[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Extended - amenity=boat_sharing
Hi everybody, As discussed in my earlier post, I think voting is important even for specific service tags to make them offical. Therefore, I extend the voting period for the boat_sharing proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing The idea is to replicate the same structure for boats as for cars. To indicate where you can pick up a shared boat you reserved. I expect that service providers will mostly deliver this information, but we should agree on the format. Thanks for voting. Nounours77 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] What is OSM: a base layer for individual maps, or a fully featured geobased information system?
Hi there, Not sure if this is the right place for this philosophical question. But starting from the comment of Brycenesbitt to my apartment-proposal I feel this will become yet another piece of unmaintanable data in OSM. and several comments I got on my boat_sharing proposal just use it, don't go through proposal process I think it's a important question. What do we define tags for? A) OSM is just a base layer We tag just for general features of the landscape, and maybe roads. This will make a beautiful map, which then can be used as a base layer, e.g. for a holiday-apartment renting agency, which than can render all there apartments from their own private database as an overlay on OSM base layer. = this will mean, we do not have to maintain the apartment info, nor has the provider to bother with OSM. This is much easier. But means that the information is only avaible on the agencies website, and thus there will be million places I have to look for the info. B) OSM as a fully featured geobased information system We see of OSM a a standalone, fully featured geobased information system. I can take the map in my pocket (like on the iPhone App PocketEarth, or OsmAnd), and will everywhere have any kind of information. I'm driving through a village, I like it, and I want to stay. So, where are the next nice holiday-apartments around me? Of course, this only works, if the data is maintained and current. But: I want OSM to get important enough that every service provider offering a service to a wide enough public is just forced in his own interest to publish it's data on OSM and keep it current. As a conclusion for us this means: Yes, we need a defined tagging (accepted proposal) for tourism=apartment, ifnot, never ever all service providers will put their apartment on OSM. And never the Apps like PocketEarth or OsmAnd will support to render it. I was advised by several persons that I should just use tourism=boat_sharing, and not bother about going through a proposal and voting process. BUT: I asked OsmAnd to render the tag, and the answer was - quite understandable: Only officially supported tags will be rendered. There we are again with the well know snake which bites it's tail: No data - no rendering. No rendering, nobody collects data or publishes it on OSM. My answer to this would be: make a reasonable, understandable, clear and clean tagging scheme, discuss it, vote it, document it. If done properly, the data will come and the rendering as well. Please, what is your vision of OSM? A or B? If A, I will stop bothering about tourism=apartment, amenity=boat_sharing, or amenity=nursery, since this are all service informations you can argue you can find somewhere else ... But if it's B), then we need all that to make OSM the best, most complete and inevitable geobased information system. Thanks for your comments, and yes, I reopened the boat_sharing proposal for voting, just in case somebody wants to support me!!! Have a nice week-end, Nounours77 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apartment ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Extended - amenity=boat_sharing
On 29/03/2014 12:41, nounours77 wrote: As discussed in my earlier post, I think voting is important even for specific service tags to make them offical. Not really - OSM doesn't have official tags. It has commonly used ones, and people agree not to use the same tag to mean different things, but a lack of interest in a proposal is a pretty good indicator that, er, no one is actually interested. If you think that something is important enough to be mapped, then map it! If you think people are using different tags to express what is essentially the same concept, discuss it with those people to see if it is the same concept or if there are nuances that anyone is missing. Please don't expect people who have no knowledge of the real-world concept that you're trying to capture to be able to offer a useful opinion. Re the comments in your parent message: Please, what is your vision of OSM? A or B? It's neither. It's a big pile of data, which contains things that everyone and no-one are interested, but which are _verifiable_. It's easy to combine that data with other data, both on the fly in an application or statically beforehand. Re OsmAnd, if you want an OsmAnd map to contain your tag, then simply make your own maps containing that tag: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OsmAnd#Create_your_own_maps (from the contents section at the top of the first page of the OsmAnd wiki) There are as many potential maps as mappers - please don't be discouraged that a majority of the extremely broad range of OSM mappers don't find some niche feature relevant, as that's true of almost all of the long tail of tags that differentiates OSM from top-down-mandated alternatives such as Google et al. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Post-voting-clean-up: help needed.
