On 22/04/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2015-04-22 9:19 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>: > >> Well, electronic cigarettes aren't really smoking in the first place, >> unless you want to claim that a teapot boiling is "smoking", which is >> something most people realize isn't the case by the time they're 10... > > +1, e-cigarettes should IMHO not be covered by the "smoking" tag, because > they have nothing to do with smoking. Yes, it is a form of nicotin > consumption, but so are nicotin pills, chewing gum, patches, chewing > tobacco, sniffing tobacco and maybe others. None of them is covered by > "smoking", there is no "smoke".
That's taking the word much too litteraly. The reason behind all the anti public-smoking laws is that non-smokers are subjected to the product and most of the associated health risks. Pills, patches and gums are different because you can't be a "passive pill swallower". The fact that e-cigarettes seem less harmfull (it'll take many years to properly quantify the risk) doesn't change that. The "it isn't actual smoke" argument is a technicality, a PR stunt, a legal hack enabling nicotine addicts to smoke in public. Getting back to the subject of OSM, for places that do distinguish between classic- and e-cigarettes, I suggest using a namespace for the sake of consistency, discoverability, and compatibility : smoking=yes/no/outside/etc for the general value smoking:<type>=yes/no/etc for exceptions With <type> being any of cigarette, e-cigarette, hooka, marijuana, opium, etc. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
