considered useful by the community.
>
> I thus decided to retract it.


as you are interested in consistency, have you considered proposing the 
opposite, retagging of the 1000 capacity on benches to seats?

Cheers Martin


--

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 16:26:59 +
From: martianfreeloader 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

I personally find it more consistent to reduce the number of synonymous
keys across all objects.

But yes, I am considering two groups of mutually exclusive proposals to
settle this issue. Something along these lines:

-
ISSUE 1
Should the capacity of a bench be tagged on all benches or only on those
which have clear seat separation? This is independent of issue 2.

Proposal 1A) Only on benches with have clear seat separation.

Proposal 1B) On all benches.

Question to be resolved:
Can a thing that has individual seats be considered a bench at all?

---

ISSUE 2:
Which key should be used to tag the capacity of a bench? This is
independent of issue 1.

Proposal 2A) Use seats=* on

Re: [Tagging] Re: Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68 Seats or capacity ?

[Anne- Karoline Distel]

 
 Thanks, but I don't think our medieval pavement adheres to European industrial standards. Also, benches along hiking trails etc. I should just being a measuring tape with me, I suppose.--Sent from my Android phone with WEB.DE Mail. Please excuse my brevity.On 30/09/2022, 11:02 St Niklaas  wrote:
 
   
   
   
Hi Anne,  
  
By lack of friends use your elbows they wont mind.  
A seat with friends is 0.50 m closely of cosey. With a 'normal' format of strangers its about 0.60 the length of the top of your stretch fingers up to the backside of your elbow. But an estimated guess would do as well or the size of the pavement could be helpful as well. 
A tile is 0.30 x 0.30 or 0.40 x 0.60 regular size and a kerbstone is 1.00 length. Take you’re pick.  
  
Greetz  

   
   
  
   Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org  Verzonden: vrijdag 30 september 2022 04:07 Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org  Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68 
   
 

   
  

 
  Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
       tagging@openstreetmap.org
   
   To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
   or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
   
   You can reach the person managing the list at
       tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
   
   When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
   than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."
   
   
   Today's Topics:
   
      1. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (martianfreeloader)
      2. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps (Davidoskky)
      3. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (Martin Koppenhoefer)
      4. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (martianfreeloader)
      5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (Anne-Karoline Distel)
      6. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (Peter Elderson)
      7. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
     (stevea)
   
   
   --
   
   Message: 1
   Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:58:35 +
   From: martianfreeloader 
   To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
   Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
       by capacity
   Message-ID: 
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
   
   Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion 
   that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.
   
   I thus decided to retract it.
   
   
   
   --
   
   Message: 2
   Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:10:25 +0200
   From: Davidoskky 
   To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
   Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps
   Message-ID: <693129da-c6e8-cb0b-5e3d-8992db7b3...@yahoo.it>
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
   
   Hi,
   
   I have added a few comments in the wiki.
   
   
   Davide
   
   On 29/09/22 10:18, Martin Fischer wrote:
   > Hey everybody,
   >
   > I just drafted a proposal to formalize app:* which is currently used 
   > in Sweden to link Android & iOS apps of pharmacies.
   > My proposal also addresses the inconsistency between the currently in 
   > use app:apple, app:google, payment:app:android and payment:app:ios.
   >
   >  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Mobile_apps
   >
   > Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
   >
   > Best,
   > Martin
   >
   > ___
   > Tagging mailing list
   > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
   >  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
   
   
   
   --
   
   Message: 3
   Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:19:51 +0200
   From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
   To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
       
   Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
       by capacity
   Message-ID: <01e0cfda-c88f-4032-9e81-cbfc7936e...@gmail.com>
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
   
   
   
   sent from a phone
   
   > On 29 Sep 2022, at 14:10, martianfreeloader  wrote:
   > 
   > Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.
   > 
   > I thus decided to retract it.
 

[Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Georg]

Hi Mateusz,

in your edit
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aman_made%3Dwater_tap&type=revision&diff=2408821&oldid=2112133
you added the sentence

> For working one additional tags fitting it would be ...

I don't really get the meaning 🤷‍♂️ Could you word it differently or
explain and let me look for a wording? Thank you 🙂



As you're very active in the wiki: Do we have a template (in the meaning
as in Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer) for _the full wiki page_
describing a key/tag/value? I did only find templates in the MediaWiki
sense, so {{something}}, but not the whole page including typical
sections etc.

Best regards,
Georg

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Sep 30, 2022, 15:13 by georg2...@nurfuerspam.de:

> Hi Mateusz,
>
> in your edit
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aman_made%3Dwater_tap&type=revision&diff=2408821&oldid=2112133
> you added the sentence
>
>> For working one additional tags fitting it would be ...
>>
>
> I don't really get the meaning 🤷‍♂️ Could you word it differently or
> explain and let me look for a wording? Thank you 🙂
>
I meant that one that is pure decoration and not active and
not giving water will not qualify for this extra tags

Do you have an idea how to better phrase it?

> As you're very active in the wiki: Do we have a template (in the meaning
> as in Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer) for _the full wiki page_
> describing a key/tag/value? I did only find templates in the MediaWiki
> sense, so {{something}}, but not the whole page including typical
> sections etc.
>
maybe
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_a_page_describing_key_or_value
will help

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

Re: [Tagging] Can we assume surface=cobblestone:flattened to be an exact duplicate of surface=sett?

[Volker Schmidt]

Sett <-> flattened cobblestone:
Sett are roughly rectangular blocks, hewn from big blocks of stone (granite
or basalt).
Flattened cobblestones are made from roughly round cobblestones by
flattening the part that faces the road surface.
Cobblestones and pebbles are essentially the same: pebblestones are small
cobblestones.
See wikipedia for more details.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022, 11:40 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging, <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Sep 30, 2022, 10:56 by marc_m...@mailo.com:
>
> Hello,
>
> Le 30.09.22 à 04:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
>
> maybe it should be changed and be treated as missing surface info
>
>
> I don't see how cobblestone:flattened could mean unhewn_cobblestone in
> some case, imho it's a alias for sett
>
> but if cobblestone:flattened (as said in the surface template)
> should not be used to avoid confusion with sett or unhewn_cobblestone, why
> are you willing to ask if ti's asphalt etc like any missing
> surface objet ?
>
> 1) it could be repaved in meantime and actual surface be now different
>
> 2) it would require extra effort to support this
> (about one day of work in total + increased maintenance effort)
>
> 3) it would be more confusing to user to have several different interfaces
> depending something unclear to user, especially given that it could in
> meantime changed to surface=asphalt (or badly tagged in the first place)
> ___
> 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] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

[grin via Tagging]

Hello,

To open it for a larger audience please let me share my question from the osm 
wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dservice#service_vs._unclassified,_conflicting_definitions

Quoting:

- - - - -

service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

There are some discrepancies between this page and highway=unclassified, and 
the wording leaves a lot to interpretation and opinions.

This page suggests that service is a road which ends on some feature with no 
through traffic (leading to a building, a parking place, etc). Is is also 
specifically exclude frontage roads as an example to tag according to function 
and not purpose. By following this definition a road with throughfaring traffic 
(where both end is open, connecting to other roads or tracks) cannot be 
service, so it should be unclassified.

However unclassified declares itself as "considered usable by motorcars" and 
also "In rural contexts, narrow paved roads with only private access for 
motorcars (maybe public access for agricultural motor-vehicles, cyclists and 
pedestrians) should be tagged as highway=service and motorcar=private (maybe 
motor_vehicle=agricultural)", suggesting that unclassified requires to be 
motorcar=yes and suggests that "narrow paved roads with motorcar=private" 
should be tagged as service.

These definitions quite contradict one another.

Take a pretty common road type in Europe, which goes on the embankment of a 
river, which generally paved, narrow, legally open for walking and bicycling 
people, often part of the national/international bicycle-road network, and 
closed for motorcar traffic (usually only waterworks' cars are allowed). What's 
that? Cannot be "unclassified" since motorcars aren't allowed, cannot be 
service since it doesn't "leading to something". Some people tag it this way, 
some that way. That's not good.

Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the 
wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or 
unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service for 
"narrow paved roads w/ private motorcar access". I'd support the latter: I 
would rather use unclassified here, but that's an opinion.

Your inputs are welcome. 

- - - - -

Here, as well as there.

Thank you,
g

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

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30 Sep 2022, at 17:48, grin via Tagging  wrote:
> 
> Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the 
> wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or 
> unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service for 
> "narrow paved roads w/ private motorcar access". I'd support the latter: I 
> would rather use unclassified here, but that's an opinion.
> 
> Your inputs are welcome.


a service road will often be a dead end, but „no through traffic“ does not mean 
there cannot be a continuation of the road (but with limited access), you could 
also see it like 2 (or even more) service roads that connect at the feature.

