Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[André Pirard]

On 2018-09-20 17:16, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:55 AM André Pirard > wrote:


Belgium speaks 3 official languages and their very official
borders *have been* mapped.
This subject was presented several times on this list and "raised"
a total lack of interest.
Especially regarding the need to define a language boundary type.
The most similar country regarding languages is Switzerland.
But they did not care to define borders, AFAIK.
Same for USA, Canada, etc.


"Did not care to define" is an odd way of putting it. USA cannot map 
official language borders because USA has no official language or 
languages. The majority language is, obviously, US English, but there 
is no legislation making it official nor requiring government business 
to be transacted in English. We also have a long and ugly history of 
nationalists suppressing minority languages, but generally speaking, 
the laws that the nationalists claim to be enforcing do not exist. 
"English as official language" legislation has been introduced in 
virtually every session of the Congress, and has never passed. The 
movement to make English official goes all the way back to 1780, even 
before the war of American independence was concluded.
Your comment is very friendly and welcome, but, unless each and every 
case is like what you say, let us first keep the discussion to whether 
OSM should implement language borders and how.

Best regards / meilleurs voeux / (sorry, I don't speak Flemish)
How nice, but what even most French typing persons cannot do is 
correctly type "vœux".
Not supported by Windows. Ubuntu/Debian.Linux/Unix are needed to type 
 o e ;-)


Пока ;-)
I suppose one could tag 'official languages' of  US jurisdictions that 
sort of have them. Until recently, California and Massachusetts had 
laws on the books requiring public schools to teach classes only in 
English. (Arizona still does, but California and Massachusetts 
repealed their laws in the last couple of years and have reinstated 
bilingual education.) Dade County, Florida had a well-publicized local 
law that forbade transportation signage in any language but English, 
requiring Spanish-language signs to be taken down. About half the 
states have laws requiring that the edicts of government must be 
published in English (but not requiring that it be used to the 
exclusion of other languages). Nebraska's legislation after the First 
World War had the effect, briefly, of banning all foreign-language 
instruction in the state's schools (and Heaven help those who wished 
to prepare for travel abroad!).


It is true that in the US, one can expect to find street signs in 
English (augmented possibly with one or more minority languages), but 
that is usually a matter of practicality rather than formal policy.


I suppose that one could also, as an example, draw an official 
language border around the Navajo Nation and indicate that Diné bizaad 
and Spanish, as well as English, are official languages of its 
government, but that again opens the whole debate about how to 
domestic dependent nations, and it is accurate to state that I don't 
care to reopen that debate today.


Best regards / meilleurs voeux / (sorry, I don't speak Flemish)

Kevin



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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:55 AM André Pirard 
wrote:

> Belgium speaks 3 official languages and their very official borders *have
> been* mapped.
> This subject was presented several times on this list and "raised" a total
> lack of interest.
> Especially regarding the need to define a language boundary type.
> The most similar country regarding languages is Switzerland.
> But they did not care to define borders, AFAIK.
> Same for USA, Canada, etc.
>

"Did not care to define" is an odd way of putting it. USA cannot map
official language borders because USA has no official language or
languages. The majority language is, obviously, US English, but there is no
legislation making it official nor requiring government business to be
transacted in English. We also have a long and ugly history of nationalists
suppressing minority languages, but generally speaking, the laws that the
nationalists claim to be enforcing do not exist. "English as official
language" legislation has been introduced in virtually every session of the
Congress, and has never passed. The movement to make English official goes
all the way back to 1780, even before the war of American independence was
concluded.

I suppose one could tag 'official languages' of  US jurisdictions that sort
of have them. Until recently, California and Massachusetts had laws on the
books requiring public schools to teach classes only in English. (Arizona
still does, but California and Massachusetts repealed their laws in the
last couple of years and have reinstated bilingual education.) Dade County,
Florida had a well-publicized local law that forbade transportation signage
in any language but English, requiring Spanish-language signs to be taken
down. About half the states have laws requiring that the edicts of
government must be published in English (but not requiring that it be used
to the exclusion of other languages). Nebraska's legislation after the
First World War had the effect, briefly, of banning all foreign-language
instruction in the state's schools (and Heaven help those who wished to
prepare for travel abroad!).

It is true that in the US, one can expect to find street signs in English
(augmented possibly with one or more minority languages), but that is
usually a matter of practicality rather than formal policy.

I suppose that one could also, as an example, draw an official language
border around the Navajo Nation and indicate that Diné bizaad and Spanish,
as well as English, are official languages of its government, but that
again opens the whole debate about how to domestic dependent nations, and
it is accurate to state that I don't care to reopen that debate today.

Best regards / meilleurs voeux / (sorry, I don't speak Flemish)

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[André Pirard]

  
  
Hi,

Yes, only official languages should be mapped.
They're difficult enough already to be verified "on the ground" in a
survey.
Belgium speaks 3 official languages and their very official borders
have been mapped.
This subject was presented several times on this list and "raised" a
total lack of interest.
Especially regarding the need to define a language boundary type.
The most similar country regarding languages is Switzerland.
But they did not care to define borders, AFAIK.
Same for USA, Canada, etc.

Meilleures salutations,
Beste groeten,
Bestem Gruß,
Best regards,



  

  André.

  




  


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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 at 20:26, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

>
> I am not really familiar with the legal status of aboriginal lands in
> various parts of the world and how use of the names differs betweeen
> the inside and the outside.  I have a hard time imagining an aboriginal
> land with a distinct and homogeneous language use that is not also an
> administrative unit.
>
> If we could discuss this on a practical (and hopefully somewhat
> representative) example that would probably help.
>

Christoph

Here's one example for you of an Australian Aboriginal community, that I
mentioned in an earlier post

Peppimenarti, Northern Territory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Peppimenarti,%20Northern%20Territory?uselang=en-AU
,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3301216487

is part of Victoria Daly Regional Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Daly_Region
http://www.victoriadaly.nt.gov.au/daly-river-nauiyu
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5514633

The various references say "The main language spoken in Peppimenarti is
Tyemirri [or Ngan'gityemerri - ISO "nam", to give it it's full name!] with
English being the second most predominant in the area", but also "Although
there are ten different languages and cultural groups, the dominant
languages are Malak Malak and Kriol while English is widely used across the
whole of community."

This would appear to be a fairly representative example of this sort of
community? As my two sources said - the local people speak their own
language amongst themselves, but do also speak English.

So I guess we could draw an admin level 9 or 10 border around Peppi & tag
it with language=eng / nam?

Don't know what you would do Vic Daly though = eng / "language codes 1 -
10"?

& BTW, there's also now an ISO 639-3 table of (3-letter) language codes!
https://iso639-3.sil.org/code_tables/639/data/all

Hope this all helps?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Michael Patrick]

FYI, the U.S. NGA ( National Geospatial Agency ) provides the NGA GEOnet
Names Server (GNS)  with both
a viewer and text lookup  .
Also available are various web services
 ( like WMS ), APIs,
downloads and via shapefiles for GIS software like Qgis. YMMV, i.e. in
Belgium there is very explicit name variants

with associated languages and encodings, in areas of Australia
 the aboriginal names are variants, but the
actual language isn't explicitly named. If you do a search on the  Nicholas
Range ( Badakhshān, Afghanistan ) for example:
( what follows will probably explode in email depending on your client -
alternate

)

Silsilah-ye Kōh-e Wākhān   (Approved - N)
Silsilah   (Generic)
--
سلسله کوه واخان   (Non-Roman Script - NS)
سلسله   (Generic)
--
Nicholas Range   (Variant - V)
--
Qatorkŭhi Vakhon   (Variant - V)
--
Selselah Kōh-e Wākhān   (Variant - V)
--
Selseleh-ye Kūh-e Vākhān   (Variant - V)
Selseleh-ye Kūh   (Generic)
--
Khrebet Vakhanski   (Variant - V)
--
Vakhanskiy Khrebet   (Variant - V)
--
Qatorkŭhi Vakhon   (Variant - V)
--
Vakhsh Mountains   (Variant - V)
--
Wa-han P’a-mi-erh   (Variant - V)
--
Selsela-Koh-i-Wākhān   (Variant - V)

About what you expect - Russian, English, Arabic, Chinese, Arabic, etc.