hi there, sorry for bothering. I tried to do the post-voting-clean-up on tourism=apartment. I changed the status for the proposal page to accepted, a created a new tag page [1] I thought this will then magically appear in the tourism [2] and the map features [3] page, since both of them seem not to be maintained by hand. But it does not. I used the templates etc. and tried to do as the other pages - but they are listed and mine not. I search a lot, but could not find a clue??? Am I overseeing something obvious??? Thanks for help! nounours77 [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dapartment [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Map_Features ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] What is OSM: a base layer for individual maps, or a fully featured geobased information system?
I am in the B category for my vision of OSM. I had not voted on these because they aren't important to me and i will never probably use either tag but the work you've done is good and I just now voted Yes on both. While I was reading through the table of possible tourism=*_hut I noticed that you mentioned mountain_hut several times but it was not originally included in the table. I assumed you meant to say alpine_hut and edited the proposal replacing mountain_hut with alpine_hut. I am new to this and after the fact, realized I should have brought it up here first. Then thinking I'd better backtrack and undo my edits, I checked with Taginfo and found that mountain_hut is used 7 times — not very often but it is there. So I took the further liberty of adding it to the list of keys in the table. My apologies if I was out of line. But my discovery does point out the need to somehow better define what these accommodations are and unify the ones we can agree need to be unified. Those various types of huts need to be either better differentiated or if that can't be done, put together under fewer keys. I also agree that the differences between a hotel, hostel, guest_house, and motel are perhaps to fine to worry about. More work ahead Alaska Dave On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:41 PM, nounours77 kuessemondtaegl...@gmail.comwrote: Hi there, Not sure if this is the right place for this philosophical question. But starting from the comment of Brycenesbitthttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Brycenesbitt to my apartment-proposal *I feel this will become yet another piece of unmaintanable data in OSM. *and several comments I got on my boat_sharing proposal *just use it, don't go through proposal process* I think it's a important question. What do we define tags for? *A) OSM is just a base layer* We tag just for general features of the landscape, and maybe roads. This will make a beautiful map, which then can be used as a base layer, e.g. for a holiday-apartment renting agency, which than can render all there apartments from their own private database as an overlay on OSM base layer. = this will mean, we do not have to maintain the apartment info, nor has the provider to bother with OSM. This is much easier. But means that the information is only avaible on the agencies website, and thus there will be million places I have to look for the info. *B) OSM as a fully featured geobased information system* We see of OSM a a standalone, fully featured geobased information system. I can take the map in my pocket (like on the iPhone App PocketEarth, or OsmAnd), and will everywhere have any kind of information. I'm driving through a village, I like it, and I want to stay. So, where are the next nice holiday-apartments around me? Of course, this only works, if the data is maintained and current. But: I want OSM to get important enough that every service provider offering a service to a wide enough public is just forced in his own interest to publish it's data on OSM and keep it current. As a conclusion for us this means: Yes, we need a defined tagging (accepted proposal) for tourism=apartment, ifnot, never ever all service providers will put their apartment on OSM. And never the Apps like PocketEarth or OsmAnd will support to render it. I was advised by several persons that I should just use tourism=boat_sharing, and not bother about going through a proposal and voting process. BUT: I asked OsmAnd to render the tag, and the answer was - quite understandable: *Only officially supported tags will be rendered*. There we are again with the well know snake which bites it's tail: No data - no rendering. No rendering, nobody collects data or publishes it on OSM. My answer to this would be: make a reasonable, understandable, clear and clean tagging scheme, discuss it, vote it, document it. If done properly, the data will come and the rendering as well. Please, what is your vision of OSM? A or B? If A, I will stop bothering about tourism=apartment, amenity=boat_sharing, or amenity=nursery, since this are all service informations you can argue you can find somewhere else ... But if it's B), then we need all that to make OSM the best, most complete and inevitable geobased information system. Thanks for your comments, and yes, I reopened the boat_sharing proposal for voting, just in case somebody wants to support me!!! Have a nice week-end, Nounours77 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apartment ___ 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] What is OSM: a base layer for individual maps, or a fully featured geobased information system?
