Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Neil Matthews]

previous_name isn't documented -- and seems a bad idea. It's unlikely to
be searchable with Nominatim, and won't be rendered.

This is the scheme some of us are using in Bristol
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Bristol#Lifecycle.



In an ideal world (!) I'd say use something like disused:name /
proposed:name.

  * disused:name / proposed:name would be searchable.
  * proposed:name and disused:name would both be rendered (at lower
priority to name) and "faintly"
  * validation support

No idea how such a Utopia might be achieved though.

Neil


On 07/05/2018 20:27, Brian Prangle wrote:
> The answer to the question I posed originally seems to be either 
> "never" or "immediately". Maplin I understand waiting some more time
> for the liquidation process to complete. For clarity the mechanical
> edit would be shop=vacant and previous_name=  whichever variant of the
> Toys R us name is present; which preserves the shop amenity  with a
> change of use and preserves the "landmark" data, which I hope answers
> some of the concerns raised so far. Maintaining map data surely has to
> be a mix of automation and hand-crafted, not a zealot position of one
> to the exclusion of the other. If we know data to be inaccurate and
> there is an easy fix surely we're bounden to users of our map to make
> it the best we can. If we adopt Frederick's position(which I see,
> rightly or wrongly, as a quest for ideological purity) we put
> community  before users, when I see it has to be a balance between the
> two. What's the point of  building a map if we don't make it as
> accurate and complete as possible,/*as soon as possible*/? Otherwise
> it's in danger of becoming purely a thing of beauty hand-crafted by
> dedicated hobbyists, with  no thought for all those who have decided
> to use our map.
>
> How long should we wait for a mapper to verify something that's
> changed? Lloyds and TSB  banks demerged 5 years ago - yet we still
> have 180 branches with the old name. Likewise the Territorial Army
> changed name 6 years ago and we still have 27 instances of the old
> name. So how about  volunteers for a campaign to contact local mappers
> and gently encourage them to update the map?
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
>
> On 5 May 2018 at 11:57, Rob Nickerson  > wrote:
>
> And for the balance: I disagree with Frederik on this one.
>
> If we know the map is wrong we should fix it. We should not leave
> it just because it may encourage others to fix it and then go on
> to do other local edits.
>
> Frederik's view is that a crap map encourages more people to edit.
> I'm not convinced. A crap map could also put people off - "why
> bother, OSM is so far behind, I'll contribute to/just use Google
> maps instead"
>
> I agree that a *blank* map encourages new mappers, but that was 10
> years ago! Less convinced that an out of date map does. At least
> not with our current homepage or if we do get a new mapper its
> most likely to be a single edit (maybe with MapsMe) rather than a
> new prolific mapper. 
>
> So I'm happy with this mechanical edit (full removal preferred,
> but addition of disussed ok too).
>
> Rob
>
> P.s. Do we still have cases of Lloyds TSB in OSM?
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Dave F]

Is there a tag being used to add these to OSM?

On 08/05/2018 13:14, David Woolley wrote:

On 08/05/18 13:10, Dave F wrote:
I've changed over to using disused:shop=* as it keeps the use of the 
shop in the tag. Due to shop classifications they often reopen with 
businesses of a similar nature. (food, clothes etc)


That reflects the planning classification (which are actually more 
fine grained than the OSM landuses). 

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[David Woolley]

On 08/05/18 13:10, Dave F wrote:
I've changed over to using disused:shop=* as it keeps the use of the 
shop in the tag. Due to shop classifications they often reopen with 
businesses of a similar nature. (food, clothes etc)


That reflects the planning classification (which are actually more fine 
grained than the OSM landuses). 

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Dave F]

On 07/05/2018 20:27, Brian Prangle wrote:
The answer to the question I posed originally seems to be either  
"never" or "immediately". Maplin I understand waiting some more time 
for the liquidation process to complete. For clarity the mechanical 
edit would be shop=vacant and previous_name=


I've changed over to using disused:shop=* as it keeps the use of the 
shop in the tag. Due to shop classifications they often reopen with 
businesses of a similar nature. (food, clothes etc)


DaveF

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Andrew Hain]

And some with an apostrophe: 
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=Lloyd+TSB#values

--
Andrew

From: Rob Nickerson 
Sent: 08 May 2018 00:19:36
To: Brian Prangle
Cc: Talk-GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

>Lloyds and TSB  banks demerged 5 years ago - yet we still have 180 branches 
>with the old name.

We also have 7 mapped as "LLoyds TSB", 5 as "Lloyds TSB Bank", 4 as "Lloyds TSB 
Scotland" 3 as (dubious) "Lloyds/TSB", 1 as "LLoyds TSB Bank", 1 as "Lloyds  
TSB" (double space), 1 as "Lloyd's TSB", 1 as "Lloyds TSB Bank Plc", 1 as 
"Lloyds TSB Bank PLC" and 1 as "Lloyds-TSB".

But on the plus side... um, no, that's lost on me!

Sigh.

Rob


On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 20:27, Brian Prangle 
> wrote:
The answer to the question I posed originally seems to be either  "never" or 
"immediately". Maplin I understand waiting some more time for the liquidation 
process to complete. For clarity the mechanical edit would be shop=vacant and 
previous_name=  whichever variant of the Toys R us name is present; which 
preserves the shop amenity  with a change of use and preserves the "landmark" 
data, which I hope answers some of the concerns raised so far. Maintaining map 
data surely has to be a mix of automation and hand-crafted, not a zealot 
position of one to the exclusion of the other. If we know data to be inaccurate 
and there is an easy fix surely we're bounden to users of our map to make it 
the best we can. If we adopt Frederick's position(which I see, rightly or 
wrongly, as a quest for ideological purity) we put community  before users, 
when I see it has to be a balance between the two. What's the point of  
building a map if we don't make it as accurate and complete as possible, as 
soon as possible? Otherwise it's in danger of becoming purely a thing of beauty 
hand-crafted by dedicated hobbyists, with  no thought for all those who have 
decided to use our map.

How long should we wait for a mapper to verify something that's changed? Lloyds 
and TSB  banks demerged 5 years ago - yet we still have 180 branches with the 
old name. Likewise the Territorial Army changed name 6 years ago and we still 
have 27 instances of the old name. So how about  volunteers for a campaign to 
contact local mappers and gently encourage them to update the map?

Regards

Brian


On 5 May 2018 at 11:57, Rob Nickerson 
> wrote:
And for the balance: I disagree with Frederik on this one.

If we know the map is wrong we should fix it. We should not leave it just 
because it may encourage others to fix it and then go on to do other local 
edits.

Frederik's view is that a crap map encourages more people to edit. I'm not 
convinced. A crap map could also put people off - "why bother, OSM is so far 
behind, I'll contribute to/just use Google maps instead"

I agree that a blank map encourages new mappers, but that was 10 years ago! 
Less convinced that an out of date map does. At least not with our current 
homepage or if we do get a new mapper its most likely to be a single edit 
(maybe with MapsMe) rather than a new prolific mapper.

So I'm happy with this mechanical edit (full removal preferred, but addition of 
disussed ok too).

Rob

P.s. Do we still have cases of Lloyds TSB in OSM?

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb