Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 30/08/2015 9:07 PM, johnw wrote: On Aug 30, 2015, at 4:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: indeed the buildings are just buildings (eventually with own names, start dates and other attributes) , it's not them to put the name for the whole complex on. But IMHO it's neither a landuse object, it's an object with a different tag that defines it. We still need a tag for gated communities? Fine, lets introduce one. Why is that any different than a condo complex? both are privately owned residences with a common management/ HOA company, with access control on a well defined landuse. Why is tagging a residential thing different in any way from a industrial thing? why is the governmental stuff completely missing? again. Confusing. +1 Lay down a general category landuse. add a tag denoting it’s particulars ( is it a works, a mall, a city hall complex, or a apartment complex?) Add the building=* areas (church, office, apartment, industrial building) and the ref/name and all the other building crap. lay down the roads and amenities inside the landuse. if you want a tag to say “this residential area is a gated community” to put on the landuse (like adding mall or works or whatever) that’s fine. but my interest is standardizing and completing the landuse tag usage. Why have landuse at all if you don’t finish the categories it could be used for? Why have a landuse=* at all to denote area if you will deny its use (arbitrarily) for some kinds of building complexes but use it on others? It really is a big mystery for me - and the fundamental conflict I an trying to solve - as standardizing the landuse=* tag would greatly help the mapping of urban and suburban cities - as not only laying out the primary landuse let you understand the city, and then adding the exception building or amenity *more accurately labels and represents the real world* - not to mention getting rid of so much ambiguity and cruft on tagging things by their area (schools, hospitals, etc) - because eventually, every single square meter of a city will have it’s areas denotes - so why keep a scattershot and inconsistent method that varies across so many things? +1 The only point I think I see from Martin is tagging a landuse with a name etc. But I don't see that as a problem at all ... If an area tagged landuse=hospital has a name etc then why should that not be put on it? Same with a farm, industrial etc etc. Even a residential area - gated would be a good example access=destination, name etc... What other 'object' is to have this name .. that is associated with the whole site? As the whole site can be mapped using landuse= I see no problem in using it as such. Same as a park - one name ... even with multiple buildings, sports grounds ... the park has one name the other objects in it may have others .. or even the same name. Not a problem. == I think Martin 'see's' a problem with use in a GPS where searches are conducted ... it is a 'problem' because there is no provision for including landuse in that. But that can change. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 30.08.2015 um 01:27 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: A mall sits on one named landuse=retail. a mall is retail landuse the tag for the mall is shop=mall A factory sits on landuse=industrial. a factory is industrial landuse the tag is man_made=works ... A gated community in San Diego is 20-30 houses made by the same builder with an access gate out front (and a single sign for the name of the place). It is not an actual community. ok, so it's a bunch of houses with a fence around them and access control. Maybe there's also different landuse inside the same fence (if that's not the case in your particular example there will be other cases where it is like that). I would not want to impose the constraint of needing to have a single landuse just to drop a name. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 30.08.2015 um 01:27 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Why should the pattern for mapping industrial complexes be any different for residential? Civic/government? Schools? Hospitals? None of the buildings in any of those examples, when grouped together into a named complex, have the name of the complex - they are all named differently. There is no building named factory when they *all together* make a factory. A factory, an apartment complex, and a school are usually *a lot bigger* than their buildings. indeed the buildings are just buildings (eventually with own names, start dates and other attributes) , it's not them to put the name for the whole complex on. But IMHO it's neither a landuse object, it's an object with a different tag that defines it. We still need a tag for gated communities? Fine, lets introduce one. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 30, 2015, at 4:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: indeed the buildings are just buildings (eventually with own names, start dates and other attributes) , it's not them to put the name for the whole complex on. But IMHO it's neither a landuse object, it's an object with a different tag that defines it. We still need a tag for gated communities? Fine, lets introduce one. Why is that any different than a condo complex? both are privately owned residences with a common management/ HOA company, with access control on a well defined landuse. Why is tagging a residential thing different in any way from a industrial thing? why is the governmental stuff completely missing? again. Confusing. Lay down a general category landuse. add a tag denoting it’s particulars ( is it a works, a mall, a city hall complex, or a apartment complex?) Add the building=* areas (church, office, apartment, industrial building) and the ref/name and all the other building crap. lay down the roads and amenities inside the landuse. if you want a tag to say “this residential area is a gated community” to put on the landuse (like adding mall or works or whatever) that’s fine. but my interest is standardizing and completing the landuse tag usage. Why have landuse at all if you don’t finish the categories it could be used for? Why have a landuse=* at all to denote area if you will deny its use (arbitrarily) for some kinds of building complexes but use it on others? It really is a big mystery for me - and the fundamental conflict I an trying to solve - as standardizing the landuse=* tag would greatly help the mapping of urban and suburban cities - as not only laying out the primary landuse let you understand the city, and then adding the exception building or amenity *more accurately labels and represents the real world* - not to mention getting rid of so much ambiguity and cruft on tagging things by their area (schools, hospitals, etc) - because eventually, every single square meter of a city will have it’s areas denotes - so why keep a scattershot and inconsistent method that varies across so many things? Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
From my experience, department stores allow you to pay separately in each department, but don't generally require you to do so, except for items that are both valuable and easily concealed, such as jewelry. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On August 28, 2015 9:16:48 AM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 15:33 schrieb Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: In a department store I would pay for each item individually, in the department and hence have three transactions. And you would have often less trouble finding someone who can give you advice. 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] Shop vs amenity
Here in Nashville, TN, USA, back when the department stores were all located in the central business district, they indeed tended to be multistory. Starting in the 1970s, the downtown department stores either went out of business or migrated to the suburbs, where land was cheaper, and one-to-two-story department stores became the norm. In the last decade, downtown living started becoming stylish again, but none of the large stores have yet moved downtown. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On August 27, 2015 4:44:56 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 26.08.2015 um 02:09 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: The difference between a building used as a supermarket compared to a department store is the internal fitout, the building remains the same. not at all, this might be the case in some areas (that I am not aware of) and edge cases, but the typical supermarket is 1 storey, in huge cases 2 (and then one level is typically electronics, or gardening and other non-food articles and tends towards a department store by the selection of products) and doesn't have a representative / expensive outside facade, while department stores tend to have at least 3 floors, typically 4 and more, and do have to have a representative outside, so no, these are not the same kind of buildings. Do you have any real example of a supermarket becoming a department store or vice versa? 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] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 29.08.2015 um 01:05 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Building=Big_box_retail Shop=supermarket Name=big stand-alone supermarket (Shop could be a big diy store, electronics, etc as a big-box as well) supermarkets have different requirements than electronics stores, e.g. because they have big refrigeration storage areas (with good insulation). Yes, you could use them for other purposes, but it typically won't be cost efficient. Building=retail_warehouse (not a true warehouse nowadays) Shop=warehouse (existing?) Name=warehouse club (Costco) isn't warehouse a term for a multi storey storage facility typically not intended for the public? Building=shopping_center_anchor Shop=supermarket Name=centre_supermarket (Very very common in the US And Japan, I assume elsewhere) Building=mall_anchor Shop=supermarket Name=Mall Chain supermarket (Could be a department store, a sports store, or other mall anchor) I thought anchor stores are dedicated areas in malls and shopping centers, not buildings on its own (i.e. the tag would be building:part in this case) Building=urban_mixed Levels=35 + Point: Shop=supermarket Name=basement_supermarket Location=basement (not sure?) urban mixed is a very common typology, but I would like to store more detail here (which components form the mix). I'd always prefer an area over a point when it comes to big objects, because the polygon size, shape and orientation is an information in itself. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 29, 2015, at 9:50 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: supermarkets have different requirements than electronics stores, e.g. because they have big refrigeration storage areas (with good insulation). Yes, you could use them for other purposes, but it typically won't be cost efficient. Modern ones are floating - almost no part of the freezers or coolers are built into the floor. They replace them or re-arrange them as needed. A lot of older locations are bing remodeled to use the newer, more efficient units lately. The industrial ones in the back are quite small, (and not part of the structure) and their power sub-panel need is about the same current draw as a standard factory. The deli or other labor based section (people who make box lunch, prepare fresh food, or an onsite bakery) would have more of a architectural burden than the freezers - but externally they look the same, and they could be a drug store or a clothing store or a halloween store - i have seen a supermarket turned into all of those. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
