Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Simon Poole]

Am 07.01.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Bryan Housel:
> ...
> On “both is OK”. the `service:vehicle` issue was because we can’t use the 
> same key `service=*` to contain both things like `tyres` (a few thousands) 
> and `driveway` (a few millions).  Sorry, but the `service=tyres` has to go.  
> A few thousand uses is not “established tagging practice”.  And I doubt that 
> that usage was ever discussed here or proposed either.  If it was, I missed 
> the proposal where someone said “lets put tyres in a tag already used 3 
> million times for something else”.  My “no” vote on such a thing would not 
> have mattered anyway.
>
> ...

This is not a given, your problem exists just as a consequence of iD
retrieving tag values from taginfo and how iD presets are designed.
Everything else (as in any other editor) definitely doesn't have an
issue with sub-tag keys using the same name as there is more than enough
context to be able to differentiate the different usages. For a new tag
on the other hand we have freedom to as we choose so there is no
specific reason to reuse keys if there is no a good reason to do so.

Generally I think that people are heading of in the completely wrong
direction, while I can understand the desire to be able to document
every single aspect of a shop or other kind of facility, as Stefan has
already pointed out, there are lots of issues with the over name spacing
down to breaking fundamental assumptions about OSM tagging (for example
having capitalized values in keys as in a recent hydrant tagging proposal).

To hypothesize on some of the stuff floating around, obviously there is
a desire to document exactly what kind of stuff a shop sells, so people
have proposed stuff like

motorcycle:tyres=yes

service:tyres:car=yes

service:bicycle:tyres=yes

a hodgepodge of different ways of tagging and potential for 100s of keys.

But it could be so simple:simply structure the value space.

All of the above could be:

sells=tyres:motorcycle;tyres:cars;tyres:bicycle;tools:cars

And please no decade old complaints about lists in tags, we have lots of
structured value tags that work just fine, and yes you could even
document that something is -not- sold in a structured fashion.

Simon




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] service

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 12:40, Bryan Housel  wrote:

>
> Yes, strong preference for `service:vehicle:*=yes/no` instead of
> `service=*`
>

Fixed!

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Warin]

I find using my own editor reduces the 'going back and forwards" on the 
new page.
And I am more comfortable using it and storing it while I think on it 
before creating the new page.
In general a couple of days between thought, creation and eventual 
creation is of benefit to my 'work'.




On 08/01/19 09:42, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

Thanks Paul, I'll try that "next" time!

Thanks

Graeme


On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 08:24, Paul Allen > wrote:



That's the LONG way around. :)



___
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] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 09:53, Kevin Kenny  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:59 PM Joseph Eisenberg
> These rural religious groups are often as xenophobic as all get-out in the
> abstract, but when presented with a
> real, live, stranger who respects them, drop it almost at once and
> are unbelievably welcoming.
>

Doesn't that partially depend on the number of banjos playing in the
background? :-)

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Warin]

On 08/01/19 02:53, Konrad Lischka wrote:

Hello,

the proper tagging of kindergarten grounds in Germany really makes me 
think.
The problem: We have a lot of operators that are independent 
charitable entities (for example registered associations see 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_association_(Germany) 
 but belong to charitable 
organisation too like Caritas or Paritätischer.


My solution would be:
amenity=kindergarten
operator=[Name of theregistered association]
operator:type=charitable
organisation=[organisation name like Caritas]

What do you think?

Two points:
(1) operator:type
=charitable is hardly used 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=charitable)
=private_non_profit 
 seems 
more common 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=private_non_profit)
but it is not the same. In Germany the tax authorities give the 
charitable status only to some organisation based on a few defined 
areas of work in the social or educational field. Non-Profis are more 
commons, but not the same.


(2) organisation=
The use seems to be rather uncodified
The is no https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:organisation
alltough there is some use: 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/organisation





Many shops and fuel station are operated by some remote entity too. OSM 
uses "brand" for that.

Not certain that fits here but it is a similar situation?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Technically it is both -- taginfo gets statistics from the OSM database,
but the descriptions, images, and "recommendations" all come from wiki -
e.g. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#wiki comes from wiki.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:26 PM Bryan Housel  wrote:

> > On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Joseph Eisenberg 
> wrote:
> >
> > Doesn’t taginfo use the wiki as the source of tags that are listed?
>
>
> No, taginfo’s source is the actual tag data from the OSM database.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] service

[Bryan Housel]

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:22 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
> Hi Bryan
> I've just created a new page for shop=caravan 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan 
> , which i copied from the 
> shop=car page.
> 
> As such, it's also copied across the various service=* tags dealer /  parts / 
> repair etc
> Does this create a problem? :-(
> More than happy to change it if it does, but what is the best / preferred 
> format?


Yes, strong preference for `service:vehicle:*=yes/no` instead of `service=*`
details here:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4497 

https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/3535 


Thanks, Bryan___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Bryan Housel]

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> Doesn’t taginfo use the wiki as the source of tags that are listed?


No, taginfo’s source is the actual tag data from the OSM database.




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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:59 PM Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:
>
> “You may find that a Mosque may not be happy if a non-Muslim walks in”
>
> I’m not aware of any mosques that prohibit non-Muslims, outside of the holy 
> cities (Mecca/Medina), though you would need to dress appropriately and act 
> respectfully.
>
> Jehovas’ Witnesses also welcome new people (aka potential converts).
>
> Mormon temples have places that are off-limits, however - even to ordinary 
> Mormons.
>
> There are some Hindu temples that prohibit women, and many places of worship 
> expect men and women to be segregated.
>
> So it’s not an access tag.


Yeah, an access tag is orthogonal to religion=*. Almost any religion
has some areas with restricted access.

Many cloisters, both Eastern and Roman have inner areas that are
accessible only to the vowed members of that community.

Most if not all Eastern churches have inner sanctuaries that are
entered only by ordained clergy of at least the rank of deacon, and
close doors or draw curtains to hide the most sacred moments of their
liturgies from the view of even the congregation.

Many religions have various concepts of ritual purity, and
non-adherents may defile the house unless they conform with particular
requirements. (Some of these have outer regions of their houses of
worship where believers can conduct various purification rituals
before entering the sanctuaries.)

Many religions have services, or portions of services, that are open
to all, but specific rites that are reserved to the initiates.

In summary, access=* cannot be determined at all from religion=*



General off-topic comments:

For almost any faith, taking the attitude, "I am not of your people. I
do not yet know your God. Can you teach me?" works wonders. "What must
one do to respect the house?" "What of your ceremonies may someone who
is not a committed member attend?" "Is there anything in particular
that I might not know of that could give offense?"

For a mosque, add questions like: "Can you teach me to make wudu? Can
I begin to learn the words of as-salat? May I listen to the Quran?"

For a synagogue, I already sport a scruffy beard, so if I don a
kippah, I'm usually not suspect. I can ask: "Is it your custom that
all must wear tallit (or tefilin) in the sanctuary, and if so, is it
possible for me to borrow one (a pair)?"

Even farther off-topic:

If a long-distance hiker wants to be treated like royalty in most of
rural America, it works wonders to ask a shop clerk, postmaster, or
other contact on a Saturday: "Where do you worship? I'm afraid all I
have is what's in my backpack, so I won't be able to dress properly
for a church service, does your community welcome travelers? Is there
anywhere in this town that you'd recommend to buy a meal/stay the
night? Oh, God bless you!" If you're sincere, it's not inconceivable
that you'll be treated to a home-cooked meal, spend the night in some
church member's spare room, and have the opportunity to clean yourself
and your gear, and be the center of attention at the coffee hour
following Sunday services. These rural religious groups are often as
xenophobic as all get-out in the abstract, but when presented with a
real, live, stranger who respects them, drop it almost at once and are
unbelievably welcoming. (Of course, the price of this is that you have
to *be* respectful, not *act* respectful. They can tell the
difference.)

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

Re: [Tagging] Changeset tag for issue closing

[Anton Klim]

Considering heated discussions usually follow object tags, I won't expect the 
same amount of people to argue about change set tags (I sometimes forget they 
exist).
Seems logical, although to me qa processing seems complicated to process/fit in 
a tag...

Ant

07.01.2019, в 22:51, Bryan Housel  написал(а):

> iD now integrates with the KeepRight Q/A tool.. This is pretty great, and you 
> should try it out:
> https://twitter.com/bhousel/status/1081398222176817152
> 
> 
> But I have a tagging question.  
> 
> As we roll out this feature, as well as other Q/A tool integrations, some 
> people would like to be able to have the issues that they are closing appear 
> in their changeset comment, or hashtag, or some other tag.
> 
> It seems like the obvious solution - adding a changeset comment like “closes 
> #keepright-123” - is ok but not great.  It doesn’t really say what the user 
> did, and we will quickly run into the 255 char limit if the user closes a lot 
> of issues.
> 
> So I’m thinking of introducing changeset tags like “closes:x=123;456;789” 
> where x can be a tracking service like “keepright”, “osmose”, 
> “improveosm”, “maproulette” or any other issue tracker we want to connect iD 
> to.  
> 
> Thoughts?  
> 
> Reply here or on  https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5679
> 
> If there aren’t any serious objections, I’ll probably add this in a few days.
> 
> Thanks!
> Bryan
> 
> ___
> 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] Facts and opinions

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 01:13, Bryan Housel  wrote:

>
> On “both is OK”. the `service:vehicle` issue was because we can’t use the
> same key `service=*` to contain both things like `tyres` (a few thousands)
> and `driveway` (a few millions).  Sorry, but the `service=tyres` has to
> go.
>

Hi Bryan

I've just created a new page for shop=caravan
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan, which i copied from the
shop=car page.

As such, it's also copied across the various service=* tags dealer /  parts
/ repair etc

Does this create a problem? :-(

More than happy to change it if it does, but what is the best / preferred
format?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Doesn’t taginfo use the wiki as the source of tags that are listed?

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:55 AM Wolfgang Zenker 
wrote:

> * Bryan Housel  [190107 16:12]:
> > And on “the wiki”, I have basically given up on the OSM wiki [..].
> > If something is “not documented on the wiki” that means nothing because
> the wiki is not documentation.
>
> That sounds kind of weird, because the Wiki basically only exists to be
> used for documentation of the OpenStreetMap project. Care to tell us
> where you would expect to find documentation? And by documentation, I
> mean things like explaining concepts, how to do and not do things,
> examples, etc.
> Taginfo supplies only a tiny subset of what mappers need as documentation,
> so where to get the rest if not the Wiki?
>
> Curious,
> 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] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Joseph Eisenberg]

“You may find that a Mosque may not be happy if a non-Muslim walks in”

I’m not aware of any mosques that prohibit non-Muslims, outside of the holy
cities (Mecca/Medina), though you would need to dress appropriately and act
respectfully.

Jehovas’ Witnesses also welcome new people (aka potential converts).

Mormon temples have places that are off-limits, however - even to ordinary
Mormons.

There are some Hindu temples that prohibit women, and many places of
worship expect men and women to be segregated.

So it’s not an access tag.


On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:44 AM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 22:14, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
>
>>
>> I have never considered the 'religion' tag as an access tag. Typically I
>> can freely enter a PoW, and
>> listen to the ceremony, without being a member of that community or
>> believe in that religion.
>>
>
> Getting off-topic here, but that does not apply to all religions.  And not
> to all denominations
> of Christianity.  You may find that a Mosque may not be happy if a
> non-Muslim walks in, and a
> Kingdom Hall may not be happy if a non-Jehovah's Witness walks in.  Some
> denominations
> of some religions view the entry of those not of their brand of faith
> (infidels) to be sacrilegious
> and/or blasphemous.  In some places the punishments can be quite severe,
> so you should
> avoid blithely walking into a place of worship during a religious ceremony
> unless you are sure
> it is OK to do so.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Changeset tag for issue closing

[Bryan Housel]

iD now integrates with the KeepRight Q/A tool.. This is pretty great, and you 
should try it out:
https://twitter.com/bhousel/status/1081398222176817152 



But I have a tagging question.  

As we roll out this feature, as well as other Q/A tool integrations, some 
people would like to be able to have the issues that they are closing appear in 
their changeset comment, or hashtag, or some other tag.

It seems like the obvious solution - adding a changeset comment like “closes 
#keepright-123” - is ok but not great.  It doesn’t really say what the user 
did, and we will quickly run into the 255 char limit if the user closes a lot 
of issues.

So I’m thinking of introducing changeset tags like “closes:x=123;456;789” 
where x can be a tracking service like “keepright”, “osmose”, “improveosm”, 
“maproulette” or any other issue tracker we want to connect iD to.  

Thoughts?  

Reply here or on  https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5679 


If there aren’t any serious objections, I’ll probably add this in a few days.

Thanks!
Bryan

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 22:14, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:

>
> I have never considered the 'religion' tag as an access tag. Typically I
> can freely enter a PoW, and
> listen to the ceremony, without being a member of that community or
> believe in that religion.
>

Getting off-topic here, but that does not apply to all religions.  And not
to all denominations
of Christianity.  You may find that a Mosque may not be happy if a
non-Muslim walks in, and a
Kingdom Hall may not be happy if a non-Jehovah's Witness walks in.  Some
denominations
of some religions view the entry of those not of their brand of faith
(infidels) to be sacrilegious
and/or blasphemous.  In some places the punishments can be quite severe, so
you should
avoid blithely walking into a place of worship during a religious ceremony
unless you are sure
it is OK to do so.

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Thanks Paul, I'll try that "next" time!

Thanks

Graeme


On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 08:24, Paul Allen  wrote:

>
> That's the LONG way around. :)
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 21:51, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

The Vienna allotments don’t seem to fit our wiki definition, but I think
> they may have started out as allotment gardens years ago and evolved into
> residential areas over time?
>

Back when I mapped some allotments, about a year ago, I came across
something in the
wiki saying that allotment plots shouldn't be confused with some other type
of plot (or maybe
it was some other type of allotment) which seems similar to what you
describe for Vienna,
except I vaguely remember it was in Russia (but I could well be
misremembering).  I can't find
it again, so it's probably been edited out of the wiki.

But i did find the Wikipedia entry about allotments, and the stuff about
the Russian
equivalent seems to confirm my vague memories and what you describe for
Vienna
allotments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotment_(gardening)#Russia
It's quite amusing
to think of all the Russian oligarchs living in garden sheds on allotments.

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

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:13 AM Bryan Housel  wrote:
> And on “the wiki”, I have basically given up on the OSM wiki because it 
> contains so much wrong information and opinion, and I’m tired of having my 
> edits reverted.

That's kind of upsetting. Asking as a near-outsider, do you suspect
that your edits are being shut down by some 'inner circle'? The
'closed inner circle' problem is what made me give up on Wikipedia - I
found that in the areas where I actually know something, all that the
privileged editors would accept was trivial changes like the
correction of spelling or grammatical errors. Or is it simply that
your information gets stomped on by legions of the clueless or
wrongheaded?

Both are disturbing, but the two problems would have very different
solutions. For the former, the only solution is political. For the
latter, perhaps edits would be more robust if expressed factually:
"The rule that iD currently assumes is: ..." rather than "the tag must
be used in THIS fashion." Descriptive rather than prescriptive
language tends to excite less the desire to wipe it out.

I will admit that I don't wikify nearly enough - and it's partly my
bad experience with Wikipedia that puts me off it. I just want to know
what I'm in for if I decide to mend my ways and explain more of what I
do.

> Anyway hope that clears up some of the confusion. If not - I’m sure we’ll 
> discuss these exact same issue again here in another 9 months anyway.

There are always new faces, even for the stale old arguments.
Sometimes they come with new insights, sometimes we simply have to
tread the same ground because there are people who haven't been here
before who have to be guided. None of us knows how to map the world,
and as we come closer to figuring that out, we wind up having to talk
things to death. Over and over. And I don't know a better way to do it
- gradually come closer to consensus. But yes, it's infuriating when
it happens.

You - the iD developers - are in a uniquely thankless position because
your application is so often the first thing a newcomer sees when
trying to contribute to the map. The decisions you make in the
templates become the newcomers' impression of "how things must be
done" - whether a genuine consensus exists or not. Which means that
everyone who has an opinion about tagging is eager to tell you that
you're doing it all wrong, and you have to guess as best you can what
consensus might eventually emerge.

So, let me thank you for braving that particular combat zone. Yeah,
"you're doing it all wrong." :-) But you're doing it, which is more
than I'm able or willing to take on.

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 21:55, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> As Warin suggested, I just went to shop=car, "Edit source", copied the
> entire page, pasted it as a new text document (I use Open Office but I'd
> think any "Word" program would work), made the necessary changes of
> changing car to caravan etc, searched shop=caravan in the OSM wiki with
> nothing found, created the new page, copy / pasted my document, preview,
> save & done! (Apart from going back in a dozen times to tweak things!)
>

That's the LONG way around. :)

Edit source on shop=car.  Copy the entire page into the paste buffer.
Create the new page.  Paste
the paste buffer into it.  No need for an intermediate Word document.  In
fact, that way you don't risk
Word doing "clever" things behind your back like "fixing" apostrophes to be
what it thinks you should
be using (it's sometimes wrong even in plain English, and with wiki markup
it can be a disaster).

OK, the Word document gives you search and replace whereas with a browser
you just have search
and have to do the rest manually. but that way you don't have to take extra
care that your global
search/replace hasn't left you with a "caravane" where you should have had
"care."


> *Very* straight forward & simple! :-)
>

It can be even simpler.  For some values of "simple." :)

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 07.01.2019 19:08, Volker Schmidt wrote:

if it is a religion related operator, I usually also add religion and 
denomination tags, i.e. in
your Caritas example it would be
religion=christian
denomination=catholic


I would not be sure how to handle this:
Are these "access" tags, in the sense that (in the example) the kindergarten only accepts Roman 
Catholic children, or is it only indicating the religious background of the institution, but they 
accept children with other religious backgrounds as well.


I have never considered the 'religion' tag as an access tag. Typically I can freely enter a PoW, and 
listen to the ceremony, without being a member of that community or believe in that religion.


Similarly, educational institutions in my scope mostly accept children with different background, in 
particular if the receive state funding. E.g. Ireland, the majority of the schools is operated by 
the catholic church, and as a recipient of public funding they have to accept everybody, equally.


Back to Konrad's question, any better ideas to tag the name of the operator's 
umbrella organisation?
I drafted:
> operator:umbrella=* would be more suitable, or more self-explanatory but 
longer
> operator:umbrella_organisation=*


tom

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 07:12, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> "sells" would be a tag I would use to describe what a shop sells.
>
> "service" is a tag used to describe "highway=service".
> Should it be used with other things? Or is there some other word OSM can
> use here?
>

Good question!

I just copied what was already shown under the =car page, but used the
original version, rather than the
car:sales =yes/no/used
car:rental =yes/no
option, which is currently the subject of discussion!

Maybe that would be a better way to go?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 17:20, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)
>

Most of the problems have been sorted by a little bit of playing, plus an
extra couple of fields added.

Languages - how do I edit them all out?
>

Still have to get rid of all the language options though & can't see any
way of doing that?

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:43, Dave Swarthout  wrote:

> I read through the documentation for Templates
>

Dave

I wouldn't worry or stress too much about the word "template"

As Warin suggested, I just went to shop=car, "Edit source", copied the
entire page, pasted it as a new text document (I use Open Office but I'd
think any "Word" program would work), made the necessary changes of
changing car to caravan etc, searched shop=caravan in the OSM wiki with
nothing found, created the new page, copy / pasted my document, preview,
save & done! (Apart from going back in a dozen times to tweak things!)

*Very* straight forward & simple! :-)

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 21:21, Georg Feddern  wrote:

>
> May be not necessary to RFC & vote - but I think to discuss (may be I
> missed that part already?)
>

I recently asked how to tag a caravan dealer & someone suggested
shop=caravan as it was already in use. I then created this page to give a
reference for people to find.


> You intend to summarize up caravans, motorhomes and tents.
> But I mostly know of 'specialised' shops:
> - motorhomes only
> - caravans only
> - tents only
>
> (OK, I also know some 'supermarkets' with combinations.)
>
> At least I want to find the right dealer for me (e.g. motorhome), so it
> would be necessary to distuingish them.
> Because there are mixed shops and all fall under caravaning, I suppose a
> subkey would be necessary - but yet I did not found a useful one or know
> a possible new one.
>

Um? Yes, I put them all together because I thought they all "sort of" fit
together, but I can see your point.

Possibly something like caravan:type=caravan / motorhome / Winnebago /
camper trailer etc, but then you get to the problem of what is difference
between a camper van, motorhome & Winnebago?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Wolfgang Zenker]

* Bryan Housel  [190107 16:12]:
> And on “the wiki”, I have basically given up on the OSM wiki [..].
> If something is “not documented on the wiki” that means nothing because the 
> wiki is not documentation.

That sounds kind of weird, because the Wiki basically only exists to be
used for documentation of the OpenStreetMap project. Care to tell us
where you would expect to find documentation? And by documentation, I
mean things like explaining concepts, how to do and not do things,
examples, etc.
Taginfo supplies only a tiny subset of what mappers need as documentation,
so where to get the rest if not the Wiki?

Curious,
Wolfgang
( lyx @ osm )

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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Many “allotments” in Central Europe have small cabins or even full-sized
houses which are used as part-time residences. Take a look at the
“allotments” around Vienna, Austria for example, or most any German city.

The Vienna allotments don’t seem to fit our wiki definition, but I think
they may have started out as allotment gardens years ago and evolved into
residential areas over time?
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:37 AM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 14:57, Sérgio V.  wrote:
>
>> Hi, BTW, What is actually the difference between:
>>
>> Tag:place=plot
>> (Status: in use / wiki-start: 7 April 2015)
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dplot
>> "Use the tag place=plot to identify a named plot is a tract or parcel of
>> land owned or meant to be owned by some owner."
>>
>
> It is a plot of land that is owned.  Its purpose is as yet unrealized and
> it is as yet unused.  It
> might end up with a house on it.  Depends what the owner intends to do
> with it and what zoning
> permits.
>
> Tag:allotments=plot
>> (Status: approved / wiki-start: 5 October 2013)
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:allotments%3Dplot
>> "The allotments=plot tag is used to demarcate an area within an allotment
>> site given over to an individual or group. An allotment site is typically
>> broken up into many of these allotment plots. Define an area within an area
>> tagged as landuse=allotments."
>>
>
> Allotment plots ARE in use, as gardens/agriculture.  An allotment plot is
> for people who want to
> be able to do some gardening but their residential property does not have
> a garden.  Their plot
> is defined (growing plants).  They are in use (most of them).  They are
> not to be built on (although
> the terms may permit a small garden shed).  They are not for any purpose
> other than gardening.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Creating shop=caravan

[Warin]

On 07/01/19 22:19, Georg Feddern wrote:

Am 07.01.2019 um 08:20 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:

& here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)

Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I 
take that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it?


May be not necessary to RFC & vote - but I think to discuss (may be I 
missed that part already?)


You intend to summarize up caravans, motorhomes and tents.
But I mostly know of 'specialised' shops:
- motorhomes only
- caravans only
- tents only

(OK, I also know some 'supermarkets' with combinations.)

At least I want to find the right dealer for me (e.g. motorhome), so 
it would be necessary to distuingish them.
Because there are mixed shops and all fall under caravaning, I suppose 
a subkey would be necessary - but yet I did not found a useful one or 
know a possible new one.


Any ideas?


Depends on the local use.
A caravan shop in one area of the world could be expected to only do 
caravans. In another part of the world to do both caravans and motor 
homes. In another part of the world tents etc.


"sells" would be a tag I would use to describe what a shop sells.

"service" is a tag used to describe "highway=service".
Should it be used with other things? Or is there some other word OSM can 
use here?






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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Warin]

Sorry for using a word that triggers some usage I had not intended. Keep 
asking as it does help explain things.


On 07/01/19 21:41, Dave Swarthout wrote:

Warin -
I read through the documentation for Templates and the way it's used 
in Mediawiki applications like our Wiki is to define a piece of text, 
with or without photos, etc., as a reusable fragment that can be 
inserted in any page and if the original, the "template", is edited 
the changes propagate to all instances of the template in as many 
places as it appears. It's sort of like what used to be known as 
"boilerplate" in word-processors except its content is dynamic.


Thanks for your clarification though. It motivated me to learn a bit 
more about the Wiki s/w I constantly complain about. LOL


On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:32 PM Marc Gemis > wrote:


Graeme,

You might have to change the picture and the rendering icon in the
right "summary" bar.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:22 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick
mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)
>
> Known problems
>
> Languages - how do I edit them all out?
>
> service=parts has moved one box too far across
>
> Have to change the photo & (suggested) icon
>
> Wikidata reference
>
> Any & all other comments welcome!
>
> Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can
I take that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 17:06, Graeme Fitzpatrick
mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 11:12, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is what I do .. it works and leaves the original page
alone...
>>>
>>> 1) get the "car" template
>>> On the page you want to copy Click on "edit Source" - Copy all
of it and paste it over to your your word processor as a new document.
>>>  Exit out out this "Edit Source" without saving "cancel" I
think is it - so it stays the same.
>>>
>>> 2) edit the template
>>> Now in your word processor find and replace all the "car" and
replace with "caravan". Perform similar edits here - much easier
than the editor you may not be familiar with on the wiki.
>>> When your finished here ...
>>>
>>>
>>> 3) create the new page
>>> Type the title of the page you want to create in the wiki
search box ...
>>> It will come up with a suggestion to create the page you want
.. click on that and you have started to create the new page :)
>>> Copy all of the stuff you have on your word processor page
over to the new page (copy and paste) .. and save it ... Done.
>>
>>
>> Warin, that is fantastic! :-)
>>
>> Now you just have to write a page titled Creating pages, so
everybody can find it!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>
> ___
> 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



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Volker Schmidt]

if it is a religion related operator, I usually also add religion and
> denomination tags, i.e. in your Caritas example it would be
> religion=christian
> denomination=catholic
>

I would not be sure how to handle this:
Are these "access" tags, in the sense that (in the example) the
kindergarten only accepts Roman Catholic children, or is it only indicating
the religious background of the institution, but they accept children with
other religious backgrounds as well.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 7. Jan. 2019 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb Konrad Lischka <
klisc...@mailbox.org>:

> operator:type=charitable
> organisation=[organisation name like Caritas]
>
> What do you think?
>




if it is a religion related operator, I usually also add religion and
denomination tags, i.e. in your Caritas example it would be
religion=christian
denomination=catholic

Regarding the "charitable" status, this would be by country, right? The
(tax?) status of the operating organization in the country where the
feature is located? Or where the seat of the organization is?

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 07.01.2019 16:53, Konrad Lischka wrote:


My solution would be:
amenity=kindergarten
operator=[Name of theregistered association]
operator:type=charitable


operator:type seems to be established with 180k uses. Plausible to me.


organisation=[organisation name like Caritas]


What you are trying to tag is the umbrella organisation of the operator,
kind of the operator of the operator,
not the "organisation of the kindergarten".

Thus organisation=* seems a bad fit to me.


(2) organisation=
alltough there is some use: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/organisation


usage is very low (161) and unstructured regarding the values. Would not count 
on that.

Thus something like
operator:umbrella=* would be more suitable, or more self-explanatory but longer
operator:umbrella_organisation=*

(Langenscheidt: de: Dachverband = en: umbrella organization )
tom

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

[Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

[Konrad Lischka]

Hello,

the proper tagging of kindergarten grounds in Germany really makes me think.
The problem: We have a lot of operators that are independent charitable 
entities (for example registered associations see 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_association_(Germany) but belong to 
charitable organisation too like Caritas or Paritätischer.

My solution would be:
amenity=kindergarten
operator=[Name of theregistered association]
operator:type=charitable
organisation=[organisation name like Caritas]

What do you think?

Two points:
(1) operator:type
=charitable is hardly used 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=charitable)
=private_non_profit 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=private_non_profit) 
seems more common 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/operator%3Atype=private_non_profit)
but it is not the same. In Germany the tax authorities give the charitable 
status only to some organisation based on a few defined areas of work in the 
social or educational field. Non-Profis are more commons, but not the same.

(2) organisation=
The use seems to be rather uncodified
The is no https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:organisation
alltough there is some use: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/organisation

Kind regards
Konrad
—
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/klischka



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 14:57, Sérgio V.  wrote:

> Hi, BTW, What is actually the difference between:
>
> Tag:place=plot
> (Status: in use / wiki-start: 7 April 2015)
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dplot
> "Use the tag place=plot to identify a named plot is a tract or parcel of
> land owned or meant to be owned by some owner."
>

It is a plot of land that is owned.  Its purpose is as yet unrealized and
it is as yet unused.  It
might end up with a house on it.  Depends what the owner intends to do with
it and what zoning
permits.

Tag:allotments=plot
> (Status: approved / wiki-start: 5 October 2013)
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:allotments%3Dplot
> "The allotments=plot tag is used to demarcate an area within an allotment
> site given over to an individual or group. An allotment site is typically
> broken up into many of these allotment plots. Define an area within an area
> tagged as landuse=allotments."
>

Allotment plots ARE in use, as gardens/agriculture.  An allotment plot is
for people who want to
be able to do some gardening but their residential property does not have a
garden.  Their plot
is defined (growing plants).  They are in use (most of them).  They are not
to be built on (although
the terms may permit a small garden shed).  They are not for any purpose
other than gardening.

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

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

[Bryan Housel]

> Just recently the iD Editor maintainer added more multiCombo functions
> (like [3]) and presets key (like "service:vehicle" [4]). Both is OK
> per se, but the latter preset was undocumented on the Wiki, and
> obviously the iD Editor maintainer prefers namespaces over semicolons
> for handling multiple values - and both issues seem to be completely
> undiscussed!


Amazingly you squeezed 4 wrong things into two sentences.  Just to set the 
record straight:

On my “preference”, both namespaces and semicolons are fine, I don’t have a 
preference and iD handles both. 

On “both is OK”. the `service:vehicle` issue was because we can’t use the same 
key `service=*` to contain both things like `tyres` (a few thousands) and 
`driveway` (a few millions).  Sorry, but the `service=tyres` has to go.  A few 
thousand uses is not “established tagging practice”.  And I doubt that that 
usage was ever discussed here or proposed either.  If it was, I missed the 
proposal where someone said “lets put tyres in a tag already used 3 million 
times for something else”.  My “no” vote on such a thing would not have 
mattered anyway.

On “completely undiscussed”, we already discuss tagging extensively in public 
on the iD GitHub - because this is where issues with bad tags tend to manifest 
themselves.  The osm-carto project sees their share too.  I believe more people 
follow the GitHub projects than are subscribed to this tagging mailing list.  
I’ve also posted plenty of information on this mailing list but it seems that 
people don’t read it.  This is at least the third time we’re discussing this 
exact issue on this mailing list.

And on “the wiki”, I have basically given up on the OSM wiki because it 
contains so much wrong information and opinion, and I’m tired of having my 
edits reverted.  I just recently had another issue where we added a traffic 
signal tag that was already used, and then someone edited the wiki to rant 
about how iD is wrong and for people to not use the tag.  Where before, I 
thought the wiki was “not perfect”, now I’m of the opinion that it’s actively 
harming OpenStreetMap.  I encourage everyone to just disregard everything 
that’s on the wiki and go by what taginfo says as far as how the tags are used 
and what the accepted values are.  If something is “not documented on the wiki” 
that means nothing because the wiki is not documentation.

Anyway hope that clears up some of the confusion. If not - I’m sure we’ll 
discuss these exact same issue again here in another 9 months anyway.

Thanks, Bryan


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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Sérgio V .]

Hi, BTW, What is actually the difference between:

Tag:place=plot
(Status: in use / wiki-start: 7 April 2015)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dplot
"Use the tag place=plot to identify a named plot is a tract or parcel of land 
owned or meant to be owned by some owner."

Tag:allotments=plot
(Status: approved / wiki-start: 5 October 2013)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:allotments%3Dplot
"The allotments=plot tag is used to demarcate an area within an allotment site 
given over to an individual or group. An allotment site is typically broken up 
into many of these allotment plots. Define an area within an area tagged as 
landuse=allotments."

What's the practical difference? I'm understanding it's inducing a subtle 
difference in a plot being owned (sold) or not yet.
But in both cases, the plot is empty, isnt' it? Their plot numbers are used 
just for sale purpose, arent'? They are not a permanent number as a further 
building number given by the municipality.

For Tag:place=plot says: "OSM does not aim to be a land registry. You can add 
plot data if you want but only where the plot boundaries are actually visible 
on the ground. "

What would be the purpose of mapping indivual empty plots?
If it's for routing purposes, fine, I imagine someone should live over there. 
Then having a number would be reasonable.
If nobody lives there yet, say it's just a commercial allotment with empty 
plots yet, then mapping them wouldn't be a land registry?
In the case of mapping empty plots, would identification of plots make 
conflicts with further mapping of true buildings, or farmyards, constructed 
over them, that might be actually routed for someones address?



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I believe many areas of allotments have a single postal address assigned to
the entire area, while the individual plots are not registered as official
addresses.

Perhaps this explains why a different tag was used.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:41 PM Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Monday 07 January 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > They are verifiable by asking the organization in charge of the
> > allotments, as I initially did
> > when mapping some allotments.
>
> Verifiability in OSM means *independent* verifiability based on
> observations of the geographic reality.  Same as with any other kind of
> proprietary ID.
>
> > How about because allotments do not have postcodes?
>
> That might depend on the country but AFAIK in many countries postal
> codes cover the whole country.
>
> > How about
> > because addresses are
> > generally a means of figuring out where to deliver physical mail and
> > allotments are not on
> > postal delivery routes?
>
> There are many addresses that do not receive postal delivery - in
> particular for example corporate infrastructure where mail is
> collectively delivered to a single location while individual buildings
> and other infrastructure still have their own addesses.
>
> > Even addr:unit would be stretching the
> > definition of unit past its breaking
> > point.
>
> I have not made any suggestion as to what kind of address tag to use but
> if the plot number is signed and you invite your friends for a grilling
> party at plot 42 that is definitely an address from my perspective.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> 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] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 07 January 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> They are verifiable by asking the organization in charge of the
> allotments, as I initially did
> when mapping some allotments.

Verifiability in OSM means *independent* verifiability based on 
observations of the geographic reality.  Same as with any other kind of 
proprietary ID.

> How about because allotments do not have postcodes?

That might depend on the country but AFAIK in many countries postal 
codes cover the whole country.

> How about 
> because addresses are
> generally a means of figuring out where to deliver physical mail and
> allotments are not on
> postal delivery routes?

There are many addresses that do not receive postal delivery - in 
particular for example corporate infrastructure where mail is 
collectively delivered to a single location while individual buildings 
and other infrastructure still have their own addesses.

> Even addr:unit would be stretching the 
> definition of unit past its breaking
> point.

I have not made any suggestion as to what kind of address tag to use but 
if the plot number is signed and you invite your friends for a grilling 
party at plot 42 that is definitely an address from my perspective.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 12:47, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

>
> I am wondering about the practical verifiability of such numbers.  I
> mean in OSM we do not map internal numbering systems of organizations
> for their infrastructure if those are not manifested in the form of
> signs visible to the outside observer.
>

They are verifiable by asking the organization in charge of the allotments,
as I initially did
when mapping some allotments.  Or there may be a hand-drawn map in the
window of a hut
on the allotments, as I found when I later went up to survey the place.

There are situations where signage is not a requirement for mapping.
There are several named
bridges in my area, where the names are shown on OS OpendData StreetView
(which we are
allowed to use and is avaiable as background imagery) but which do not have
signs.

I find your "internal numbering systems of organizations" argument a little
weak.  I cannot, in
general, walk into a private company and wander around unaccompanied, so
knowiung their
numbering or rooms is not useful.  I can wander around my local
allotments.  I can apply for an
allotment and be told that plots 4 and 7 are available and, if they are
shown on a map, I can
wander around to inspect them without needing a guide.


> If plot numbers are signed the question is why these are not considered
> addresses.
>

How about because addr:housenumber makes little sense in the context of an
allotment plot?
How about because allotments do not have postcodes?  How about because
addresses are
generally a means of figuring out where to deliver physical mail and
allotments are not on
postal delivery routes?  Even addr:unit would be stretching the definition
of unit past its breaking
point.

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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 07 January 2019, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> The current wiki page for landuse=allotments
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dallotments) states
> that one should "Use allotments=plot and/or boundary=lot for an
> individual plot and lot=number_of_plot for number of plot."
>
> However, the wiki page for allotments=plot
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:allotments%3Dplot) states
> "You may want to use the ref=* to indicate the number assigned to
> your plot."

I am wondering about the practical verifiability of such numbers.  I 
mean in OSM we do not map internal numbering systems of organizations 
for their infrastructure if those are not manifested in the form of 
signs visible to the outside observer.

If plot numbers are signed the question is why these are not considered 
addresses.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 06:45, Anton Klim  wrote:

> I think iD might be rendering refs now, unless I misremember.
>

I just checked, and iD doesn't display the ref, only the name.  But it no
longer needs
an explicit area=yes to get the label in the centre of the plot rather than
putting it along
the edge as though the closed way were a highway.


