On 17/08/2019 17:02, Andrew Hain wrote:
In the UK every business that handles food has its hygiene ratings and
usually address published as open data under a licence we can use.
Sometimes a business in an unmarked house is listed with an unredacted
address; I don’t record the business or the
On 19/08/19 21:14, ael wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 05:21:22PM +0900, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Interesting!
I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
see
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 08:25:30PM +1000, Warin wrote:
> On 19/08/19 19:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 19 Aug 2019, 10:44 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
> >
> > On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> >
> > Interesting!
> >
> > I remembered a problem with
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 11:12:58AM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>
>
> 19 Aug 2019, 10:44 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> > On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting!
> >>
> >> I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
> >> 5000 times to
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 06:44:31PM +1000, Warin wrote:
> On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> > Interesting!
> >
> > I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
> > 5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
> > see
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 05:21:22PM +0900, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> Interesting!
>
> I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
> 5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
> see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/trade and
>
On 19/08/19 19:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
19 Aug 2019, 10:44 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Interesting!
I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used
almost
5000 times to specify the type of trade
19 Aug 2019, 10:44 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
> On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
>> Interesting!
>>
>> I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
>> 5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
>> see
On 19/08/19 18:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Interesting!
I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/trade and
Interesting!
I remembered a problem with "trade=*" - it's already been used almost
5000 times to specify the type of trade goods sold at a shop=trade -
see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/trade and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dtrade
On 8/19/19, Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone
> On 19. Aug 2019, at 02:28, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> But trade= is better than generic business= for the workshop of an individual
> tradesperson.
by the time craft was introduced, it should probably have been “trade”, IIRR
the craft tag was invented by Germans
On 19/08/19 10:20, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
This:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-March/044160.html
was the original discussion that I had been going to expand on, with
the possibility of trade= for places like a plumber's workshop / shed
etc.
There was also
Re “What's the preference of trade= against business= plumbers,
electricians, builders etc who don't work out of an "office"?”
Some of those do have offices, especially if it’s a company that employed
several plumbers.
But trade= is better than generic business= for the workshop of an
individual
This:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-March/044160.html
was the original discussion that I had been going to expand on, with the
possibility of trade= for places like a plumber's workshop / shed etc.
There was also discussion about craft= being more used for "one-off"
sent from a phone
> On 18. Aug 2019, at 11:53, ael wrote:
>
> Of course, the more specific tagging is right where there is a good
> match.
+1, and where there isn’t yet a good match I’d prefer to invent one.
Cheers
Martin
___
Tagging mailing
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 10:46:45PM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> > On 17. Aug 2019, at 22:36, ael wrote:
> >
> > But do we have any generic terms already? Unless
> > you just mean office.
>
>
> businesses can already be found in amenity (e.g. food and drink, pharmacies,
> post
sent from a phone
> On 17. Aug 2019, at 22:36, ael wrote:
>
> But do we have any generic terms already? Unless
> you just mean office.
businesses can already be found in amenity (e.g. food and drink, pharmacies,
post offices, prisons (US), etc.), tourism, leisure, shop, craft, office,
sent from a phone
> On 17. Aug 2019, at 15:18, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Also out of courtesy.
yes, there may always be considerations from individual mappers to refrain from
mapping certain things , for different reasons like courtesy, respect etc., and
this is perfectly fine (more difficult
sent from a phone
> On 17. Aug 2019, at 13:49, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
>
> I restarted the thread more recently with a specific example:
> craft=atelier had just been documented after being used a dozen times,
> and was added to the Key:craft page and to Map Features. My question
> is:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 13:28, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> you have mentioned the owner’s wishes already yesterday, but I wasn’t
> aware we had a requirement that the owners must tolerate having their
> property mapped.
We don't (that I know of).
> So far I thought the only strict
sent from a phone
> On 17. Aug 2019, at 13:22, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> But also no need not to map them should the
> owners wish.
you have mentioned the owner’s wishes already yesterday, but I wasn’t aware we
had a requirement that the owners must tolerate having their property mapped.
So
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 12:53, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
That is, should wiki users and mappers feel free to add any newly
> documented values of craft=, shop=, building=, office=, and sport= to
> the Map Features wiki page, and the Key page (eg Key:office,
> Key:craft), or should this always be
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 12:42, ael wrote:
>
> I would be all in favour of introducing "business" as long as it was
> not restricted in that way. Easy with various values. It might
> gradually evole and get used properly and gradually outnumber the old
> misused office tag. Should not be too
This thread actually started with the question in the title:
"Keys to which new values can be added (to Map Features) without a
proposal: craft=, shop=, building=, office=, sport=?"
That is, should wiki users and mappers feel free to add any newly
documented values of craft=, shop=, building=,
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 12:27:22PM +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
> It's both. Perhaps, with hindsight, most would agree that is sub-optimal
> but that's
> the way it is. More importantly, it's been that way for long enough that
> fixing it is
> probably not possible.
Unfortunately, you are probably
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 11:55, ael wrote:
>
> But surely parcels are seldom delivered to an "office" but typically to
> reception in a business. Of course, reception may be part of an office,
> especially in small organisations.
>
I'd normally class a reception as part of the larger organization
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 01:55, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17/08/19 07:54, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 22:33, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> That said, in the few cases like that where a company doesn't specifically
> make its location
> public knowledge, if I
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:54:52PM +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 22:33, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> >
> > The way I see it, we’re mapping the world, as it is. Not just places where
> > the general public may have an interest in navigating to it. If you were to
> > make
On 17/08/19 07:54, Paul Allen wrote:
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 22:33, Martin Koppenhoefer
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The way I see it, we’re mapping the world, as it is. Not just
places where the general public may have an interest in navigating
to it. If you were to make
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 22:33, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> The way I see it, we’re mapping the world, as it is. Not just places where
> the general public may have an interest in navigating to it. If you were to
> make an analysis about the functional structure of a city you would want to
>
sent from a phone
> On 16. Aug 2019, at 15:13, ael wrote:
>
> I could never see the point in tagging offices which are of no intrinsic
> interest except perhaps to office equipment suppliers.
The way I see it, we’re mapping the world, as it is. Not just places where the
general public may
On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 12:52, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> IMHO what may be needed is “workshop” rather than business.
>
Artists will probably be upset by "workshop" and will insist they have
studios (which is
where we came in). Whilst it might be sensible to have something (whatever
we call
sent from a phone
> On 16. Aug 2019, at 09:02, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> I've been intending to work on a proposal but haven't had a chance -
> worthwhile?
IMHO what may be needed is “workshop” rather than business. We are already
tagging many kinds of businesses with the tags
We discussed this a few month ago with the possibility of introducing a new
tag of business= to show such things as (house) painters, plumbers "shed" &
so on for work premises that aren't "craft", which suggests handmade /
handicraft.
I've been intending to work on a proposal but haven't had a
I certainly expect that professional artists who design sculptures out of
metal have staff who are proficient at their tasks, including welding,
brazing, forging and such.
Traditionally an artist who worked in bronze or another metal would be
expected to have the highest standards in their craft,
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:07 AM Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 15/08/2019 14:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> > How about "craft=artist" then? The tag "craft=atelier" was described
> > as for any type of artist: "workshop of a ...professional artist in
> > the fine or decorative arts"
>
> "craft=artist"
sent from a phone
On 15. Aug 2019, at 20:38, Paul Allen wrote:
>> will have much more extensive storage requirements than painters do (e.g.
>> scaffolding or concrete workers/formwork).
>
> A dedicated storage area is not a shop, or an office, or a workshop.
true, but the typical
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 19:02, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> > On 15. Aug 2019, at 16:59, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > A craft=painter (current meaning) is where paperwork is done and perhaps
> > where equipment is stored, but it is not where the actual craft of
> decorating takes place.
>
> a
sent from a phone
> On 15. Aug 2019, at 16:59, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> A craft=painter (current meaning) is where paperwork is done and perhaps
> where equipment is stored, but it is not where the actual craft of decorating
> takes place.
a painter is somehow special in this, but not the
sent from a phone
> On 15. Aug 2019, at 16:59, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Yes, but under the current system (which is probably too deeply embedded to
> fix) an office can
> be one of two basic types:
>
> 1) A place for doing paperwork or other administrative tasks.
>
> 2) A place selling
Agree, but adding a new tag must happen at the same time as adding a
description of what it is (and how it differs from the existing one). The
current proposal process is too complicated and lengthy, thus often people
just forgo it and add tags without documentation. In my opinion, this is
worse
On 15/08/2019 14:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
How about "craft=artist" then? The tag "craft=atelier" was described
as for any type of artist: "workshop of a ...professional artist in
the fine or decorative arts"
"craft=artist" is much better in my view - people are far more likely to
know what
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 15:40, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> I agree painter is ambiguous, but office is about an office, while the
> place of a decorator would probably not just be an office but contain all
> the tools and paint and stuff they need to do their work.
>
Yes, but under the
sent from a phone
> On 15. Aug 2019, at 15:26, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> How about "craft=artist" then? The tag "craft=atelier" was described
> as for any type of artist: "workshop of a ...professional artist in
> the fine or decorative arts"
I would not have thought to put artists
sent from a phone
> On 15. Aug 2019, at 14:16, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> sense for house painters, it should be office=painter (or, better,
> office=decorator).
> If I want somebody to paint my house I expect him to apply paint to my house,
> not to his
> own office, so he doesn't (normally)
sent from a phone
> On 15. Aug 2019, at 13:29, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> of the new page mentions that this may be a problem because
> amenity=studio is also used for TV, Radio and Music recording studios.
yes, IMHO we should completely avoid the term “studio”, as it can refer to lots
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 14:28, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> I can't believe I didn't notice the misspelling. Well, that is a major
> problem with this value.
>
Not so much if one uses editor presets. The fact that so few know what it
means is a bigger
problem, but potentially soluble via editor
On 31/07/2019 08:20, Warin wrote:
"Any tag you like" is one of the OSM mantras.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
To be clearer it should be "Any tag you like.. to describe something
different"
If a valid tag is in use - use that.
Cheers
DaveF
I can't believe I didn't notice the misspelling. Well, that is a major
problem with this value.
How about "craft=artist" then? The tag "craft=atelier" was described
as for any type of artist: "workshop of a ...professional artist in
the fine or decorative arts"
Wikipedia says "In art, the
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 12:31, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> Today a new wiki page was created for Tag:craft=artelier and the tag
> was added to Template:Map_Features:craft, which adds this tag to the
> Map Features page. It's been used 15 times. In comparison, studio=art
> has been used 13 times,
So I mentioned above that it seems that craft=, building=, office=,
shop= and sport= values are frequently added to the "Map Features"
list page without discussion.
Today a new wiki page was created for Tag:craft=artelier and the tag
was added to Template:Map_Features:craft, which adds this tag
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 at 22:37, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> only after it has become generally established :)
>
> while none of these conditions are maybe absolute hard requirements, IMHO
> most of them should be fulfilled:
>
> - is used in significant numbers by many different people
>
But
sent from a phone
> On 31. Jul 2019, at 14:46, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> My thought was that we could clarify that certain types of new
> features can be added to the Map Features pages without meeting all
> those characteristics (shops, offices) but that other types shouldn't
> be added
> - is used in significant numbers by many different people
> - has presets in different applications
> - is used by at least one “important” data user (e.g. OpenStreetMap carto,
> routing service, osmand, etc.)
> - is used on several continents and not just in a limited geographic area
>
sent from a phone
> On 31. Jul 2019, at 10:50, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> when should a new value should be added to the wiki page "Map Features".
only after it has become generally established :)
while none of these conditions are maybe absolute hard requirements, IMHO most
of them
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 at 07:47, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Based on current practice, it seems that most people are ok with
> adding new values to certain keys that already have a long list of
> documented values in map features, as long as the tag is frequently
> used and well-documented?
>
It
Le 31.07.19 à 10:50, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
> when should a new value should be added to the wiki page "Map Features".
imho when the key is :
- documented
- well used/supported
- not controversial
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
I apologize for the unclear wording. I'm not asking if a proposal is
needed for creating a new key or value. Anyone can make up a new tag,
and this happens hundreds of times a day.
I'm asking:
when should a new value should be added to the wiki page "Map Features".
The idea is that for a key
sent from a phone
> On 31. Jul 2019, at 09:20, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is no requirement for a proposal for values or keys of any kind.
> A proposal is at best a 'recommendation', not a 'requirement'.
+1
Cheers Martin
___
On 31/07/19 16:45, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Based on current practice, it seems that most people are ok with
adding new values to certain keys that already have a long list of
documented values in map features, as long as the tag is frequently
used and well-documented?
The relevant keys appear
Based on current practice, it seems that most people are ok with
adding new values to certain keys that already have a long list of
documented values in map features, as long as the tag is frequently
used and well-documented?
The relevant keys appear to be:
craft=
building=
office=
shop=
sport=
61 matches
Mail list logo