Hi - I'm afraid the answer is neither. OSM is a database for geodata that is open-licensed, publicly verifiable and not short-term. This means it's more than just a base-layer. But it also means it's not a database for all possible geodata. We don't include holiday apartment reviews/ratings because they're too subjective; we don't include the local temperature because it changes too quickly. You're going to have to live with the fact that (a) no-one wants to render your tag until it has some momentum, while (b) rendering certainly helps a tag get momentum, but that doesn't mean that your tag deserves that benefit yet. Much better is if you start using your tag, and then maybe the community of boat-sharing users starts to use it too, and maybe renders a special boat-sharing map, and the tagging develops organically. It doesn't make a big difference whether it's been officially voted in or not. There will always be geodata that doesn't belong in OSM, such as house prices, tripadvisor ratings, crime rates. OSM doesn't need to ingest this data in order to be useful; it needs to be available to get mashed-up with this data. Best Dan 2014-03-29 12:41 GMT+00:00 nounours77 kuessemondtaegl...@gmail.com: Hi there, Not sure if this is the right place for this philosophical question. But starting from the comment of Brycenesbitt to my apartment-proposal I feel this will become yet another piece of unmaintanable data in OSM. and several comments I got on my boat_sharing proposal just use it, don't go through proposal process I think it's a important question. What do we define tags for? A) OSM is just a base layer We tag just for general features of the landscape, and maybe roads. This will make a beautiful map, which then can be used as a base layer, e.g. for a holiday-apartment renting agency, which than can render all there apartments from their own private database as an overlay on OSM base layer. = this will mean, we do not have to maintain the apartment info, nor has the provider to bother with OSM. This is much easier. But means that the information is only avaible on the agencies website, and thus there will be million places I have to look for the info. B) OSM as a fully featured geobased information system We see of OSM a a standalone, fully featured geobased information system. I can take the map in my pocket (like on the iPhone App PocketEarth, or OsmAnd), and will everywhere have any kind of information. I'm driving through a village, I like it, and I want to stay. So, where are the next nice holiday-apartments around me? Of course, this only works, if the data is maintained and current. But: I want OSM to get important enough that every service provider offering a service to a wide enough public is just forced in his own interest to publish it's data on OSM and keep it current. As a conclusion for us this means: Yes, we need a defined tagging (accepted proposal) for tourism=apartment, ifnot, never ever all service providers will put their apartment on OSM. And never the Apps like PocketEarth or OsmAnd will support to render it. I was advised by several persons that I should just use tourism=boat_sharing, and not bother about going through a proposal and voting process. BUT: I asked OsmAnd to render the tag, and the answer was - quite understandable: Only officially supported tags will be rendered. There we are again with the well know snake which bites it's tail: No data - no rendering. No rendering, nobody collects data or publishes it on OSM. My answer to this would be: make a reasonable, understandable, clear and clean tagging scheme, discuss it, vote it, document it. If done properly, the data will come and the rendering as well. Please, what is your vision of OSM? A or B? If A, I will stop bothering about tourism=apartment, amenity=boat_sharing, or amenity=nursery, since this are all service informations you can argue you can find somewhere else ... But if it's B), then we need all that to make OSM the best, most complete and inevitable geobased information system. Thanks for your comments, and yes, I reopened the boat_sharing proposal for voting, just in case somebody wants to support me!!! Have a nice week-end, Nounours77 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apartment ___ 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] Post-voting-clean-up: help needed.
