[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Approved - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi,

the proposal has been approved.

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

In the coming days, I will create wiki pages for the keys. I will also 
try to incorporate some of the comments by users who voted against the 
proposal or abstained from voting (without changing the core of the 
accepted tagging scheme, of course).


Kind regards,
Michael
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi,

just a short reminder that today is the last day of voting for this proposal.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi Tom,

Am 10.10.22 um 10:54 schrieb Tom Pfeifer:

Accepting a particular coin or banknote is among short-living business policies 
that can change
frequently and is often harder to observe than e.g. opening_hours. Thus they 
are difficult to
maintain and likely to be outdated. In my opinion, they should not be in the 
OSM database in general.


I disagree, at least from my experience, these are very constant 
policies in shops.



Sometimes such changes can even have technical reasons. E.g. the metro rail in 
Berlin has separate
blocks in their ticket vending machines, for coins, bills, card to be inserted, 
cards with NFC.
They take them in and out as they like, you cannot rely on finding a particular 
one the next day.
Reasons might be defective blocks or vandalism fear on particular stations.


I agree that in a case where denotation acceptance in vending machines 
is really varying, it should not be mapped. But in my experience, those 
are exceptions to the rule that this is generally a quite constant 
feature of such machines.


Kind regards,
Michael

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi Martin,

Am 11.10.22 um 09:10 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:

in Italy, one and two cent coins have been abolished, they are not accepted any 
more in shops, and while prices are still ending mostly with 9, the sum gets 
rounded.

I guess this should not be mapped because the default?


As for most tagging in OSM, I think that the (regional) default should 
not be mapped. If not accepting 0.01 EUR and 0.02 EUR is default in 
Italy, it should only be mapped at locations that do accept them.


Kind regards,
Michael
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

The proposal includes advice to only use this tag in shops that don't accept 
all denominations.

For vending machines, on the other hand, it is very common to not accept all 
denominations, so the tag should/can always be added.

Kind regards
Michael

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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Payment denominations

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi,

I have written a proposal for adding information about the coins and 
banknotes that are accepted at a feature, especially vending machines, 
but in some cases also amenities and shops. I decided to make this an 
addition to the payment:*=* namespace and use the value format of the 
charge=* tag to integrate this as seamless as possible into existing 
tagging practices. You can find more information in the proposal:


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

Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.

KInd regards,
Michael
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] What is a saltbox?

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Hi,
we have a big inconsistency between different wiki pages and editors how we 
define the roof shape "saltbox". 
1) A saltbox is a roof with a tilted part at left and right side and a flat 
part on top. This definition can be found at:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings
It is used for example in the presets of the Vespucci editor. 

2) A saltbox is a roof with only one tilted part (usually directed at the road) 
and one flat part on top. On the other side it goes straight down. The roof 
shape described at 1) is a double_saltbox.
This definition can be found 
at:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OSM-4D/Roof_table

This definition is for example used by the StreetComplete editor.

This is a serious issue, because it means that for none of the over 3,000 
buildings with the tag roof:shape=saltbox we can know which shape it actually 
has.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

The only pedestrian lane that I know, in my German hometown, is separated from 
the rest of the road by a solid line. So it's not legal for vehicles to drive 
on it.
Michael 

 
  Am So., Nov. 3, 2019 at 8:20 schrieb Martin 
Koppenhoefer:   

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 2 nov 2019, alle ore 20:37, Clifford Snow  
> ha scritto:
> 
> I like your proposal but think it needs to clarify the difference between a 
> pedestrian lane and a shoulder [1]. In the US, most (many?) states allow 
> pedestrians to walk on shoulders if there is no sidewalk/footway, with the 
> exception of motorways. How would a mapper know if this is a shoulder or a 
> pedestrian lane?


you may not drive on the shoulder but you can drive on the pedestrian lane.

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] Billboard or something else

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Hi,
I agree that advertising is not a fitting key. I could only find these:
 https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=traffic_information_display 
(18 uses)https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=variable_message_sign 
(9 uses)


Michael 
 
  Am Mi., Okt. 30, 2019 at 3:37 schrieb Graeme 
Fitzpatrick:   Just doing some tagging along a motorway 
& spotted an electronic traffic information sign: 
https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.5884424,152.8232412,3a,75y,110.42h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKWvFW2sU9ugwzCMYv6hTkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
  At this moment, it's showing travel times to various spots up ahead, but can 
also display warnings re crashes etc
Don't think it really counts as advertising=billboard 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:advertising=billboard, but what is the 
better alternative?
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] Feature proposal - Approved - Utility markers

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Hi,
should position=* be kept when retagging pipeline markers to the new scheme? If 
yes, then this tag should be added to the wiki documentation.
Michael  
 
  Am So., Okt. 27, 2019 at 18:35 schrieb François 
Lacombe:   Hi all,
Voting of Utility markers proposal is now over and it was approved with 46 yes 
out of 47 votes.This is a great participation level for such kind of topic.
Thank you to anyone who spent time to improve this proposal and finally gives 
his vote.
Cleanup has already began, wiki will be up to date in a couple of 
days.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:markerhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:utility
Feel free to add examples or raise concerns about particular situations in 
appropriate Talk pagesHope this will also help further milestone, 
highway/railway markers mapping and development.

All the best
François Lacombe___
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] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I have now canceled the proposal. I really just wanted to establish a 
tag for the shore power devices in front of my workplace. I don't have 
enough interest and motivation to try to fit at least four different 
kinds of power-providing devices into one tag. And I also can't think of 
a way to prevent overlap in case of different tags for them.



Am 25.06.2019 um 13:32 schrieb Michael Brandtner via Tagging:
I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is 
now to incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the 
same main tag. A problem I have not solved yet is how to incorporate 
the sub-tags of the tags that would be marked as deprecated?? (mainly 
amenity=charging_station).


Am Samstag, 22. Juni 2019, 17:41:08 MESZ hat Michael Brandtner via 
Tagging  Folgendes geschrieben:



Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply 



The definition (wording can surely be improved):
"??A place where you can get electrical power."

I've not taken into account your discussion about different socket 
types. This would be the topic for a different proposal about 
improving the power_supply= sub-tag. But this proposal is only about 
establishing the new main tag.


I'm looking forward to your comments!
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

 I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is now to 
incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the same main tag. 
A problem I have not solved yet is how to incorporate the sub-tags of the tags 
that would be marked as deprecated  (mainly amenity=charging_station). 

Am Samstag, 22. Juni 2019, 17:41:08 MESZ hat Michael Brandtner via Tagging 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply
The definition (wording can surely be improved):" A place where you can get 
electrical power."
I've not taken into account your discussion about different socket types. This 
would be the topic for a different proposal about improving the power_supply= 
sub-tag. But this proposal is only about establishing the new main tag.
I'm looking forward to your comments! 
___
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] Tagging sockets

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I'd like to separate the discussions about amenity=power_supply (my proposal) 
and the enhancement/merging of the socket: and power_supply key.

On topic: I think it is important that information can be added by looking at 
the device. This means that in my opinion socket:cee_blue= and socket:cee_red= 
should be valid tags. The amperes, if known, could be added with 
socket:[type]:current= like suggested in the wiki.


   Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2019, 11:36:16 MESZ hat John Sturdy 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the cee_blue 
sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than limiting it to one 
rating; this will also make it consistent with the cee_red_* sockets.
Also, BS1363 (UK, Ireland, and quite a few other countries --- see 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power_plugs_and_sockets:_British_and_related_types#International_usage_of_Type_G)
 is missing.
__John

On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 2:45 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

  On 23/06/19 01:39, Michael Brandtner via Tagging wrote:
  
 Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal. 
  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply 
  The definition (wording can surely be improved): " A place where you can get 
electrical power."  
 
 This could be applied to an airport that provides USB charging ports at 
table/desk/chair .
 