Javbw On Aug 29, 2015, at 9:50 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I thought anchor stores are dedicated areas in malls and shopping centers, not buildings on its own (i.e. the tag would be building:part in this case) Technically, the anchor is the large important tenant that takes up a lot of space in a mall - usually with a large, dedicated, and easily mapped building adjoining the actual mall promenade that pulls people into the mall - which used to be a department store (Sears), or a clothing reseller (like Macy's or JC Penny), but nowadays there are still department stores (Target), but also cinemas, and in Japan - plain supermarkets and large bookstores can still anchor a mall medium sized mall. I suggested a seperate building, because in a lot of outdoor malls, the anchors are easily mapped and separate from the smaller shops. http://goo.gl/maps/Ww0Pz. There are 3 anchors here - easily mappable and 2 stories tall (the rest of the mall is 1 story) Apple stores are the exception in the retail world - most are in a small (10x15m) shop location in a mall - but drive as much foot traffic as an anchor and earn more money per sq meter than any other retail shop on Earth - but the notion of an anchor with their name on the side of a huge building at the end of a mall is still really common. I guess for a lot of places it would be building:part. Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 29, 2015, at 9:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure those are or have to be landuses , eg the gated community is a settlement or settlement part. A group of separate buildings that make up an apartment complex is a single named Landuse=residential This is a group of individual building=apartments grouped together to be a singularly named place with a single Landuse. Without the landuse to tie them together, thy are just buildings next to each other. http://goo.gl/maps/aliFj http://goo.gl/maps/TpcQ2 If you don't go by landuse, you end up with this mess - what happens in Japan with bad data. The government builds complexes full of apartment buildings, and gives them names like Ref=A1, A2 , etc - but zenrin's data is crap, and feeds the complex name + ref to Google to map each building like it is a separate facility. http://goo.gl/maps/XVuEx (this is A1) I want to avoid this stupidity. If you visit the complex, it is a single name, with a single landuse, with map out front with the complex name on top, and the refs on the individual buildings. That is how i want to map it too. So landuse=residential is a wonderful thing to group buildings into their respective complexes - just like buildings in a shopping plaza, a gated community, a business park, industrial complex, or regional capital buildings. Many buildings with unique names. One landuse with one name on it. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 29.08.2015 um 01:05 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: There is a mall in Tokyo with a train station going through it, with a gigantic ferris wheel on top, with a roller coaster going through the center of the ferris wheel! It is a spaghetti madness there! yes, clearly for Tokyo we would need a 3D model to get to an adequate detailed representation. Fortunately there are only 0.3% of the world's population and much fewer percent of the surface, so that for the moment we'll focus on the rest of the world and live with a compromise there ;-) Besides this I bet the Ferris wheel atop the train station with the roller coaster going through is kind of an extreme exception even for Tokyo ;-) There are a few extreme buildings and situations also in other parts of the world, I remember seeing a project for a library tower with a highspeed train crossing it (mostly for the spectacular effect, don't think it makes a lot of sense). For the moment I'd rather focus on mapping easier stuff and augment the coverage for areas where we already know how to do it, in the end, the exact way a roller coaster takes is micromapping at its finest but doesn't make the map really more useful. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 29.08.2015 um 01:20 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Airports, malls, military bases, shopping centres, car dealerships, gated communities, and many other locations are usually a lot bigger than their buildings. Most locations built for cars are twice the size of the building! And stand-alone buildings are pointless until they are grouped by the sets that have been put into (a school, a city hall, a shopping centre, an apartment complex, a steel parts manufacturing plant) - so a landuse should exist for each class of landuse. I'm not sure those are or have to be landuses , eg the gated community is a settlement or settlement part. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 29.08.2015 um 16:07 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Without the landuse to tie them together, thy are just buildings next to each other. often gated communities are settlements or parts of them (e.g. neighbourhood ) but in other cases they are just a bunch of buildings with a fence around them. The term community suggests a proper entity. Landuse can be seen as a propery, I wouldn't use it to constitute objects on their own. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
Javbw On Aug 30, 2015, at 4:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: suggests a proper entity. Landuse can be seen as a propery, I wouldn't use it to constitute objects on their own. A mall sits on one named landuse=retail. A factory sits on landuse=industrial. A company HQ sits on a single landuse=commercial. And an apartment complex sits on a single landuse=residential. A gated community in San Diego is 20-30 houses made by the same builder with an access gate out front (and a single sign for the name of the place). It is not an actual community. Landuse is awesome. Why do some values of landuse, in your description get treated so differently when the urban/suburban ones are all the same? Every building in a city should be on a landuse. The exceptions are the old amenities (school, hospital, which I would love to change to a landuse). Why do we keep coming back to the rejection of this simple and consistent idea? Why do people insist on making it difficult, counter-intuitive, and strange? Why should the pattern for mapping industrial complexes be any different for residential? Civic/government? Schools? Hospitals? None of the buildings in any of those examples, when grouped together into a named complex, have the name of the complex - they are all named differently. There is no building named factory when they *all together* make a factory. A factory, an apartment complex, and a school are usually *a lot bigger* than their buildings. Their landuse area is well defined. The landuse is named. Their amenities belong to the landuse, not a building on the landuse. This is true of every other category of urban and suburban landuses and the older grounds amenities. Amenity=* Building=* ref=* building=* ref=* |-Landuse=* name=*-| That should be consistent and unchanging, no matter the building. Hence my desire for landuse=civic. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 29/08/2015 10:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 29.08.2015 um 01:05 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: There is a mall in Tokyo with a train station going through it, with a gigantic ferris wheel on top, with a roller coaster going through the center of the ferris wheel! It is a spaghetti madness there! yes, clearly for Tokyo we would need a 3D model to get to an adequate detailed representation. Fortunately there are only 0.3% of the world's population and much fewer percent of the surface, so that for the moment we'll focus on the rest of the world and live with a compromise there ;-) Err the rest of the world is also moving to multi use buildings. The common case is a building with apartments on the upper levels and offices/shops on the lower levels. There will need to be a solution for these .. and that solution should be suitable for Johns' extreme example too. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 30/08/2015 9:27 AM, John Willis wrote: Why do we keep coming back to the rejection of this simple and consistent idea? Why do people insist on making it difficult, counter-intuitive, and strange? I think they are attached to their past practices and knowledge. It is very much like a change in operating systems ... say CPM to DOS. Or Windows '95 to windows XT etc... The knowledge and skills developed with the past system have to be replaced with the new, despite any advantages to the change (particularly for new users) the old system is familiar and therefore favoured by the established users who don't want the trouble of learning the new. Me? I'm in favour of any change that 1. aids new users 2. has a consistent structure 3. is easy to document ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 02:37 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: We don't have building=drop_forge and building=paint_booth for industrial, yet those are specialty building types - I agree those are particular building types (with particular requirements that lead to specific architectural solutions), but I don't agree that we don't want them tagged as such in OSM ;-) Building types are by wiki definition any type you want, unless the value is the pointless no, common data consumers will recognize all values as a building. No need to repeat the information from the landuse at the same information level on the building. I also acknowledge that current documentation for building types is rather poor. Defining a building by a particular amenity alone doesn't sound very good when the building and function are so easily separated, and easily separated from its parent landuse=* (a shop in a college, a gift shop at a temple, a 7-11 in a hotel, etc) true for small shops, less so for huge buildings like supermarkets, department stores, production halls, storage warehouses, swimming pools, auditoriums, baseball stadions, high rise hotels, shopping malls, television towers, distribution centers, office towers, apartment houses, power plants, music halls, ... If you really want to define retail buildings *as buildings* - then you need to define them by their built types: single_shop, strip_mall, shopping_Centre, shopping_centre_anchor yes (if they're individual buildings and not parts of a huge building, otherwise building:part) , urban_mixed, rural_mixed too generic IMHO , indoor_mall, mall_anchor, mall_outlier, outdoor_mall, warehouse, big-box, etc. +1 a market could be in any one of those depending on the region or country. +1 Imo, using building=to define shop type is the same as using building=to define office company type. Can you tell by looking - without logo - if it is the HQ of a bank, a law firm, a school district, or a bunch of disparate tenants? I don't think so. yes, they're all office buildings you won't normally confuse them with a wastewater treatment plant or a farm though ;-) Of course there are subtypes (e.g. classification by kind of access and distribution of flow, or by height and proportion of height to width, by depth, presence of courtyards, shape in general etc.) I should be able to zoom out to where there are no icons - and see retail, commercial, industrial, residential, civic-government, and specialty (school, hospital, park, etc) buildings and *landuses* rendered differently and instantly understand the layout of a city without a single label,shield, or icon. I believe it would create too much confusion to highlight most building typologies in a general map rendering (but there might be exceptions, e.g. I would highlight important buildings like churches, castles and townhalls because they typically played an important role in the development of the settlement around here and provide easier understanding of the whole structure when you know about them). Maybe operas, museums and theatres as well, but less so, as they are more recent and hence had less impact. Train stations as well merit special treatment in my opinion, despite being more recent they typically had huge impact. And so on, depends obviously a lot on the area and context/culture (e.g. historic graineries and armories might be important too). And the basis for that is a complete set of landuse and complimentary building tags. nah, landuse is a quite limited set of values, building types are endless... cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Fri, 2015-08-28 at 14:43 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 02:37 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: We don't have building=drop_forge and building=paint_booth for industrial, yet those are specialty building types - I agree those are particular building types (with particular requirements that lead to specific architectural solutions), but I don't agree that we don't want them tagged as such in OSM ;-) Building types are by wiki definition any type you want, unless the value is the pointless no, common data consumers will recognize all values as a building. No need to repeat the information from the landuse at the same information level on the building. I also acknowledge that current documentation for building types is rather poor. I don't think we can distinguish a supermarket from a department store by the building, that will vary from region to region. I think the fundamental difference between a supermarket, at least a large hypermarkets/superstores and a department store is the method of shopping. Small supermarkets are primarily food stores, superstores such as large Tesco, Walmart, Auchan sell much of what a department store would but the method of shopping is fundamentally different. Suppose my shopping list a pair of jeans, a DVD and a bottle of wine. I walk into Tesco, get a trolley and go to the clothing section. I pick up a pair of jeans, put the into the trolley and head for the media section. I again pick up the DVD, put it in the trolley and walk to the beer, wines and spirits section. I then go to a till and pay for all the items and leave. In a department store I would pay for each item individually, in the department and hence have three transactions. Most supermarkets are on a single floor, the trolley being the main driver here, but any large supermarkets now have multiple floors. The floors being linked by travelators where the trolley wheels lock into the slots to prevent them rolling. I have seen these in Tesco, ASDA and Auchan. Department stores tend to be older, in city centres, hence the multiple floors. But new ones, in out of town retail parks can equally be a single floor. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 01:59 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: Nothing wrong with being generic, highway=residential covers a lot of different looking roads around the world. OSM can use existing sub tags to further describe them if required. the more generic we are, the less information we convey. On the other hand it has to be weighed against complexity to use the data, and we might decide differently based on the kind of feature. I believe we can still do a lot to make our data more useful for people who search specific things besides routing on roads for normal cars, bicycles or pedestrians where we are already quite good. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 01:59 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: There are existing tags to describe the number of floors in a building. If that is the only difference. it's not cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 28, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: true for small shops, less so for huge buildings like supermarkets, department stores, production halls, storage warehouses, swimming pools, auditoriums, baseball stadions, high rise hotels, shopping malls, television towers, distribution centers, office towers, apartment houses, power plants, music halls, ... Every one of those can appear as a smaller shop or amenity in a larger building in Tokyo. Supermarket in the basement, mall on the first 4 floors, hotel above that, and a restaurant on the top. Golf on roofs, giant TV towers 10 stories tall sprouting from apartment buildings, hotels with swimming pools on top, and tons of urban mixed buildings. Stadiums, performance halls, and radio towers have their own architecture, but all the others could be crammed together and connected in an endless variety of ways in larger buildings. There is a mall in Tokyo with a train station going through it, with a gigantic ferris wheel on top, with a roller coaster going through the center of the ferris wheel! It is a spaghetti madness there! It is true that yes, most of the supermarkets I know of and visit are dedicated buildings. But the architecture is a) very generic and common, and could be several other classes of stores, and b) I would like consistent shop tagging, so if i have to tag a supermarket as a stand-alone building, an anchor in a mall, or a point in a 30 story office building, it uses the same basic tag. Now, if i was tagging building type, Building=Big_box_retail Shop=supermarket Name=big stand-alone supermarket (Shop could be a big diy store, electronics, etc as a big-box as well) Building=retail_warehouse (not a true warehouse nowadays) Shop=warehouse (existing?) Name=warehouse club (Costco) Building=shopping_center_anchor Shop=supermarket Name=centre_supermarket (Very very common in the US And Japan, I assume elsewhere) Building=mall_anchor Shop=supermarket Name=Mall Chain supermarket (Could be a department store, a sports store, or other mall anchor) Building=urban_mixed Levels=35 + Point: Shop=supermarket Name=basement_supermarket Location=basement (not sure?) The shop=* is always used to define the shop. That can be put in any situation on any building (a shop in a church, a stadium, or applied to any building type) and the building=lets me describe the building type. I think you have used an example where a church that is now a museum is tagged as building=church because the architecture is church) - but the issue is that there is no such thing as supermarket architecture. But there are several well known classes of retail buildings that could be used to describe the building beyond building=retail - for example, Mall anchor is a famous retail building type, and often times it is easy to map a mall anchor building, so it could get a specific render if we are able to tag that separately from the other tiny leased locations throughout the mall. Same with the shopping centre anchors. There are specialty building types - but retail is usually just squares of space, and often times the building itself is disconnected from the tenant. A department store became a clothing and bedshets store, turned into an electronics shop. A electronics shop turned into a gym. A bank into a Restaurant. A department store into a super market. Right next to my house in california. And the architecture stayed the same. building=mall_outlier Shop=electonics store = gym Building=shopping_centre_anchor Shop=department clotheselectronics Building=mall_anchor Shop=department supermarket Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
Javbw On Aug 28, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: nah, landuse is a quite limited set of values, building types are endless... Types. Industrial Residential Commercial Education Hospital Station Civic/government And a corresponding generic building. You can have a landuse=retail to define a mall's area, and a few building=retail for the buildings on imagery. Or map the endless myriad of building types on top (mall anchor, shed, parking garage, etc). But there should be an appropriate landuse to sit under every single building. - becaise most locations are larger than their building - and denoting the full extent of the location is often WAY more important than the actual building. Airports, malls, military bases, shopping centres, car dealerships, gated communities, and many other locations are usually a lot bigger than their buildings. Most locations built for cars are twice the size of the building! And stand-alone buildings are pointless until they are grouped by the sets that have been put into (a school, a city hall, a shopping centre, an apartment complex, a steel parts manufacturing plant) - so a landuse should exist for each class of landuse. Conveying the actual size of any location with landuse means when you zoom out far enough and the (unimportant) building disappear, you can still see the general layout of the city. Why do we only bother to do that with some landuses and not others? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 26.08.2015 um 02:09 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: The difference between a building used as a supermarket compared to a department store is the internal fitout, the building remains the same. not at all, this might be the case in some areas (that I am not aware of) and edge cases, but the typical supermarket is 1 storey, in huge cases 2 (and then one level is typically electronics, or gardening and other non-food articles and tends towards a department store by the selection of products) and doesn't have a representative / expensive outside facade, while department stores tend to have at least 3 floors, typically 4 and more, and do have to have a representative outside, so no, these are not the same kind of buildings. Do you have any real example of a supermarket becoming a department store or vice versa? cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 27.08.2015 um 12:13 schrieb Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: That said it's probably a bit complicated, because there will be some overlapp. yes, there is clearly overlap, but usually you can go with the auto declaration of the business. Problem for German speaking people is that even popular web dictionaries give you carpenter as a translation for both, Zimmermann and Schreiner/Tischler (and don't distinguish between Bautischler and Möbeltischler). IMHO we should make clear descriptions of the main kind of work a business with a given tag should be specialized in, so that we produce useful data. I believe we need 3 or 4 different kind of tags here (2 kind of carpenter like businesses: carpenters and structural wood engineering). cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 8/27/2015 2:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: not at all, this might be the case in some areas (that I am not aware of) and edge cases, but the typical supermarket is 1 storey, in huge cases 2 (and then one level is typically electronics, or gardening and other non-food articles and tends towards a department store by the selection of products) and doesn't have a representative / expensive outside facade, while department stores tend to have at least 3 floors, typically 4 and more, and do have to have a representative outside, so no, these are not the same kind of buildings. This is not generally true, although it might be where you are. A typical department store here is one or two floors inside, with an outside somewhat like this: https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7057/6842722906_1b8e4cc101_z.jpg, or maybe on the fancier end, https://www.flickr.com/photos/darrellinyvr/6988854497/. This is the same as in Ontario, and across much of the US where I have traveled. The only 3+ floor locations that come to mind are some old stores downtown. Meanwhile, with moving ramps capable of taking carts, some new supermarkets are on an elevated level. Do you have any real example of a supermarket becoming a department store or vice versa? Yes - local to me, the Woodward's location used to be a department store, and has been a Zeller's (discount retail), parts of a Safeway (supermarket), fitness center, and now has a Walmart moving into part of it. You should not assume that the architecture you are familiar with is common across the world. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 00:20 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Interestingly, most electronics shops are on stilts - first floor is parking, second floor is is the main floor. In Tokyo, everything is crammed into the bottom floors of multi-story buildings, with the supermarkets in the basements of large buildings or malls I would bet both of them could be described with distinctive building types. It's pointless to call them building=retail because you can already see it from the building user (shop tag) that it's a retail building. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 00:22 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com: This is not generally true, although it might be where you are. A typical department store here is one or two floors inside, with an outside somewhat like this: https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7057/6842722906_1b8e4cc101_z.jpg, or maybe on the fancier end, https://www.flickr.com/photos/darrellinyvr/6988854497/. I'm sorry for you ;-) This is the same as in Ontario, and across much of the US where I have traveled. The only 3+ floor locations that come to mind are some old stores downtown. yes, I had some fear that this was indeed the case in North America, hence my first sentence (referring to areas). I guess I had these old store locations downtown in mind (typical for Europe as well). Not sure what would be the best description for your typical building types (still, retail without any additional information seems very generic), likely supermarket and department store aren't ;-) cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
The Montgomery ward's department store in my old hometown was turned into a Walmart (2 stories) but most department stores in California are 1-2 floors (with most targets and walmarts being 1 story). Most supermarkets are one. Size is the only difference in their construction, and often near each other, built by the same construction companies, paid by the same landowners. I can totally see that in some countries (and especially for certain brands) there would be easily defined building types, but All of them are retail buildings. They should at least be called retail buildings. To many people, the brand logo out front and the color choice of the paint will signal that it is a market or a dept store far beyond it's architecture, in most cases. The difference between a large drug store, a supermarket, a department store, and a DIY store in rural Japan is almost non-existent (Besia, Besia fashion, Sekichu, Kawachi stores). Interestingly, most electronics shops are on stilts - first floor is parking, second floor is is the main floor. In Tokyo, everything is crammed into the bottom floors of multi-story buildings, with the supermarkets in the basements of large buildings or malls - there are very few dedicated buildings to a single store if it is large - especially supermarkets. They end up being leaseholders in the basement of a large residential or business office building, or in the basement of large department stores or malls. The rest of the city is a sea of mixed use little tiny house sized buildings (shop on the bottom, house up top) for which, AFAIK, we still do not have a proper mixed-use tag (urban nor rural) Javbw On Aug 28, 2015, at 6:29 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 26.08.2015 um 02:09 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: The difference between a building used as a supermarket compared to a department store is the internal fitout, the building remains the same. not at all, this might be the case in some areas (that I am not aware of) and edge cases, but the typical supermarket is 1 storey, in huge cases 2 (and then one level is typically electronics, or gardening and other non-food articles and tends towards a department store by the selection of products) and doesn't have a representative / expensive outside facade, while department stores tend to have at least 3 floors, typically 4 and more, and do have to have a representative outside, so no, these are not the same kind of buildings. Do you have any real example of a supermarket becoming a department store or vice versa? 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] Shop vs amenity
I forgot to mention, as most supermarkets are part of large shopping centres (shops ringing a parking lot). the building is built, and the market or whatever is merely a leaseholder. Many are purpose built inside to be a certain one, but the architecture matches all the other (smaller) shops in the shopping centre. This means the leaseholder has very little say in the architecture choice. Most of the older supermarkets I know are newer leaseholders in old locations in older centres with distinct styling - without the signs on the front, you couldn't know where one shop stopped and the other began. Javbw On Aug 28, 2015, at 7:20 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: To many people, the brand logo out front and the color choice of the paint will signal that it is a market or a dept store far beyond it's architecture, in most cases. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Djoiner http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dcabinet_maker https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dcarpenter The problem with that whole carpenter page it that it's wikipedia copypasta. And when I wanted to change anything our friend Xxzme wasn't too happy... That said it's probably a bit complicated, because there will be some overlapp. sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 10:33 schrieb Ruben Maes ruben.mae...@gmail.com: Tuesday 25 August 2015 11:30:33, Warin: As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office:-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. Carpenter? If I want a repair done .. then it is a service? = office. If I want a new chair then a product? = shop. ? Or craft=carpenter[1]. or maybe joiner / cabinet maker? There might be subtle differences here, in Germany the carpenter (Zimmermann) is a profession making mostly structural wood work (walls, roofs, stairs etc) while cabinet makers are building and repairing wooden furniture and joiners (Bauschreiner/Bautischler) will make finishings like claddings (wall/ceiling), handrails, fixed (built in) furniture, doors and frames (usually not the structural part). There is some overlap and they might do parts of the other profession/specialization as well, but you are usually better off with asking someone to do the stuff they are specialized in (because they have the right tools and workshop and experience). The Schreiner(de) will have much smaller tolerances and will usually produce finer finishings while the Zimmermann (de, en:carpenter) will make more rough work which will either be visible outdoors or will likely be clad later by someone specialized in finer works. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 28/08/2015 9:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 00:20 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Interestingly, most electronics shops are on stilts - first floor is parking, second floor is is the main floor. In Tokyo, everything is crammed into the bottom floors of multi-story buildings, with the supermarkets in the basements of large buildings or malls I would bet both of them could be described with distinctive building types. It's pointless to call them building=retail because you can already see it from the building user (shop tag) that it's a retail building. Here a building=retail could be a convenience store, a grocer, a baker ... the building style remains the same, the occupying business can and does change over time. They may even be unoccupied for some time. Thus building=retail is a very good tag. Much like building=church. Even when not used as a church .. they are readily recognise as a church building. --- A building=residential describes may styles of buildings, the style of a residence in the tropics is much different to that in colder climates. So too there is a wide variety of retail buildings. Both are recognisable by their function. If you want to further describe them ... fine .. develop sub tags, don't change the primary tag though. for example building=residence residence=queenslander ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queenslander_%28architecture%29 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 01:47 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: building=residence residence=queenslander ... looks like a detached_house, maybe a villa in some occasions? I agree that Queenslander is very specific and suitable for a sub-tag, but wouldn't mind if someone put it in the main building tag. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
When I think class, you think specific and vice versa. We are very often ying and yang! There are so, so, so many single retail buildings where one store has a few tiny kiosks inside (without being a mall) - almost every supermarket I know in the US has an (independent) bank, a starbucks, a dry cleaner, or some other sub-leased little spot. Near the front to serve customers. We don't have building=drop_forge and building=paint_booth for industrial, yet those are specialty building types - because the the absolute myriad of mixes and matches that occur. Retail buildings more often than not cannot be grouped into sets by built usage, like an office building, house, or apartment building could. Defining a building by a particular amenity alone doesn't sound very good when the building and function are so easily separated, and easily separated from its parent landuse=* (a shop in a college, a gift shop at a temple, a 7-11 in a hotel, etc) If you really want to define retail buildings *as buildings* - then you need to define them by their built types: single_shop, strip_mall, shopping_Centre, shopping_centre_anchor, urban_mixed, rural_mixed, indoor_mall, mall_anchor, mall_outlier, outdoor_mall, warehouse, big-box, etc. a market could be in any one of those depending on the region or country. There are guidelines for naming mall types as well http://www.icsc.org/research/references/c-shopping-center-definitions Imo, using building=to define shop type is the same as using building=to define office company type. Can you tell by looking - without logo - if it is the HQ of a bank, a law firm, a school district, or a bunch of disparate tenants? I don't think so. I want some generic classes of buildings to denote general purpose. I want the same landuses to denote general purpose as well, because so often a building or a an amenity type is an outlier to the general landuse (most city halls have a convenience store for selling government stamps in Japan), so you can at least get an idea of class and render class of building and landuse differently, and then slap on the icon of whatever shop= office= or amenity= on tag has been added to the area, building, or point on top of it all. I should be able to zoom out to where there are no icons - and see retail, commercial, industrial, residential, civic-government, and specialty (school, hospital, park, etc) buildings and *landuses* rendered differently and instantly understand the layout of a city without a single label,shield, or icon. And the basis for that is a complete set of landuse and complimentary building tags. Javbw On Aug 28, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 00:20 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Interestingly, most electronics shops are on stilts - first floor is parking, second floor is is the main floor. In Tokyo, everything is crammed into the bottom floors of multi-story buildings, with the supermarkets in the basements of large buildings or malls I would bet both of them could be described with distinctive building types. It's pointless to call them building=retail because you can already see it from the building user (shop tag) that it's a retail building. 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] Shop vs amenity
On 28/08/2015 9:33 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 28.08.2015 um 00:22 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com: This is not generally true, although it might be where you are. A typical department store here is one or two floors inside, with an outside somewhat like this: https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7057/6842722906_1b8e4cc101_z.jpg, or maybe on the fancier end, https://www.flickr.com/photos/darrellinyvr/6988854497/. I'm sorry for you ;-) This is the same as in Ontario, and across much of the US where I have traveled. The only 3+ floor locations that come to mind are some old stores downtown. There are existing tags to describe the number of floors in a building. If that is the only difference. I know of one 'department store' building that is now an educational college. The exterior of the building still reflects the origin of being a retail building. yes, I had some fear that this was indeed the case in North America, hence my first sentence (referring to areas). I guess I had these old store locations downtown in mind (typical for Europe as well). Not sure what would be the best description for your typical building types (still, retail without any additional information seems very generic), likely supermarket and department store aren't ;-) Nothing wrong with being generic, highway=residential covers a lot of different looking roads around the world. OSM can use existing sub tags to further describe them if required. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 26, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: So ALL shops should all be together under shops= (even though all shops are in fact amenities too). Same for offices. This reduces the amenity= values to those that are not offices nor shops. I think the easiest way to define a shop is a retail building where customers go for goods and services. Retail includes service - you buy service at the location. A shoe shop or a shoe repair shop are both shops, and both deal with people who need new shoes or shoes repaired. shop is a shortening of retail shop. If we started over, I would rather use retail=* instead of shop=*. This might be a good solution to go about migrating people to the new system - use retail=* instead of shop=* landuse=retail building=retail shop=* (retail=*) There are plenty of businesses where people no not expect customers. My friend is an electrical engineer. He inspects factories for electrical problems. he has a small office. It is not a shop, but an office. Even big office buildings for lawyers are the same - An office will occasionally have visitors, but an office is not setup for serving customers, it caters to the tenants who use it for getting work done, even if that is client work. This is the big difference between a retail building and an office building - Apple HQ vs an Apple Store. there are visitors, clients, contractors, and fanboys visiting apple HQ all day. but the building’s purpose is for allowing the employees to do their job, not serve the people walking in with goods and services. that is the opposite in the retail stores. A craftsperson usually has a facility where they practice their craft, which is usually not a retail facility. I know we have a whole bunch of craft= for that. Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 25/08/2015 10:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 03:30 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: e.g. bank, carpenter, post_office As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office :-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. craft=carpenter bank and post office are in amenity and no need to move them (for places open to the public). I see the office key as a back office (not open to the public if not by appointment), so office=bank makes perfectly sense, but it is not the same as amenity=bank Amenity: OSM description: For describing useful and important facilities for visitors and residents. So; A supermarket is an important facility for residents and visitors. Therefore it is an amenity. A convenience store is an important facility for residents and visitors. Therefore it is an amenity. Do you see where this leads .. ALL shops are amenities! Office: OSM description: A place of business, similar to shops. Humm more: A place predominantly selling services. These may range from the obvious services such as accountants and lawyers. No requirement for an appointment, offices of travel agents, estate agents, insurance ... don't normally require an appointment. Accountants and Lawyers are also useful and important to visitors and residents from time to time. So ALL offices are amenities too The idea is to organise things - like with like. So ALL shops should all be together under shops= (even though all shops are in fact amenities too). Same for offices. This reduces the amenity= values to those that are not offices nor shops. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