Personally I don't think it's obvious how to add/edit itens in pages like *Map Features*. For example, to edit the Tourism section, you have to go to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:tourism and *repeat* the information about the tag, such as which objects it can be applied to, description, photo, etc. (but using a different syntax) I have no idea why we have to repeat such information there instead of simply adding a reference. I wouldn't be surprised if some of this data is outdated. 2014-03-29 10:20 GMT-03:00 nounours77 kuessemondtaegl...@gmail.com: hi there, sorry for bothering. I tried to do the post-voting-clean-up on tourism=apartment. I changed the status for the proposal page to accepted, a created a new tag page [1] I thought this will then magically appear in the tourism [2] and the map features [3] page, since both of them seem not to be maintained by hand. But it does not. I used the templates etc. and tried to do as the other pages - but they are listed and mine not. I search a lot, but could not find a clue??? Am I overseeing something obvious??? Thanks for help! nounours77 [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dapartment [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tourism [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Map_Features ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Coastline-River transit placement
Hello, i put up a proposal for specifying somewhat tighter limits on where to place the transit between the coastline and the riverbank polygon at the mouth of a river: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Coastline-River_transit_placement Currently there are essentially no rules at all on this matter and it appears to me this is not really helpful for mappers. Cases of extreme placement are rare but when they occur they often have a high impact since they involve large scale features usually prominently shown in maps. The limits i drafted are fairly loose and should cover most opinions on where the transit should best be placed in individual cases. I do this as a proposal since it at least formally affects the meaning of an existing tag although practically there would only be very few places where changes would need to be made to comply with it. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Driving side
I removed the value opposite from the page. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:driving_sideoldid=1008962 2014-03-28 19:27 GMT-03:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de: On 27.03.2014 16:11, Pieren wrote: But you force the QA tools to search and load country relations even if they just have to check locally a way. This is not a problem for tools like osmose or keepright but it is a problem for tools like JOSM validator. There are other reasons why JOSM and its plugins should ideally have access to the driving_side (implicit or explicit) of each way anyway. Other functionality affected by it includes the Lanes Details style and the Turn Lanes plugin. And this functionality is not made easier by the new value. Introducing a value just for the sake of one test case within a subset of the available validators isn't worth it imo, especially as it only detects unnecessary rather than wrong data. ___ 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] fundamental structured tagging principles (was: ... amenity=boat_sharing)
On 2014-03-29 13:41, nounours77 wrote : Hi everybody, As discussed in my earlier post, I think voting is important even for specific service tags to make them offical. Therefore, I extend the voting period for the boat_sharing proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boat_sharing The idea is to replicate the same structure for boats as for cars. To indicate where you can pick up a shared boat you reserved. I expect that service providers will mostly deliver this information, but we should agree on the format. Don't believe those who advocate lack of coordination and chaos, they might be paid by Google ;-) Go ahead with your standardizations! Nice to vote. But I think that general principles must be respected. A more structured approach might me more rewarding. A map feature must be made of an object having attributes. An object is the more generally a building=yes or a shack=yes, an open place or whatever physical (meadow, forest, landuse, tower, ...): it is what is represented by the node, way or relation and that needs to be rendered on the map. amenity, shop, rental, hairdresser etc... are not objects but the activity or other attribute taking place at the object. There can be several attributes (e.g. shop and rental activities) for the same object, not no two objects for the same map feature. As discussed before, a building may be both a castle (château) and a hotel. I have recommended that the wiki should clearly classify objects and attributes. People have advocated that the street number is the object and that the house (and roof) are the attributes of the number. This is of course nonsense. The object is what is represented by the map node, way or relation and that is a house or land ... One may be interested in building a view (in SQL sense) by street number key, but that does not make a closed way a number. Or several numbers being represented by the same closed way. Well known objects have a well known rendering, which solves the problem of those