Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: To leave a tag that describes it as a pub (when it is not) then add another tag that says it is not a pub is plain daft. +1 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:20:10 -0700 Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Yes, [amenity=hotel, involuntary=yes] is a poor way to tag prison in the same yes as using [shop=convenience; disused=yes] is a poor way to tag something where only remains of shop are present and it is impossible to buy anything. This type of trolltags is really irritating - and in general it is a tagging for renderer to force data consumers to process objects that are no longer existing. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Shop vs amenity
On Aug 26, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: So ALL shops should all be together under shops= (even though all shops are in fact amenities too). Same for offices. This reduces the amenity= values to those that are not offices nor shops. I think the easiest way to define a shop is a retail building where customers go for goods and services. Retail includes service - you buy service at the location. A shoe shop or a shoe repair shop are both shops, and both deal with people who need new shoes or shoes repaired. shop is a shortening of retail shop. If we started over, I would rather use retail=* instead of shop=*. This might be a good solution to go about migrating people to the new system - use retail=* instead of shop=* landuse=retail building=retail shop=* (retail=*) There are plenty of businesses where people no not expect customers. My friend is an electrical engineer. He inspects factories for electrical problems. he has a small office. It is not a shop, but an office. Even big office buildings for lawyers are the same - An office will occasionally have visitors, but an office is not setup for serving customers, it caters to the tenants who use it for getting work done, even if that is client work. This is the big difference between a retail building and an office building - Apple HQ vs an Apple Store. there are visitors, clients, contractors, and fanboys visiting apple HQ all day. but the building’s purpose is for allowing the employees to do their job, not serve the people walking in with goods and services. that is the opposite in the retail stores. A craftsperson usually has a facility where they practice their craft, which is usually not a retail facility. I know we have a whole bunch of craft= for that. Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] diplomatic institutions (with tl;dr)
Take a look at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process --K On 26 August 2015 at 13:10, serpens-...@gmx.de wrote: What is the best way to bring this on a formal way to an official tag? Is wiki:Proposed_features the right place (it is partly about changing existing tags not only about new tags)? Where takes a vote place about this? Best Serpens Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. August 2015 um 14:21 Uhr Von: serpens-...@gmx.de An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: [Tagging] diplomatic institutions (with tl;dr) Short introduction: Let’s take the tagging scheme „fuel“ for example: amenity=fuel fuel:diesel=yes/no fuel:discount=discount programme … This is logical and consistent: amenity=xy and then a namespace xy:subkey=Tag --- Now to my topic: diplomatic institution – like an embassy, a consulate, ambassador’s residence, honorary consulate, consulate general, delegation, high commission, permanent mission, (permanent) representation etc. We have amenity=embassy since long time. Some of these are tagged on top with the (relatively new) key „diplomatic“ too – a very useful key. --- So I have two suggestions: *FIRST* Change amenity=embassy to amenity=diplomatic (this is more consistent and logical, analog to amenity=fuel etc.) or whatever=diplomatic. But please not the too specific „amenity=embassy“ – how could I explain a new mapper to tag a non-embassy (like a consulate) as „amenity=embassy“. for this, see also proposed features: - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Embassy (and „talk“ page there) --- Besides the tagging of the type of diplomatic institution it is super useful to tag a machine-readable country code (at least for the sending country). This is done so far via country=country code. This is not the best solution because there are very often misunderstandings – which country? The sending country or the destination (hosting) country? Sometimes target=country code is used for the destination (hosting / „targeted“) country. My *SECOND* suggestion: diplomatic:sending=ES --- machine-readable ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code diplomatic:destination=FR --- -- -- It could be also diplomatic:destination_country or diplomatic:target or something like this. The destination country is not always identical with addr:country – see for example the embassy of Ethiopia in Berlin (destination countries: Germany, Poland, Slovak Republic and Czech Republic), see http://aethiopien-botschaft.de/ for this, see also my osm blog (about tagging country codes on embassies etc.): - state 2009: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/5734 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/9082 - state 2015: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/28350 --- Because English is not my first language: Dear native speakers, please check if this is correct (sending country / destination country?). Taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=embassy http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/diplomatic http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/country http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/target Best serpens --- tl;dr (sorry for the long post!): Example (Spanish consulate in France – CURRENT STATE): amenity=embassy--- „oh, look, it’s an embassy!“ diplomatic=consulate --- contradiction: „uhm, wait, no. it’s a consulate.“ country=ES --- often misunderstood as „addr:country“ name=Spanish consulate addr:country=FR … Example (Spanish consulate in France – MY PROPOSAL): amenity=diplomatic --- it’s a diplomatic institution diplomatic:type=consulate --- more specififc: it’s a consulate diplomatic:sending=ES --- machine-readable ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code diplomatic:destination=FR --- -- -- name=Spanish consulate addr:country=FR … ___ 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 mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 09:49:07PM +0100, Chris Hill wrote: On 24/08/15 18:56, François Lacombe wrote: Hi Mateusz, It seems this tag is a combination of waterway=canal and disused=yes. I'm not so in favor of such value (derelict_canal). There are two different information in one value. I think that 'disused=yes' is a dangerous tag and should be avoided. indeed, in most cases the key prefix disused: causes less trouble http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
Wednesday 26 August 2015 21:04:47, Andrew Errington: Curiously, the disadvantages of disused=yes seem rather contrived, and not really likely, whereas the disadvantages of disused:*=* seem quite genuine. Not to mention that disused=yes is simpler, and very obvious to a human reader. You're kidding, right? To me it's clear that disused:*=* is better for things that are no longer what they were, e.g. disused:shop=* If however you want to map a canal where the water is still present, I'm fine with waterway=canal, disused=yes since the feature is still a canal, even though it's no longer used. -- The field from of an email is about as reliable as the address written on the back of an envelope. That's why this message is OpenPGP signed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] diplomatic institutions (with tl;dr)
What is the best way to bring this on a formal way to an official tag? Is wiki:Proposed_features the right place (it is partly about changing existing tags not only about new tags)? Where takes a vote place about this? Best Serpens Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. August 2015 um 14:21 Uhr Von: serpens-...@gmx.de An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: [Tagging] diplomatic institutions (with tl;dr) Short introduction: Let’s take the tagging scheme „fuel“ for example: amenity=fuel fuel:diesel=yes/no fuel:discount=discount programme … This is logical and consistent: amenity=xy and then a namespace xy:subkey=Tag --- Now to my topic: diplomatic institution – like an embassy, a consulate, ambassador’s residence, honorary consulate, consulate general, delegation, high commission, permanent mission, (permanent) representation etc. We have amenity=embassy since long time. Some of these are tagged on top with the (relatively new) key „diplomatic“ too – a very useful key. --- So I have two suggestions: *FIRST* Change amenity=embassy to amenity=diplomatic (this is more consistent and logical, analog to amenity=fuel etc.) or whatever=diplomatic. But please not the too specific „amenity=embassy“ – how could I explain a new mapper to tag a non-embassy (like a consulate) as „amenity=embassy“. for this, see also proposed features: - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Embassy (and „talk“ page there) --- Besides the tagging of the type of diplomatic institution it is super useful to tag a machine-readable country code (at least for the sending country). This is done so far via country=country code. This is not the best solution because there are very often misunderstandings – which country? The sending country or the destination (hosting) country? Sometimes target=country code is used for the destination (hosting / „targeted“) country. My *SECOND* suggestion: diplomatic:sending=ES --- machine-readable ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code diplomatic:destination=FR --- -- -- It could be also diplomatic:destination_country or diplomatic:target or something like this. The destination country is not always identical with addr:country – see for example the embassy of Ethiopia in Berlin (destination countries: Germany, Poland, Slovak Republic and Czech Republic), see http://aethiopien-botschaft.de/ for this, see also my osm blog (about tagging country codes on embassies etc.): - state 2009: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/5734 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/9082 - state 2015: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Serpens/diary/28350 --- Because English is not my first language: Dear native speakers, please check if this is correct (sending country / destination country?). Taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=embassy http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/diplomatic http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/country http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/target Best serpens --- tl;dr (sorry for the long post!): Example (Spanish consulate in France – CURRENT STATE): amenity=embassy--- „oh, look, it’s an embassy!“ diplomatic=consulate --- contradiction: „uhm, wait, no. it’s a consulate.“ country=ES --- often misunderstood as „addr:country“ name=Spanish consulate addr:country=FR … Example (Spanish consulate in France – MY PROPOSAL): amenity=diplomatic --- it’s a diplomatic institution diplomatic:type=consulate --- more specififc: it’s a consulate diplomatic:sending=ES --- machine-readable ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code diplomatic:destination=FR --- -- -- name=Spanish consulate addr:country=FR … ___ 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] waterway=derelict_canal
On 26/08/2015, Richard ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:23:10PM +1000, Warin wrote: On 26/08/2015 8:20 AM, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Your choice to use what you want. The mappers chose to use tags that reflect what is, was or will be. As they want. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts Curiously, the disadvantages of disused=yes seem rather contrived, and not really likely, whereas the disadvantages of disused:*=* seem quite genuine. Not to mention that disused=yes is simpler, and very obvious to a human reader. Andrew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
