Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

sent from a phone > On 10. May 2018, at 17:41, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > "brand" is an artificial construct of today's global capitalist economy. > I have nothing against OSM recording it, but I'd be loathe to afford the > concept the same importance as corporate PR

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

Hi, On 05/10/2018 04:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > It is also a result of how the tags have been introduced, name was used much > earlier than brand (which was originally only proposed for automotive brands) > so that there is some self-amplifying process of people looking around how >

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On 10.05.2018 16:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > The reason why it is done differently is not an educated decision but the > result of poor presets and mappers filling them in without further reflection. Sure, but uneducated decisions reveal a lot about people's intuitions and interests – two

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

This whole discussion reminds me of the following passage from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass: The name of the song is called ‘Haddocks' Eyes.’” > > “Oh, that's the name of the song, is it?" Alice said, trying to feel > interested. > > “No, you don't understand,” the Knight said,

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

10. May 2018 12:59 by pla16...@gmail.com : > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Colin Smale <> colin.sm...@xs4all.nl > > > wrote: > >>  >> A "name" is what something is "called" by "others." Which "others" are >> considered, is the real

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

10. May 2018 09:44 by leonkarcher@gmail.com : > Hello, > While I was filling up > this list > > on the wiki with information, > someone on the talk page asked why I was adding brand=* to every object. His >

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

sent from a phone On 10. May 2018, at 15:05, Tobias Knerr wrote: >> Imho it us the opposite : name should be added only if it us not the >> same as brand > > That approach is different from real-world usage of the tags and appears > to offer little practical benefit.

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On 10.05.2018 09:52, marc marc wrote: > Imho it us the opposite : name should be added only if it us not the > same as brand That approach is different from real-world usage of the tags and appears to offer little practical benefit. As far as I can tell, many – probably most – mappers look at

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, Colin Smale wrote: > Referred to, by whom? Who is the persona here? This in OSM is always the local observer. What you might be after is that not every mappable feature in OSM that is occasionally referred to with a verbal identifier has a verifiable name according to

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, Colin Smale wrote: > > I should probably add that what can be considered the name of a > > feature is ultimately the decision of the local community. > > ...as long as there are global ground rules. The autonomy of local > communities, just like democracy, cannot be

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Colin Smale wrote: > > A "name" is what something is "called" by "others." Which "others" are > considered, is the real debate here. Is it the council? Is it the residents > within 100m? Is it a tourist who doesn't speak the local

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On 10 May 2018 at 18:33, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Thursday 10 May 2018, marc marc wrote: > > Imho it us the opposite : name should be added only if it us not the > > same as brand > > Exactly. Nme tags are for identifiers that identify the individual > object, not a whole

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On 2018-05-10 12:01, Christoph Hormann wrote: > I should probably add that what can be considered the name of a feature > is ultimately the decision of the local community. ...as long as there are global ground rules. The autonomy of local communities, just like democracy, cannot be unbounded.

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, Simon Poole wrote: > > It can be argued that the name suggestion index it is a bit at odds > with the point raised be Marc and Christoph, but for many of the > stores/facilities in question there is no difference, and in any case > I've been toying with the idea of

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On top of all what has already been said, what you -should- be doing (after discussion) is adding the tags to https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index instead of embarking on a lone crusade to show everybody the light. It can be argued that the name suggestion index it is a bit at odds

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, Leon Karcher wrote: > > Also note the edits of DP14_BrandUnification are an undiscussed > > mechanical edit and should be reverted. > > Undiscussed? See > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036034.htm >l See

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, Christoph Hormann wrote: > Also note the edits of DP14_BrandUnification are an undiscussed > mechanical edit and should be reverted. Undiscussed? See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036034.html And it is only partly mechanical since I'm

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

On Thursday 10 May 2018, marc marc wrote: > Imho it us the opposite : name should be added only if it us not the > same as brand Exactly. Nme tags are for identifiers that identify the individual object, not a whole class of objects. Also note the edits of DP14_BrandUnification are an

Re: [Tagging] brand=* necessary?

Imho it us the opposite : name should be added only if it us not the same as brand But some render doesn't use brand, this need to fix to avoid loosing data on the map Le 10 mai 2018 à 09:45, Leon Karcher > a écrit : Hello, While I

[Tagging] brand=* necessary?

Hello, While I was filling up this list on the wiki with information, someone on the talk page asked why I was adding brand=* to every object. His argument was that the brand tag is a duplicate of the name tag in most cases and I should only add it if