date:20221010

пн, 10 окт. 2022 г., 22:31 Marc_marc :

> when a =yes tag has different characteristics,
> it is easy to add values for the different characteristics
> unisexx=segregated unisexx=not-segregated
> and given the existence of 2 meanings according to the contributors,
> the yes value will have to be double-checked if we wish to specify
> the meaning the contributor had in mind
>
This is first reasons for proposal. Second reason is usage female=yes and
male=yes for both toilets and hairdresser, where meaning are different.
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gender

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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*




Don't think it really needs anything more than you said earlier:

amenity=fountain + fountain=decorative / utility / drinking

should cover it?


No, this is not enough to cover the features that are currently tagged, 
thus this would be a regression.


Currently you can tag nasone, toret, roman_wolf and wallace which are 
specific models/styles of drinking fountains. For example, nasone is a 
particular type of fountain present in Rome; all fountains of this type 
look the same. Deleting information about them being a nasone and simply 
tagging them as fountain=drinking would mean losing information; this 
means that if you're in Rome and you check for the presence of drinking 
fountains you cannot discern which ones are a nasone and which ones are 
not. Having lived in Rome I can tell you that this is important 
information and that people actually do search for this kind of things 
(as long as it's easy enough).


These should be, in my opinion, fountain=drinking, 
new_key_describing_fountain_style=nasone.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

2022-10-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 01:15, Marc_marc  wrote:

>
> Standardization is a good thing for quality but it is often a difficult
> exercise, especially when the previous tags mix several pieces of
> information into one, as is the case here
>

Especially when you consider that we now have at least 7 concurrent threads
discussing fountains, water taps & drinking water! :-)

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 19:19, Davidoskky via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
> Would simply style work?
>

Don't think it really needs anything more than you said earlier:

amenity=fountain + fountain=decorative / utility / drinking

should cover it?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Better term for unisex

2022-10-10 Thread Asa Hundert

Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 19:42 Uhr schrieb Amanda McCann
:
>
> I'm a native English speaker, and I agree! I also wrote that part of the wiki 
> (years ago). I think some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as meaning 
> “gender segregated but male & female are available”, i.e. read that paragraph 
> as “some OSMers might have been wrong, and we don't know how many 
> unisex=yes/no tags in OSM were affected by the misunderstanding”
>

Not a native speaker: unisex is a property of the infrastructure:
Toilets that accommodate any person regardless of sex are unisex,
garments that can be worn, regardless of sex are unisex.

If a facility is to be used by men and women at the same time, this is
not a property of the infrastructure, so unisex will not apply. The
sauna is unisex all the time, but the schedule is not, there are mixed
and un-mixed times instead. Such is the language here, translated into
English.

just my 2c; Hungerburg

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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Approved - migration to use belarusian as default language in Belarus for tagging

2022-10-10 Thread Paveł Tyślacki

Hey

Proposal to use belarusian as default language in Belarus for tagging were
approved by majority: (belarusian)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Be:Belarus_language_issues/Migration_proposal

next steps regarding proposal:
- update documentation
- notify major users about new rules
- in month make migration
- for 3-6 month actively support users to use new rules
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-10 Thread Peter Neale via Tagging

>I think you're joking about the lemonade, but here's the world's 
>largestfountain drink cup, now mapped in OSM:

Yes, I thought I was joking, but now you tell me it is possible!  LOL
Regards,Peter(PeterPan99) 

On Monday, 10 October 2022 at 20:25:53 BST, Minh Nguyen 
 wrote:  
 
 Vào lúc 03:08 2022-10-09, Peter Neale via Tagging đã viết:
> A tap is a device to control the flow of whatever liquid (or gas, I 
> suppose) is coming out.  Potable water, non-potable water; lemonade; 
> petrol (gasoline), Oxygen, whatever...

I think you're joking about the lemonade, but here's the world's largest 
fountain drink cup, now mapped in OSM:

https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/commercial/2017/8/largest-soft-drink-achieved-in-missouri-491025
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1102693755

At least in American English, a "fountain drink" is one that comes from 
a soda fountain at a fast food restaurant. Speaking of soda fountains:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dr-pepper-soda-fountain-claire-daniels_n_58f0f9f7e4b0da2ff8603e89

And for the indoor mappers in the room:

https://www.insider.com/worlds-largest-chocolate-fountain-opens-at-lindt-shop-in-switzerland-2020-9

(What a world we live in!)

