Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
I personally am not a fan of using 8 different names in one name tag (though some countries that have multiple equal languages do favour that nationally). The example here "Baltijas jūra / Baltijos jūra / Itämeri / Läänemeri / Morze Bałtyckie / Östersjön / Østersøen / Ostsee / Балтийское море" seems a bit clumsy. As a side question: how many places are actually affected by this, in an order of magnitude? I would expect most seas and oceans, some englobing territories like continents (although we discussed before that continents doesn’t make much sense in OSM), multilingual political entities (Europe, Mercosul, etc.), and I guess stateless Islands (typically around Antarctica). I guess it’s more than an hundred, but is it much more than a thousand? The reason I’m asking is that there may actually be a relatively reasonable number of tiles affected by the issue. I understand that it would be quite a heavy technical challenge to have to deal with several versions of similar tiles, but at least it may actually not take that much additional space. (Also, it might put things into perspective to have an idea of how many places we are discussing here ☺) Regards, Martin. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
On 2019-12-06 16:58, Andy Townsend wrote: On 06/12/2019 15:10, Tomek wrote: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305640277 W dniu 19-12-06 o 16:08, Tomek pisze: EN Is this change acceptable and can I continue? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78060265 I don't think this is the best solution I personally am not a fan of using 8 different names in one name tag (though some countries that have multiple equal languages do favour that nationally). The example here "Baltijas jūra / Baltijos jūra / Itämeri / Läänemeri / Morze Bałtyckie / Östersjön / Østersøen / Ostsee / Балтийское море" seems a bit clumsy. I agree with that. It does not solve anything. Is there an international language used within shipping worldwide? Perhaps that would be a better option than this. English. And in aviation. English. All examples of the nasty English Imperialist Agressor who wants to impose their language on other nations. Or something like that. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
W dniu 19-12-06 o 19:01, Andy Townsend pisze: > On 06/12/2019 14:40, Tomek wrote: >> EN >> The problem is that the English imperialists want to impose their >> language on other nations; and do not understand (do not want to >> understand) how someone writes in a language other than English, is >> it so difficult to use Google / Yandex / Bing? > > Taking a step back from the original problem (what should go in the > name tag for e.g. the Atlantic Ocean), I think it's worth thinking > about how you're trying to discuss this with people. > > I'd suggest that talking about "English imperialists" as part of your > argument is unhelpful to your cause, not because it is rude (even > though it is) but because ultimately you presumably want to win people > over to your point of view. It would help to try and understand how > OSM got into the position it is in now (with one "name" tag and lots > of "name:language" tags) and to try and understand the conflicting > requirements that mean that there isn't going to be a perfect solution > that satisfies everyone. Until you do that and understand where other > people are coming from you won't be able to engage with their > arguments, and you won't be able to make an argument that engages with > their point of view and perhaps expands their worldview a bit. > PL Wiadomość użytkownika „Cheerio John” tylko potwierdza moje zdanie. Ale to nieistotne, spróbujmy dojść do porozumienia i rozwiązać problem. EO La mesaĝo de uzanto “Cheerio John” nur apogas mian opinion. Sed tio ne gravas, ni provu akiri interkompreniĝon kaj solvi la problemon. <>___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
It is certainly the case. However, the new tools begin to change this situation. For example, at Wikidata items one can add a translation into any language quickly and conveniently. The commercial websites also get the different language versions, since it can be implemented now easily and robustly. For example, the website of Uber is available in any language of a region where this enterprise operates. Let alone smartphones. One can nowadays have her/his smartphone in any language. And it was not the case still in 90s. The translation is becoming the true international language. Best regards, Oleksiy On 12/6/19 18:46, john whelan wrote: The international language would be English. It is after all the language of trade and as a consequence absorbed many words from other languages. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
On 06/12/2019 14:40, Tomek wrote: EN The problem is that the English imperialists want to impose their language on other nations; and do not understand (do not want to understand) how someone writes in a language other than English, is it so difficult to use Google / Yandex / Bing? Taking a step back from the original problem (what should go in the name tag for e.g. the Atlantic Ocean), I think it's worth thinking about how you're trying to discuss this with people. I'd suggest that talking about "English imperialists" as part of your argument is unhelpful to your cause, not because it is rude (even though it is) but because ultimately you presumably want to win people over to your point of view. It would help to try and understand how OSM got into the position it is in now (with one "name" tag and lots of "name:language" tags) and to try and understand the conflicting requirements that mean that there isn't going to be a perfect solution that satisfies everyone. Until you do that and understand where other people are coming from you won't be able to engage with their arguments, and you won't be able to make an argument that engages with their point of view and perhaps expands their worldview a bit. Best Regards, Andy PS: If you'd like to create a map that's based on EO name tags let me know if you would like any help. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
The international language would be English. It is after all the language of trade and as a consequence absorbed many words from other languages. But that is taking a pragmatic view and is only one minor voice amongst all the contributors. There will be many other voices decrying its use. One approach would be to tag name:en in areas where the local language differs or the local written language is unusable by a significant number of people either because of hardware / software issues or literacy issues. Cheerio John On Fri, 6 Dec 2019, 11:00 am Andy Townsend, wrote: > On 06/12/2019 15:10, Tomek wrote: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305640277 > > W dniu 19-12-06 o 16:08, Tomek pisze: > > EN > Is this change acceptable and can I continue? > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78060265 > > > Not yet. Wait what people say in reply. > > I personally am not a fan of using 8 different names in one name tag > (though some countries that have multiple equal languages do favour that > nationally). The example here "Baltijas jūra / Baltijos jūra / Itämeri / > Läänemeri / Morze Bałtyckie / Östersjön / Østersøen / Ostsee / Балтийское > море" seems a bit clumsy. > > Is there an international language used within shipping worldwide? > Perhaps that would be a better option than this. > > Best Regards, > > Andy > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
You understand correctly. And yes, you can guess a users language from either http headers or geolocation or even a cookie. But the issue there currently is, is that there is one Mapnik map with the captions rendered in the tiles. To do something about that you would need to make a different caption layer and present the one you think is right for the user viewing the map as an overlay over a non-captioned Mapnik map. Or you have to make different Mapnik styles for different languages and present them also based on those criterea. Or, as I suggested before: make your own map. The german community has one with a different style and lots of placed rendered in German and English. A problem with that is that it takes much more time and storage to make those tiles. I know google does something like it but does it IMHO in a bad way because for me it translates every place into a Dutch name, giving rise to oddities as Ariën-aan-de-Leie. So if you want to go that way, expect it to be less than trivial. I understand the issue. It’s frustrating because it is a technical issue of the renderer, not of the database: it seems to conflict with the “semantic first, not renderring” OSM principle. The problem arises out of one of the general OSM principles: use the name that is verifiable on the ground. This does not work well for oceans or any international body. No ocean has a sign affixed to it with its name (well, there might be signposts in different countries pointing to it). This is a great point. To me, it seems to point to removing the “name” tag on such places: this information doesn’t correspond to anything “real” (but the “name:en” does). And I don’t even mind if some careless renderers just use “name:en” as a default is the tag “name” is absent: it’s something that should be parametric, but a renderer might just have be designed specifically for English, so whatever. And I would be violently against removing name tags for such places. Oleksiy Muzalyev makes a great point why you should not remove name tags from places. It makes them unfindable. You can not find something which is not in the OSM database. Having them rendered in an unwanted language seems to me to be much more desirable than not being able to find them at all. I’m sorry, I failed to find Oleksiy Muzalyev’s message: what was the sent time of this message? I’m very surprised by this comment, because OSM search also includes the localised names in its search. Here is a random example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=中国 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Ĉinio both find China ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/270056 ) as unique result. This means that the base search in https://www.openstreetmap.org not also searches for the “name” tag, but also for the “name:zh”, “name:eo”, etc. tags (it also looks for the “official_name” tags too: https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=中华人民共和国 ). Or are you referring to another search engine? Maybe you misunderstood me: when I say “removing the “name” tag”, I mean removing the only tag whose name is strictly “name”. In particular, I’m of course not suggesting to also the “name:en”, “name:eo”, etc. tags. This would of course be silly as it would remove the information from OSM: it’s not what I’m advocating here. I’m just suggesting to remove the “name” tag, not its localised versions. This does not remove any information as the “name” tag is usually identical to one of its localised version: in the case of https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/270056 , the “name” and “name:zh” are identical. Regards, Martin. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
On 06/12/2019 15:10, Tomek wrote: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305640277 W dniu 19-12-06 o 16:08, Tomek pisze: EN Is this change acceptable and can I continue? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78060265 Not yet. Wait what people say in reply. I personally am not a fan of using 8 different names in one name tag (though some countries that have multiple equal languages do favour that nationally). The example here "Baltijas jūra / Baltijos jūra / Itämeri / Läänemeri / Morze Bałtyckie / Östersjön / Østersøen / Ostsee / Балтийское море" seems a bit clumsy. Is there an international language used within shipping worldwide? Perhaps that would be a better option than this. Best Regards, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305640277 W dniu 19-12-06 o 16:08, Tomek pisze: > EO > Ĉu tiu ĉi redakto estas akceptata kaj mi povas pluigi ŝanĝi? > PL > Czy ta zmiana jest akceptowalna i mogę kontynuować? > EN > Is this change acceptable and can I continue? > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78060265 > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk <>___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
EO Ĉu tiu ĉi redakto estas akceptata kaj mi povas pluigi ŝanĝi? PL Czy ta zmiana jest akceptowalna i mogę kontynuować? EN Is this change acceptable and can I continue? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78060265 <>___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
W dniu 19-12-06 o 14:11, Martin Constantino–Bodin pisze: > Probably the most important point: the goal of the Esperanto community > is not to overcome English in some kind of epic battle. It is to > provide language diversity and avoid language imperialism. Hence, the > main point of the community is not that Esperanto should be used as > the international language instead of English, it’s that there should > not be one unique international language: Esperanto should be an > international language, not the international language ☺ Anyway, the > Esperanto movement is complex, and some parts of it just states that > Esperanto should be used for pragmatical reasons as it costs much less > to teach it than other languages (a good instance of this is > https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport_Grin ). EO Problemo estas, ke anglaj imperiistoj volas altrudi sian lingvo al aliaj nacioj; kaj ne komprenas (ne volas kompreni) se iu skribas en alia lingvo ol la angla, ĉu estas tiel malfacile uzi tradukilon de Google/Yandex/Bing? PL Problemem jest to, że angielscy imperialiści chcą narzucić swój język innym narodom; i nie rozumieją (nie chcą zrozumieć) jak ktoś pisze w innym jeżyku niż angielski, czy jest tak trudno skorzystać z tłumacza Google/Yandex/Bing? EN The problem is that the English imperialists want to impose their language on other nations; and do not understand (do not want to understand) how someone writes in a language other than English, is it so difficult to use Google / Yandex / Bing? W dniu 19-12-06 o 00:02, Joseph Eisenberg pisze: >> for smaller seas, I suggest adding names in all official / main languages >> of adjacent countries, so instead of "Black Sea" there will be: > Karadeniz Marea Neagră Чорне море | Черно море | Чёрное море | შავი ზღვა > > That's fine. EO La ĝusta signo por disigi nomojn estas “/”, baldaŭ mi komencos ŝanĝi! PL Właściwym znakiem rozdzielającym jest „/”, zaraz zacznę zmieniać! EN The correct separator is "/", I will start changing! W dniu 19-12-06 o 08:04, Maarten Deen pisze: > On 2019-12-05 22:12, Tomek wrote: > >> EN: >> In what language should the names of interstate objects be: seas / >> bays, continents, oceans, poles? They are not currently displayed on >> the default map(1), programs (e.g. OsmAnd, iD and JOSM editors) use >> the name:LANGUAGE label, so the content of the "name" label is >> ideological only, not practical. > > I disagree that the name tag is ideological. Maybe you