A lookup of Yopurga , Xinjiang, China ( a seat of a third-order
administrative division), you will find many Uighur ( aboriginal) variants
expressed in both Cyrillic ( Ёпурға ) and Arabic ( يوپۇرغا) - this includes
historical entries. The dates can be helpful in determining the relevance -
in some areas of the world the only map name may have come of a British
Ordnance Survey in the 1800's.

Rumor has it the very best current language data is a proprietary database
owned by a evangelical christian organization that is verified by a network
of missionaries working in those areas. Almost all the language data has
some sort of license or copyright attached to it - the NGA data is the
standard US Federal "do whatever you want' with it, and the folks I've met
from NGA are very supportive of the OSM project.

Hope some of this helps form your proposal.

Michael Patrick,
OSM Seattle
Data Ferret






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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Sunday 16 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> "you would need extensive external data to determine how to
> actually display combinations of names (which obviously depends on
> the languages and scripts involved)"
>
> Do you mean how to decide which name is displayed "first"?  On the
> left / on top etc?

No, the order is simply a matter of deciding if your list is supposed to 
be an ordered list or not.  I mean the form in which the different 
names are displayed.  If you look at how the name tag is used in 
various parts of the world with combinations of different languages 
this varies a lot.  I don't know how much of this is just arbitrary 
choices based on personal typesetting preferences and how much of this 
represents actual local cultural conventions but my intent was not to 
impose a culturally imperialistic corset on how names will be shown to 
all names world wide but allow mappers to document their local 
conventions.  It is still up to the map designers how far they want to 
use that of course.

The most common separating elements between different language names in 
name tags are '-' and '/' - usually enclosed by spaces.  But that is 
obviously based on latin script dominance.  Other scripts and to some 
extent also latin script languages have different conventions.  If you 
have names in well distinguishable scripts a separator is often 
unnecessary and uncommon.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

"you would need extensive external data to determine how to
actually display combinations of names (which obviously depends on the
languages and scripts involved)"

Do you mean how to decide which name is displayed "first"?  On the left /
on top etc?

I think that's up to map designers.

But I suppose the order of the language codes in the value could considered
the suggested order to use
(Eg language:default=ara;fr tagged on the boundary of Morocco would mean:
"Show Arabic and French names,
Perhaps put Arabic first."

If mappers want to "paint the label", as you phrased it, then the name=*
tag already works for that.
But this proposal is suggesting moving away from micromanaging the way
multiple language names are displayed together

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 10:09 PM Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Sunday 16 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> >
> > *Would it be feasible for database users to query
> > boundary=aboriginal_lands along with the admin boundaries*?
>
> As said i can't really form an opinion on this without a real world
> example, the corresponding data and a suggestion how this should be
> interpreted together with the administrative boundaries.
>
> Of course you can somehow formulate a rule for that but i am not sure if
> this would make sense and be intuitive for the mapper.
>
> > It should be interpreted with the individual language name tags.
> > If the default language is zh;zh_pinyin (Chinese and romanized
> > Chinese), there should be a name:zh and name:zh_pinyin tag on each
> > feature within the boundary, in theory, and these two name tags
> > should be combined in an international map rendering.
>
> But then you would need extensive external data to determine how to
> actually display combinations of names (which obviously depends on the
> languages and scripts involved).  Evidence in how the name tag is used
> for combining different names in different parts of the world shows
> that the local conventions on how to display different languages
> together varies quite strongly.
>
> Or in other words:  It is very easy for data users to generate a list of
> languages from a format string if required but it is rather difficult
> if not impossible to generate an accurate and suitable format string
> for every combination of languages from just a list of languages.  If
> this is just a question of typesetting rules that is the resposibility
> of the map designer obviously but i have the impression this is also a
> matter of local culture w.r.t. names and languages and that is
> something that can and should be mapped.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> 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] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Sorry, the example may not have been clear. It was simple an example of a
bilingual tag that might be used in a place where signs show the name in
Chinese characters, plus a latin alphabet version. This might happen in an
overseas Chinese community. I was mainly looking for a combination of two
tags that might be found, one of which uses a standard ISO code and the
other of which is used in OSM but is non-standard, just to show the
possible format.

In most cases there is going to be one language, just like most name tags
are currently in one language, and that will be the local or official
language, in the script used on signs. Brussels, Belgium, and Morocco and a
few other places are unusual exceptions.

So I think it should work the way you would like; the locally used name, in
the local script, should be displayed.

Joseph

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 9:51 PM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
> I don't (yet) have an opinion either way on the feasibility or
> desirability of tagging languages used in a region.  But this...
>
> It should be interpreted with the individual language name tags.
>> If the default language is zh;zh_pinyin (Chinese and romanized Chinese),
>> there should be a name:zh and name:zh_pinyin tag on each feature within the
>> boundary, in theory, and these two name tags should be combined in an
>> international map rendering.
>>
>> In theory, this should look similar to what we currently get with the
>> name=* tag
>>
>
> This is something I strongly disagree with.  For most objects, name=*
> should not be translated because, for most
> objects it should be, in my opinion, an opaque representation of signage.
> If I don't speak the local language I need to
> know what to look for on the street sign or the shopfront sign as
> represented on the signage.  Knowing what it would
> say if the locals had decided to put up signage in English is not very
> helpful.  An IPA rendering of the local pronunciation
> of the name might be beneficial for those with text-to-speech.
>
> If a sign is bilingual then using name=xx: and name=yy: are perhaps of
> merit in breaking down the components of the
> full name.  E.g., a sign near me says "Heol Napier / Napier Street" (the
> slash isn't actually present, the name is broken
> up into two lines) and so name="Heol Napier / Napier Street" +
> name:cy="Heol Napier" + name:en="Napier Street" is
> one possible way of representing it in a meaningful way.
>
> But how are you going to handle a house name like "Duncavin" which is
> about a mile from me?  The "Dun" is
> Scottish for "fort."  It's a house in Wales which is bilingual
> English/Welsh.  And the name is a bad pun.  Displaying
> the name phonetically might help somebody asking a local where the place
> is.  Displaying a translation (even if
> the pun works in the other language) isn't useful.  What's needed is what
> the sign actually displays, not what it would
> display if it were in a different language.
>
> Yes, knowing the language(s) spoken in a particular region might be
> useful.  Yes, having the query tool display tag names
> like "shop" and "amenity" in the user's preferred language would be very
> useful.  Rendering a house name like "Penrallt"
> or "Y Felin" in Cryrilic or Arabic or Hebrew script isn't really going to
> help anyone because house and street names are
> often labels whose meaning is opaque.  Is 在米爾路上 (blame Google Translate,
> not me) really going to help somebody
> looking for a sign that has these literal characters on it: "Garnon's Mill
> Road"?  Conversely, if I were in China and I
> were looking for a road signed "在米爾路上" would it help me to know it meant
> "Garnon's Mill Road"?
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Sunday 16 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> *Would it be feasible for database users to query
> boundary=aboriginal_lands along with the admin boundaries*?

As said i can't really form an opinion on this without a real world 
example, the corresponding data and a suggestion how this should be 
interpreted together with the administrative boundaries.

Of course you can somehow formulate a rule for that but i am not sure if 
this would make sense and be intuitive for the mapper.

> It should be interpreted with the individual language name tags.
> If the default language is zh;zh_pinyin (Chinese and romanized
> Chinese), there should be a name:zh and name:zh_pinyin tag on each
> feature within the boundary, in theory, and these two name tags
> should be combined in an international map rendering.

But then you would need extensive external data to determine how to 
actually display combinations of names (which obviously depends on the 
languages and scripts involved).  Evidence in how the name tag is used 
for combining different names in different parts of the world shows 
that the local conventions on how to display different languages 
together varies quite strongly.

Or in other words:  It is very easy for data users to generate a list of 
languages from a format string if required but it is rather difficult 
if not impossible to generate an accurate and suitable format string 
for every combination of languages from just a list of languages.  If 
this is just a question of typesetting rules that is the resposibility 
of the map designer obviously but i have the impression this is also a 
matter of local culture w.r.t. names and languages and that is 
something that can and should be mapped.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

I don't (yet) have an opinion either way on the feasibility or desirability
of tagging languages used in a region.  But this...

It should be interpreted with the individual language name tags.
> If the default language is zh;zh_pinyin (Chinese and romanized Chinese),
> there should be a name:zh and name:zh_pinyin tag on each feature within the
> boundary, in theory, and these two name tags should be combined in an
> international map rendering.
>
> In theory, this should look similar to what we currently get with the
> name=* tag
>

This is something I strongly disagree with.  For most objects, name=*
should not be translated because, for most
objects it should be, in my opinion, an opaque representation of signage.
If I don't speak the local language I need to
know what to look for on the street sign or the shopfront sign as
represented on the signage.  Knowing what it would
say if the locals had decided to put up signage in English is not very
helpful.  An IPA rendering of the local pronunciation
of the name might be beneficial for those with text-to-speech.

If a sign is bilingual then using name=xx: and name=yy: are perhaps of
merit in breaking down the components of the
full name.  E.g., a sign near me says "Heol Napier / Napier Street" (the
slash isn't actually present, the name is broken
up into two lines) and so name="Heol Napier / Napier Street" +
name:cy="Heol Napier" + name:en="Napier Street" is
one possible way of representing it in a meaningful way.

But how are you going to handle a house name like "Duncavin" which is about
a mile from me?  The "Dun" is
Scottish for "fort."  It's a house in Wales which is bilingual
English/Welsh.  And the name is a bad pun.  Displaying
the name phonetically might help somebody asking a local where the place
is.  Displaying a translation (even if
the pun works in the other language) isn't useful.  What's needed is what
the sign actually displays, not what it would
display if it were in a different language.

Yes, knowing the language(s) spoken in a particular region might be
useful.  Yes, having the query tool display tag names
like "shop" and "amenity" in the user's preferred language would be very
useful.  Rendering a house name like "Penrallt"
or "Y Felin" in Cryrilic or Arabic or Hebrew script isn't really going to
help anyone because house and street names are
often labels whose meaning is opaque.  Is 在米爾路上 (blame Google Translate,
not me) really going to help somebody
looking for a sign that has these literal characters on it: "Garnon's Mill
Road"?  Conversely, if I were in China and I
were looking for a road signed "在米爾路上" would it help me to know it meant
"Garnon's Mill Road"?

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 7:26 PM Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> > would it be a problem to also search for boundaries of
> > aboriginal_lands in addition to 8 admin boundary levels?
>
> I am not really familiar with the legal status of aboriginal lands in
> various parts of the world and how use of the names differs betweeen
> the inside and the outside.  I have a hard time imagining an aboriginal
> land with a distinct and homogeneous language use that is not also an
> administrative unit.
>

Native America and Alaskan Native reservations in the USA have some
administrative functions, in some cases superseeding the admin_level 4
"State", but in other cases functioning as a lower admin level. This comes
from their history as "foreign nations" whose lands were incorporated into
the USA (and Canada) based on treaties (and war).

So they are generally tagged with boundary=aboriginal_lands. Some mappers
dislike the word "aboriginal" or dislike having a specific tag, and instead
use the boundary=protected_area tag with a subtag specifiying a cultural /
social protected group.

Some American Indian nations no longer use their language, but others are
very vibrant, eg on the huge Navajo Nation reservation in Arizona and New
Mexico, the majority speak the Navajo language (169,000 native speakers)
and it's used for local place names. The boundary cuts across two states
and several counties. Many aboriginal_lands areas in Brazil have strong use
of the local language, and some of the Aboriginal areas in Australia and
Canada as well.

*Would it be feasible for database users to query boundary=aboriginal_lands
along with the admin boundaries*? Is there a technical limitation?
For example, could the Openstreetmap Carto style handle this?


> > *language:default=de* would be used on the admin_level=2 boundary for
> > Germany
> > *language:default=fr;nl *could be used on the administrative boundary
> > for Brussels
>
> I am not sure what exactly this tag is supposed to mean.  Is it just the
> format string i suggested indicating the locally preferred form of name
> display minus the actual form, i.e. reduced to a list of component
> names or is it something different?
>

It's nearly the same as your example of* language_format=$de *for Germany;
I've just replaced _format with :default to hopefully make it more
understandable for mappers

And I removed the '$' symbol, because I have not yet understood why it
would be beneficial

Yes, it should indicate the locally preferred form of name display, which
should, in theory, be equivalent to the actual use on the ground.
Bilingual names need to be supported for places such as Brussels, Morocco
etc.

how is the data user supposed to interpret this tag?  ... [Is it]
> supposed to be interpreted in combination with the plain, possibly
> compund name tag or with the individual language name tags.[?]
>

It should be interpreted with the individual language name tags.
If the default language is zh;zh_pinyin (Chinese and romanized Chinese),
there should be a name:zh and name:zh_pinyin tag on each feature within the
boundary, in theory, and these two name tags should be combined in an
international map rendering.

In theory, this should look similar to what we currently get with the
name=* tag

I am willing to propose that the name=* tag should be listed as "optional"
in the wiki, and proposing that the JOSM and ID editor folks change the
validators and presets.
But I'm reluctant to expand the scope of this proposal, it's already a big
change.

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Sunday 16 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 1:23 AM Christoph Hormann  
wrote:
> > > Are you objecting to the idea of tagging places as well as
> > > boundaries? What about the protected area / aboriginal lands
> > > boundaries?
> >
> > * I don't think any tagging concept where the language format tag
> > of a feature other than an administrative boundary relation has a
> > meaning beyond said feature has a chance to be acutally broadly
> > interpreted by data users.*
>
> *boundary=administrative *may have up 9 levels in some places
> *(admin_level 2 to 10*)
> Do we need to limit the max admin_level that can be used for the
> language tag?
> If not, why would it be a problem to also search for boundaries of
> aboriginal_lands in addition to 8 admin boundary levels?

I am not really familiar with the legal status of aboriginal lands in 
various parts of the world and how use of the names differs betweeen 
the inside and the outside.  I have a hard time imagining an aboriginal 
land with a distinct and homogeneous language use that is not also an 
administrative unit.

If we could discuss this on a practical (and hopefully somewhat 
representative) example that would probably help.

>
> *language:default=* would have the code as the "value" in the
> key=value pair
>
> Examples:
>
> *language:default=de* would be used on the admin_level=2 boundary for
> Germany
> *language:default=fr;nl *could be used on the administrative boundary
> for Brussels
> *language:default=zh;zh_pinyin* could be used in China, if the local
> community wants to show the romanized name along with the Chinese
> characters

I am not sure what exactly this tag is supposed to mean.  Is it just the 
format string i suggested indicating the locally preferred form of name 
display minus the actual form, i.e. reduced to a list of component 
names or is it something different?

And how is the data user supposed to interpret this tag?  Since you do 
not want to deprecate the name tag it is not clear to me if it is 
supposed to be interpreted in combination with the plain, possibly 
compund name tag or with the individual language name tags.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 16. Sep 2018, at 06:23, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> boundary=administrative may have up 9 levels in some places (admin_level 2 to 
> 10) 

even admin_level 11 in some places:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/admin_level#values
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#11_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries


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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Clifford Snow]

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 9:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

>
> If it's necessary, I'm willing to make a proposal to change aboriginal /
> native lands to an administrative boundary, without an admin_level
> Would that solve the problem?
>
>
Please don't suggest changing aboriginal lands tag. I'm very familiar with
the US and to a smaller degree Canada. Admin_level doesn't work well for
aboriginal lands. In the US's case, aboriginal lands are considered
domestic dependant nations. While many are completely within a state, they
are not under the states control in that they are free to govern
themselves.

Using boundary=aboriginal_lands is an established practice that works.

Best,
Clifford

-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Colin, the theread title is now incorrect. I no longer think it is feasible
to map the boundaries of languages.

The proposal will just seek to document the format of default name=* tags.
This will also provide information about the language used within in a
particular administrative boundary, as a side-benefit

I've been considering Brussels as a test-case, since they have already made
up their own tags and boundaries ( default_language=fr for example )

I've tried to contact one of the people who set up the language areas in
Belgium to get their opinion.

Warin:
I live in New Guinea, but on the Indonesian side.
While you may not see these languages as worth your time as a mapper, they
matter to the people here.
And the local langauges are used for all the local names for geographic
features, so they are getting into the OSM database, little by little.
If you don't live on one of these linguistic diversity hotspots it should
be much easier to tag just the proper admin boundary, even in Belgium
Joseph

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 6:56 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 16/09/18 01:37, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> Joseph, I have to admit I am getting a bit lost as to what you are trying
> to define with this proposal. Whatever tagging we end up with, who is the
> target audience? What are the use cases? Is it an aid to interpreting and
> pronouncing the contents of the "name" tag? Is it a (strong) hint to
> mappers about how to synthesize multilingual labels? Is it documenting the
> official languages, or the popular spoken languages, or what?
>
> Take Brussels for example. Officially bilingual for political reasons, in
> practice large parts are essentially French-only. Composite street names
> can be nl - fr or fr - nl. Can I suggest we work through Belgium as a case
> study, and when there is a proposal to suit Belgium, we then cross-check
> with e.g. Switzerland, Morocco, Spain or whatever?
>
>
> If you want an extreme case then Papua New Guinea has over 820 languages..
> all in one country.
> They have 3 official languages, usage varies depending on what you are.
> Documenting them would also be a challenge.
> The amount of work vs the people who will use the data?
> For PNG I don't see the work = the benefit.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papua_New_Guinea#Languages
>
>
>
>
> On 2018-09-15 17:15, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> Re: "How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there,
> whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you
> define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a
> new concept to OSM."
>
> In Brussels they would actually like to be able to display the two
> languages neutrally, without a set display order. I don't think a display
> order specification is necessary. That information is already in the
> default "name=*" tag
>
> "Is it intended to be only for street names? If so,
> highway:name:language=* might be required to make that clear. Or does
> everything that can have a name need to fit in with this?"
>
> Not only streets. Everything with a name=* tag has the same issues
>
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 11:02 PM Colin Smale 
> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-09-15 15:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>
>> Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the single
>> value to be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need
>> multiple defaults, see my comment above about different contexts."
>>
>> The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be displayed
>> together as the default language setting, if so desired. If you check out
>> the Multilingual Names wiki page
>> , there are
>> places where people choose to standardize the default name=* be a
>> combination of two languages or two encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or
>> Arabic + French in Moroco. If this is going to be adopted by the folks in
>> Belgium, Morocco etc, there should be the choice of specifying two (or 3)
>> languages, to fit with their current preference.
>>
>>
>> How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there,
>> whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you
>> define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a
>> new concept to OSM.
>>
>>
>> I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is used, just
>> trying to make it more useful by tagging what language is actually being
>> used in the value for the name key. And I suspect there may be more
>> communities that will choose this option, to encourage displaying names
>> both in the local langauge and in the official or national language.
>>
>> So your idea is only for multilingual areas? Seems a bit of a waste.
>> Combine this with "name:language=fr" in Wallonia, "name:language=nl" in
>> Flanders, "name:language=de" in the Ostkantons, and "name:language=fr;nl"
>> in Brussels?
>>
>> Is it intended to be only for street names? If so,
>> 

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 1:23 AM Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> > Are you objecting to the idea of tagging places as well as
> > boundaries? What about the protected area / aboriginal lands
> > boundaries?
>
>
>
>
> * I don't think any tagging concept where the language format tag of a
> feature other than an administrative boundary relation has a meaning beyond
> said feature has a chance to be acutally broadly interpreted by data users.*
>

*boundary=administrative *may have up 9 levels in some places *(admin_level
2 to 10*)
Do we need to limit the max admin_level that can be used for the language
tag?
If not, why would it be a problem to also search for boundaries of
aboriginal_lands in addition to 8 admin boundary levels?

I don't quite understand the technical side of using this database, so
you'll have to explain it like I'm an idiot. :-)
(I do understand how interpreting tags on place nodes would be difficult)

If it's necessary, I'm willing to make a proposal to change aboriginal /
native lands to an administrative boundary, without an admin_level
Would that solve the problem?


> > OK, but is this necessary for it to work? Is a 3-letter ISO code
> > sufficient?
> > Would it be possible to put the language code in the key
> > (language:=default) or is it better to stick to the value?
>
>
> * I am not quite sure what your suggestion is.  You would need to
> formulate a specific suggestion for me to determine if this would work.  *
>

*language:default=* would have the code as the "value" in the
key=value pair

Examples:

*language:default=de* would be used on the admin_level=2 boundary for
Germany
*language:default=fr;nl *could be used on the administrative boundary for
Brussels
*language:default=zh;zh_pinyin* could be used in China, if the local
community wants to show the romanized name along with the Chinese characters

This is similar to how name tags are currently formed, though there the key
has the code in format name:<*code*>=

For this to work a database user would need to associate the language
format tag with the name:<*code*> tag, right?
But the *name:* tag doesn't include any special characters.

> Functionally both ideas work the same, right?
>
>
>
>
> * No, most of the advantages of my tagging concept depend on not having an
> aggregate name tag but tagging the individual names in different languages
> (like name:en, name:fr) separately and defining the locally preferred
> formatting independent of that.*
>
> *OK. I'm trying to set up the proposal so that this objective can still be
achieved in the long-term.*

Deprecating the default name=* tag will be controversal, so I don't think
it should be combined with this early stage.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Warin]

On 16/09/18 01:37, Colin Smale wrote:


Joseph, I have to admit I am getting a bit lost as to what you are 
trying to define with this proposal. Whatever tagging we end up with, 
who is the target audience? What are the use cases? Is it an aid to 
interpreting and pronouncing the contents of the "name" tag? Is it a 
(strong) hint to mappers about how to synthesize multilingual labels? 
Is it documenting the official languages, or the popular spoken 
languages, or what?


Take Brussels for example. Officially bilingual for political reasons, 
in practice large parts are essentially French-only. Composite street 
names can be nl - fr or fr - nl. Can I suggest we work through Belgium 
as a case study, and when there is a proposal to suit Belgium, we then 
cross-check with e.g. Switzerland, Morocco, Spain or whatever?




If you want an extreme case then Papua New Guinea has over 820 
languages.. all in one country.

They have 3 official languages, usage varies depending on what you are.
Documenting them would also be a challenge.
The amount of work vs the people who will use the data?
For PNG I don't see the work = the benefit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papua_New_Guinea#Languages



On 2018-09-15 17:15, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

Re: "How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible 
there, whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, 
unless you define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which 
AFAIK would be a new concept to OSM."
In Brussels they would actually like to be able to display the two 
languages neutrally, without a set display order. I don't think a 
display order specification is necessary. That information is already 
in the default "name=*" tag
"Is it intended to be only for street names? If so, 
highway:name:language=* might be required to make that clear. Or does 
everything that can have a name need to fit in with this?"

Not only streets. Everything with a name=* tag has the same issues

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 11:02 PM Colin Smale > wrote:


On 2018-09-15 15:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the
single value to be used in the absence of an explicit value.
If you think you need multiple defaults, see my comment above
about different contexts."
The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be
displayed together as the default language setting, if so
desired. If you check out the Multilingual Names wiki page
,
there are places where people choose to standardize the
default name=* be a combination of two languages or two
encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or Arabic + French in
Moroco. If this is going to be adopted by the folks in
Belgium, Morocco etc, there should be the choice of
specifying two (or 3) languages, to fit with their current
preference.

How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible
there, whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order,
unless you define the list of languages to be an ordered list,
which AFAIK would be a new concept to OSM.

I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is
used, just trying to make it more useful by tagging what
language is actually being used in the value for the name
key. And I suspect there may be more communities that will
choose this option, to encourage displaying names both in the
local langauge and in the official or national language.

So your idea is only for multilingual areas? Seems a bit of a
waste. Combine this with "name:language=fr" in Wallonia,
"name:language=nl" in Flanders, "name:language=de" in the
Ostkantons, and "name:language=fr;nl" in Brussels?
Is it intended to be only for street names? If so,
highway:name:language=* might be required to make that clear. Or
does everything that can have a name need to fit in with this?
___
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] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Saturday 15 September 2018, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> please let us not use "complicated" characters, on some keyboards
> those aren't even indicated and you might need multifinger
> combinations to type them. If the key says "language format" I
> believe for the value we only have to define a separator. The strings
> between the separator will be "formats" and we'll not need curly
> braces to understand it (e.g. "de;fr" or "de+fr"). If you prefer, we
> could allow traling and leading spaces ("de + fr") for improved
> readability.

That is a very different idea and without knowing the supposed meaning 
of this list of language codes i am not really sure what to think of 
it.

The purpose of the format string is to allow documenting the locally 
preferred form to display names - which is exactly what the name tag is 
currently used for, just in a less transparent, less consistent and 
more difficult to maintain and to interpret form.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-09-15 18:22 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :

>  The
> most common way to do that is to prefix symbols with a special
> character.  An alternative would be to enclose symbols in special
> characters (like braces, e.g. language_format={de} - {fr}).
>


please let us not use "complicated" characters, on some keyboards those
aren't even indicated and you might need multifinger combinations to type
them. If the key says "language format" I believe for the value we only
have to define a separator. The strings between the separator will be
"formats" and we'll not need curly braces to understand it (e.g. "de;fr" or
"de+fr"). If you prefer, we could allow traling and leading spaces ("de +
fr") for improved readability.

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Saturday 15 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> * the choice of suggesting tagging the language information on either
>
> > the administrative boundary relations or the individual features
> > but not on any other feature with a meaning beyond the feature
> > itself was not arbitrary.
>
> Are you objecting to the idea of tagging places as well as
> boundaries? What about the protected area / aboriginal lands
> boundaries?

I don't think any tagging concept where the language format tag of a 
feature other than an administrative boundary relation has a meaning 
beyond said feature has a chance to be acutally broadly interpreted by 
data users.

Once you start going down this road the interpretation will become very 
complicated for the data user and completely intransparent for the 
mapper and hence it would almost certainly fail to find acceptance.

> > * the choice of syntax for the language string is something that
> > can be discussed obviously.  You can essentially use any characters
> > that are unlikely to occur in an actual format as structuring
> > elements.  The dollar sign is a common symbol prefix here.
>
> OK, but is this necessary for it to work? Is a 3-letter ISO code
> sufficient?
> Would it be possible to put the language code in the key
> (language:=default) or is it better to stick to the value?

I am not quite sure what your suggestion is.  You would need to 
formulate a specific suggestion for me to determine if this would work.  
In general in a format string you need a way to distinguish between 
literal characters and characters indicating a symbol/variable.  The 
most common way to do that is to prefix symbols with a special 
character.  An alternative would be to enclose symbols in special 
characters (like braces, e.g. language_format={de} - {fr}).

> > * the core of my proposal is not using the plain "name" tag any
> > more for anything other than legacy fallback if other data is
> > missing.  Any proposal to separately tag the language of the name
> > tag ... is a very different idea.
>
> Functionally both ideas work the same, right?

No, most of the advantages of my tagging concept depend on not having an 
aggregate name tag but tagging the individual names in different 
languages (like name:en, name:fr) separately and defining the locally 
preferred formatting independent of that.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Colin Smale]

Joseph, I have to admit I am getting a bit lost as to what you are
trying to define with this proposal. Whatever tagging we end up with,
who is the target audience? What are the use cases? Is it an aid to
interpreting and pronouncing the contents of the "name" tag? Is it a
(strong) hint to mappers about how to synthesize multilingual labels? Is
it documenting the official languages, or the popular spoken languages,
or what? 

Take Brussels for example. Officially bilingual for political reasons,
in practice large parts are essentially French-only. Composite street
names can be nl - fr or fr - nl. Can I suggest we work through Belgium
as a case study, and when there is a proposal to suit Belgium, we then
cross-check with e.g. Switzerland, Morocco, Spain or whatever?

On 2018-09-15 17:15, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> Re: "How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there, 
> whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you define 
> the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a new 
> concept to OSM." 
> 
> In Brussels they would actually like to be able to display the two languages 
> neutrally, without a set display order. I don't think a display order 
> specification is necessary. That information is already in the default 
> "name=*" tag 
> 
> "Is it intended to be only for street names? If so, highway:name:language=* 
> might be required to make that clear. Or does everything that can have a name 
> need to fit in with this?" 
> 
> Not only streets. Everything with a name=* tag has the same issues 
> 
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 11:02 PM Colin Smale  wrote: 
> 
> On 2018-09-15 15:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: 
> 
> Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value to 
> be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need multiple 
> defaults, see my comment above about different contexts." 
> 
> The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be displayed 
> together as the default language setting, if so desired. If you check out the 
> Multilingual Names wiki page [1], there are places where people choose to 
> standardize the default name=* be a combination of two languages or two 
> encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or Arabic + French in Moroco. If this is 
> going to be adopted by the folks in Belgium, Morocco etc, there should be the 
> choice of specifying two (or 3) languages, to fit with their current 
> preference.  
> 
> How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there, whereas 
> "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you define the list 
> of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a new concept to 
> OSM. 
> 
> I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is used, just trying 
> to make it more useful by tagging what language is actually being used in the 
> value for the name key. And I suspect there may be more communities that will 
> choose this option, to encourage displaying names both in the local langauge 
> and in the official or national language. 
> 
> So your idea is only for multilingual areas? Seems a bit of a waste. Combine 
> this with "name:language=fr" in Wallonia, "name:language=nl" in Flanders, 
> "name:language=de" in the Ostkantons, and "name:language=fr;nl" in Brussels? 
> 
> Is it intended to be only for street names? If so, highway:name:language=* 
> might be required to make that clear. Or does everything that can have a name 
> need to fit in with this? 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Links:
--
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

* the choice of suggesting tagging the language information on either
> the administrative boundary relations or the individual features but
> not on any other feature with a meaning beyond the feature itself was
> not arbitrary.
>

Are you objecting to the idea of tagging places as well as boundaries?
What about the protected area / aboriginal lands boundaries?

I was trying to avoid tagging individual POIs and features with
language:default=xxx, to reduce the workload on mappers.

Is it not yet feasible to associate nodes with the nearest place?


> * the choice of syntax for the language string is something that can be
> discussed obviously.  You can essentially use any characters that are
> unlikely to occur in an actual format as structuring elements.  The
> dollar sign is a common symbol prefix here.
>

OK, but is this necessary for it to work? Is a 3-letter ISO code
sufficient?
Would it be possible to put the language code in the key
(language:=default) or is it better to stick to the value?


> * the core of my proposal is not using the plain "name" tag any more for
> anything other than legacy fallback if other data is missing.  Any
> proposal to separately tag the language of the name tag ... is a very
> different idea.
>

Functionally both ideas work the same, right? In particular, tagging
specific POIs with language_format= or language_default= is
tagging the language of the default name, unless the two tags were added by
different mappers with opposing ideas.

I didn't want to bring up anything about deprecating the defaul name=* tags
or stopping rendering them.
That can be discussed sometime in the future if this proposal catches on.

TL:DR:
1) Do we really need that $ symbol?
2) Language code in value vs key?
3) Tagging settled places?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Re: "How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there,
whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you
define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a
new concept to OSM."

In Brussels they would actually like to be able to display the two
languages neutrally, without a set display order. I don't think a display
order specification is necessary. That information is already in the
default "name=*" tag

"Is it intended to be only for street names? If so, highway:name:language=*
might be required to make that clear. Or does everything that can have a
name need to fit in with this?"

Not only streets. Everything with a name=* tag has the same issues

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 11:02 PM Colin Smale  wrote:

> On 2018-09-15 15:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value
> to be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need
> multiple defaults, see my comment above about different contexts."
>
> The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be displayed
> together as the default language setting, if so desired. If you check out
> the Multilingual Names wiki page
> , there are
> places where people choose to standardize the default name=* be a
> combination of two languages or two encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or
> Arabic + French in Moroco. If this is going to be adopted by the folks in
> Belgium, Morocco etc, there should be the choice of specifying two (or 3)
> languages, to fit with their current preference.
>
>
> How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there,
> whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you
> define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be a
> new concept to OSM.
>
>
> I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is used, just
> trying to make it more useful by tagging what language is actually being
> used in the value for the name key. And I suspect there may be more
> communities that will choose this option, to encourage displaying names
> both in the local langauge and in the official or national language.
>
> So your idea is only for multilingual areas? Seems a bit of a waste.
> Combine this with "name:language=fr" in Wallonia, "name:language=nl" in
> Flanders, "name:language=de" in the Ostkantons, and "name:language=fr;nl"
> in Brussels?
>
> Is it intended to be only for street names? If so, highway:name:language=*
> might be required to make that clear. Or does everything that can have a
> name need to fit in with this?
>
> ___
> 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] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 14 September 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> Christoph (@Imagico) has suggested tagging the official language
> information on administrative boundary relations:
> http://blog.imagico.de/you-name-it-on-representing-geographic-diversi
>ty-in-names/

A few remarks here regarding this:

* the choice of suggesting tagging the language information on either 
the administrative boundary relations or the individual features but 
not on any other feature with a meaning beyond the feature itself was 
not arbitrary.  Limiting this to a well defined data basis and simple 
rules (here:  individual feature tag and administrative unit as 
fallback, priority through admin_level) is a necessary prerequisite for 
any chance of practical use.  And if you look at what systematics are 
used for the name tags at the moment the vast majority of choices 
happens on administrative units with admin_level 2-4.

* the choice of tagging the locally preferred form of showing the names 
and not any culture specific classification into things 
like "official", "primary", "indigenous", "main" or "majority" was also 
deliberate because this seems to be the approach that least imposes a 
specific cultural understanding of languages onto people.

* keep in mind the very idea behind this proposal is that data users 
have the free choice to either use the language format information in 
the data as is or replace or modify it with any other information.  So 
any discussion along the lines of "i want to base the language format 
on some non-verifiably spatial division" is unnecessary because you 
obviously can always do that, you just can't have and maintain such 
data inside of the OSM database.

* the choice of syntax for the language string is something that can be 
discussed obviously.  You can essentially use any characters that are 
unlikely to occur in an actual format as structuring elements.  The 
dollar sign is a common symbol prefix here.

* the core of my proposal is not using the plain "name" tag any more for 
anything other than legacy fallback if other data is missing.  Any 
proposal to separately tag the language of the name tag (several 
initiatives in that direction have been made in the past) is a very 
different idea.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-09-15 15:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value to 
> be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need multiple 
> defaults, see my comment above about different contexts." 
> 
> The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be displayed 
> together as the default language setting, if so desired. If you check out the 
> Multilingual Names wiki page [1], there are places where people choose to 
> standardize the default name=* be a combination of two languages or two 
> encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or Arabic + French in Moroco. If this is 
> going to be adopted by the folks in Belgium, Morocco etc, there should be the 
> choice of specifying two (or 3) languages, to fit with their current 
> preference.

How about "name:language_order=fr;nl"? No confusion possible there,
whereas "name:language=fr;nl" would not specify the order, unless you
define the list of languages to be an ordered list, which AFAIK would be
a new concept to OSM. 

> I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is used, just trying 
> to make it more useful by tagging what language is actually being used in the 
> value for the name key. And I suspect there may be more communities that will 
> choose this option, to encourage displaying names both in the local langauge 
> and in the official or national language.

So your idea is only for multilingual areas? Seems a bit of a waste.
Combine this with "name:language=fr" in Wallonia, "name:language=nl" in
Flanders, "name:language=de" in the Ostkantons, and
"name:language=fr;nl" in Brussels? 

Is it intended to be only for street names? If so,
highway:name:language=* might be required to make that clear. Or does
everything that can have a name need to fit in with this? 
  

Links:
--
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Re: "A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value
to be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need
multiple defaults, see my comment above about different contexts."

The idea is to allow a community to choose 2 languages to be displayed
together as the default language setting, if so desired. If you check out
the Multilingual Names wiki page
, there are places
where people choose to standardize the default name=* be a combination of
two languages or two encodings; eg  fr + nl in Brussels, or Arabic + French
in Moroco. If this is going to be adopted by the folks in Belgium, Morocco
etc, there should be the choice of specifying two (or 3) languages, to fit
with their current preference.

I'm not trying to change the way the default name=* tag is used, just
trying to make it more useful by tagging what language is actually being
used in the value for the name key. And I suspect there may be more
communities that will choose this option, to encourage displaying names
both in the local langauge and in the official or national language.

Any thoughts about the best order? Should the language code be in the value
or in the key? As a mapper it doesn't make a difference to me, but I think
it matters to database users.

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:12 PM Colin Smale  wrote:

> On 2018-09-15 06:33, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> I like the word "default"; it doesn't make a value judgement or have
> positive / negative connotations. And it sounds like it has to do with how
> the database should function, which is the right idea. The most common
> language used for names should be the "default", whether or not it is
> official.
>
>
> As long as it is made explicit what the scope is for this default. We may
> need different default languages for different contexts. Interpreting
> name=* is one thing but it is a different concept to the locally spoken
> language(s), or the official language(s) for example.
>
>
> *language:default=* has the advantage of being searchable with a
> simple query like "language:default=*" in Taginfo, Overpass and JOSM. But
> it requires the use of semicolons to specify multiple default languages.
>
> A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value to be
> used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need multiple
> defaults, see my comment above about different contexts.
>
> ___
> 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] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-09-15 06:33, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> I like the word "default"; it doesn't make a value judgement or have positive 
> / negative connotations. And it sounds like it has to do with how the 
> database should function, which is the right idea. The most common language 
> used for names should be the "default", whether or not it is official.

As long as it is made explicit what the scope is for this default. We
may need different default languages for different contexts.
Interpreting name=* is one thing but it is a different concept to the
locally spoken language(s), or the official language(s) for example. 

> _language:default=_ has the advantage of being searchable with a simple 
> query like "language:default=*" in Taginfo, Overpass and JOSM. But it 
> requires the use of semicolons to specify multiple default languages.

A default should not require multiple values! It is the single value to
be used in the absence of an explicit value. If you think you need
multiple defaults, see my comment above about different contexts.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Sep 2018, at 08:47, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> Graeme,
> Are aboriginal lands already in OSM as boundary relations? I believe there is 
> some debate about whether to use boundary=protected_area or 
> boundary=aboriginal_lands


it doesn’t matter, we don’t need boundaries, we need to agree on the tagging. 
If such boundaries exist in the real world we will have them sooner or later.