For service=alley it is usual to be connected in a grid, for service=driveway 
it is atypical (maybe on camp sites?), there are different road types all under 
the highway=service umbrella

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

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

[Peter Elderson]

Unclassified, by definition, is a road on the traffic grid suitable for 
motorised vehicles. It is not necessarily paved. Access restrictions may apply, 
and usage may change in time, e.g the road still connects, but is legally 
closed for cars except emergency vehicles and people who live along the road. 
Or, a new railway intersects the road and no crossing is provided. In those 
cases, usually the road is still seen as an unclassified road.

Peter Elderson

> Op 30 sep. 2022 om 17:48 heeft grin via Tagging  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> To open it for a larger audience please let me share my question from the osm 
> wiki:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dservice#service_vs._unclassified,_conflicting_definitions
> 
> Quoting:
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions
> 
> There are some discrepancies between this page and highway=unclassified, and 
> the wording leaves a lot to interpretation and opinions.
> 
> This page suggests that service is a road which ends on some feature with no 
> through traffic (leading to a building, a parking place, etc). Is is also 
> specifically exclude frontage roads as an example to tag according to 
> function and not purpose. By following this definition a road with 
> throughfaring traffic (where both end is open, connecting to other roads or 
> tracks) cannot be service, so it should be unclassified.
> 
> However unclassified declares itself as "considered usable by motorcars" and 
> also "In rural contexts, narrow paved roads with only private access for 
> motorcars (maybe public access for agricultural motor-vehicles, cyclists and 
> pedestrians) should be tagged as highway=service and motorcar=private (maybe 
> motor_vehicle=agricultural)", suggesting that unclassified requires to be 
> motorcar=yes and suggests that "narrow paved roads with motorcar=private" 
> should be tagged as service.
> 
> These definitions quite contradict one another.
> 
> Take a pretty common road type in Europe, which goes on the embankment of a 
> river, which generally paved, narrow, legally open for walking and bicycling 
> people, often part of the national/international bicycle-road network, and 
> closed for motorcar traffic (usually only waterworks' cars are allowed). 
> What's that? Cannot be "unclassified" since motorcars aren't allowed, cannot 
> be service since it doesn't "leading to something". Some people tag it this 
> way, some that way. That's not good.
> 
> Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the 
> wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or 
> unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service for 
> "narrow paved roads w/ private motorcar access". I'd support the latter: I 
> would rather use unclassified here, but that's an opinion.
> 
> Your inputs are welcome. 
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> Here, as well as there.
> 
> Thank you,
> g
> 
> ___
> 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] Is it man_made=water_tap?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 18:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would not tag a bubbler as a tap.
>
These were the bubblers that we grew up with at school

https://victoriancollections.net.au/media/collectors/57a00a4fd0cdd1210422a51e/items/59b460bc21ea6705f4784c26/item-media/59b460db21ea6705f4785418/item-fit-380x285.jpg

& we had a few of these in the main street!

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkvFD46TMCRZIHH70vkP8Q0Qzdjv0HWGoPoGAbFKYP9lx9off-7OuONYzPkQ7MkTGZ--4&usqp=CAU

Aren't they also taps, despite being bubblers?

> "if water comes out, it is a tap" is not always the case.
>
I should have said that if you need to manipulate something to make the
water come out, then it's a tap!

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Two more questions re the wiki.

" A water tap is a man-made construction providing access to water, *supplied
by centralized water distribution system*" - how about taps connected to
rain-water tanks? That part of that sentence should be deleted.

&

" Note that fountain =
bubbler 
providing tiny upward jet of water is not considered as a water tap"

I disagree with that completely. In regard to a water tap, there's no
difference if the water comes out downwards, upwards or straight out! It is
still a device for providing drinking water.