use the wrong > word and meant theoretical? EO Ne havanta praktikan signifon (ĉiuj uzas name:LINGVO), nur por esti tien. PL Nie mający praktycznego znaczenia (wszyscy korzystają z name:JĘZYK), tylko na pokaz. EN Not of practical importance (everyone uses the name:LANGUAGE), just for show. W dniu 19-12-06 o 10:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev pisze: > > For many geographical names there are articles in the Latin version of > Wikipedia. For example, for the Black Sea: > https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus_Euxinus > > for Poland: https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonia , for Canada: > https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada , etc. > > So if one wishes to add a name in Latin, i.e. name:la in the editor, > it is possible just to look it up in the Latin version of Wikipedia. > > The Latin language was widely used in the cartography and in science > in general over the past centuries. For example Isaac Newton's book > "Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica", one of the most > important works in the history of science, was published in 1687 in > Latin. > > And it is still used in science nowadays. The legacy of the Rēs > pūblica Rōmāna & Imperium Rōmānum, including its language, is so > enormous that it can never get extinct. At the same time the Latin > does not have a standing army any more. > > So it is indeed kind of neutral. What is beneficial and safer for > mappers in some parts. Besides the name in Latin is often recognizable > for people who speak English, French, German, etc. Even for people > from the Cyrillic, Chinese, Korean, etc. background it is often also > understandable, since the Latin alphabet is studied at the elementary > school. > EO Anstataŭ Latino eblas uzi Interlingvaon: https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingvao tio ĉi estas “rekreita kaj simpligita” Latino. PL Zamiast łaciny można korzystać z Interlingwy: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua https://sites.google.com/site/jezykinterlingua/ jest to coś tak jakby „odtworzona i uproszczona” łacina. EN Instead of Latin, you can use Interlingua: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlingua it is something like "recreated and simplified" Latin. W dniu 19-12-06 o 10:53, Maarten Deen pisze: >>> Still, it is a Good Idea to have one standard (language) to >>> communicate >>> or define things, like everything meant for an international public >>> in >>> the wiki is English and the tag system is English. >> >> you should argue why it is a good idea to have _one_ standard language >> in the project. IMHO it excludes many billions of
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
On 2019-12-06 14:11, Martin Constantino–Bodin wrote: Removing the name tag does not solve any problem. The renderer for the map (or any program that needs to display the name tag) needs to make a decision which tag to display. If the name tag is not present it will have to fall back to another one. In cases where you are running a program on your computer, this decision might be easy: the language setting of your computer (like JOSM does). In cases where you make something for a general audience, that decision will not be so easy. Then you will get into this discussion about "what language is used most" or "we don't feel comfortable having an in our eyes non-neutral language pushed up to us". I agree that it does not entirely solve the problem. It however partially solves it: in most contexts, there is a default language defined. Be it the language of the computer (as you said for JOSM), of the browser (and, if we look at the HTTP_ACCEPT header, there might even be more than one!), or some rendering options. If one is printing a map, there is generally a context around (the language of the book, or the place—which is usually the same than the computer’s on which the map is being generated). Maybe I’ve misunderstood have you mean by “general audience” here. I would greatly appreciate example where there is no available default language indirectly provided by the user (’s system) or context. You understand correctly. And yes, you can guess a users language from either http headers or geolocation or even a cookie. But the issue there currently is, is that there is one Mapnik map with the captions rendered in the tiles. To do something about that you would need to make a different caption layer and present the one you think is right for the user viewing the map as an overlay over a non-captioned Mapnik map. Or you have to make different Mapnik styles for different languages and present them also based on those criterea. Or, as I suggested before: make your own map. The german community has one with a different style and lots of placed rendered in German and English. A problem with that is that it takes much more time and storage to make those tiles. I know google does something like it but does it IMHO in a bad way because for me it translates every place into a Dutch name, giving rise to oddities as