-- 
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us




___
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 - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer

On 10.10.2022 17:01, Marc_marc wrote:
> Le 10.10.22 à 10:54, Tom Pfeifer a écrit :
>> Sometimes such changes can even have technical reasons
> 
> this does not change the problem: if you have a banknote that
> is not accepted by the vending machine, you cannot buy your ticket,
> no matter if it is a technical reason or an operator's mood.

Sure. My point was that the technical reasons are even more volatile than the 
policies.
Thus for me that is in the catagory
"Don't map temporary events and temporary features".

tom


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

Re: [Tagging] Better term for unisex


Le 10.10.22 à 19:37, Amanda McCann a écrit :

some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as meaning “gender segregated but 
male & female are available”


as a non-English speaker, I understand unisex as "possible for both",
without any information on whether it will be segregated or not.

when a =yes tag has different characteristics,
it is easy to add values for the different characteristics
unisexx=segregated unisexx=not-segregated
and given the existence of 2 meanings according to the contributors,
the yes value will have to be double-checked if we wish to specify
the meaning the contributor had in mind



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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-10 Thread Minh Nguyen


Vào lúc 03:08 2022-10-09, Peter Neale via Tagging đã viết:
A tap is a device to control the flow of whatever liquid (or gas, I 
suppose) is coming out.  Potable water, non-potable water; lemonade; 
petrol (gasoline), Oxygen, whatever...


I think you're joking about the lemonade, but here's the world's largest 
fountain drink cup, now mapped in OSM:


https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/commercial/2017/8/largest-soft-drink-achieved-in-missouri-491025
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1102693755

At least in American English, a "fountain drink" is one that comes from 
a soda fountain at a fast food restaurant. Speaking of soda fountains:


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dr-pepper-soda-fountain-claire-daniels_n_58f0f9f7e4b0da2ff8603e89

And for the indoor mappers in the room:

https://www.insider.com/worlds-largest-chocolate-fountain-opens-at-lindt-shop-in-switzerland-2020-9

(What a world we live in!)

--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us




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

Re: [Tagging] Better term for unisex

Term "unisex" is obvious for me (I am not a native English speaker), but in
JOSM validator historically has been rule "replace female=yes & male=yes to
unisex=yes".

пн, 10 окт. 2022 г., 21:56 martianfreeloader :

> Hi Amanda,
>
> No.
>
> What puzzles non-native speakers (including myself) is that English has
> a clear distinction between sex and gender (other than, for example,
> German). Yet, the term "unisex" (contains the word "sex") is used to
> designate a situation in the "gender" category, not sex.
>
> Can you help?
>
>
> On 10/10/2022 19:37, Amanda McCann wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Oct 2022 20:05 +02:00, Zeke Farwell 
> wrote:
> >> The proposal currently states:
> >>> Meaning of the unisex =yes
> is currently unclear:
> >>>
> >>>   * gender neutral facility (as the "unisex" term in English); or
> >>>   * facility that accessible for men and women, either segregated or
> not.
> >> I do not understand what is unclear.  The term unisex is well
> >> understood among English speakers to mean "gender neutral".
> >
> > I'm a native English speaker, and I agree! I also wrote that part of the
> wiki (years ago). I think some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as
> meaning “gender segregated but male & female are available”, i.e. read that
> paragraph as “some OSMers might have been wrong, and we don't know how many
> unisex=yes/no tags in OSM were affected by the misunderstanding”
> >
>
> ___
> 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] Better term for unisex

2022-10-10 Thread martianfreeloader


Hi Amanda,

No.

What puzzles non-native speakers (including myself) is that English has 
a clear distinction between sex and gender (other than, for example, 
German). Yet, the term "unisex" (contains the word "sex") is used to 
designate a situation in the "gender" category, not sex.


Can you help?


On 10/10/2022 19:37, Amanda McCann wrote:

On Thu, 06 Oct 2022 20:05 +02:00, Zeke Farwell  wrote:

The proposal currently states:

Meaning of the unisex =yes is 
currently unclear:

  * gender neutral facility (as the "unisex" term in English); or
  * facility that accessible for men and women, either segregated or not.

I do not understand what is unclear.  The term unisex is well
understood among English speakers to mean "gender neutral".


I'm a native English speaker, and I agree! I also wrote that part of the wiki 
(years ago). I think some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as meaning 
“gender segregated but male & female are available”, i.e. read that paragraph 
as “some OSMers might have been wrong, and we don't know how many unisex=yes/no 
tags in OSM were affected by the misunderstanding”



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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps



Do you know if a tag already exist to describe the presence   of a 
tap in a building ?


a tap like the one used in man_made=water_tap ?


I'm not exactly sure what it is describing, I should contact the people 
who added those tags...


I assume in the case of fuel stations it means there is water available, 
maybe for cleaning a car or something like this.


In the case of other buildings they tag it together with 
drinking_water=yes, so I guess in this case it means there are sinks or 
something like that in the building.



I was think about a proposal about water_tap 
If you wish, you can contact me privately and we can discuss on the 
points I'm unsure about the proposal I'm writing and find better 
solutions together.


I feel that writing on this mailing list is not such a good way to find 
good solutions to problems, while it appears a wonderful place to find 
problems.



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Refine departures board tagging


Le 10.10.22 à 19:58, Dimitar a écrit :
|Voting has started for Refine departures board tagging. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Refine_departures_board_tagging 


sorry but in the deluge of proposals, I missed the RFC of
this 2nd version.

but frankly I don't understand : the first vote clearly shows
that people prefer tags with several values
as a result of which you propose :
Deprecate passenger_information_display=*
Promote instead departures_board=*

perfect for me...
exept slipped in the middle of the text, there are lots of =yes/no tags 
out of nowhere like departures_board:analog:timetable=yes/no
and a depreciation of departures_board=timetable in favour of 
departures_board=analog (despite that a paper/metal timetable

isn't analog)

So what do we vote on? On the list of what is described in the proposal? 
or on everything we find here and there in the text ?

for the sake of clarity, I think it would be better to go back
to the RFC, correct the inconsistency between the 2 paragraphs
and reopen the vote



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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps


Le 10.10.22 à 19:55, Davidoskky via Tagging a écrit :


(BTW, I want to document existing tagging here and tap=yes has 347 
uses while

man_made=water_tap 23 711 uses - though if someone wants to make proposal
they are welcome, tagging scheme is quite rotten here)


I have been looking at the current uses of tap=* and water_tap=* as I'm 
planning to make a proposal for tap=*.


I was think about a proposal about water_tap
because if you want to map the feature of a man_man=water_tap
when it'sn't the main feature, well keeping the same string
is a batter idea than "man_made=A but B=yes/no

Do you know if a tag already exist to describe the presence   
of a tap in a building ?


a tap like the one used in man_made=water_tap ?



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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Refine departures board tagging

2022-10-10 Thread Dimitar

 Voting has started for Refine departures board tagging.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Refine_departures_board_tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps


On 10/10/22 18:25, Marc_marc wrote:


of course, I share your opinion since it breaks the tag chain system :
a sub-tag rafines the "upper" tag which must therefore be present.

it is the expression that at least one tag is missing to describe
the common characteristic between these amenity=fountain and these 
amenity=driking_water


Do you have any alternative idea on how to deal with this?

I already proposed the two ideas I got: either having amenity=fountain 
also describe non decorative fountains and thus deprecate fountain=* as 
subtag of amenity=drinking_water or introducing a new key for all those 
values of fountain=* that are not decorative fountains, so that 
fountain=* doesn't have to be a subtag of amenity=drinking_water.



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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps



(BTW, I want to document existing tagging here and tap=yes has 347 
uses while

man_made=water_tap 23 711 uses - though if someone wants to make proposal
they are welcome, tagging scheme is quite rotten here)


I have been looking at the current uses of tap=* and water_tap=* as I'm 
planning to make a proposal for tap=*.


tap=* and water_tap=* are currently being used to tag the presence of a 
water tap in a building.


tap=* is used in Dominican Republic and the values used are "yes", "no" 
or the number of water taps in the building.


water_tap=* is used in Venezuela to indicate if a fuel station has a 
water tap available.



Writing a proposal for tap=* becomes even more difficult if I have to 
keep these uses in mind.


Do you know if a tag already exist to describe the presence of a tap in 
a building? I think tap=* is appropriate, but maybe something else is 
already available.



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

Re: [Tagging] Better term for unisex

2022-10-10 Thread Amanda McCann

On Thu, 06 Oct 2022 20:05 +02:00, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
> The proposal currently states:
>> Meaning of the unisex =yes 
>> is currently unclear: 
>> 
>>  * gender neutral facility (as the "unisex" term in English); or
>>  * facility that accessible for men and women, either segregated or not.
> I do not understand what is unclear.  The term unisex is well 
> understood among English speakers to mean "gender neutral". 

I'm a native English speaker, and I agree! I also wrote that part of the wiki 
(years ago). I think some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as meaning 
“gender segregated but male & female are available”, i.e. read that paragraph 
as “some OSMers might have been wrong, and we don't know how many unisex=yes/no 
tags in OSM were affected by the misunderstanding”

-- 
Amanda

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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps


Le 10.10.22 à 18:07, Davidoskky via Tagging a écrit :
having fountain=* as subtag of amenity=drinking_water does  
not look like a good solution to me


of course, I share your opinion since it breaks the tag chain system :
a sub-tag rafines the "upper" tag which must therefore be present.

it is the expression that at least one tag is missing to describe
the common characteristic between these amenity=fountain and these 
amenity=driking_water




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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

It is true that OpenStreetMap allows for any tag you like, but this 
isn’t meant to encourage you to devalue established tags by using them 
differently from how they are typically used. What would be the 
benefit you expect from such retagging? 


This is not something I am suggesting; this is the current state of things.

fountain=drinking is currently a subtag of amenity=fountain and it is 
documented in the wiki. fountain=* is unfortunately also a subtag of 
amenity=drinking_water, I just noticed this and I think that this makes 
it even more confusing.


Anyway, I have proposed another solution: the introduction of a new key 
to cover all these features; a proposal for it was made but it was 
withdrawn due to fierce criticism, among which was yours since you 
disliked the fact that it deprecated some tags you're using.



I do see the problems in both approaches; but also having fountain=* as 
subtag of amenity=drinking_water does not look like a good solution to 
me. Moreover, what is the point of having values of fountain=* that do 
not apply to the amenity=fountain main key?


For example, this approach does not allow tagging fountains which are 
not decorative and that do not provide drinking water.


You can tag them as man_made=water_tap if they have a tap, if a tap is 
not present these cannot be tagged according to this scheme, because:


- No tap, thus no man_made=water_tap

- Not a decorative fountain, thus no amenity=fountain

- No drinking water, thus no amenity=drinking_water


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

Unification of tags allows more simple usage source data, e.g leisure =
pitch allows rendering of all pitches, but lots of tags as
leisure=tennis_court, leisure = baseball_playground, leisure =
football_ground is more difficult to use.

пн, 10 окт. 2022 г., 18:15 Marc_marc :

> Le 09.10.22 à 09:37, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> > Why do people have to “deprecate” other people’s tags when they
> > introduce new ones with different semantics?
>
> to avoid 42 schemas https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png
>
> Standardization is a good thing for quality but it is often a difficult
> exercise, especially when the previous tags mix several pieces of
> information into one, as is the case here or for tag with several
> meaning (see forest saga)
>
>
>
> ___
> 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 - Voting - Payment denominations


Le 10.10.22 à 10:54, Tom Pfeifer a écrit :
Accepting a particular coin or banknote is among short-living business policies 
that can change frequently and is often harder to observe than e.g. opening_hours.


maybe it's a cultural difference:
the shops I know with a sign informing about this prohibition,
have this continuous restriction since the euro notes and
already had the same restriction for the biggest notes
before the euro.
so surely that one is more stable than an opening time
and also easy to observe.
for two of them, it is even more stable than the brand
of the shop.
i would even dare to think that it has the same life span
as the shop manager


Sometimes such changes can even have technical reasons


this does not change the problem: if you have a banknote that
is not accepted by the vending machine, you cannot buy your ticket,
no matter if it is a technical reason or an operator's mood.
and choosing to have a restriction on the number of different banknotes 
or coins is not a technical reason, machines without this restriction 
are *technically* possible, it is a *choice* made according

to cost and space requirements


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet


Le 09.10.22 à 09:37, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
Why do people have to “deprecate” other people’s tags when they 
introduce new ones with different semantics?