> Mapping individual setlements would be more challenging! I would leave 
> that to the local folks to add themselves,



As was stated earlier in this thread, all language related tagging should be 
done by local folks


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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Graeme,
Are aboriginal lands already in OSM as boundary relations? I believe there
is some debate about whether to use boundary=protected_area or
boundary=aboriginal_lands?
I know that many Reservations in the USA are still yet to be mapped, though
the data should be available from the government.
If we are primarily mapping defined boundary relations, it should be
feasible. Mapping individual setlements would be more challenging! I would
leave that to the local folks to add themselves, just as each community
decides what default name=* value will be used, and in what language.
Joseph

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 3:35 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 at 08:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I speak with a couple of people on other forums, one who manages the
>> stores in some of these communities in the Northern Territory & Western
>> Australia, & the other was Head Nurse in a local hospital, so I'll bounce
>> the question of them & report back.
>>
>
> The question that I posed:
>
> "What language/s are spoken in all the various communities?
>
> Primarily English / "Pidgin" (not sure if that's the right word for it)
> but their own "nations" language as well, the other way round or what ?
>
> & will this change, community to community "
>
> Responses from the people concerned
>
> "The language does change from locations such as the desert locations and
> here in Arnhem land. Interesting when we were in Peppimenarti, they spoke
> their language but with a mixture of English words and we could understsnd
> it.
>
> Around Arnhem land the lauguage is pretty much the same being Yolngu
> people. I think most indigenous would be able to understand most
> locations though with a few meanings that may be different.
>
> Here at x they will chat in their own language and I normally walk
> past, joke and say what did you call me and they would just laugh."
>
> &
>
> "Most Indigenous Australians learn English at school these days and speak
> their language at home and to each other when they're out and about. Some
> larger cities have ESL classes as well.
>
> The map in the link below was the screensaver on all of the monitors at my
> previous workplace. There's a bit of information in there, too, which you
> may find interesting. :)
>
> They also provided links to
> https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/articles/aiatsis-map-indigenous-australia,
> & https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_languages, which
> shows the sort of task you'd have in front of you! :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 at 08:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> I speak with a couple of people on other forums, one who manages the
> stores in some of these communities in the Northern Territory & Western
> Australia, & the other was Head Nurse in a local hospital, so I'll bounce
> the question of them & report back.
>

The question that I posed:

"What language/s are spoken in all the various communities?

Primarily English / "Pidgin" (not sure if that's the right word for it) but
their own "nations" language as well, the other way round or what ?

& will this change, community to community "

Responses from the people concerned

"The language does change from locations such as the desert locations and
here in Arnhem land. Interesting when we were in Peppimenarti, they spoke
their language but with a mixture of English words and we could understsnd
it.

Around Arnhem land the lauguage is pretty much the same being Yolngu
people. I think most indigenous would be able to understand most locations
though with a few meanings that may be different.

Here at x they will chat in their own language and I normally walk
past, joke and say what did you call me and they would just laugh."

&

"Most Indigenous Australians learn English at school these days and speak
their language at home and to each other when they're out and about. Some
larger cities have ESL classes as well.

The map in the link below was the screensaver on all of the monitors at my
previous workplace. There's a bit of information in there, too, which you
may find interesting. :)

They also provided links to
https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/articles/aiatsis-map-indigenous-australia, &
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Aboriginal_languages, which
shows the sort of task you'd have in front of you! :-)

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I started a draft proposal focused on the use of the language tag as a
default for names.

I'm inclined to use a tag that is clearly limited to verifiable features of
human geography. The terminology should also show that the tag is meant to
be used in this database to help interprete name=* tags in particular.
Whether or not a language is "official" or "indigenous" would only be
important as far as it affects the names that people use for local, mapable
features.

Christoph (@imagico)'s original idea was  *language_format=$*;
eg* language_format=de **for Germany*
I see from the April discussion that Beligium is using
*default_language=*, eg* default_langauge=fr *in southern Belgium.

I like the word "default"; it doesn't make a value judgement or have
positive / negative connotations. And it sounds like it has to do with how
the database should function, which is the right idea. The most common
language used for names should be the "default", whether or not it is
official.

*language:default=* has the advantage of being searchable with a
simple query like "language:default=*" in Taginfo, Overpass and JOSM. But
it requires the use of semicolons to specify multiple default languages.

*language:=default *can specify multiple languages without implying
any order of first to last.
But will it be hard to search for these codes if you don't already know
what language you are looking for? Do standard tools support searching for
something like "language:*=default"?

I also just noticed that Christoph suggested using a "$" symbol before the
2 or 3 digit language code. Would this be necessary or helpful?

Joseph


On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 8:19 AM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Graeme,
> If the level 2 admin_boundary is tagged, it wouldn't be strictly necessary
> to tag each level 4 (State/Province) boundary if all are the same as the
> national level.
>
> Thank you for bringing up Aboriginal / Native American / First Peoples /
> Minority Ethnic Group language communities. I would suggest tagging these
> boundaries in the same way as admin_level boundaries, if they are
> officially defined by the government in some way, as in Canada and Brazil.
> So if the local Aboriginal or Indian American or First People's government
> has declared that language xx is an official language, it could be marked
> as such. If it isn't official but is widely used in place names, names of
> POIs and natural features it could also be tagged the same as a de facto
> language standard.
>
> In areas like Indonesia where local ethnic communities do not have special
> autonomy or protection, they language could be tagged on the admin_level
> boundary if appropriate, or on place nodes if the official administration
> areas do not correspond to language communities.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:15 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 23:14, Joseph Eisenberg <
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Would "language:en=yes" be enough for the mainland USA? Or
>>> "language:en=main"; "langauge:en=majority"?
>>>
>>
>> I was wondering the same thing for Australia? The official language is
>> English so the level 2 (1 ?) admin zone would be tagged language:en=yes
>>
>> The states would also be en=yes, as that is what is spoken in all the
>> cities & towns of any size, but when you get down to all the small
>> Aboriginal & Torres Straight Island communities it all changes
>>
>> I still would like a way to specify that a language is the native
>>> langauge of that particular places. I believe many Indonesians would
>>> appreciate a way to specify that their local language is the main means of
>>> communication in their village or district, even if Indonesian is the
>>> official language, for example.
>>>
>>> Is there a preferred British English terminology for this?
>>> language:xx=local; language:xx=native; language:xx=indigenous?
>>>
>>
>> Out of those options, I think I'd go for =local, as the others could have
>> negative connotations?
>>
>> I speak with a couple of people on other forums, one who manages the
>> stores in some of these communities in the Northern Territory & Western
>> Australia, & the other was Head Nurse in a local hospital, so I'll bounce
>> the question of them & report back.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Graeme,
If the level 2 admin_boundary is tagged, it wouldn't be strictly necessary
to tag each level 4 (State/Province) boundary if all are the same as the
national level.

Thank you for bringing up Aboriginal / Native American / First Peoples /
Minority Ethnic Group language communities. I would suggest tagging these
boundaries in the same way as admin_level boundaries, if they are
officially defined by the government in some way, as in Canada and Brazil.
So if the local Aboriginal or Indian American or First People's government
has declared that language xx is an official language, it could be marked
as such. If it isn't official but is widely used in place names, names of
POIs and natural features it could also be tagged the same as a de facto
language standard.

In areas like Indonesia where local ethnic communities do not have special
autonomy or protection, they language could be tagged on the admin_level
boundary if appropriate, or on place nodes if the official administration
areas do not correspond to language communities.



On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:15 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 23:14, Joseph Eisenberg 
> wrote:
>
>> Would "language:en=yes" be enough for the mainland USA? Or
>> "language:en=main"; "langauge:en=majority"?
>>
>
> I was wondering the same thing for Australia? The official language is
> English so the level 2 (1 ?) admin zone would be tagged language:en=yes
>
> The states would also be en=yes, as that is what is spoken in all the
> cities & towns of any size, but when you get down to all the small
> Aboriginal & Torres Straight Island communities it all changes
>
> I still would like a way to specify that a language is the native langauge
>> of that particular places. I believe many Indonesians would appreciate a
>> way to specify that their local language is the main means of communication
>> in their village or district, even if Indonesian is the official language,
>> for example.
>>
>> Is there a preferred British English terminology for this?
>> language:xx=local; language:xx=native; language:xx=indigenous?
>>
>
> Out of those options, I think I'd go for =local, as the others could have
> negative connotations?
>
> I speak with a couple of people on other forums, one who manages the
> stores in some of these communities in the Northern Territory & Western
> Australia, & the other was Head Nurse in a local hospital, so I'll bounce
> the question of them & report back.
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

this would also be useful for „micromapping“, e.g. the tag could be added to 
places like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5314074411

(ignore the position for the purpose of this discussion)
currently you can’t see it is a place where English is spoken.