Wednesday 26 August 2015 12:51:22, Dave F.: Sub tags such as disused=yes have always been the way to describe additional attributes of an entity. It's even the syntax used by XML: you collect all 'waterway=canal' items then manipulate that selection set. If programmers don't notice then, quite simply, they're not very good at they're job. The point is that a disused shop is no longer a shop: A shop is a place you can go to to buy stuff or services. If the shop has closed, it's effectively not a shop any more and no longer of interest to most data users. -- The field from of an email is about as reliable as the address written on the back of an envelope. That's why this message is OpenPGP signed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 26/08/2015 12:51, Dave F. wrote: Sub tags such as disused=yes have always been the way to describe additional attributes of an entity. It's even the syntax used by XML: you collect all 'waterway=canal' items then manipulate that selection set. If programmers don't notice then, quite simply, they're not very good at they're job. I look forward to your modifications to the OSM Carto (and other) stylesheets to add handling for disused=yes throughout then. :) Your use of always above simply isn't borne out by the facts. I personally have always tried to tag former things in a way that's appropriate to their current status, and that _might_ be disused=yes (as discussed in the thread above) but it might also be disused:foo=bar, or it might be delete the tag entirely, while trying to keep some link to history (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/364520111/history for an example). Cheers, Andy (SomeoneElse) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 25/08/2015 23:20, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Sub tags give *extra* data about an entity. A pub that's closed down it's still recognisable as a pub. It's not a park bench or a multi-storey car park. It's just closed. This should be described in sub tags. Similarly a canal that's derelict hasn't morphed into an airplane runway. Use sub tags to describe its condition. Expecting mappers to change tagging because renderers are unwilling to add a few lines of code is the tail wagging the dog we don't want to encourage that. Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 24/08/2015 21:49, Chris Hill wrote: On 24/08/15 18:56, François Lacombe wrote: Hi Mateusz, It seems this tag is a combination of waterway=canal and disused=yes. I'm not so in favor of such value (derelict_canal). There are two different information in one value. I think that 'disused=yes' is a dangerous tag and should be avoided. Suppose someone uses foo=bar + disused=yes. Someone else searches for foo=bar, he will find the objects with and without disused=yes. If he doesn't notice he will treat the disused the same as the active objects. Sub tags such as disused=yes have always been the way to describe additional attributes of an entity. It's even the syntax used by XML: you collect all 'waterway=canal' items then manipulate that selection set. If programmers don't notice then, quite simply, they're not very good at they're job. An example of where the non use of sub tags lead to confusion is tree coverage: natural=wood v. landuse=forest to distinguish between trees that are 'managed' has led to misuse as can be seen in their wiki pages: All tree coverage should be a single primary tag any attributes described in sub tags managed=yes. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:23:10PM +1000, Warin wrote: On 26/08/2015 8:20 AM, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Your choice to use what you want. The mappers chose to use tags that reflect what is, was or will be. As they want. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 26/08/2015 13:44, Dave F. wrote: On 25/08/2015 23:20, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Sub tags give *extra* data about an entity. A pub that's closed down it's still recognisable as a pub. Not by someone who wants a beer, it can't! ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 26/08/2015 13:34, Andy Townsend wrote: On 26/08/2015 12:51, Dave F. wrote: Sub tags such as disused=yes have always been the way to describe additional attributes of an entity. It's even the syntax used by XML: you collect all 'waterway=canal' items then manipulate that selection set. If programmers don't notice then, quite simply, they're not very good at they're job. I look forward to your modifications to the OSM Carto (and other) stylesheets to add handling for disused=yes throughout then. :) Please see my other reply in this thread. Your use of always above simply isn't borne out by the facts. Apologies, I overstated my point. Since 2009? I personally have always tried to tag former things in a way that's appropriate to their current status, and that _might_ be disused=yes (as discussed in the thread above) but it might also be disused:foo=bar, or it might be delete the tag entirely, while trying to keep some link to history (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/364520111/history for an example). To repeat my other reply a bit a closed pub is still often recognisable as a pub even if you can't buy a beer there. With the current UK market it could stay that way for months before either reopening or converted to 'affordable' housing, in which case, change the tags. disused:foo=bar how far do you go with that format? If sub tags are not to be used do we put all data to the primary? It could get very long. btw shouldn't it be foo=disused:bar? Ta Dave F. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 26/08/15 13:44, Dave F. wrote: A pub that's closed down it's still recognisable as a pub. It's not a park bench or a multi-storey car park. It's just closed. This should be described in sub tags. No, a pub that is closed is simply not open for business until it reopens the next day. A pub that is disused is no longer a pub. It may become a pub again in the future but for now it is not a pub. The services that a pub provides are no longer available at that place. As a pub it has ceased to be. In short: it is an ex-pub. To leave a tag that describes it as a pub (when it is not) then add another tag that says it is not a pub is plain daft. Changing it's tagging to show it is no longer a pub, such as disused:amenity=pub is distinctly showing that it is no longer a pub even though it might superficially look like one. Now I need a beer. -- Cheers, Chris user: chillly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal
On 8/26/15 8:55 AM, Andy Townsend wrote: On 26/08/2015 13:44, Dave F. wrote: On 25/08/2015 23:20, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule! Fortunately, we will not have to do that in OpenStreetMap Carto, as we will not be supporting the style of tagging where one tag says what something is, then another tag saying it's not really that, but used to be, or will be. We do not want to encourage the use of disused=yes, abandoned=yes, or similar tags. Sub tags give *extra* data about an entity. A pub that's closed down it's still recognisable as a pub. Not by someone who wants a beer, it can't! we have a disused namespace for this sort of thing. it relieves the carto developers of having to check disused=yes; the data is in the db but it doesn't mess with the default rendering. if people want to render disused pubs, the data is there and they can use it. of course if the pub is torn down then it should move to OHM if it's of genuine historic significance. 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