to avoid 42 schemas https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png

Standardization is a good thing for quality but it is often a difficult 
exercise, especially when the previous tags mix several pieces of 
information into one, as is the case here or for tag with several 
meaning (see forest saga)




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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging


Oct 10, 2022, 15:45 by marc_m...@mailo.com:

 I started this thread to confirm/reject listing
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg as
 man_made=water_tap
 fountain=bubbler
 drinking_water=yes
 amenity=drinking_water

>
> how can you have a sub-tag fountain=* without a main tag *=fountain ?
>
I have not designed this tagging scheme, and apparently depending
on situation it is 
- subtag of amenity=fountain
- subtag of amenity=drinking_water
- primary tag

¯\_ (ツ)_/¯
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Peter Neale via Tagging

>So "water tap" is referring only to control mechanism that enables user to 
>start water flow?>(and sometimes also stop water flow)
>Not to entire water delivery apparatus?
Yes!, Just like my house HAS a door (which controls entry and leaving), but my 
house IS_NOT a door.
So a water-delivery device (whtever you call it) can HAVE a tap (to contol flow 
of water leaving), but that does NOT mean that the whole thing IS a tap.
Regards,Peter
 PeterPan99

On Sunday, 9 October 2022 at 22:18:50 BST, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
 wrote:  

Oct 9, 2022, 23:08 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:

sent from a phone

On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
 wrote:

Let me know if this edit was right or wrong (I am quite confused here,
and this is why I want to document this to make situation less confusing).

IMHO saying it _is_ a water tap is confusing, I’d say it _has_ a water tap, 
i.e. tap=yes

wait.

So "water tap" is referring only to control mechanism that enables user to 
start water flow?
(and sometimes also stop water flow)

Not to entire water delivery apparatus?

(BTW, I want to document existing tagging here and tap=yes has 347 uses while
man_made=water_tap 23 711 uses - though if someone wants to make proposal
they are welcome, tagging scheme is quite rotten here)
 ___
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] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

sent from a phone

> On 10 Oct 2022, at 15:34, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Do we tag
> 
> the waste receptacle
> 
> or
> 
> the tap
> 
> or
> 
> the drinking fountain
> 
> ?? Which is the feature primarily there for? To me that is the drinking 
> fountain. I'd leave out the tap and the waste receptacle

if you want to tag it all in one node, you could add tap=yes and bin=yes, the 
latter is often used for bus stops with a waste bin.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

sent from a phone

> On 10 Oct 2022, at 09:12, Davidoskky via Tagging  
> wrote:
> 
> I like this, but I'd remove amenity=drinking_water rather than 
> drinking_water=yes, because you _should_ add the tag amenity=fountain.

this would be completely inconsistent with the usage of the amenity=fountain 
tag in OpenStreetMap as far as I have seen it in multiple countries. It is true 
that OpenStreetMap allows for any tag you like, but this isn’t meant to 
encourage you to devalue established tags by using them differently from how 
they are typically used. What would be the benefit you expect from such 
retagging?

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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps


I started this thread to confirm/reject listing
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg as
man_made=water_tap
fountain=bubbler
drinking_water=yes
amenity=drinking_water


how can you have a sub-tag fountain=* without a main tag *=fountain ?

next time I map one, I 'll use
amenity=drinking_water
tap=yes
flow_direction=up

this doesn't prevent to have drinking_water for amenity=fountain



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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps




On 10/10/22 08:20, stevea wrote:


I continue to call "bubblers" (although I personally call them "drinking fountains") emitting a jot of water 
on button press "water taps," as it is that button press that makes them a "tap."  Yes, they are both 
drinking fountains / bubblers, too, as well as amenity=drinking_water, I hope it is all clear (how I see things).  And, I 
continue to listen, this is sort of fascinating, in an "oh, my gosh, look how we have had to drag this out" kind of way.
___


To me a drinking fountain provides water for easy immediate human 
consumption of water without any aids. Here they usually have a control 
device, a tap' and a waste receptacle.


Do we tag

the waste receptacle

or

the tap

or

the drinking fountain

?? Which is the feature primarily there for? To me that is the drinking 
fountain. I'd leave out the tap and the waste receptacle.





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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity


Le 10.10.22 à 14:07, Matija Nalis a écrit :

(i.e. are we talking about how many thinly 3 years olds_or_  have super-obese 
adults can fit there?)


As with all slightly subjective values, at best an average use is given.

example: a path (too narrow for for a car of average width) is
sometimes usable by a tiny car, that's not why you should depreciate 
path and track/... to keep only road + width values.


on the contrary, I find it interesting to have the possibility to add
a measurement for those who want, but it will not replace the comfort
of "I sat on the bench, another "average ppl" can seat with me without
a measure



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations



On 10/10/22 11:42, stevea wrote:

Such "rules" would be somewhere in the realm of the "policy" of the merchant 
(or perhaps government agency).



On Oct 9, 2022, at 5:25 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 10:12, stevea  wrote:
Yes, I'm glad to hear this:  somebody refusing a 500€ bill / invoice with a 
500€ note would simply make me leave the note on the table (counter, hand of 
the proprietor, if s/he let me...) and walk away, my obligation to remunerate 
fully and legally completed.

The history of "money" is fascinating.  And it continues to unfold with crypto, 
totally electronic payments, this seeming desire to eliminate cash (by merchants and 
governments who don't seem to like the anonymity it can provide...) and more.


I heard it was forbidden in this case not to accept the 500 bill as it is legal 
tender

Does anybody else have rules on the maximum amount that can be paid in coins?

https://banknotes.rba.gov.au/legal/legal-tender/



In this case it is a legal law. However most merchants 'may refuse' .. 
they may also accept if they are inclined to do so.. usually this means 
'not busy'. And most are happy to get some coins in rather than the 
never ending flow of coins out.


And any bank will normally accept an unrestricted number of coins.. they 
have machines for sorting, counting and packaging them so the job is 
easy for them.



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

2022-10-10 Thread martianfreeloader


Hi Mitja,

I've drafted two opposing proposals on whether capacity/seats should be 
tagged on benches without a functional separation into seats or not.


The purpose is to find out if there is a community consensus on this 
question.


"Sure, it's fine to tag capacity, even if there is now functional 
separation":

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bench:_Tag_capacity,_even_if_no_separation

"No way! -- This is not objective":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bench:_Do_not_tag_capacity_if_no_separation

*NOTE:* Please discuss *both* proposals on the discussion page with the 
positive statement:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Bench:_Do_not_tag_capacity_if_no_separation




On 10/10/2022 14:07, Matija Nalis wrote:

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:20:09 +0200 (CEST), Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
 wrote:

This revert makes sense to me.

BTW, one may count both seats and capacity on benches, why not


One might even decide to tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:length

instead (or in addition) to `seats`, as is it actually (reproducably) 
measurable instead of guessable
(i.e. are we talking about how many thinly 3 years olds _or_ have super-obese 
adults can fit there?)



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

2022-10-10 Thread Matija Nalis

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:20:09 +0200 (CEST), Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
 wrote:
> This revert makes sense to me.
>
> BTW, one may count both seats and capacity on benches, why not

One might even decide to tag 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:length

instead (or in addition) to `seats`, as is it actually (reproducably) 
measurable instead of guessable 
(i.e. are we talking about how many thinly 3 years olds _or_ have super-obese 
adults can fit there?)

-- 
Opinions above are GNU-copylefted.

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

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

2022-10-10 Thread Matija Nalis

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 20:13:00 -0700, stevea  wrote:
> Water "tap" implies at least some (even if crude) control of the flow.


And if one wants to define exactly how that flow is controlled, there is:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:handle

and other tags, like:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:actuator=manual
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn_to_close
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mechanical_driver

etc.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

2022-10-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging




Oct 10, 2022, 11:57 by illiamarchenk...@gmail.com:

>
>
> вс, 9 окт. 2022 г., 9:50 Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com> >:
>
>> On 8/10/22 20:49, Illia Marchenko wrote:
>>  > Water outlets for public or customer use (generic tagging).
>>  > >> 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/Water_outlet
>>  > Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>>  >
>>  
>>  Discussions can take place here, part of the tagging list.
>>
>
> Of course, but "> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page." 
> mentioned on > wiki.openstreetmap.org/Proposal_process 
> 
>

See 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposal_process#Remove_%22Please_discuss_this_proposal_on_its_Wiki_Talk_page%22
that just proposed to change this text (comments on wiki in that section are 
welcome)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

In Australia it would be unusual to find a drinking fountain without a 
tap to stop the flow when a person is not drinking. I think it could 
be illegal such is the scarcity of water. 
Thus, I believe that a world wide default should be avoided in favour of 
local ones or enforcing explicit tagging.


tap=yes as default would not work in Italy and tap=no as default would 
not work in Australia.