Or less „famous“ features  like embassies, or other „foreign“ (compared to the 
majority) language features like places of worship, schools, associations, 
broadcasting studios, universities, etc.
e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/203509198

Mapping the languages and maybe even dialects will provide a lot of cultural 
insight. Imagine additional native languages for neighborhoods :)


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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 23:14, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Would "language:en=yes" be enough for the mainland USA? Or
> "language:en=main"; "langauge:en=majority"?
>

I was wondering the same thing for Australia? The official language is
English so the level 2 (1 ?) admin zone would be tagged language:en=yes

The states would also be en=yes, as that is what is spoken in all the
cities & towns of any size, but when you get down to all the small
Aboriginal & Torres Straight Island communities it all changes

I still would like a way to specify that a language is the native langauge
> of that particular places. I believe many Indonesians would appreciate a
> way to specify that their local language is the main means of communication
> in their village or district, even if Indonesian is the official language,
> for example.
>
> Is there a preferred British English terminology for this?
> language:xx=local; language:xx=native; language:xx=indigenous?
>

Out of those options, I think I'd go for =local, as the others could have
negative connotations?

I speak with a couple of people on other forums, one who manages the stores
in some of these communities in the Northern Territory & Western Australia,
& the other was Head Nurse in a local hospital, so I'll bounce the question
of them & report back.

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Good points everyone!

Thank you for the link, I'm sorry that I missed the April discussion (It's
difficult to search these lists). But I’m glad to see that this is not a
novel idea. It looks like some of the same issues came up, and tagging
admin boundaries was the best solution, though places could also be tagged
when necessary.

My wife is a linguist, so I asked for advice about the best terminology.
Apparently this is not decided in the field. The language that children
acquire from their parents at home is often called a “first language” - but
kids can acquire 2 or even 3 “first” languages at once. The local language
for a place may be specified as an “endogenous” or “indigenous” language
(eg Irish Gaelic in Ireland). A lingua franca is also called a “language of
wider communication”, eg Mandarin in China, Indonesian in Indinesia,
English in India. Most of these terms seem too long for OSM keys, however.

"Official" is a good key or value which is verifiable at least.

I liked the suggestion from the previous discussion suggestion of
"*l**anguage:xx=yes
for each official language" *rather than language=xx;yy;zz. I've heard that
semicolon dividers are sub-optimal.

I would amend this to "language:xx=official"; this would allow several
languages to be clearly defined as official languages.

Then the question is what to do with the USA and other places that have
defacto languages of wider communication, but no official law on the books.
Could these be considered "official" in the sense that they street signs
and laws and regulations are all in this language, and the government
operates in this language?

Would "language:en=yes" be enough for the mainland USA? Or
"language:en=main"; "langauge:en=majority"?

I still would like a way to specify that a language is the native langauge
of that particular places. I believe many Indonesians would appreciate a
way to specify that their local language is the main means of communication
in their village or district, even if Indonesian is the official language,
for example.

Is there a preferred British English terminology for this?
language:xx=local; language:xx=native; language:xx=indigenous?

Thanks for your help. I will write up a formal proposal as soon as we work
out these details.

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:48 PM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 14.09.2018 04:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> > It would be useful to tag the primary language of wider communication in
> > a place, because this information is already implicit in the names of
> > places but hard to access.
>
> See also a longer thread on this list from April:
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-April/035855.html
>
> > The most complicated issue would be areas where local languages do not
> > relate to existing boundaries.
>
> Yes, and I would like to avoid introducing tons of new hardly-verifiable
> boundary relations for that. OSM suffers from being unable to define
> fuzzy boundaries and they would be necessary here.
>
> Hence
>
> > 2) Tag each inhabited place with a language.
>
> seems a more sensible idea to me.
>
> I would like to caution against westerners "helpfully" defining the
> "primary" language for any place other than where they live though, we
> have too much accidental cultural imperialism already. Let people all
> over the world be agents of their own map, and define what *they* think
> the locally used languages are, rather than "help" them understand their
> own culture.
>
> As you rightly say,
> > It is certainly possible for a local mapper to verify the majority
> > language spoken in their own community and neighboring settlements
>
> where "local mapper" is the important term. (Also, let us not
> accidentally roll out the concept of *one* "primary" language, which
> will only cause the same kinds of conflict as the "one primary name" we
> already have - many languages could share the first rank of importance.)
>
> > However, it would be more work to add tags to each
> > place=hamlet/village/town/neighborhood than to tag a single boundary
> line.
>
> I'd go for a mixed approach - tag the (largest useful) administrative
> boundary first, and then allow lower level admin boundaries and finally,
> place nodes, to override the default. Requires a little more brains to
> evaluate but we can really do without another world-wide mass edit where
> someone adds an obvious "primary language" tag to every settlement.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 5:55 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 14. Sep 2018, at 10:18, Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> On 2018-09-14 08:47, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I'd go for a mixed approach - tag the (largest useful) administrative
> boundary first, and then allow lower 

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

On 14. Sep 2018, at 10:18, Colin Smale  wrote:

>>> On 2018-09-14 08:47, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> 
>> I'd go for a mixed approach - tag the (largest useful) administrative
>> boundary first, and then allow lower level admin boundaries and finally,
>> place nodes, to override the default.
>> 
> 
> Sounds good!


yes, I believe this is also where we arrived last time.

A harder one seems the actual tagging, as multivalues are contested, and 
several “primary” languages for the same place are certainly a key requirement.

It even achieves the fuzziness at a small scale by allowing place _nodes_ to 
override areas, naturally this introduces uncertainty because the extent of 
nodes is not precisely defined, so it might reduce the willingness to engage in 
an edit war (all parties can read the same data according to their liking).


cheers,
Martin 

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-09-14 08:47, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> I'd go for a mixed approach - tag the (largest useful) administrative
> boundary first, and then allow lower level admin boundaries and finally,
> place nodes, to override the default.

Sounds good! Let's use that approach for e.g. maxspeed as well. It looks
like you have just solved the old "defaults" problem.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping language borders, tagging offical languages?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 14.09.2018 04:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> It would be useful to tag the primary language of wider communication in
> a place, because this information is already implicit in the names of
> places but hard to access.

See also a longer thread on this list from April:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-April/035855.html

> The most complicated issue would be areas where local languages do not
> relate to existing boundaries. 

Yes, and I would like to avoid introducing tons of new hardly-verifiable
boundary relations for that. OSM suffers from being unable to define
fuzzy boundaries and they would be necessary here.

Hence

> 2) Tag each inhabited place with a language.

seems a more sensible idea to me.

I would like to caution against westerners "helpfully" defining the
"primary" language for any place other than where they live though, we
have too much accidental cultural imperialism already. Let people all
over the world be agents of their own map, and define what *they* think
the locally used languages are, rather than "help" them understand their
own culture.

As you rightly say,
> It is certainly possible for a local mapper to verify the majority
> language spoken in their own community and neighboring settlements

where "local mapper" is the important term. (Also, let us not
accidentally roll out the concept of *one* "primary" language, which
will only cause the same kinds of conflict as the "one primary name" we
already have - many languages could share the first rank of importance.)

> However, it would be more work to add tags to each
> place=hamlet/village/town/neighborhood than to tag a single boundary line.

I'd go for a mixed approach - tag the (largest useful) administrative
boundary first, and then allow lower level admin boundaries and finally,
place nodes, to override the default. Requires a little more brains to
evaluate but we can really do without another world-wide mass edit where
someone adds an obvious "primary language" tag to every settlement.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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