  
  I've not taken into account your discussion about different socket types. 
This would be the topic for a different proposal about improving the 
power_supply= sub-tag. But this proposal is only about establishing the new 
main tag.  
 
 Unfortunately the connection will be a vital detail for most. e.g. Some items 
can be charged from a USB post others cannot. 
 
 I would think that there needs to be one tag for the connection 'detail'. It 
needs to be able to be applied to any tag where the connection detail is to be 
tagged. 
 
 At the moment there are 2 keys for this detail
 
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:socket
 and
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power_supply
 
 These should be combined into one universal sub key that could be applied to 
any feature. 
 
 --
 I think most map users will be after a USB power port to charge their phone! 
So that should be a priority and something that should be mentioned on your 
proposal as it will then get a lot of attention. 
 I think you will find that the socket type is a vital detail and needs to be 
addressed. 
 
 Minor detail: The order of the 'usefull combination' can be better. Access, 
fee and socket type should be at the top. 
 
 ___
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] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I didn't really want to include device charging into this, but it seems that my 
tag is too generic to prevent that. Maybe I should stop trying to combine the 
power supplies at camping grounds and marinas and instead go with 
amenity=shorepower?  
 
  Am So., Juni 23, 2019 at 3:44 schrieb Warin<61sundow...@gmail.com>:   
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
  
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply
The definition (wording can surely be improved):" A place where you can get 
electrical power."
I've not taken into account your discussion about different socket types. This 
would be the topic for a different proposal about improving the power_supply= 
sub-tag. But this proposal is only about establishing the new main tag.
I'm looking forward to your comments! ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I've found this Wikipedia page:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shorepower

There is no shore power tag in OSM yet. But now I'm uncertain if we should also 
make a difference between shore power and power supply for other uses. 
 
  Am Fr., Juni 21, 2019 at 14:21 schrieb Michael Brandtner via 
Tagging:   Hi,
I'm thinking about (and in fact, have already used about two times) a new tag: 
amenity=power_supply. It is meant for mapping places where you can get 
electrical power for a fee. They can be found at camping grounds and harbours. 
They have sockets you can use to get power and you can pay with a special card 
that you can buy at a shop (or maybe sometimes with credit cards or even coins, 
I'm not sure about that). 

The tagging scheme for this wouldn't really be new. You create a node at the 
location of the machine, similar how we already map amenity=water_point. For 
additional information about sockets etc., the already established tag 
power_supply=* can be used.
Please note that this is not an amenity=charging_station. These devices are not 
meant for charging vehicles but for getting power for your boat or caravan 
while staying at a harbour or camping ground.
By the way, the tag is not my invention. At the moment, it is already used 56 
times. 

Do you think this is a good idea? I'd like to get your comments before starting 
an actual proposal process.
Michael
___
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] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

 The sub-tag does already exist, I've linked to it in my original post 
(power_supply=). What doesn't exist is a main tag for tagging isolated columns 
for power supply.
This image shows what I'm talking about:
 
https://www.alamy.de/outdoor-steckdosen-mit-sicherheitsschalter-auf-blau-metall-pol-fur-die-stromversorgung-von-kleinen-booten-im-hafen-umgeben-mit-konkreten-fliese-montiert-image233468696.html








Am Freitag, 21. Juni 2019, 16:17:48 MESZ hat Philip Barnes 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 15:49 +0200, Jan S wrote:
> 
> Am 21. Juni 2019 15:25:06 MESZ schrieb Philip Barnes <
> p...@trigpoint.me.uk>:
> > On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 16:07 +0300, Anton Klim wrote:
> > > Guess it could be the same as fuel stations/hotels etc with extra
> > > amenities: high-level tagging on the whole campsite pitch with a
> > > sub
> > > tag, or nodes on actual power sockets for more detail.
> > 
> > The position is useful information, you may need to know if your
> > cable
> > is long enough.
> 
> Would such a tag fit for e-car charging stations, too, or can we
> already tag those? These charging stations basically provide
> electricity for money, too, don't they?
We already map those see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=charging%20station?uselang=en

Slightly different in that you would navigate to one if you need to
charge your car. You would not go to a campsite to charge your phone,
but power can be a consideration when choosing somewhere to camp.

Although power available sub-tagging could be applied to lots of
objects. Pubs, Cafes and Railway Stations provide power for customers
to charge mobile phones and laptops, most will provide mains but many
now have USB connectors so you only need to carry a cable.

Phil (trigpoint)



___
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] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Hi,
I'm thinking about (and in fact, have already used about two times) a new tag: 
amenity=power_supply. It is meant for mapping places where you can get 
electrical power for a fee. They can be found at camping grounds and harbours. 
They have sockets you can use to get power and you can pay with a special card 
that you can buy at a shop (or maybe sometimes with credit cards or even coins, 
I'm not sure about that). 

The tagging scheme for this wouldn't really be new. You create a node at the 
location of the machine, similar how we already map amenity=water_point. For 
additional information about sockets etc., the already established tag 
power_supply=* can be used.
Please note that this is not an amenity=charging_station. These devices are not 
meant for charging vehicles but for getting power for your boat or caravan 
while staying at a harbour or camping ground.
By the way, the tag is not my invention. At the moment, it is already used 56 
times. 

Do you think this is a good idea? I'd like to get your comments before starting 
an actual proposal process.
Michael
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

 I think that this is a language issue and the hallway (German "Flur") is 
meant, not the floor.

Am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2019, 03:11:32 MESZ hat marc marc 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 Hello,

 > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table

questions / minor suggestions :

in changing_table:location=room what's the usecase of :
"or the floor to the toilets" ? maybe just drop it.
if someone wants to put their child on the floor, I don't see how
we could describe that this floor is adapted but not this other one

the first sentence of the tagging paragraph is about the rational (why 
some other existing tag doesn't fit the need),
drop or move it to the rational paragraph

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I’m against the tag baby_changing_table. As I have already written, 
changing_table is unambiguous and the most common word for this thing. No need 
for such a long key.

Am Donnerstag, April 25, 2019, 10:52 PM schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer 
:



sent from a phone

> On 22. Apr 2019, at 01:49, marc marc  wrote:
> 
> I know the tag description, thanks :)
> the question is "can we expect to have changing tables on a regular 
> basis that are different from what we can expect with other tags,
> which would justify encouraging people to put a description ?


I don’t mind encouraging or not a description, as long as it is in the wiki 
alone it won’t change anything, you can add description tags to anything where 
you feel it is appropriate and generally we should use it mainly for exceptions 
where structured tagging doesn’t seem appropriate.
As I understand it this wouldn’t often be a description of the table object but 
more likely a description of the context or circumstances, e.g. if you’d have 
to ask the staff, or get the table in one place and use it in the next room, 
etc.

What about changing tables as a feature property? For example in Germany there 
are chain shops (drugstores) which offer changing tables as a free service to 
their clients (including napkins). You might not want to position it in the 
shop (the shop might be mapped as a node) but just give the information that 
they offer the service. changing_table=* would seem to be the right tag for 
this property, what about the table as a feature/osm object?
The proposal lacks a definition at the moment, a sentence what the tag should 
mean.

I would prefer “baby_changing_table” as it makes it clearer what it is about 
(think about it, you also gave the proposal this title, and not just changing 
table).

Ciao, 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I don' think we should use no, but private. But as others have stated, I can't 
really think of a changing table that should be mapped in osm but isn't 
accessible even for customers. 
But us this really a point we need to discuss? Can't we just say that 
changing_table:access should be used with values of the access key and let 
mappers decide which one is the most apptopiate? 
 
  Am Mo., Apr. 22, 2019 at 14:46 schrieb Valor Naram:   
___
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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

Even if there is an extra room, there will be a changing table in it. and the 
bench is a substitute for a changing table. So I don't find this tag limiting. 
Of course there will be also a bin and a washing basin in such a room. But the 
table is the most important feature, similar to amenity=toilets


Am Sonntag, April 21, 2019, 5:56 PM schrieb Rory McCann :

The current proposal is baby_changing_table=*, but the common values for 
diaper=* include things like diaper=room, diaper=table, diaper=bench, so 
I think limiting this tag to just tables is bad. May I suggest 
baby_changing_facilities=* instead?




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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

 changing_table seems to be the most common term so we should use it.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/changing%20tablehttps://www.dictionary.com/browse/changing-table
 



Gesendet von Yahoo Mail für iPad


Am Sonntag, April 21, 2019, 9:12 AM schrieb bkil :

Here are some alternatives, do share your concerns with 
each:nappy_changing=*nappy_changing_place=*nappy_changing_table=*nappy_changing_room=*...
 same with _change_ in place of _changing_
Some I do not like as 
much:changing_table=*change_table=*baby_table=*diaper=*diaper_table=*nappy_table=*
On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 2:07 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

  +1 for starting it.
 
 Think the name could be better .. sounds like a baby exchange :)
 
 On 21/04/19 04:59, bkil wrote:
  
 Thank you for taking the time to complete this nice write up. I obviously 
support the proposed scheme. ;-) 
  I don't have strong feelings about the exact naming of the used key, as I 
mentioned previously.  
  On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 5:14 PM Valor Naram  wrote:
  
  Definition: A tag to mark the possibility to change the baby's nappy  
Proposal page: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/baby_changing_tables 
  Please join the discussion and I will spend time to make changes. 
  Cheerio 
  Sören alias Valor Naram  ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
  
  
 ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 

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

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



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

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

[Michael Brandtner via Tagging]

I’m not a native speaker but I don’t think there will be any confusion when 
using changing_table. I don’t know of any changing tables for adults outside of 
nursing homes. In case of need we can add changing_table:for=adults.


Am Freitag, April 19, 2019, 11:06 PM schrieb marc marc 
:

I encourage you to make a proposal if you want.

in reality the problem #1 is that some members of the community are very 
cautious when there is a 1:1 change proposal to replace a bad 
"not-low-usage" key with a new better key, including those who have 
never filled one of this object in osm nor used the data about this 
object :(
Maybe your proposal will pass sucess due it is changing one key
with several others.

the problem of existing applications (there are only 4 reported on 
taginfo) is not a problem. it is possible to ask it to support the 2 
keys for 1 month and to make a mass edition in the middle of the month. 
but here again the problem is the timidity of some members

the small question that remains, should the key be called 
baby_changing_table or changing_table? some people talked
about adult tables (I have a little trouble imagining an adult
on a table). that could avoid confusion


Le 19.04.19 à 22:46, Valor Naram a écrit :
> You (Warin) and marc marc made some suggestions on how to improve this 
> key. I also found a workaround for the problem of
> 
>  > [r]eplacing the key `diaper` with `changing_table` [or some other key 
> or by any other changings how to tag changing tables] without or with 
> the consens of the others of the community would hurt apps like AndOSM 
> and other platforms working with the `diaper` key e.g. Babykarte.
> 
> I will write a proposal or should I first discuss my ideas with you instead?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Sören alias Valor Naram
> 
> 
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a 
> changing table
> From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> CC:
> 
> 
>    On 19/04/19 05:21, Paul Allen wrote:
>>    On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 19:54, Valor Naram >    > wrote:
>>
>>
>>        https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Proposal_list
>>        guided me to you. I have the following situation: I want to tag a
>>        changing table but this changing table is in the toilet room for
>>        wheelchair users. The page at
>>        https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:d
>>        iaper states tagging for changing tables is just available in
>>        toilets
>>        for women,-men and unisex but not in toilets for wheelchair users.
>>
>>
>>    At first glance I thought you wanted to tag places where people in
>>    wheelchairs
>>    could change their own diapers.  Then I checked with the wiki page and
>>    realized what you mean.
>>
>>    And then I realized diaper=* is not a good idea for a key.  In
>>    British English we call
>>    them nappies (singular nappy), not diapers.   And what the toilet
>>    has is not a supply
>>    of nappies (diapers) but a CHANGING TABLE.  Which is what you
>>    described it as,
>>    because that's what it is.  And had the key been
>>    nappy_changing_table instead of diaper
>>    I wouldn't have (briefly) misunderstood what you wanted to tag (a
>>    changing table in
>>    a toilet for wheelchair users, not a place where wheelchair users
>>    can change their
>>    own nappy).
> 
>    +1 ... change table!
> 
>    Wheelies (wheelchair users) also use catheters with bags. Much
>    easier to deal with compared to a diaper.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