Ariën-aan-de-Leie. So if you want to go that way, expect it to be less than trivial. The problem arises out of one of the general OSM principles: use the name that is verifiable on the ground. This does not work well for oceans or any international body. No ocean has a sign affixed to it with its name (well, there might be signposts in different countries pointing to it). This is a great point. To me, it seems to point to removing the “name” tag on such places: this information doesn’t correspond to anything “real” (but the “name:en” does). And I don’t even mind if some careless renderers just use “name:en” as a default is the tag “name” is absent: it’s something that should be parametric, but a renderer might just have be designed specifically for English, so whatever. And I would be violently against removing name tags for such places. Oleksiy Muzalyev makes a great point why you should not remove name tags from places. It makes them unfindable. You can not find something which is not in the OSM database. Having them rendered in an unwanted language seems to me to be much more desirable than not being able to find them at all. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
Most people know where the Atlantic Ocean, and it is not a problem. But if I want to see, for example, where is the Laptev Sea I cannot find it on the OSM map, not on any layer. Both the Atlantic Ocean and the Laptev Sea could be marked in Latin language as Oceanus Atlanticus and Mare Lapteviorum. It would be understandable enough, in accordance with the scientific tradition, and exactly as it was marked on the original Mercator's map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Mercator_1569_world_map_composite.jpg (ref.) https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oceanus_Atlanticus https://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_Lapteviorum Best regards, Oleksiy On 06-Dec-19 12:04, Frederik Ramm wrote: "European Union" or "Atlantic Ocean" aren't usually rendered anyway. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
(Long post. TL;DR: I’m presenting the Esperanto community and I am looking for instances where there is no default language involved around the renderer.) IMHO that is more a "he says, she says" argument than anything valid. To me it comes more across that a small community wants to push its own agenda. That may be unfair because I don't know how big the Esperanto community is, so it is IMHO. I am biased. I don't know Esperanto. Therefore I would be against rendering everything that is not nation-specific in Esperanto. Maybe it would be helpful if I can quickly present the language and its community here. This is not meant to be exhaustive, but may help the discussions. I will try to be extra-short, but I’m not super good at that: if you want to skip it, just jump to the line starting with “Anyway, all that to say that”. It is a small community (about 2 million speakers in 2005). It however is internationally recognised as a great community-driving community, as illustrated by its presence (through TEJO) in the United Nation as a key role to coordinate local actions towards vulnerable populations, particularly the ones that has linguistic issues and suffer from the overall forceful usage of the English language. The main driving force of Esperanto is not its number of speakers, but its simplicity to learn (Piron, 1994 ; Flochon, 2000) compared to other languages and its propedeutical nature (that is, it helps learning other languages). As a rough estimate, studies suggest that it takes up to 10 times less time to reach a fluent level in Esperanto than a fluent level in English for Europeans. Non-Europeans need indeed more time, but still much less time than to learn languages such as English or French. Furthermore, this simplicity of the language does not come with loss of expressivity: as a French native speaker and Esperanto speaker, I have huge trouble translating what I say in Esperanto to French, as French is missing some crucial notions in some contexts. Most roots of Esperanto are from Roman and Slavic languages. However, in contrary to most languages, words in Esperanto are rarely just one root. The language is highly agglutinative and comes with a handy set of suffixes that enable to get a whole lexical field from a single root. For instance, “ĉevalo” means horse, “ĉevalino” means mare, “ĉevalido” means colt, “ĉevalisto” means horseman/groom, “ĉevalaro” means horse herd, etc. Of course, these suffixes apply for any other animal: “ŝafo” means sheep, and thus “ŝafino” is a ewe, “ŝafaro” is a “flock of sheep”, etc. So although the roots are indeed Europe-centric, it is not that large an issue as root importation has been restricted as much as possible: if a combination of other words lead to the same result, the root (usually) is not imported. Probably the most important point: the goal of the Esperanto community is not to overcome English in some kind of epic battle. It is to provide language diversity and avoid language imperialism. Hence, the main point of the community is not that Esperanto should be used as the international language instead of English, it’s that there should not be one unique international language: Esperanto should be an international language, not the international language ☺ Anyway, the Esperanto movement is complex, and some parts of it just states that Esperanto should be used for pragmatical reasons as it costs much less to teach it than other languages (a good instance of this is https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapport_Grin ). That was relatively long, and a bit out of the context — sorry about that. I was hoping that it might help understand the goals of some OSM-esperantists here (and in my experience, it seems that actually many Esperantists use OSM compared to other communities! I may be biaised on that). Anyway, all that to say that I don’t think that using Esperanto names for the “name” tags in places like oceans is a good idea: it doesn’t even meet the goals of Esperantists themselves (well, some, probably). That’s why I’m really in favor of just removing this tags in such places. Removing the name tag does not solve any problem. The renderer for the map (or any program that needs to display the name tag) needs to make a decision which tag to display. If the name tag is not present it will have to fall back to another one. In cases where you are running a program on your computer, this decision might be easy: the language setting of your computer (like JOSM does). In cases where you make something for a general audience, that decision will not be so easy. Then you will get into this discussion about "what language is used most" or "we don't feel comfortable having an in our eyes non-neutral language pushed up to us". I agree that it does not entirely solve the problem. It however partially solves it: in most contexts, there is a default language defined. Be it the language of the
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
On 2019-12-06 11:46, Martin Constantino–Bodin wrote: Some context first. So there has been this changeset that triggered some discussions: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77845837 Changeset comments in not a great place for discussion, so I suggest that we continue here. (Thanks @SomeoneElse for the link! ☺) First, The issue comes in places where there is not a particular language, like oceans, most seas, or places like Antartica. In most of these places, the “name” tag is actually using the English name. The issue is that English, despite being a de facto internal language, is felt by some communities as a non-neutral choice, given all the inequalities it yields among people in the world, given its complexity, etc. The Esperanto community is particularly criticising the choice of the English language as an international language. IMHO that is more a "he says, she says" argument than anything valid. To me it comes more across that a small community wants to push its own agenda. That may be unfair because I don't know how big the Esperanto community is, so it is IMHO. The question I would like to ask is about the relevance of having a “name” tag in places where there is no default language—knowing that all the “name:en”, “name:eo”, etc. are already there. I can imagine that some renderers might expect to always be a tag “name”, and I wonder how fixable this is (especially in the cases where there is a localised name). If you have any argumented pointer about this, I would be interested. Removing the name tag does not solve any problem. The renderer for the map (or any program that needs to display the name tag) needs to make a decision which tag to display. If the name tag is not present it will have to fall back to another one. In cases where you are running a program on your computer, this decision might be easy: the language setting of your computer (like JOSM does). In cases where you make something for a general audience, that decision will not be so easy. Then you will get into this discussion about "what language is used most" or "we don't feel comfortable having an in our eyes non-neutral language pushed up to us". I am biased. I don't know Esperanto. Therefore I would be against rendering everything that is not nation-specific in Esperanto. As far as I know, the wiki doesn’t state anything about English being the default language for the name tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names It thus doesn’t feel like this question has already been discussed. However, I never participated in the main OSM mailing list and thus missed any such discussions if they already took place. If so, please give me an argumented link. The problem arises out of one of the general OSM principles: use the name that is verifiable on the ground. This does not work well for oceans or any international body. No ocean has a sign affixed to it with its name (well, there might be signposts in different countries pointing to it). So there is no real solution to it. Removing the name tag does not solve the problem because a renderer might choose to display name:en. Changing the name tag to Esperanto does not solve the problem and doing that on a global scale I would also see as vandalism. Because why Esperanto? Is there a general consensus for that? That is how we operate on OSM. Maybe the esperanto community can solve this by making their own Mapnik tiles and using their own www.openstreetmap.eo domain or using eo.openstreetmap.org. If they (or anyone else) want to look at the map with international names in Esperanto than it is there to use. I for one would welcome something like that with all captions in latin script (like the public transport map, but in full Mapnik style). Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
6 Dec 2019, 12:04 by frede...@remote.org: > I have reverted a recent edit in which the "name" tag was removed from > some "international" objects by a user (on the grounds of "if I cannot > have an Esperanto name then nobody shall have a name for that object!"), > however in principle, if the community came to the conclusion that this > was a good idea, I would not be opposed. > For things like Atlantic Ocean or Pacific Ocean I would be OK with not adding name tag at all. Though idea of mapping ocean seems suspect to me AFAIK there are many way to divide oceans and there is no consensus See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borders_of_the_oceans ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
Hi, On 06.12.19 12:01, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > place=continent nodes make no sense at all True but there will likely be some great mind who, just to get a nice "AFRICA" label on zoom level 2, will create a multipolygon encompassing every single piece of coastline around the continent and call that multipolygon "Africa". Every time some poor soul splits up the coastline somewhere in Africa they will wonder why the upload takes five minutes, and soon the Africa multipolygon will be at version 12345... Seeing that this is the inevitable alternative, maybe the place=continent node is the lesser evil. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
Hi, On 06.12.19 11:46, Martin Constantino–Bodin wrote: > The question I would like to ask is about the relevance of having a > “name” tag in places where there is no default language—knowing that all > the “name:en”, “name:eo”, etc. are already there. I can imagine that > some renderers might expect to always be a tag “name”, and I wonder how > fixable this is (especially in the cases where there is a localised > name). I think that the absence of these features on standard maps would not hurt anyone. "European Union" or "Atlantic Ocean" aren't usually rendered anyway. And it would increase the incentive for map makers to use the name:xx values and make maps in the language requested by the viewer. I have reverted a recent edit in which the "name" tag was removed from some "international" objects by a user (on the grounds of "if I cannot have an Esperanto name then nobody shall have a name for that object!"), however in principle, if the community came to the conclusion that this was a good idea, I would not be opposed. At one point in the distant past, there were two groups edit-warring about the name tag for Jerusalem, and it was decided that Jerusalem should not have a name tag at all until they agree on one. Perhaps that idea could be rolled out globally. We've even had the radical idea of removing the "name" tag everywhere, and instead have some way of tagging the default language for regions, so that, if you wanted to emulate today's rendering of the "local name" for everything, you'd first have to look up the local language prefix and then use the appropriate name:xx - but this was considered too complicated. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Relevance of the “name” tag in places where there is no obvious associated language
6 Dec 2019, 11:46 by martin.bo...@ens-lyon.org: > > Some context first. So there has been this changeset that triggered > some discussions: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77845837> > Changeset comments in not a great place for discussion, so I suggest > that we continue here. (Thanks @SomeoneElse for the link! ☺) > > Looking at this changeset I think that solution for some of the element is to simply delete it. place=continent nodes make no sense at all this tag has major problem due to fact that there are multiple competing ways how Earth may be divided into continents. Given low number of continents, fact that collecting this data on ones own is easy and that depending on OSM data is not useful (moving, deleting or changing name of place=continent node would have massive impact on a map)and that it is desirable to tweak label placement for specific maps it is dubious whatever this data is useful. Why https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/36966065 is here and not 200 kilometers to the west? like role=label it is pointless exercise in label placement, tuned for rare (unique?) map using this for label placement. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