> Using ref seems more logical than coming up with a ref replacement just
> for allotments.
>

Yes and no.  IIRC, ref has been pressed into use for things it was never
intended to do
and caused some problems.  OTOH, it's now well-established so you're right
that it
doesn't seem logical to invent a replacement, especially when the original
proposal
(and its purportedly approved version) said to use ref=*.

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

Re: [Tagging] Allotments plot / lot tagging and ref?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 00:38, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> “One day plots may even be rendered, but I'm not holding my breath.”
>
> I’m working on the SQL query right now... but I thought we should discuss
> this here first.
>

Excellent news.  Thanks for this.

Point of discussion: should ref=* be all there is or should name=* also be
rendered in
a similar way that addr:name and addr:housenumber are rendered (with, I
think, the
name rendered in preference to the number where space is tight)?

I'd have to dig out the photo I took of a drawing of plot assignments to
get the exact
details, but my recollection of assignments in my local(ish) allotments
(the only ones
I've mapped) plot 10a is also titled "Collective Orchard" (or some such).
And, as I
mentioned earlier, the guy who proposed the plot tag had mapped something
like
"name=J Bloggs Memorial Allotment".

I think a case can be made for handling the name as well as the ref, but
perhaps not a
very strong case.  And, TBH, just rendering the borders of the plots would
be a big
improvement, so I'll take what I can get.

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Georg Feddern]

Am 07.01.2019 um 08:20 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:

& here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)

Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I 
take that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it?


May be not necessary to RFC & vote - but I think to discuss (may be I 
missed that part already?)


You intend to summarize up caravans, motorhomes and tents.
But I mostly know of 'specialised' shops:
- motorhomes only
- caravans only
- tents only

(OK, I also know some 'supermarkets' with combinations.)

At least I want to find the right dealer for me (e.g. motorhome), so it 
would be necessary to distuingish them.
Because there are mixed shops and all fall under caravaning, I suppose a 
subkey would be necessary - but yet I did not found a useful one or know 
a possible new one.


Any ideas?

Regards
Georg

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

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

[Dave Swarthout]

Warin -
I read through the documentation for Templates and the way it's used in
Mediawiki applications like our Wiki is to define a piece of text, with or
without photos, etc., as a reusable fragment that can be inserted in any
page and if the original, the "template", is edited the changes propagate
to all instances of the template in as many places as it appears. It's sort
of like what used to be known as "boilerplate" in word-processors except
its content is dynamic.

Thanks for your clarification though. It motivated me to learn a bit more
about the Wiki s/w I constantly complain about. LOL

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:32 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:

> Graeme,
>
> You might have to change the picture and the rendering icon in the
> right "summary" bar.
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:22 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
> >
> > & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)
> >
> > Known problems
> >
> > Languages - how do I edit them all out?
> >
> > service=parts has moved one box too far across
> >
> > Have to change the photo & (suggested) icon
> >
> > Wikidata reference
> >
> > Any & all other comments welcome!
> >
> > Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I take
> that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Graeme
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 17:06, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 11:12, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is what I do .. it works and leaves the original page alone...
> >>>
> >>> 1) get the "car" template
> >>> On the page you want to copy Click on "edit Source" - Copy all of it
> and paste it over to your your word processor as a new document.
> >>>  Exit out out this "Edit Source" without saving "cancel" I think is it
> - so it stays the same.
> >>>
> >>> 2) edit the template
> >>> Now in your word processor find and replace all the "car" and replace
> with "caravan". Perform similar edits here - much easier than the editor
> you may not be familiar with on the wiki.
> >>> When your finished here ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 3) create the new page
> >>> Type the title of the page you want to create in the wiki search box
> ...
> >>> It will come up with a suggestion to create the page you want .. click
> on that and you have started to create the new page :)
> >>> Copy all of the stuff you have on your word processor page over to the
> new page (copy and paste) .. and save it ... Done.
> >>
> >>
> >> Warin, that is fantastic! :-)
> >>
> >> Now you just have to write a page titled Creating pages, so everybody
> can find it!
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Graeme
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Creating shop=caravan

[Marc Gemis]

Graeme,

You might have to change the picture and the rendering icon in the
right "summary" bar.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:22 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>
> & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-)
>
> Known problems
>
> Languages - how do I edit them all out?
>
> service=parts has moved one box too far across
>
> Have to change the photo & (suggested) icon
>
> Wikidata reference
>
> Any & all other comments welcome!
>
> Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I take that 
> we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 17:06, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 11:12, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is what I do .. it works and leaves the original page alone...
>>>
>>> 1) get the "car" template
>>> On the page you want to copy Click on "edit Source" - Copy all of it and 
>>> paste it over to your your word processor as a new document.
>>>  Exit out out this "Edit Source" without saving "cancel" I think is it - so 
>>> it stays the same.
>>>
>>> 2) edit the template
>>> Now in your word processor find and replace all the "car" and replace with 
>>> "caravan". Perform similar edits here - much easier than the editor you may 
>>> not be familiar with on the wiki.
>>> When your finished here ...
>>>
>>>
>>> 3) create the new page
>>> Type the title of the page you want to create in the wiki search box ...
>>> It will come up with a suggestion to create the page you want .. click on 
>>> that and you have started to create the new page :)
>>> Copy all of the stuff you have on your word processor page over to the new 
>>> page (copy and paste) .. and save it ... Done.
>>
>>
>> Warin, that is fantastic! :-)
>>
>> Now you just have to write a page titled Creating pages, so everybody can 
>> find it!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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