[Michael Brandtner]

 I'm not sure how to proceed now. Should I create a proposal for this?
Am Samstag, 1. Dezember 2018, 12:16:42 MEZ hat bkil  
Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 You have the choice to disagree with micromapping and ignore it. Many such 
decisions are made on a local level, for example when executing mapping parties.
We help define such keys in a consistent manner so *others* may map such micro 
features. We are not encouraging others to do micromapping either, but if they 
do, they will at least not sprinkle the database with random, inconsistent 
keys. Though certain imports provide such information as well, making mapping 
effort a non-issue.
Based on such precisely defined keys, you have all means to filter the database 
when you load them onto your devices or your services, so it should not cause 
harm to data consumers either.
Also note that one's trash is another's treasure. While neither you nor I would 
map railroad ties, some would consider localizing balise useful, and with a 
proper reader (or an import) it is just a matter of going along the track (or 
even riding the train).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balise
If you are orienteering or simply lost, reference numbers on balise, power 
poles or other man made objects could come in handy for those without 
electronics and having only a printed OpenStreetMap.
A more realistic example is that to you, wifi or power supplies may not be 
important, but if one doesn't have mobile Internet subscription and a large 
powerback or if the given provider in the given village has appalling coverage, 
it can come useful to know which pub to favor when on a long trip (or during a 
mapping party). Same goes for marking pub sports - you may not be playing 
these, but not everyone attends pubs for the sole purpose of getting wasted.
I don't like to judge the needs of others, as I may not know all local 
circumstances, and anyway - who am I to judge? If something can in general be 
considered important for a large class of people, I usually map it regardless 
whether I need it or whether I endorse the practice.
Going back to the question of parking, it has occurred to me a lot that drivers 
asked where they can found the nearest meter. In many cases, they could have 
purchased their tickets via SMS, but they didn't know the code and couldn't 
find the meter to find such tiny piece of information. If even a single minute 
is wasted per driver for finding a meter and walking up to it just for reading 
the code, we're wasting a large amount of GDP for something where we could 
offer a better solution with ease. Again, this doesn't bother me much as I'm 
usually parking for free, but I map such things for solidarity.

Take care and be nice to others,k

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:46 PM Sergio Manzi  wrote:

  
+1 You're my hero!
 
To clarify: my contribution was about making right (according to my point of 
view, of course!) something that I thought had issues, but in a general way I'm 
totally with you and I'm finding a little bit crazy the level of details that 
someone want to use in the description of OSM features, some of which, I think, 
should have very little to do with OSM (I'm thinking of the  meticoulous 
description/mapping of infrastructures of less than general interest. As I said 
elswere: should we map railroad ties too?).
 
 
Thanks!
 
Sergio
 

 
 On 2018-11-29 21:29, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
  
 
 
  On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 02:19, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
  
  
Right! Too many payments! :-) To spare some bytes it could be: 
payment:sms:ExampleApp:code=.  What do you think?
  
 I would think that it shouldn't be up to OSM to list all the ways someone can 
pay for parking, down to which app to use or phone number to call / SMS. 
  OSM should say that "this" area is paid parking & leave it at that - once the 
driver parks their car, they walk over to the payment terminal & all the 
necessary info is listed there, & updated as needed by the car park operator - 
their problem, not our's! 
  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
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

[Michael Brandtner]

If I pay per SMS, then I don't pay per app. It doesn't make sense to have both 
in the same key. I do like bkil's suggestions but do think that the tags should 
be as specific as possible, even if that means to have multiple keys with the 
same value.
So for 
example:payment:sms=yespayment:AppName1=yespayment:AppName2y=yesref:sms=12345contact:sms=0127ref:AppName1=12345ref:AppName2=12345
This leads me to another interesting question: Should these be added to 
amenity=parking or to vending=parking_tickets? In my opinion it makes more 
sense to add them to the parking lot itself because I don't need the ticket 
machine if I use pay by phone. But the wiki only suggests payment=* keys for 
vending=parking_tickets, not for amenity=parking. 