Thanks

Graeme


On Fri, 30 Sept 2022 at 23:30, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Sep 30, 2022, 15:13 by georg2...@nurfuerspam.de:
>
> Hi Mateusz,
>
> in your edit
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aman_made%3Dwater_tap&type=revision&diff=2408821&oldid=2112133
> you added the sentence
>
> For working one additional tags fitting it would be ...
>
>
> I don't really get the meaning 🤷‍♂️ Could you word it differently or
> explain and let me look for a wording? Thank you 🙂
>
> I meant that one that is pure decoration and not active and
> not giving water will not qualify for this extra tags
>
> Do you have an idea how to better phrase it?
>
> As you're very active in the wiki: Do we have a template (in the meaning
> as in Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer) for _the full wiki page_
> describing a key/tag/value? I did only find templates in the MediaWiki
> sense, so {{something}}, but not the whole page including typical
> sections etc.
>
> maybe
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_a_page_describing_key_or_value
> will help
>
> ___
> 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] OSM Wiki

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 4:48 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> Two more questions re the wiki.
>
> " A water tap is a man-made construction providing access to water, *supplied
> by centralized water distribution system*" - how about taps connected to
> rain-water tanks? That part of that sentence should be deleted.
>
Agree it should be deleted or at least modified.  A tap could be supplied
by a local well for example. In fact, it may not be obvious how a tap is
supplied by just looking at it.

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[stevea]

I'll go this:  "A water tap is a human-made construction providing access to 
potable water" and leave out "supplied by centralized water distribution 
system."  That might be "a bucket near the roof of this building."  Honestly, I 
think it helps to connote "with a handy, accessible, user-friendly valve" soon 
after.  Emphasis on potable, drinkable, usable water, right now, like many 
humans enjoy what we mean today by indoor, "running water."  (Even as this 
fixture might be a raw, brass bib outdoors, where you might connect a garden 
hose, but it's still a water tap, as is the drinking fountain at the football 
pitch).  You might spray one of these up to your lips, you might wash your 
hands in it or use it to draw water into your hydration bottle for later.  
There are quite a few different kinds of these.

Words are powerful.  That's what "water tap" means to me.

It's still unclear to me where best (now, tomorrow) to discuss such topics, 
wiki Talk, here, other...  I figure as long as I say my thing no more than 
once, I'm OK.  Please let me know if I'm off there.  I do consume and 
participate in multiple media, as I think many or all of do to some degree, we 
don't always overlap "neatly."
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Oct 1, 2022, 00:43 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

> "Note that > fountain > => 
> bubbler >  
> providing tiny upward jet of water is not considered as a water tap"
>
> I disagree with that completely. In regard to a water tap, there's no 
> difference if the water comes out downwards, upwards or straight out! It is 
> still a device for providing drinking water.
>

I would not  expect https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg
to be a water tap, but I am not a native speaker.

How you would then distinguish
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg
and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg

(upward tiny flow vs downward flow that basically always is more significant)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[stevea]

As a native speaker (though US English, not "the King's" or RP), a "bubbler" 
(what we Yanks call "drinking fountain") is a water tap.

Some of these "aim at our lips," some of them are "better suited in a downward 
direction, perhaps for hand-washing, perhaps for drawing into a hydration 
bottle...".  Both are water taps, hey, maybe water_tap as a value.

To me, it feels like "we either close or there," as I see a great deal of 
agreement, here.  I haven't heard a wider chime-in to my emphasis on "potable" 
(drinkable, if you prefer) but I think many of us mean that with a water_tap, 
even if we don't say it, I think we should.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 09:01, Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
> Agree it should be deleted or at least modified.
>

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 09:19, stevea  wrote:

> I'll go this:  "A water tap is a human-made construction providing access
> to potable water" and leave out "supplied by centralized water distribution
> system."


Yep, we're in agreement there.

How about "water bubblers"? Are they also a tap?


> It's still unclear to me where best (now, tomorrow) to discuss such
> topics, wiki Talk, here, other...


Yep! Many times I've asked questions on various wikis, some of which have
only been modified in the last month or so, so still well & truly active, &
never had a response? Discord is (usually) OK for a quick answer to How do
I ..., but a problem I sometimes notice there is that I'm asking questions
during the Australian day, which is middle of the night in Europe & US!
Tagging still, atm, seems the best place for in-depth discussions, although
Discourse "may" replace it?

 Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 09:32, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
> I would not  expect https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg
> to be a water tap, but I am not a native speaker.
>

Yes, quite definitely a water tap!

How you would then distinguish
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg
> and
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg
>

I wouldn't! I'd call them both a tap.


> (upward tiny flow vs downward flow that basically always is more
> significant)
>

For the purpose of a water tap, the amount of flow is basically irrelevant,
just so long as you can get water from it as required.

