Thank you for reply.
Here is a most simple example.
If we need more complex ones, I'll make them.
* City level
Whole Chiba "city"
Chiba city has 6 "suburb"s.
See "subarea" member of relation, for details.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2679956
* Suburb level
This is one of the subu
2013/9/18 Martin Koppenhoefer
>
> I think it is a bad idea to connect the meaning of osm tags to definitions
> in wikipedia, because the content of wikipedia articles is not something we
> control. When the wikipedia article changes (e.g. it gets extended or
> restrained by splitting it up) it do
On 19/set/2013, at 12:10, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> We have to have a place where a data consumer sees that amenity=fastfood is a
> specific kind of a amenity=restaurant.
is it?
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https:
2013/9/19 Janko Mihelić :
> 2013/9/18 Martin Koppenhoefer
>>
>> I think it is a bad idea to connect the meaning of osm tags to definitions
>> in wikipedia, because the content of wikipedia articles is not something we
>> control. When the wikipedia article changes (e.g. it gets extended or
>> rest
Am 19.09.2013 12:24, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
>
> On 19/set/2013, at 12:10, Janko Mihelić wrote:
>
>> We have to have a place where a data consumer sees that amenity=fastfood is
>> a specific kind of a amenity=restaurant.
>
>
> is it?
If we want to follow the operators of big fast food
2013/9/19 Peter Wendorff
> If we want to follow the operators of big fast food brands, then yes, as
> they call their shops restaurant themselfes.
>
that's the difference between marketing and the real world.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
T
2013/9/19 Dan S
> However, it's possible we could start to have a fairly low-key move
> towards ontology by simply using mediawiki categories. For example if
> you add [[Category:placestogetameal]] to the wiki pages for fast_food,
> restaurant, cafe, then it's rather likely that data consumers ca
2013/9/19 Martin Koppenhoefer
> is it?
>
I don't know, and nobody does because we don't have an ontology. If someone
asks me, then yes, fastfood is a restaurant. If someone asks you, than a
restaurant means "slow food".
If we decide it's "slow food" we don't put them one over the other. If we
d
Hi,
I am relatively new to OSM. I have one point to make.
I am pretty sure that the persistence of traversible structures is one of
the reasons that Wikipedia admins are ... effective?
It seems like (as a user of Wikipedia) that there are literally thousands
of people who have robots trawling a
This illustrates, to me, that an attempt to add an ontology on top of
the tagging is likely to be vulnerable to the problems it aims to
solve.
Any such thing would want to express relationships, so that e.g.
renderers which have never seen the tag before can say "aha, they say
that I could ren
2013/9/19 Janko Mihelić
> I don't know, and nobody does because we don't have an ontology. If
> someone asks me, then yes, fastfood is a restaurant. If someone asks you,
> than a restaurant means "slow food".
Maybe some fast foods could qualify as restaurants while others don't?
Generally I'd
2013/9/19 Martin Koppenhoefer
>
> but it will always result in flattening complexity (and therefor detail
> and small but fine distinctions).
>
On the contrary, I have a feeling this would increase complexity. Right
now, if you invent a new tag, for example "amenity=slow_food_restaurant",
ther
On 19/09/2013 14:45, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
IMHO the great invention of OSM is that it isn't based on an ontology but
on free tagging. The world is too complex (and dynamic) to be entirely
described by an ontology. It seems appealing to try though, I admit, but it
will always re
On 2013-09-17 01:40, Glenn Plas wrote :
> On 2013-09-17 01:02, André Pirard wrote:
>> On 2013-09-16 11:52, Glenn Plas wrote :
>>> If you want to be serious about this then a new topic should be
>>> initiated by sending a new mail instead of a reply with a new
>>> subject. Every decent mailclient o
On 2013-09-17 05:29, Marc Gemis wrote :
> André,
>
> in digest mode, your mails are replaced by a link to the html content.
> In non-digest mode your mails appear fine.
>
> The result is that I never read your mails on the tagging mailing list
> that I follow i digest mode. It's just "too much work
On 09/19/2013 05:32 AM, Dan S wrote:
2013/9/19 Janko Mihelić :
Anyway, connection to wikipedia articles is only a small, secondary part of
my proposal. Links between tags themselves is something we have to document
somewhere. We have to have a place where a data consumer sees that
amenity=fastfo
16 matches
Mail list logo