Sergio Manzi  schrieb am 21:15 Mittwoch, 28.November 2018:
 

  Sorry, but it should be: 
 payment:sms=yes
 payment:sms:WhateverPayApp=yes
 payment:sms:WhateverPayApp:contact=
 payment:sms:WhateverPayApp:ref:payment= 
 because, sooner or later, multiple payment options/clearingouse/apps could be 
supported and each should have its info. The "ref:" could be go, IMHO...
  Cheers, Sergio Manzi 
  On 2018-11-28 21:07, bkil wrote:
  
 payment:sms=yes
payment:WhateverPayApp=yes
contact:sms=
ref:payment=

As an alternative, ref:sms=* would also work for me, though I think
it's redundant if the code is the same for all payment options.
ref:payment:sms=* sounds a bit excessive, but would be the most
correct tagging. However, OSM strives for consistency and
mapper-friendliness more than "correct" tagging in most cases, so I.

I would definitely mark the exact payment variety, like

* payment:sms=*,
* payment:app=* or even better payment:WhateverPayApp=*,
* payment:mastercard_contactless=*.

I don't recommend using payment:pay_by_phone=* or
payment:contactless=* due to the sheer number of incompatible
different payment solutions (see wiki). It sounds worse to me than
payment:debit_cards=* that many disapprove of, while I do use
payment:debit_cards=* myself. I actually wanted to bring this up in a
new topic recently:

 
 
 payment:contactless=*
 
 
 Contactless payment on Wikipedia and Contactless smart card on Wikipedia
Used to indicate that a venue has 'contactless' (RFID/NFC-based) bank
card readers. You may consider adding the precise variety of
contactless smart card accepted: payment:expresspay=*,
payment:mastercard_contactless=* (formerly payment:paypass=*),
payment:visa_contactless=* (alternatively payment:paywave=*),
payment:quickpass=*, payment:quicpay=* (overseas J/Speedy, commonly
payment:QUICPay=*), payment:rupay_contactless=*, payment:zip=*,
payment:mifare=*
(wikipedia:en:MIFARE#Places_that_use_MIFARE_products),
payment:felica=*(wikipedia:en:FeliCa#Card_usage), payment:wechat=*
(wikipedia:en:WeChat#WeChat_Pay_payment_services), payment:alipay=*
(wikipedia:en:Alipay#Comparison_with_other_payment_systems),
payment:venmo=*. Not to be confused with contactless electronic
variants of payment:meal_vouchers=* and payment:electronic_purses=*
that are used in-house at many places. <<

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 9:29 AM Philip Barnes  wrote:
 
 
On 21 November 2018 12:45:30 GMT, Michael Brandtner 
 wrote:
 
 Philip Barnes  schrieb am 23:29 Dienstag,
20.November 2018:

 
 I am not 100% sure that mobile payment is the correct term, that to
 
 me implies using your phone for contactless payment.
But wouldn't that be payment:contactless?

 
 The English term used in these cases is Pay by Phone.
 
 So your suggestion is payment:pay_by_phone and ref:pay_by_phone?
 
 That is correct, pay by phone is the normal English usage.

Phil (trigpoint)
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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


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

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

[Michael Brandtner]

 Philip Barnes  schrieb am 23:29 Dienstag, 20.November 
2018:

 > I am not 100% sure that mobile payment is the correct term, that to me 
 > implies using your phone for contactless payment.
But wouldn't that be payment:contactless? 