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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains



On 10/10/22 20:55, Davidoskky via Tagging wrote:


If it was fitted with a shower .. then it becomes a shower. 
If around the pipe on which the tap is present is fitted a fountain .. 
then it becomes a fountain.


Nit picking: Oxygen is a gas .. under 'normal' conditions. 

Better to use the term fluid rather than liquid.


I would expect the following to have taps are part of their 
construction - as a OSM default - shower, bottle filler, drinking 
fountain. If there is no tap .. then tap=no .. or better 
flow=continuous. Why is flow=continuous better .. it says what it is. 

Why would tap=yes be a good default?

I have run an overpass query to find all tagged types of drinking 
fountains 
("fountain"~"^(bubbler|drinking|nasone|drinking_fountain|toret|roman_wolf|wallace)$").


The total number of tagged items is 1572, 964 of which are in Italy 
(732 of which in Rome!!). In Italy this kind of fountains generally 
does  not have a tap.


Thus, the majority of fountains currently tagged in osm do not have a 
tap; at this point it would be more sensible to have tap=no as a default.




In Australia it would be unusual to find a drinking fountain without a 
tap to stop the flow when a person is not drinking. I think it could be 
illegal such is the scarcity of water.



Certainly when water restriction are declared such uncontrolled drinking 
fountains would be rendered useless, thus I don't think there are any 
here without taps.


With the most restrictive water restrictions decorative fountains are 
turned off, public water taps disabled but drinking fountains still usable.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-10 Thread Michael Brandtner

The proposal includes advice to only use this tag in shops that don't accept 
all denominations.

For vending machines, on the other hand, it is very common to not accept all 
denominations, so the tag should/can always be added.

Kind regards
Michael

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

вс, 9 окт. 2022 г., 9:50 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> On 8/10/22 20:49, Illia Marchenko wrote:
> > Water outlets for public or customer use (generic tagging).
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/Water_outlet
> > Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
> >
>
> Discussions can take place here, part of the tagging list.
>

Of course, but "Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page."
mentioned on wiki.openstreetmap.org/Proposal_process


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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

If it was fitted with a shower .. then it becomes a shower. 
If around the pipe on which the tap is present is fitted a fountain .. 
then it becomes a fountain.


Nit picking: Oxygen is a gas .. under 'normal' conditions. 

Better to use the term fluid rather than liquid.


I would expect the following to have taps are part of their 
construction - as a OSM default - shower, bottle filler, drinking 
fountain. If there is no tap .. then tap=no .. or better 
flow=continuous. Why is flow=continuous better .. it says what it is. 

Why would tap=yes be a good default?

I have run an overpass query to find all tagged types of drinking 
fountains 
("fountain"~"^(bubbler|drinking|nasone|drinking_fountain|toret|roman_wolf|wallace)$").


The total number of tagged items is 1572, 964 of which are in Italy (732 
of which in Rome!!). In Italy this kind of fountains generally does  not 
have a tap.


Thus, the majority of fountains currently tagged in osm do not have a 
tap; at this point it would be more sensible to have tap=no as a default.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Require proposal announcements to be made on the new forum instead of the mailing list

2022-10-10 Thread Frederik Ramm


Hi,

On 09.10.22 11:36, Cartographer10 via Tagging wrote:
Voting has started for "Require proposal announcements to be made on the 
new forum instead of the mailing list."


I think this proposal is not very well thought out. It's long rant about 
how great the new forum is and super big the hurdle is to subscribe to a 
mailing list and how many people don't like mailing lists and how it 
would be ideal for having tagging discussions on the new forum too as 
opposed to the wiki etc.etc. - and then in the end the vote is simply 
for replacing the rule "you have to announce your proposal on the 
mailing list" with "you have to announce your proposal on the new forum".


75% of the proposal text is completely irrelevant to the vote. This is 
not a well-written proposal.


But I haven't voted no because of that - I have voted no because I want 
people to settle in with the new forum first.


