"while this sounds nice for the green poodle with 6 legs, I'd be interested in real cases where our current schemes should be changed"
[landuse=farmland; farmland=greenhouse_horticulture] instead of [landuse=greenhouse_horticulture] [landuse=industrial; industrial=salt_pond] instead of [landuse=salt_pond] [landuse=industrial; industrial=mine] instead of [landuse=mine] [landuse=industrial; industrial=mine; mine=copper_mine] instead of [landuse=copper_mine] 2015-03-12 12:48 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > > 2015-03-12 12:06 GMT+01:00 Daniel Koć <daniel@koć.pl>: > >> 1. It should be more uniform (like "amenity=school" -> "landuse=school" >> for the school areas). > > > > this might be a philosophical question, but I believe that amenity=school > for the whole area is more precise than amenity=school on just a building. > The outdoor areas of schools typically serve for recreation purposes, and > recreation is undoubtedly (I hope) part of the institution school. You can > see this point of view also reflected in other occasions like the rules for > the pupils, which often allow them to move freely on the school premises > during school, but not to leave them. > > We do not gain anything by making things "uniform" that are not comparable. > > > > 3. It should be more granular (no more "amenity=green_poodle_with_6_legs", >> just because it's a very common case! Rather "amenity=poodle + colour=green >> + legs=6"). >> > > > while this sounds nice for the green poodle with 6 legs, I'd be interested > in real cases where our current schemes should be changed. Generally having > a precise tag for a very common case makes mapping and interpretation > easier than having a combination of 3 tags, but it really depends on the > single case. > > > > 5. It should treat parallel types of objects as first class citizens (kind >> of "amenity=police + amenity=school" for police academy should be possible, >> since this amenity is equally a teaching place _and_ a police place - the >> same for multiple names: we can make it "name=A;B" if really needed, but >> the semicolon is our last resort and there's no consensus if we should use >> numbering schemes like "name1=A + name2=B" or "name:1=A + name:2=B" >> instead). >> > > > I have always believed (also based on lots of discussion on talk-de) that > amenity=school was a tag for general education (as opposed to professional > schools, driving schools, diving schools, etc.). Actually the English wiki > page is less clear in this (could maybe be stated more clearly?) but still > the age of 5 to 18 doesn't fit your "police academy" idea. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool > Frankly, I don't see an advantage in having the same tag amenity=school on > a "normal" school and on a police academy. Everybody who wanted to make a > map would have to check for every school whether there was an additional > tag that said: "this is not a school of the type you might expect", with a > potentially infinite number of such additional tags (because there will be > "schools" for almost every kind of profession or leisure activity etc.), > while it also required 2 tags for what could be tagged with one > (amenity=police_academy) and which would still leave uncertainty because > you would not know whether this was a police academy or a police station > and a school on the same ground. > > > Cheers, > Martin > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk