Re: [Tagging] Study area
I am content with amenity=coworking_space and I think it fits my usage perfectly. I will add operator and opening_hours tags as soon as I determine those. The signs states the Camp is open 24 hours but unless the mall building is also open 24 hours that sign is meaningless. Here is the information I added: Node: 2692460179 at N18.8022621, E98.9667028 Now that I've started this long conversation, how do I end it? Thanks for the help, Alaska Dave On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > Am 27/feb/2014 um 12:06 schrieb Pieren : > > > > I dont think "office" fits here, for something open to all publics in > > a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' > > everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many > > restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the > > 'office' key ;-) > > > +1 > > cheers, > Martin > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
@FrViPofm: I respectfully disagree. The drinking_water tag you refer to is intended to indicate if drinking water is available at a certain facility, not whether it is safe to drink. The values in your example demonstrate this intention with "yes" and "no" comprising over 90% of the values in existence. As for the example of toilets with drinkable=yes, I agree that this might be confusing. In the Wiki it would be helpful to recommend that the drinkable tag be used with amenities like fountain, spring, etc. Using it as you did above is ambiguous. For example, one would not use the term surface=concrete to describe a waterway. Although nothing forbids you to use it that way, except common sense, it is intended to be used to describe the surface of a highway. I would hope drinkability would follow that sort of usage Dave. On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Vincent Pottier wrote: > Le 27/02/2014 07:18, Rudolf Martin a écrit : > >> Hallo, >> >> >> the tag "drinkable=" is used more than 3000 times. >> >> Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag. >> >> I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some >> discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm forum. >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/drinkable >> >> Feel free to discuss. >> >> Rudolf >> >> What about drinking_water used also more than 3000 times ? > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinkable (~3300) > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinking_water (~3100) > > It seems that today "drinkable=*" is on "standalone watering objects" > (fountains, springs...) and "drinking_water=*" is on other amenities or > objects (shelter, toilets...). > > It seems also that the values should be the same. > > And it seems that "drinking_water=*" would fit both "standalone" objects > and other objects, rather than "drinkable". What do you think of > amenity=toilets + drinkable=yes ? But in contrast, "amenity=fountain + > drinking_water=yes sounds good. > > So I would be in favour of a single "drinking_water" tag having 6400 > occurrences and a migration from "drinkable" to "drinking_water" tags. > It is easy to migrate softly the "drinkable" to drinking_water" by > duplicating the tags in a first time and make the first obsolete. > -- > FrViPofm > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tag for planetarium
The typical planetarium in the USA is attached to a museum, and most offer separately ticketed shows (stars, movies, talks). A lens-based star projectors once distinguished a planetarium. No more. Now these are basically digital movie theaters with a curved screen. As such they are most akin to a movie theater in my view. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
On 2/27/14 2:56 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Color-coding is likely used by the fire department to signify matters such as > how much water-flow is available. I don't know how standardized these color > codes are, however. > > there are standards published by the AWWA (American Water Works Association) and the NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) which are approximately the same. however, they are honored by some departments but not others. barrel color is supposed to be chrome yellow, and the bonnet and caps are supposed to be painted to indicate flow capacity at 20psi. details of the standards may be found here: http://www.firehydrant.org/info/design07.html some departments use bonnet and/or cap color to indicate the main diameter. this is easier to do than measure flow capacity but provides less useful information; in theory a hydrant on an 8" main can produce 1000 GPM at 20 psi, but in practice they sometimes produce noticeably less. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
Color-coding is likely used by the fire department to signify matters such as how much water-flow is available. I don't know how standardized these color codes are, however. On February 27, 2014 1:36:48 PM CST, Andreas Labres wrote: >Richard, > >fire_hydrant:type should remain unchanged, as this is negotiated with >local fire >departments here in Austria (as well as Germany). At least this is true >for >pillar and underground, those are most common and most important. > >Then there are fixed suction points, either from a pond or from the >ground water >(well). There is no ideal tagging for this available, this "pond" may >be adjustable. > >Things like the color don't make that much sense to me, is this one > >http://www.scardo.net/typo/fileadmin/hydrantderwoche/20121125_WeinWasser_Ai.jpg > >blue? or stainless steel? But everybody here recognizes this as a >hydrant, >whatever color that is. > >Hydrant class may make sense to you, this is what we use the diameter >for (most >common are 80 and 100). Just to give you an idea how those are used >(really used >by the local fire department there): > > http://openfiremap.org/?zoom=17&lat=48.12184&lon=16.33877 > >Other optional parameters as you like, they don't make that much sense >to us here. > >/al >(from Vienna, Austria) > >___ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
On 2/27/14 2:36 PM, Andreas Labres wrote: > Richard, > > fire_hydrant:type should remain unchanged, as this is negotiated with local > fire > departments here in Austria (as well as Germany). At least this is true for > pillar and underground, those are most common and most important. i now am proposing that pillar be supplemented with dry_barrel and wet_barrel, and that pillar itself remain unchanged. > Then there are fixed suction points, either from a pond or from the ground > water > (well). There is no ideal tagging for this available, this "pond" may be > adjustable. i'm proposing separating water source out because different types of delivery device (pillars, pipes) show up in these cases in the US, i don't think that the water source and the delivery device should be conflated into one tag. > Things like the color don't make that much sense to me, is this one > > > http://www.scardo.net/typo/fileadmin/hydrantderwoche/20121125_WeinWasser_Ai.jpg > > blue? or stainless steel? But everybody here recognizes this as a hydrant, > whatever color that is. color may be more relevant in the US. > > Hydrant class may make sense to you, this is what we use the diameter for > (most > common are 80 and 100). Just to give you an idea how those are used (really > used > by the local fire department there): > >http://openfiremap.org/?zoom=17&lat=48.12184&lon=16.33877 some US departments use the main diameter; others use class. there is no direct translation between class and diameter, nor is there a direct translation between pressure and class. > Other optional parameters as you like, they don't make that much sense to us > here. > > fundamentally i'm arguing for latitude to match local conditions. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
Richard, fire_hydrant:type should remain unchanged, as this is negotiated with local fire departments here in Austria (as well as Germany). At least this is true for pillar and underground, those are most common and most important. Then there are fixed suction points, either from a pond or from the ground water (well). There is no ideal tagging for this available, this "pond" may be adjustable. Things like the color don't make that much sense to me, is this one http://www.scardo.net/typo/fileadmin/hydrantderwoche/20121125_WeinWasser_Ai.jpg blue? or stainless steel? But everybody here recognizes this as a hydrant, whatever color that is. Hydrant class may make sense to you, this is what we use the diameter for (most common are 80 and 100). Just to give you an idea how those are used (really used by the local fire department there): http://openfiremap.org/?zoom=17&lat=48.12184&lon=16.33877 Other optional parameters as you like, they don't make that much sense to us here. /al (from Vienna, Austria) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
On 2/27/14 4:50 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > I also disagree with standpipe, in UK usage a standpipe is an emergency > source of water provided for residents if mains water if off for some reason. > > i have done some more research and asked around, and this is where i'm at: standpipe is ambiguous. it is used in the US for both wet and dry risers, and in the UK for wet & dry risers (a secondary term riser being primary in the UK) as well as for the pipe used to provide connectivity to underground hydrants. so i think it should not be used at all, since you wouldn't map the standpipes in the UK (they're mobile after all.) so riser for the in building systems is consistent with UK usage and the way we should go. however, it turns out that riser terminology does not use the term hydrant (it uses the terms outlet and inlet in the obvious way), so i will drop it from the water source specification. finally, i have found references to pillar as a hydrant type. i was not insisting on it going away, merely questioning where it came from, so now i'm ok with leaving them as is. however, there are more specific types available, so i will propose adding dry_barrel and wet_barrel to the allowable fire_hydrant:type tags. it's fairly easy to distinguish between the two types; dry barrel hydrants are the norm in climates where the ground freezes, and wet barrel hydrants are the norm in warm climates. the nut that operates the main valve of the dry barrel is a dead giveaway for the hydrant type, so it's easily detectable by mappers. how does everyone feel about these changes? richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] wikidata instead of wikipedia
> Am 27/feb/2014 um 14:10 schrieb Jo : > > I see no harm in leaving direct links to 1 or a few wikipedia pages (in > multilingual areas). you should only add more than one Wikipedia link in exceptional situations, where Wikipedias interlinking is not working, but this has nothing to do with multilingual geographic areas. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
> Am 27/feb/2014 um 12:06 schrieb Pieren : > > I dont think "office" fits here, for something open to all publics in > a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' > everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many > restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the > 'office' key ;-) +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
Le 27/02/2014 07:18, Rudolf Martin a écrit : Hallo, the tag "drinkable=" is used more than 3000 times. Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag. I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm forum. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/drinkable Feel free to discuss. Rudolf What about drinking_water used also more than 3000 times ? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinkable (~3300) https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/drinking_water (~3100) It seems that today "drinkable=*" is on "standalone watering objects" (fountains, springs...) and "drinking_water=*" is on other amenities or objects (shelter, toilets...). It seems also that the values should be the same. And it seems that "drinking_water=*" would fit both "standalone" objects and other objects, rather than "drinkable". What do you think of amenity=toilets + drinkable=yes ? But in contrast, "amenity=fountain + drinking_water=yes sounds good. So I would be in favour of a single "drinking_water" tag having 6400 occurrences and a migration from "drinkable" to "drinking_water" tags. It is easy to migrate softly the "drinkable" to drinking_water" by duplicating the tags in a first time and make the first obsolete. -- FrViPofm ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
On 2/27/14 4:37 AM, Georg Feddern wrote: > Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty: > >> then the issue is whether we want to modify fire_hydrant:type or >> replace it with a different tag altogether, say fire_hydrant:delivery >> if we keep type, should we replace pillar with plug or fire_plug or just >> let that go. > > I would keep hydrant:type - because it is a physical type/design in my > opinion. > With hydrant:delivery I would not assume the physical type, sorry. > > And I would keep type=pillar. > With fire_plug I - and I suppose many others - would assume "something > you can connect with or to". > And that are all hydrants in any design, it is too generic in my opinion. > fire plug in US usage is pretty specific, whereas pillar is a complete mystery in the US. since there is no UK usage as the type is not in service there, it kind of leaves things open, as normally OSM uses UK english as the baseline and it doesn't help in this case. > Regarding standpipe: > I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to > underground hydrants. > So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, > may be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser. > in US usage, standpipe is common usage for systems in buildings, we have almost no underground hydrants, so that usage is unknown here. http://www.flickr.com/photos/nfgusedautoparts/12813740234/ i am discussing terminology with a retired UK firefighter, i will find out from him what standard UK usage is for standpipe/riser systems in buildings richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] wikidata instead of wikipedia
I guess if this really takes off, the editors (software) need a way to look up the label and present that to the user instead of the cryptic Q-numbers. This creates many lookups though and it's probably needed to cache them. It would also be nice to use the localised labels, falling back to the main English one when the one in the user's language isn't available. I do see value in this integration with wikidata. But only if we add them to OSM, it doesn't help to add pointers to our objects on the wikidata side, since our object ids are not totally stable. I did this for Pater Damiaan and Guido Gezelle now, occasionally adding references to the sculptors of their statues, just to get a feel for the possibilities. I see no harm in leaving direct links to 1 or a few wikipedia pages (in multilingual areas). One could argue that with a link to wikipedia the link to wikidata can be looked up automatically, but that is very inefficient. Jo 2014-02-25 22:13 GMT+01:00 Michael Kugelmann : > Am 22.02.2014 00:32, schrieb ueliw0: > > with wikidata now operational, I was wondering if it would make sense to >> use (tag) wikidata items instead of the wikipedia links. >> > for me wikipedia still makes sense: I think that there is not a wikidata > page/ID available for every article. > > And: article names are easy to understand, cryptic IDs aren't... > > > Best regards, > Michael. > > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
> Am 27/feb/2014 um 11:00 schrieb Dave Swarthout : > > I think the term "drinkable" might be more attractive because it is so > closely related to the term "drinking_water" — it's a logical extension of > the top level amenity tag: > amenity=drinking_water (drinkability=yes assumed) > to different water sources such as fountains, springs and water wells. > > Potable is an English word derived from Latin and its meaning is perhaps not > obvious to non-native English speakers whereas drinkable doesn't suffer as > much from that limitation. +1 years ago in 2008 when amenity=drinking_water was proposed it was initially drafted as amenity=potable_water and then changed to drinking water as this was perceived more intuitive for non native English speakers. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 12:59 +0100, Stephan Knauss wrote: > I would not focus too much on the "office" in the key name. A footpath is > also a "highway". But everyone would agree it is not a highway at all. A public footpath/bridleway is a highway, they are maintained by the local highway authority. Obstructing any highway is an offence, whether it be a public footpath or motorway. The term highway is often misused to imply a motorway/expressway, however that is not the UK (and therefore OSM) definition of a highway. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
Dave Swarthout writes: I agree. This is not a typical office. Here is a link, with photos, etc. http://www.mayashoppingcenter.com/store/detail/C.A.M.P/4.html I would not focus too much on the "office" in the key name. A footpath is also a "highway". But everyone would agree it is not a highway at all. We treat the combination of key+values as a "tag", often the exact meaning needs a second sub-tag es well. Question is whether a place where people come together to work (either business or work for their study) is a co-working space and how to tag it. Based on your pictures and description I would tag it the same as the paid co-working places like punspace (never been there, but know pictures) and guru-box (seen in person). Having it free might be just some form of promotion of the mall to bring in more people and hope they spent some money there as well. Do you remember the ground floor of kad suan kaew where we had a mini-osm meeting last year? Quite common to have these social meeting points in malls. Still kad suan kaew differs as it was much more a general meeting place than the place you brought up which focuses on getting actual work (study) done. So if we distinguish we should make a difference on the purpose whether it focuses on getting work done (coworking) or social meeting (meeting_place). Stephan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=boat_sharing
Dear all, In analogy to "amenity=car_sharing", I would like to suggest a tag for the growing (sail)boat-sharing community. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing Many thanks for your comments! nounours77 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
Andrew Errington writes: We have them here in Korea. Students pay per month and use the room to study in. The main reason they exist is because of the dense housing here it's sometimes hard for students to get a quiet place to study. If you say that studying is also some kind of "work", then co-working if still in the scope for these places. Maybe not needed to have too many different main keys for them. all are co-working spaces. some cost money, others are free. Some cater students, other different businesses. Some offer also mail handling, beaverages, etc , others don't... "operator" might be "university" in case of on-campus places. Stephan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
2014-02-27 12:06 GMT+01:00 Pieren : > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:56 AM, sabas88 wrote: > > > Because it's overcrowded > > Today, it's less than shop ... > > > and office should suit better, as coworking are > > basically and most of the time offices ... :-) > > I dont think "office" fits here, for something open to all publics in > a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' > everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many > restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the > 'office' key ;-) > I agree it's not the case of Dave's issue, but afaik coworkings are places who sell office space (http://genova.talentgarden.org/#gallery this is the one I tagged as office=coworking, because it defines as such) What about community_centre? > > Pieren > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
I agree. This is not a typical office. Here is a link, with photos, etc. http://www.mayashoppingcenter.com/store/detail/C.A.M.P/4.html Also, here is a popup that shows the layout of the 5th floor. The CAMP occupies rooms 506, 507, 508, and 509: http://www.mayashoppingcenter.com/images/pages/directory/pop-up/popup-floor-5.jpg Dave On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Pieren wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:56 AM, sabas88 wrote: > > > Because it's overcrowded > > Today, it's less than shop ... > > > and office should suit better, as coworking are > > basically and most of the time offices ... :-) > > I dont think "office" fits here, for something open to all publics in > a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' > everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many > restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the > 'office' key ;-) > > Pieren > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
On 2014-02-27 08:32, Dave Swarthout wrote : > No objection. I equate the term "drinkable" with potable. The latter > is a weird sounding term, to me at least, but is the one in common use > in the United States to designate water sources that are safe to drink > from. potable comes from Latin potare (to drink) and drink is Germanic. See also potion, pot, and other pot* (not to be confused with potentia = possibility, power) As a language lover, I was curious to find out which sounds weird to whom besides you. That is, which is the origin of that word in different languages. Here is the result of a very quick Google poll. French=potable, Russian=питьевой, Albanian=i pijshëm, Basque=potable, Belarusian=пітной, Bosnian=pitak, Bulgarian=годен за пиене, Catalan=potable, Croatian=pitak, Czeck=pitný, Galician=potable, Greek=πόσιμο(?), Haitian=potab, Italian=potabile, Macedonian=пиење, Maltese=potabbli, Polish=pitny, Portuguese=potável, Romanian=potabil, Serbian=питак, Slovak=pitný, Slovenian=pitna, Spanish=potable, Swedish=potable, Ukrainian=питної English=potable, drinkable Latin=potabilis but also bibulus ;-) Afrikaans=drinkbare, Danish=drikkevandskvalitet, Dutch=drinkbaar, Esperanto=trinkebla, German=trinkbar, Icelandic=drykkjarhæft, Norwegian=drikkevann, Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:56 AM, sabas88 wrote: > Because it's overcrowded Today, it's less than shop ... > and office should suit better, as coworking are > basically and most of the time offices ... :-) I dont think "office" fits here, for something open to all publics in a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the 'office' key ;-) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
Le 27/02/2014 07:18, Rudolf Martin a écrit : Hallo, the tag "drinkable=" is used more than 3000 times. Up today there is no clear definition about the values of this tag. I made a proposal with some possible values, according to some discussions in this mailinglist and some threads in the osm forum. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/drinkable Feel free to discuss. Rudolf Hi. We have add a long discussion on this topic some times ago (In French) : https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-fr/2013-May/thread.html#59129 (and also http://www.randonner-leger.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=23502 ) It seems that the tag drinkable=yes should be used only according to the legislation (in France, and maybe in Europe) on spot where the quality of water is controlled and said drinkable. Every other place, according to the law must be said as "no drinking water". A lot of fountains, in France are said "no drinking water" only because the spring is not surveyed. We suggested other values such as : "rainwater_tank", "catched_spring", "wild_spring", "not_surveyed" (the translations may be better) . And the hiker takes his responsibility on place. I was once in the organizing team of a big hike : ~ 240 people during a week. A group, ~25 people, had a local guide who told that a spring in a meadow was drinkable. Every flasks were emptied and filled at the spring. But this day, it was not drinkable and it was for this group the beginning of very big... complications. So putting "drinkable=yes" because I have drunk 20 times on a wild spring seems not a good idea to me. -- FrViPofm ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
Ah, the wheel has turned full circle. We had this same discussion a couple of years ago. IMHO "potable" is the right answer, but amazingly, although everyone who joined the discussion knew what it meant, they all thought it shouldn't be used in case someone didn't know. Best wishes, Andrew On 27/02/2014, Dave Swarthout wrote: > I think the term "drinkable" might be more attractive because it is so > closely related to the term "drinking_water" — it's a logical extension of > the top level amenity tag: > amenity=drinking_water (drinkability=yes assumed) > to different water sources such as fountains, springs and water wells. > > Potable is an English word derived from Latin and its meaning is perhaps > not obvious to non-native English speakers whereas drinkable doesn't suffer > as much from that limitation. > > Regards, > Dave > > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Bryce Nesbitt > wrote: > >> "potable" seems a less ambiguous term. >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinking_water has tagging >> momentum. >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > > -- > Dave Swarthout > Homer, Alaska > Chiang Mai, Thailand > Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable
I think the term "drinkable" might be more attractive because it is so closely related to the term "drinking_water" — it's a logical extension of the top level amenity tag: amenity=drinking_water (drinkability=yes assumed) to different water sources such as fountains, springs and water wells. Potable is an English word derived from Latin and its meaning is perhaps not obvious to non-native English speakers whereas drinkable doesn't suffer as much from that limitation. Regards, Dave On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > "potable" seems a less ambiguous term. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinking_water has tagging > momentum. > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
2014-02-27 10:37 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout : > @Stephan: I like the coworking_space idea. It certainly fits the practice > at Punspace. > > >>IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key.<< > > @Stefano: Why do you think we should not use the amenity key? > Because it's overcrowded and office should suit better, as coworking are basically and most of the time offices ... :-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
We have them here in Korea. Students pay per month and use the room to study in. The main reason they exist is because of the dense housing here it's sometimes hard for students to get a quiet place to study. The ones I am talking about are not really co-working space. They are for middle- and high-school students. They are called study rooms. Best wishes, Andrew On 27/02/2014, Dave Swarthout wrote: > @Stephan: I like the coworking_space idea. It certainly fits the practice > at Punspace. > >>>IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key.<< > > @Stefano: Why do you think we should not use the amenity key? > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:50 PM, sabas88 wrote: > >> >> >> >> 2014-02-27 8:45 GMT+01:00 Stephan Knauss : >> >> On 27.02.2014 01:48, Dave Swarthout wrote: >>> @Martin, I'm not sure about the status of the books but that's not the prominent feature of this place. I will go back for more details later but it is definitely not a library. @Stephan - neither Punspace or Guru's Box are tagged. I brought that fact up during the meeting we had there and nobody had any ideas. Punspace is similar to the place I'm reporting here except it is not free and available for short term rental only. >>> >>> a while ago it was suggested to use office=coworking for coworking >>> places. with fee=yes/no you could also distinguish the free and paid >>> ones. >>> >>> In the co-working thread is sounded like office is the better key and >>> should be preferred over amenity. Still in February a wiki page for the >>> amenity key was created. >>> >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dcoworking_space >>> >>> >> Well, it wasn't approved so it should be moved to Proposed_Features >> space.. >> IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key. >> >> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013- >>> November/015668.html >>> >>> Taginfo: >>> Count Key Value >>> 48 amenity coworking_space >>> 15 office coworking >>> 6 office coworking_space >>> 2 amenity coworking_place >>> >>> >>> Stephan >>> >>> >> Regards, >> Stefano >> >>> >>> ___ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >> >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> > > > -- > Dave Swarthout > Homer, Alaska > Chiang Mai, Thailand > Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
I also disagree with standpipe, in UK usage a standpipe is an emergency source
of water provided for residents if mains water if off for some reason.
Phil (trigpoint)
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 27/02/2014 9:37 Georg Feddern wrote:
Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty:
> i'm currently tinkering with what will be come a proposal to modify
> current hydrant tagging.
>
> my thinking is to add
> fire_hydrant:water_source={main,pond,stream,standpipe}
> and deprecate fire_hydrant:type=pond
no objections except 'standpipe' - see below.
> then the issue is whether we want to modify fire_hydrant:type or
> replace it with a different tag altogether, say fire_hydrant:delivery
> if we keep type, should we replace pillar with plug or fire_plug or just
> let that go.
I would keep hydrant:type - because it is a physical type/design in my
opinion.
With hydrant:delivery I would not assume the physical type, sorry.
And I would keep type=pillar.
With fire_plug I - and I suppose many others - would assume "something
you can connect with or to".
And that are all hydrants in any design, it is too generic in my opinion.
Regarding standpipe:
I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to
underground hydrants.
So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, may
be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser.
Georg
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging
Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty:
i'm currently tinkering with what will be come a proposal to modify
current hydrant tagging.
my thinking is to add
fire_hydrant:water_source={main,pond,stream,standpipe}
and deprecate fire_hydrant:type=pond
no objections except 'standpipe' - see below.
then the issue is whether we want to modify fire_hydrant:type or
replace it with a different tag altogether, say fire_hydrant:delivery
if we keep type, should we replace pillar with plug or fire_plug or just
let that go.
I would keep hydrant:type - because it is a physical type/design in my
opinion.
With hydrant:delivery I would not assume the physical type, sorry.
And I would keep type=pillar.
With fire_plug I - and I suppose many others - would assume "something
you can connect with or to".
And that are all hydrants in any design, it is too generic in my opinion.
Regarding standpipe:
I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to
underground hydrants.
So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, may
be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser.
Georg
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
@Stephan: I like the coworking_space idea. It certainly fits the practice at Punspace. >>IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key.<< @Stefano: Why do you think we should not use the amenity key? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:50 PM, sabas88 wrote: > > > > 2014-02-27 8:45 GMT+01:00 Stephan Knauss : > > On 27.02.2014 01:48, Dave Swarthout wrote: >> >>> @Martin, I'm not sure about the status of the books but that's not the >>> prominent feature of this place. I will go back for more details later >>> but it is definitely not a library. >>> @Stephan - neither Punspace or Guru's Box are tagged. I brought that >>> fact up during the meeting we had there and nobody had any ideas. >>> Punspace is similar to the place I'm reporting here except it is not >>> free and available for short term rental only. >>> >> >> a while ago it was suggested to use office=coworking for coworking >> places. with fee=yes/no you could also distinguish the free and paid ones. >> >> In the co-working thread is sounded like office is the better key and >> should be preferred over amenity. Still in February a wiki page for the >> amenity key was created. >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dcoworking_space >> >> > Well, it wasn't approved so it should be moved to Proposed_Features space.. > IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key. > > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013- >> November/015668.html >> >> Taginfo: >> Count Key Value >> 48 amenity coworking_space >> 15 office coworking >> 6 office coworking_space >> 2 amenity coworking_place >> >> >> Stephan >> >> > Regards, > Stefano > >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