complaining that amenity=their_invention is not rendered. building=yes must always be rendered and it may be rendered differently according to its attributes, e.g. amenity. In practice, amenity, for example, is all-right, but it should not be considered a mistake but rather a requirement to add building or meadow or landuse, an object to it. Semi-colon value separator http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolonexplains that what;some;taggers;are;doing and that talking about it here are sins. I'm nut sure I agree, but it suggests namespaces: a good idea because it's more general and because it's already used. So, we can have: building=yes and shop=goods1;goods2 or shop:goods1=yes shop:goods2=yes So, for your boat business, we would have things like: building=yes | wharf=yes | whatever rental:kayak=yes rental:life-jacket=yes shop:life-jacket=yes (rent or buy) rental:boat=yes rental:boat:capacity=10 sharing:boat=yes sharing:boat:capacity=2 or sharing:boat:1:capacity=2 sharing:boat:2:capacity=4 shop=yes (used alone for surprise selling) and, of course, not excluding sharing:car=yes and the beat goes on... rental:opening-hours=* shop:opening-hours=* shop:русский:матрёшки=many So, regarding your 1-2-3 choice, I think that # 3 is the good direction. Please note that, regarding searches, shop, rental, boat, car, ... are different words. One may search for rental = anything to rent or car = any way to use a car or car rental or car sharing specifically. life-jacket, on contrast, is a single word. Tags like car_rental, car_pooling, boat_rental etc... are annoying because they multiply the same kind of wiki pages and propositions. For example, I need tags to indicate places where subscribed pedestrians can stop a subscribed car). Do I really need to create a new car_riding_on_subscription page, nobody would discuss that and I understand, or would the following two riding:*, very agreeable additions to that general framework suffice: Logically, following that and one's reasoning: post=yes (or stop-sign=yes, or whatever (to be discussed), that's the map feature where the service takes place) get-a-vehicle=yes (if felt needed, generic term for all those kinds of activities, term off my improvable invention) riding:car=yes riding:car:subscription=yes I would love to see you propose this general framework allowing your boats as well as my kayaks and car riding. As well as Trains and boats and planes to Paris or Rome with Billy and Dionne :-) I think you would be heard. Hoping this can help, ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Coastline-River transit placement
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 03:44:17PM +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote: Hello, i put up a proposal for specifying somewhat tighter limits on where to place the transit between the coastline and the riverbank polygon at the mouth of a river: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Coastline-River_transit_placement Currently there are essentially no rules at all on this matter and it appears to me this is not really helpful for mappers. Cases of extreme placement are rare but when they occur they often have a high impact since they involve large scale features usually prominently shown in maps. The limits i drafted are fairly loose and should cover most opinions on where the transit should best be placed in individual cases. looks a bit complex and still doesn't mention some issues which might be important as well: * coastline is foremost a geographical shape, so whatever the reasoning the results should be so that the coastline looks intuitive * this shape is used in special ways by some tools and renderers so we should keep an eye on that * coastline should be somewhere in the brackish water separating freshwater and saltwater * if part of the rationale is to determine whether some city is on the coast than that would typically be better defined by harbor or other properties. Any such application will require a more fine-grained approach anyway. Is there a harbor? Can I swim or surf there? Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Coastline-River transit placement
On 29/03/2014 20:29, Richard Z. wrote: Currently there are essentially no rules at all on this matter Nor will there ever be. OSM mappers are free spirits! ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Coastline-River transit placement
On Saturday 29 March 2014, Richard Z. wrote: [...] * if part of the rationale is to determine whether some city is on the coast than that would typically be better defined by harbor or other properties. Any such application will require a more fine-grained approach anyway. Is there a harbor? Can I swim or surf there? This was meant as an example - i did not specifically have this application in mind. Using the coastline to determine the distance of some object to the coast would be equally suited. The point i am trying to make is that for applications other than map rendering consistent placement of the coastline-river transit is important as well. Using water salinity as a criterion will not work since there often is no continuous transit from freshwater to saltwater but a layering with freshwater on top and the heavier saltwater below. Apart from that fast flowing rivers can reduce the salinity quite far out into the ocean. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