Tuesday 25 August 2015 11:30:33, Warin: As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office:-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. Carpenter? If I want a repair done .. then it is a service? = office. If I want a new chair then a product? = shop. ? Or craft=carpenter[1]. Craft is then for (quote from wiki) place[s] producing or processing customized goods, to make things even more complicated. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dcarpenter -- The field from of an email is about as reliable as the address written on the back of an envelope. That's why this message is OpenPGP signed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 24.08.2015 um 14:11 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: I have been adding 'residential areas' lately .. boring ... but it improves the map for people who don't know how big a place is. for me the solution to this problem are place polygons rather than indifferent landuse=residential areas cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 25/08/2015 10:21 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 00:58 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Building=retail. - existing yes, people use this tag. Personally I'm inclined to use more specific building types here, sth. like building=supermarket or department_store or ... The difference between a building used as a supermarket compared to a department store is the internal fitout, the building remains the same. So I use building=retail as the internal function can be changed but the building remains. The fitout/function is then identified with shop= ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
From my experience, American English makes much the same distinctions as what you are describing. You sometimes see a distinction between rough carpenters, who install wall studs and the like, which won't end up being visible to the customer, and finish carpenters, who install woodwork that will be visible, and thus need more skill. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 10:33 schrieb Ruben Maes ruben.mae...@gmail.com: Tuesday 25 August 2015 11:30:33, Warin: As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office:-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. Carpenter? If I want a repair done .. then it is a service? = office. If I want a new chair then a product? = shop. ? Or craft=carpenter[1]. or maybe joiner / cabinet maker? There might be subtle differences here, in Germany the carpenter (Zimmermann) is a profession making mostly structural wood work (walls, roofs, stairs etc) while cabinet makers are building and repairing wooden furniture and joiners (Bauschreiner/Bautischler) will make finishings like claddings (wall/ceiling), handrails, fixed (built in) furniture, doors and frames (usually not the structural part). There is some overlap and they might do parts of the other profession/specialization as well, but you are usually better off with asking someone to do the stuff they are specialized in (because they have the right tools and workshop and experience). The Schreiner(de) will have much smaller tolerances and will usually produce finer finishings while the Zimmermann (de, en:carpenter) will make more rough work which will either be visible outdoors or will likely be clad later by someone specialized in finer works. 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] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 03:30 schrieb Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: shops sell physical things. offices provide a service. So an electrician would be a service = office I would use craft=electrician here http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/craft#values cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 24.08.2015 um 15:33 schrieb Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl: What if amenity takes the whole building? Landuse=school for area + building=school is enough or we still should add amenity=school for the building? amenity=school is for the school (service/function), while building=school is for a school building (also those without an actual active school in them). This part of our tagging scheme is working, building is describing a building (or sometimes a technical structure similar to a building but technically not a building). This allows us to tag all kinds of combinations, e.g. two schools in one building, a school building without a school, etc. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 00:58 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: Building=retail. - existing yes, people use this tag. Personally I'm inclined to use more specific building types here, sth. like building=supermarket or department_store or ... cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 25, 2015, at 11:13 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: Everyone does not participate in all the OSM news sources. Thus people are surprised when presented with stuff they had no idea of. When I was a gamer, I played a lot of Blizzard games (WoW Diablo), and the same situation applies - devs would propose and beta test changes to the game and its systems, and would get feedback from beta testers and on the forum - a tiny minority of players. After lengthy discussions, they would roll out the changes into the actual Live game - which would affect ?10-15 million players (who have a large time investment in the game, like mappers). The only way around the backlash to changes is to have the game display news of upcoming changes (for weeks or months) before they happen, on a screen that shows up every single time its launched. If OSM put a note from the devs about upcoming changes and (separate from Github) place where the expected mass of comments could be consolidated outside the workflow, it might make people less surprised and feedback on an issue collected easier - and point to help or new tags added - weekly new documented / reworked tags on the wiki would be awesome, and help people stay on top of tags as well Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
sent from a phone Am 25.08.2015 um 10:33 schrieb Ruben Maes ruben.mae...@gmail.com: Tuesday 25 August 2015 11:30:33, Warin: As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office:-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. Carpenter? If I want a repair done .. then it is a service? = office. If I want a new chair then a product? = shop. ? Or craft=carpenter[1]. or maybe joiner / cabinet maker? There might be subtle differences here, in Germany the carpenter (Zimmermann) is a profession making mostly structural wood work (walls, roofs, stairs etc) while cabinet makers are building and repairing wooden furniture and joiners (Bauschreiner/Bautischler) will make finishings like claddings (wall/ceiling), handrails, fixed (built in) furniture, doors and frames (usually not the structural part). There is some overlap and they might do parts of the other profession/specialization as well, but you are usually better off with asking someone to do the stuff they are specialized in (because they have the right tools and workshop and experience). The Schreiner(de) will have much smaller tolerances and will usually produce finer finishings while the Zimmermann (de, en:carpenter) will make more rough work which will either be visible outdoors or will likely be clad later by someone specialized in finer works. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 24/08/2015 8:40 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 24.08.2015 5:30, John Willis napisał(a): On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:03 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: The solution for me is to move shops that are in amenity= to shop= +1 Any retail establishment should be in shop=* Great! Thanks for your responses, especially for the background, which explains a lot. Basically, The scale has changed drastically. Mind the scale became my mantra at OSM! That's why I think everybody should at least try some micromapping (close to z=19) - it shows you the whole mapping process from a different side! Things like general mapping highways for router or lack of some features (land with a hole inside, that may be many different things which are not yet mapped or even don't have tagging scheme) starts to be instantly apparent. I have been adding 'residential areas' lately .. boring ... but it improves the map for people who don't know how big a place is. Been doing it at say a deca scale .. managing to see each house. As I said boring. Now doing it at a kilo scale, hoses are about 2-4 pixels. I can do lots of the larger towns/cities this way. Not as accurate as I'd like but I can get more done .. and others can add the detail if they want. So I do both ends of the scale ... benches in parks and gardens, rubbish bins .. and upto city wide areas. Both have their appeal. The detail is most usefull for people that are there, the larger stuff for planning. Any town sized amenities with an area to denote grounds (school, hospital, golf course, etc) should move to Landuse to follow the other major landuses. +1! Seems rather logical to me to mark area as landuse and leave amenity for buildings or points inside. I'd rather say ... leave amenity for things that are _not_ shops, buildings nor landuse. Theres some holes in that idea, but it is better to patch those holes than keep letting amenity get stuffed with more and more disparate tags. There are many holes in early ideas, but it's natural and the only way to fix them is through discussion and practice. *** Now it gets really interesting: given that more people than just us 3 ;-P wants to have more coherent tagging system and approves such migration, how should it be done? I guess we have no procedures for such important and big changes yet. We're ready for adding new features, but not so much for changing already existing - especially well established ones - and I think we will really need it one day (even if not this time). There have been changes in the past ... transport 'routes' have changed .. as have power distribution things ... One way I can think of could be by massive, automatic adding a new tag (amenity=car_wash - amenity=car_wash + shop=car_wash) to let people remove the old ones gradually, because it could be less intrusive than any kind of