> The English term used in these cases is Pay by Phone.
So your suggestion is payment:pay_by_phone and ref:pay_by_phone?   ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

[Michael Brandtner]

Am Dienstag, 20. November 2018, 23:32:40 MEZ hat marc marc 
 Folgendes geschrieben:

> it's a ref specific to this parking to be entered in an app ?

> or a 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment#Payment_via_phone ?


Yes, it's a ref specific to this parking lot to be entered into an app or sms. 

But I just realized that I'm also not sure how to enter this payment method. 
payment:sms is documented in the wiki but how should we enter payment via an 
app? payment:mobile_payment? payment:app?

And maybe the ref should then be more like

ref:payment:app=12345
ref:payment:sms=12345

Michael

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Tramtrack_on_highway)

[Michael Brandtner]

 I think I agree with Rainer: You propose to add a  "railway=" tag to a way 
that already has a "highway=" tag. So then why not just add "railway=tram" and 
delete the separate way? If this is not wanted (e.g. for rendering reasons) 
then I think we should use another tag instead of "railway=".
Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018, 09:55:54 MEZ hat Nikulainen, Jukka K 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 Hello, and thank you all again for your comments!

>>Le 20 novembre 2018 22:02:01 GMT+01:00, Rainer  a écrit :
>>Sorry that I enter the discussion late.
>>First, is my understanding correct that you want to add a tag on a
>>highway that has embedded tram rails? So e.g. a bicycle router might
>>avoid such highways?
>>Generally a good idea, I think. However to use
>>railway=separately_mapped
>>is not so good in my opinion, because then the way has highway=* and
>>railway=*. What should a renderer do, render a highway or render a
>>railway?
>>As the rails in the highway are a feature that describes the shape of
>>the highway similar to surface=*, I would rather use a new tag
>>embedded_rails=yes or even more precise
>>embedded_rails=tram | embedded_rails=railway.
>>The latter is even worse for bicycles, because the rail grooves are
>>broader.
>>
>>Best regards,

That's a good point, although I don't know whether the renderer is the main 
issue. There are lots of other tags that the renderer (rightly) ignores.
It might be construed as strange that a highway= has a rail= -tag and that the 
railway is, specifically, not rendered. But I'm not sure whether the semantics 
of my tag proposal are troublesome. What do other people think about this? The 
point of my tag-proposal after all is that there _is_, in fact, a pair of rails 
_on_ the highway.

>Hmm, if someone want to do something with the railway key, they will look at 
>the value.
>It's a good proposal.
>Yves

Sorry, I'm not quite sure whether this a comment for or against the rail= -tag, 
but thank you for the input!

Since I initiated the voting process already, could you all please cast a vote 
on the poroposal page ( 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tramtrack_on_highway ) 
and add comments so that in two weeks time I could possibly mend the proposal 
according to the vote and possibly have a new vote on the winning 
tag-identification. Yves, this would also make clear whether you are against or 
for the current proposal.

Thank you all very much, and please vote and add comments on the proposal page!

Sincerely,
Jukka (Tolstoi21)

___
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] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

[Michael Brandtner]

Hi,

this is my first message to the mailing list, so bear with me if this is 
not the correct way for suggesting something like this. I'd like to make 
a change to the Wiki but wanted to get your opinions first. Many (most?) 
public parking lots in Germany have the possibility to pay via SMS or 
smartphone app. For this, the parking lot has a specific number that has 
to be entered when paying with the mobile device. The number is printed 
onto the parking ticket machines. At the moment, these reference numbers 
are very seldom entered into OSM.


I'd like to add a tag to the Wiki page for amenity=parking 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking) to encourage 
mappers to enter this information more often. I think the best tag for 
this would be ref:mobile_payment, but it hasn't been used yet by anyone 
else but me. Ref:mobile-payment has 14 uses but I think this is not 
suitable because the English spelling doesn't use a hyphen for that 
word. Other tags don't seem to exist yet.


So what do you think?

1. Should a tag for this purpose be added to the Wiki page?
2. Is ref:mobile_payment the best tag for that or do you prefer another
   one?

Michael (Discostu36)

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