Re: [Tagging] Railway: Preserved or historic or railway:preserved?

[Volker Schmidt]

Any active passenger railway is, among other usages, for tourism. So
usage=tourism seems to be redundant.

On 12 Apr 2017 00:15, "Wolfgang Zenker"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm not a railway expert, but like to comment anyway.
>
> * Dave F  [170411 23:41]:
> > I've a length of railway track that runs along part of a disused line.
> > It's not connected to the current network & run purely for tourism.
>
> Well, the track IS operated, so the fact that it used to be part of
> a larger network is less important than its current condition.
> So I would tag the track railway=rail with the usual additional
> tags for name, operator, gauge etc.
> It is used purely for tourism, so usage=tourism would be added.
> Now I would look at the inventory of that line: Do they still use
> historic equipment, maybe from the time when this used to be part of a
> larger network? If so, historic=railway would be tagged. Are the tracks
> and signaling still preserved from the days of the old network or have
> they been renewed with current equipment? If preserved, add
> railway:preserved=yes.
>
> Wolfgang
> (lyx@osm)
>
> ___
> 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 - historic=tombstone

[Michal Fabík]

On 10 April 2017 23:27:36 CEST, Martin Koppenhoefer  
wrote:
>2017-04-10 22:55 GMT+02:00 Michal Fabík :
>
>> Definition: use this tag for prominent tombstones
>
>
>
>I would not put "prominent" in the definition, otherwise the question
>will
>be: how can we tag a non-prominent tombstone?
>
>Cheers,
>Martin

Fixed, thanks. I was a little woried about making the definition too general.
-- 
Michal Fabík
Sent from a mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Railway: Preserved or historic or railway:preserved?

[Wolfgang Zenker]

Hi,

I'm not a railway expert, but like to comment anyway.

* Dave F  [170411 23:41]:
> I've a length of railway track that runs along part of a disused line. 
> It's not connected to the current network & run purely for tourism.

Well, the track IS operated, so the fact that it used to be part of
a larger network is less important than its current condition.
So I would tag the track railway=rail with the usual additional
tags for name, operator, gauge etc.
It is used purely for tourism, so usage=tourism would be added.
Now I would look at the inventory of that line: Do they still use
historic equipment, maybe from the time when this used to be part of a
larger network? If so, historic=railway would be tagged. Are the tracks
and signaling still preserved from the days of the old network or have
they been renewed with current equipment? If preserved, add
railway:preserved=yes.

Wolfgang
(lyx@osm)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Railway: Preserved or historic or railway:preserved?

[Dave F]

Hi
I'm confused.

I've a length of railway track that runs along part of a disused line. 
It's not connected to the current network & run purely for tourism.


Both KeepRight & Osmose flag an error for 'railway=preserved' tags:
"This way uses deprecated tag 'railway=preserved'. Please use 
"historic=railway + railway=rail (or whatever type) + 
railway:preserved=yes" instead!"


Apart from those recommendations being listed in reverse order of 
importance, it appears to contradict with a few wiki pages:


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railways says 'railway=preserved' is 
still OK to use.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dpreserved says 
'railway=preserved' is not really liked (note: it doesn't mention 
'historic=railway')


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging says 
'railway:preserved' should be used but note it says 'historic=railway' 
"Should be used in conjunction with |railway=disused|, 
|railway=abandoned|, and |railway=razed"| which contradicts 
KeepRight/Osmose.



Any railway experts able to clarify?

Thanks
DaveF






---
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] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Lorenzo "Beba" Beltrami]

2017-04-11 16:39 GMT+02:00 Michal Fabík :

> But then some information will always be lost. If a restaurant is tagged
> with alcohol=bring_your_own, can I still order a beer there? If it's tagged
> with alcohol=yes, can I bring my own wine? Does alcohol=no mean "no alcohol
> sold" or "no alcohol tolerated"?
> Regards,
>
+1
Here in Italy is pretty common that you can bring your wine at the
restaurant and they chill and serve your own wine to you.
And this happen in restaurants that sell wine or alcohol.

Another specific tag is needed to clarify this wider combination.

Something like:
bottle_service=yes/no/corkage_fee (if the restaurant charge a fee)

or

bottle_service=yes/no
+ bottle_service:fee=yes/no

Lorenzo
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Michal Fabík]

But then some information will always be lost. If a restaurant is tagged
with alcohol=bring_your_own, can I still order a beer there? If it's tagged
with alcohol=yes, can I bring my own wine? Does alcohol=no mean "no alcohol
sold" or "no alcohol tolerated"?
Regards,

-- 
Michal Fabík

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dave F  wrote:

> Indeed. It's an Indian establishment & I'm pretty sure it's based on
> religious grounds.
>
> I think this tag needs to be a generic indicator of their services rather
> than a subset of cuisine, so alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own covers it.
>
> DaveF
>
>
> On 11/04/2017 12:46, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 20:00 +0900, John Willis wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, althio  wrote:

 My ideas are about:
 alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
 wine=yes/no/bring_your_own

>>> +1
>>>   Perhaps alcohol:wine=*   ?
>>>
>> That is getting a little into listing what a restaurant sells.
>>
>> There is a term 'corkage' which is where a 'posh' restaurant allows you
>> to take your own drinks, but charges a fee. I do not think that is what
>> Dave was refering to, I suspect he is mapping a Balti where the owners
>> will not sell, or profit from, alcohol but do not mind customers taking
>> their own.
>>
>> The term 'bring your own booze' is a well established one.
>>
>> I would be happy with
>> alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_ownalcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own.
>>
>> Phil (trigpoint)
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Dave F]

Indeed. It's an Indian establishment & I'm pretty sure it's based on 
religious grounds.