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 09:37, stevea  wrote:

> I haven't heard a wider chime-in to my emphasis on "potable" (drinkable,
> if you prefer) but I think many of us mean that with a water_tap, even if
> we don't say it, I think we should.
>

I'm not sure if we should define that all taps are automatically potable /
drinkable.

I see a lot of taps in parks etc that are tagged as non-potable, because
they use recycled water.

Maybe leave that as water_tap + drinking_water=yes?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 5:53 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 09:37, stevea  wrote:
>
>> I haven't heard a wider chime-in to my emphasis on "potable" (drinkable,
>> if you prefer) but I think many of us mean that with a water_tap, even if
>> we don't say it, I think we should.
>>
>
> I'm not sure if we should define that all taps are automatically potable /
> drinkable.
>
Agree.  Sometimes the water is just for animals (e.g. horses), there are
also water taps that supply water for washing out the holding tanks on RVs
and that water isn't potable.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[stevea]

With those, no need to say potable/drinkable, yeah.  I do see signs that say 
"using recycled water" or "not drinkable, use for radiator only" signs (fewer 
of the latter, but I do recall those from decades ago).  This might be marked 
with a "do not drink" glyph / red circle-with-slash over a human drinking, too.

So, yeah, a tap might be only for "golf course irrigation only," for example, 
and unfit for drinking.

Thanks for the additional inputs.

> On Sep 30, 2022, at 4:56 PM, Mike Thompson  wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 5:53 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick  
> wrote:


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

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 7:45 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> How about "water bubblers"? Are they also a tap?
>

Ah yes, the "bubbler".

For those that don't live in Rhode Island, or one specific part of
Wisconsin, "bubbler" is a word that we use for what's called a "water
fountain" in other parts of the US.  The history of this is that once upon
a time, the Kohler company (the one that makes faucets and so forth)
manufactured the first outdoor water fountain, and named this invention the
"bubbler".  For reasons probably lost in history, these Kohler Bubblers
were first installed in those two locations and locals there referred to
them as bubblers from thereon out.  As other manufacturers made other water
fountain fixtures, "everywhere else" just called them water fountains.

I was probably in high school before I learned what a "water fountain"
was...
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[stevea]

Maybe it's west coast / east coast, but I hear "drinking fountain," and maybe 
I'm hearing more-often in Rhode Island "water fountain."  That latter, to my 
California ear, is a broad category that does include "bubblers" (to spray up 
at your lips and you take a drink right now) but "water fountain" (more often, 
simply "fountain") also includes the fountain at the urban street park that 
people dart in and out of on a hot day.  Or, the lit, synchronized ones at big 
Las Vegas resorts.  And again, not fire hydrants.

Not the jets on water park slide / rides, though.  Those aren't "fountains."

There are those "umbrella-shaped things" that spray water in water parks, too, 
I WOULD call those "fountain," of a certain, specific sort.  (I think Minh had 
a discussion about these somewhere...).  I wouldn't call most fountains a 
water_tap, to get back to it.  But what I call a "drinking fountain" and 
UK/Aussies call a bubbler and what Brian in Rhode Island calls a "water 
fountain" (and I've heard that, as I've heard bubbler, too) are not THOSE kind 
of "fountain."  Ugh, language, sometimes.

Peel back just a layer or three on this onion and it gets fairly rich pretty 
fast!

There's water_tap, there's fountain (water fountains, same as drinking 
fountains / bubblers, not the same as big fountains in the park or Las Vegas), 
there's bubblers, are we (largely?) on the same page about these?!  Good 
discussion so far!
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Proposed features/amenity=mailroom

[Forman, George via Tagging]

Propose the tag amenity=mailroom  for identifying a mailroom for receiving 
packages or letters at a university, an apartment building complex, or a 
commercial office building complex.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dmailroom#Tagging

Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 1 Oct 2022, at 02:38, stevea  wrote:
> 
> There's water_tap, there's fountain (water fountains, same as drinking 
> fountains / bubblers, not the same as big fountains in the park or Las 
> Vegas), there's bubblers, are we (largely?) on the same page about these?!  
> Good discussion so far!


there is also a whole tagging scheme for all of this.

amenity=drinking_water
fountain=drinking/bubbler/…
drinking_water=yes/no/…
man_made=water_tap
amenity=watering_place
amenity=fountain 
…

the tags can be combined to get to a useful description.

FWIW, the water tap tag is often used for water that is not potable (because 
otherwise the standard is amenity=drinking_water

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