conversions. It will be not always possible, because some objects has already some shop=* tag added as a primary/secondary feature. On the other hand it would help some objects tagged as amenity=feature1;feature2 to become amenity=feature1 + shop=feature2 (if feature1 is not considered to be a shop in a new take and feature2 should be shop indeed). The downside is it could take years to complete and in the meantime everybody using our data should implement additional code to deal with both forms, because there's no clear point to jump to the new scheme and leave the old cruft in the dust. shop= needs work too some shops sell more than one category of things. And some mappers want to have more detail. I'm thinking about it. Just another on the list! It would be probably better to reach some consensus and make the conversion in one go, since the change is pretty straight (like s/k=amenity/k=shop/g for some objects). It has another pitfall, however: OSM is rather big ecosystem than a single project, so we should send the message that we plan to make such change, but I don't know what channels should we use to make it really heard. It also means we accept possible breaking some stuff outside, because there always be some not actively maintained services which people still use. But at the same time that would also mean we're able to evolve rather than simply grow and it would make people aware that they need to check the news once in a while. What do you think about this problem? The change should coexist with the present structure for some time. Thus allowing migration over time. Just like the other changes that have occurred in the past. -- Note There have been no objectors so far ... these will come. The traditions of the dead generations weigh like a nightmare on the brains of the living Karl Marx 1852 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
Supported. I'm another person who wants (and will work on) a more coherent tagging system. Thats 4 of us now. The original anarchic approach of pick a tag, any tag is not working for me. We have competition between tags for landuse, natural, amenity, surface, vegetation and landcover. The overlaps and confusion makes rendering really difficult and (very importantly) makes it really hard for new contributors to tag their contributions. I'm not opposed to any of those tags, but there needs to be an enabling structure in place. On shops. I favour point amenities. I don't like area amenities. Most urban features can be shown with an area of 'landuse=xyz' and can, if needed, be further tagged with one or more 'amenity=abc' icons. So, YES, I agree that amenity=shop should be superceded by landuse=shop, with one or more subordinate key-value pairs to indicate the type. Like 'shop=bookstore'. Plus if its a public service in some way, it can be tagged separately as an amenity with an icon. As to the problem of being heard on setting structured tagging rules, there is an official procedure for publishing a proposal page and publicising it on the lists. OSM loosely follows RFC 2026, as does Wikipedia. Regardless of importance and size of the change my own inclination is to follow the Proposal procedure patiently or you just generate heaps of content-free whinge spam. Craig Now it gets really interesting: given that more people than just us 3 ;-P wants to have more coherent tagging system and approves such migration, how should it be done? I guess we have no procedures for such important and big changes yet. We're ready for adding new features, but not so much for changing already existing - especially well established ones - and I think we will really need it one day (even if not this time). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
W dniu 24.08.2015 14:11, Warin napisał(a): So I do both ends of the scale ... benches in parks and gardens, rubbish bins .. and upto city wide areas. Both have their appeal. The detail is most usefull for people that are there, the larger stuff for planning. This what I've experienced trying micromapping too. I also try see the need to mark larger stuff to put the smaller objects into the context. I'd rather say ... leave amenity for things that are not shops, buildings nor landuse. What if amenity takes the whole building? Landuse=school for area + building=school is enough or we still should add amenity=school for the building? There have been changes in the past ... transport 'routes' have changed .. as have power distribution things ... I feel the context is rapidly changing and we can no more rely on what was in the past. Once OSM was a small London-based project, now it's gaining popularity worldwide, is quite strong in Europe and some big players are involved ( http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/30/telenav-toyota-scout-idUSnPn7d9hjT+81+PRN20150730 ). This makes any changes much harder now and I'm sure it will be even more like that in the future. It's harder to make any consensus just because there is much more people to contact with. For example see the suggested highway color shift - it was not made in the closet, Mateusz was writing about it in his diary, on the mailing lists and discussed a lot on the GitHub, yet some people are surprised and angry because they felt like not being warned. We also had big discussion about voting on features which had no real effects or conclusions. And this is just internal communication! There are also some examples of well thought and even accepted tagging schemes which are not in a wider use, like: - highway:area (4 years before it really took off now!) - public_transport=* (still less popular than highway=bus_stop alone) - health 2.0 (still just proposed after 4 years) or even healthcare=* (approved 5 years ago, yet less than 10k uses) For me it means we have serious problems with bigger changes and it won't be any easier if we have no more effective procedures. shop= needs work too some shops sell more than one category of things. And some mappers want to have more detail. I'm thinking about it. Just another on the list! I guess the ultimate solution would be allowing to have more than one value for given key (shop=feature1 + shop=feature2), possibly even allowing pairs to be numbered, and maybe even having trees instead of a flat k=v namespace, but it's purely technical thing (different kind of database) and it would be definitely the biggest single change we ever had to deal with! Note There have been no objectors so far ... these will come. I'm eager to hear them too! I want the system to be coherent, but there are many ways it can be done and objections to one of them may be perfectly legit. I just hope at the end of the day we can choose the least imperfect solution, because as I've just wrote, everything has some downsides - even smooth gradual changes (being bound to old cruft for a long time and waiting for the critical mass forever). -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
W dniu 24.08.2015 5:30, John Willis napisał(a): On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:03 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: The solution for me is to move shops that are in amenity= to shop= +1 Any retail establishment should be in shop=* Great! Thanks for your responses, especially for the background, which explains a lot. Basically, The scale has changed drastically. Mind the scale became my mantra at OSM! That's why I think everybody should at least try some micromapping (close to z=19) - it shows you the whole mapping process from a different side! Things like general mapping highways for router or lack of some features (land with a hole inside, that may be many different things which are not yet mapped or even don't have tagging scheme) starts to be instantly apparent. Any town sized amenities with an area to denote grounds (school, hospital, golf course, etc) should move to Landuse to follow the other major landuses. +1! Seems rather logical to me to mark area as landuse and leave amenity for buildings or points inside. Theres some holes in that idea, but it is better to patch those holes than keep letting amenity get stuffed with more and more disparate tags. There are many holes in early ideas, but it's natural and the only way to fix them is through discussion and practice. *** Now it gets really interesting: given that more people than just us 3 ;-P wants to have more coherent tagging system and approves such migration, how should it be done? I guess we have no procedures for such important and big changes yet. We're ready for adding new features, but not so much for changing already existing - especially well established ones - and I think we will really need it one day (even if not this time). One way I can think of could be by massive, automatic adding a new tag (amenity=car_wash - amenity=car_wash + shop=car_wash) to let people remove the old ones gradually, because it could be less intrusive than any kind of conversions. It will be not always possible, because some objects has already some shop=* tag added as a primary/secondary feature. On the other hand it would help some objects tagged as amenity=feature1;feature2 to become amenity=feature1 + shop=feature2 (if feature1 is not considered to be a shop in a new take and feature2 should be shop indeed). The downside is it could take years to complete and in the meantime everybody using our data should implement additional code to deal with both forms, because there's no clear point to jump to the new scheme and leave the old cruft in the dust. It would be probably better to reach some consensus and make the conversion in one go, since the change is pretty straight (like s/k=amenity/k=shop/g for some objects). It has another pitfall, however: OSM is rather big ecosystem than a single project, so we should send the message that we plan to make such change, but I don't know what channels should we use to make it really heard. It also means we accept possible breaking some stuff outside, because there always be some not actively maintained services which people still use. But at the same time that would also mean we're able to evolve rather than simply grow and it would make people aware that they need to check the news once in a while. What do you think about this problem? -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 25/08/2015 8:58 AM, John Willis wrote: On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:56 PM, Craig Allan al...@iafrica.com wrote: should be superceded by landuse=shop, with one or more subordinate key-value pairs to indicate the type. Like 'shop=bookstore'. Plus if its a public service in some way, it can be tagged separately as an amenity with an icon. Landuse=retail. - existing Building=retail. - existing Shop=books Agree. The landuse and building values exist and don't need modification. The trick comes with how to define what they sell, which could vary wildly. So, for example, most Japanese bookstores sell stationary as well. Many video rental chains in Japan sell books, comics, and stationary. Some have game centers, cafe, adult material, and food. They usually call themselves media shops. (A value i will create for japan later) The shop= wiki encourages people to create new values. This leads to many single use values, at least some of these would be better grouped together. The biggest hurdle for shop=* is to figure out how to define the different things it sells. The only acceptable answer I can think of, because of the semicolon problem and the vending#=x problem is to basically let people put shop:___=yes/no for all the categories of goods at the shop, at least the outliers. This solves two major problems: 1) cultural definitions of what a certian shop is (a bookstore) , and what it includes and doesn't include. So follow your culture's localized definition. 2) so many shops have additional noteworthy things that are sold outside of most people's notions (a video rental shop in my town has a huge section for second hand clothes for some bizarre reason!), or exclude something expected. So they can have annotations added to what the shop sells with as many or as few as the tagger sees fit. This should help the data customers easily allow searches for expected shop types and for goods types based on the shop:___=yes/no model. Shop=books Shop:used_clothes=yes umm second_hand would be a tag to use here - exists so second_hand:clothing=yes Shop:adult_books=no I think the vending machine type solution is better ... may be use sells .. thus shop=motorcycle sells:motorcycles:Harley_Davidson=yes second_hand:motorcycles=yes services:motorcycles:Harley_Davidson=yes Humm .. the same issue exits with offices too ... office=travel_agent http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Dtravel_agent provides:asian_travel=yes ? Anyway .. a bit off the topic .. Back to the topic on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shops has a list of things that, to me, are clearly shops and others that are offices. The difference between shop and office? shops sell physical things. offices provide a service. So an electrician would be a service = office A pharmacy sells pills etc ... would be a shop. There are some contentious ones .. that could go either way depending on what the customer wants. e.g. bank, carpenter, post_office As the post office is called an office I suppose it should go as office=post_office:-) The more I think of a bank the more I think of it is an office. Carpenter? If I want a repair done .. then it is a service? = office. If I want a new chair then a product? = shop. ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 24/08/2015 11:33 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 24.08.2015 14:11, Warin napisał(a): So I do both ends of the scale ... benches in parks and gardens, rubbish bins .. and upto city wide areas. Both have their appeal. The detail is most usefull for people that are there, the larger stuff for planning. This what I've experienced trying micromapping too. I also try see the need to mark larger stuff to put the smaller objects into the context. I'd rather say ... leave amenity for things that are not shops, buildings nor landuse. What if amenity takes the whole building? Landuse=school for area + building=school is enough or we still should add amenity=school for the building? Yes. In principle. landuse .. for the use of the land building .. for the style of the building and .. amenity .. for what the feature provides. However the subject is amenity vs shop So for your example I would rather use landuse=commercial .. for the use of the land building=retail .. for the style of the building shop=pharmacy (would be amenity=pharmacy but I would like to see that changed to shop) .. for what the feature provides. There have been changes in the past ... transport 'routes' have changed .. as have power distribution things ... I feel the context is rapidly changing and we can no more rely on what was in the past. Once OSM was a small London-based project, now it's gaining popularity worldwide, is quite strong in Europe and some big players are involved ( http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/30/telenav-toyota-scout-idUSnPn7d9hjT+81+PRN20150730 ). This makes any changes much harder now and I'm sure it will be even more like that in the future. It's harder to make any consensus just because there is much more people to contact with. For example see the suggested highway color shift - it was not made in the closet, Mateusz was writing about it in his diary, on the mailing lists and discussed a lot on the GitHub, yet some people are surprised and angry because they felt like not being warned. We also had big discussion about voting on features which had no real effects or conclusions. And this is just internal communication! Everyone does not participate in all the OSM news sources. Thus people are surprised when presented with stuff they had no idea of. There are also some examples of well thought and even accepted tagging schemes which are not in a wider use, like: - highway:area (4 years before it really took off now!) I don't use it. And so on . Mappers won't use stuff that they don't see a need for. So what makes the changes from amenity to shop attractive? Mappers -A more logical grouping that is easier to remember. Editors -A more logical grouping. SO not much here. Renders -A more logical grouping that means rendering is easier.? Same colours for all shops? Note There have been no objectors so far ... these will come. I'm eager to hear them too! I want the system to be coherent, but there are many ways it can be done and objections to one of them may be perfectly legit. I just hope at the end of the day we can choose the least imperfect solution, because as I've just wrote, everything has some downsides - even smooth gradual changes (being bound to old cruft for a long time and waiting for the critical mass forever). Yes everthing is a compromise. Slow changes are much better than sudden ones. Give people time to adapt. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Shop vs amenity
I have a problem understanding these two important keys. They are defined on Wiki as: Shop: Use shop=* to mark the location of a shop and the products that it sells. + A place selling retail products or services. Amenity: Covering an assortment of community facilities including toilets, telephones, banks, pharmacies and schools. + For describing useful and important facilities for visitors and residents. Now the problem is I don't know how to recognize one from the other. Here are my cases to resolve: 1. I suggested changing the banks + ATMs color on default map to brown, because I thought shop is selling goods and amenity is about services. But we have hairdresser and beauty salon both under shop=* namespace. 2. I thought that maybe the difference is shop selling services while amenity is the rest of services - but theaters or cinemas are in general paid. 3. The interesting case is also car wash vs car repair - they both are in general selling services (we have car_parts for shops just selling goods), but one is tagged as amenity and the other is tagged as a shop, so a standard rendering would be strange a bit: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1777 What do you think about those cases and where are possible mistakes to fix - and how should we do it? -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On 24/08/2015 4:42 AM, Daniel Koć wrote: I have a problem understanding these two important keys. They are defined on Wiki as: Shop: Use shop=* to mark the location of a shop and the products that it sells. + A place selling retail products or services. Amenity: Covering an assortment of community facilities including toilets, telephones, banks, pharmacies and schools. + For describing useful and important facilities for visitors and residents. Now the problem is I don't know how to recognize one from the other. Here are my cases to resolve: The problem comes from shop= coming latter to OSM than amenity. Thus some shops got put in to amenity= as nothing else was available. And now there is resistance to move them from amenity= to shop= The solution for me is to move shops that are in amenity= to shop= This would provide consistency - if it it sells something then it is a shop (and that is prioritised over the amenity=). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:03 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: The solution for me is to move shops that are in amenity= to shop= +1 Any retail establishment should be in shop=* When OSM first started (as I understand it) everyone was struggling to define towns - here's a road, here's a park, here's a restaurant. Amenities were features of a town. Now we are mapping the individual trees in the hedges bordered by a kerb on a service road that goes by the restaurants front entrance door in the parking lot in the landuse of mall. Basically, The scale has changed drastically. Newer amenities are mostly features of a location now (drinking fountains, benches, etc) - rather than amenities of the town. This mixed scope (because amenity is the older tag) is a hinderance to having an orderly tagging scheme. Amenity should have some of its values given to other tags to complete the more recent tagging schemes for smaller scale mapping for consistency reasons, and Amenity would then become a more manageable tag. win-win. Any town sized amenities with an area to denote grounds (school, hospital, golf course, etc) should move to Landuse to follow the other major landuses. This will let all (city based) buildings and areas be on landuse=, buildings be building= and a major key denote category value or special purpose (school=, shop=, golf= ), which is very straightforward to tag - unless it is hidden behind presets in the mapping software, but that means there has to be presets for everything, or it falls apart as soon as you need to manually tag something. Theres some holes in that idea, but it is better to patch those holes than keep letting amenity get stuffed with more and more disparate tags. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