I think this tag needs to be a generic indicator of their services 
rather than a subset of cuisine, so alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own covers it.


DaveF

On 11/04/2017 12:46, Philip Barnes wrote:

On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 20:00 +0900, John Willis wrote:

On Apr 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, althio  wrote:

My ideas are about:
alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
wine=yes/no/bring_your_own

+1
  
Perhaps alcohol:wine=*   ?

That is getting a little into listing what a restaurant sells.

There is a term 'corkage' which is where a 'posh' restaurant allows you
to take your own drinks, but charges a fee. I do not think that is what
Dave was refering to, I suspect he is mapping a Balti where the owners
will not sell, or profit from, alcohol but do not mind customers taking
their own.

The term 'bring your own booze' is a well established one.

I would be happy with
alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_ownalcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own.

Phil (trigpoint)

___
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] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[John Willis]

> On Apr 11, 2017, at 8:46 PM, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> 
> here is a term 'corkage' which is where a 'posh' restaurant allows you
> to take your own drinks,

Bottle service.  They chill and serve your own wine to you. I think that should 
be another value of: 

Alcohol:wine=bottle_service 

Usually there is a "corking fee" (IIRC) for serving you your own wine over the 
house wine. 

I think that when you are talking about amenities, services, and cuisine, how 
alcohol is handled is part of that. To define one aspect or value but "ignore" 
another aspect of any mappable item is gonna be infuriating to some mappers 
(*cough* landuse=civic).  

 I do _not_ think stating how common classes of things are handled - especially 
a commonly signed item - is "listing what is sold". We talk about smoking, 
handicapped access, parking, fast food vs restaurant, takeaway - all kinds of 
amenities of a restaurant. This is just another amenity/service/restriction of 
the business. 

Almost all convenience stores in Japan have a sign that states they sell 
alcohol and another one for tobacco. Those categories are made by the culture. 
Mapping the data that is important enough to be universally signed is not the 
same as mapping what brands or varieties is or isn't sold. Vending machines 
here sell "drinks" or "alcohol" but never both, so there _has_ to be a(n 
approved) way to define it in tagging if you are mapping vending machines. 

How they handle alcohol, in general, at a location could be considered by 
people who care to map such things as being a similarly important aspect of the 
services offered there. 

Javbw. 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Philip Barnes]

On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 20:00 +0900, John Willis wrote:
> > On Apr 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, althio  wrote:
> > 
> > My ideas are about:
> > alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
> > wine=yes/no/bring_your_own
> 
> +1 
>  
> Perhaps alcohol:wine=*   ? 

That is getting a little into listing what a restaurant sells.

There is a term 'corkage' which is where a 'posh' restaurant allows you
to take your own drinks, but charges a fee. I do not think that is what
Dave was refering to, I suspect he is mapping a Balti where the owners
will not sell, or profit from, alcohol but do not mind customers taking
their own. 

The term 'bring your own booze' is a well established one. 

I would be happy with 
alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_ownalcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own.

Phil (trigpoint)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[John Willis]

> On Apr 11, 2017, at 7:26 AM, althio  wrote:
> 
> My ideas are about:
> alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
> wine=yes/no/bring_your_own

+1 
 
Perhaps alcohol:wine=*   ? 

Javbw. 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Dave F]

I looked to see if 'byob' had been used but abbreviations just lead to 
confusion.
althio's suggestion below seems appropriate. Unless another more 
appropriate tag is suggested I'll use that & add it to the wiki.


DaveF.

On 10/04/2017 23:26, althio wrote:

I agree with Martin and I must insist: no abbreviations or acronyms please.

My ideas are about:
alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
wine=yes/no/bring_your_own

- althio


On 11 April 2017 at 00:13, ajt1...@gmail.com  wrote:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=byo

Finds 3 "byo", 2 "byob" and there is also 1 "bring_your_own_wine" so there's
not a huge precedent in OSM either way, but both BYO and BYOB are understood
"as is" in English and probably more commonly used than the expanded
version.  It's similar to how you wouldn't get someone asking "can you help
me get this perambulator onto the omnibus" :)

On 10/04/2017 22:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


2017-04-10 15:12 GMT+02:00 Michal Fabík :

well, there's a well-established acronym for "bring your own booze":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYOB, so I guess "byob=yes" could work?



-1, no abbreviations or acronyms, preferably, unless already introduced.

Cheers,
Martin


___
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



---
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