Nobody keeps anyone from discussing a proposal on the new forum but I 
don't want to formally make this mailing list irrelevant just yet.


Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains



On 9/10/22 21:08, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote:
No, it would not "turn them into taps", but it WOULD mean that a tap 
is present as part of the structure of the device.  
"amenity=drinking_water; tap=yes".



If something is fitted with a tap on its outlet .. it is then a tap.

If it was fitted with a shower .. then it becomes a shower.

If a roof is later fitted with walls, a door or 2 and some windows is it 
then


building=roof, layer=1, walls=yes, entry_doors=yes, windows=yes ..

or simply building =yes?


The water is potable and you have to operate a tap to make it flow (so 
you may be OK to get a drink, but your dog might struggle and need 
assistance)


A tap is a device to control the flow of whatever liquid (or gas, I 
suppose) is coming out.  Potable water, non-potable water; lemonade; 
petrol (gasoline), Oxygen, whatever...

Nit picking: Oxygen is a gas .. under 'normal' conditions.

I would expect the following to have taps are part of their construction 
- as a OSM default - shower, bottle filler, drinking fountain. If there 
is no tap .. then tap=no .. or better flow=continuous. Why is 
flow=continuous better .. it says what it is.




Regards,
Peter
(PeterPan99)

On Saturday, 8 October 2022 at 18:43:39 BST, Peter Elderson 
 wrote:



I have the impression that slow running water points in Europe rapidly 
are fitted with a push button fot a limited amount of water or a 
limited tap time. Would that turn them into water taps?


Continuous flow of water features in Australia has long been 
problematic. Anything that is used in a not continuous manner has a tap 
fitted of some description for user operation. Public taps have even had 
their handles removed when things get rather dry.





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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Training

Voting has started for Training.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/training
Voting has started for Training
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/training
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Training

Voting has started for Training.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/training
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*


water_tap=yes/no already exist and I see no value to change
from water_tap=* to tap=* 


I cannot find water_tap=* on the wiki, anyway taginfo shows 166 elements 
tagged as water_tap=* and 470 tagged as tap=*.




I also find that you spread yourself too thinly by talking about
ideas that you could do (but which are not done in this RFC) 
I'm asking for comments about those ideas; I'm not proposing to change 
them without previously discussing about it.


If I make a proposal it will be solely on the changes I listed in the 
Proposed summary section.



I would tend to think of one or 2 simple proposals : 
Yes, I could split this into different proposals. I think that starting 
with tap=* will be the easiest.


Then I could make one to describe the style of the fountains and another 
one to add the generic values decorative and utility.



for=drinking/bottle/dog/... to describe how it can be used 
I'm quite unsure about this idea... a fountain that spouts water 
downwards can be used to fill bottles, to drink and to let dogs (and 
other animals?) drink.



at least, a namespace isn't needed (as we don't use shop:name on a 
shop=* nor shop:opening_hours on a shop=*) 

Would simply style work?


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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains



On 9/10/22 21:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Am So., 9. Okt. 2022 um 12:22 Uhr schrieb Minh Nguyen 
:


drinking_water=no is already approved for non-potable water, and
there
are non-Boolean values and drinking_water:legal=* if you'd like to
split
hairs. 




+1

I'd expect that a tag for fountains and a tag for drinking
fountains would both imply a default value for drinking_water=* by
default, but the default should be overridden when more is known
about
the water source.



a tag for drinking fountains should definitely imply drinking_water=yes,


Agreed. However there is a t least one case where a drinking fountain 
carries a sign that it is not suitable for drinking. Local drink form it 
anyway and don't seem to suffer from it. I'd tag it as 
drinking_water:legal=no and not tag drinking_water=* at all



but amenity=fountain should not imply any default value for 
"drinking_water", it should be checked and tagged explicitly. 
Expectations change around the globe and while it could be approached 
with national or regional defaults, I think it is better to be 
explicit (because a missing value is not clear, can be default or 
unknown, and potability of water is super important in this context).



I would take the safe view, drinking_water=no unless specifically tagged.






With a tag for water taps in general, it isn't as clear. But as a
data
consumer or user, I wouldn't be eager to assume that an outdoor
tap is
potable without more context. I've been to cemeteries in swampy New
Orleans that have taps signposted "Water for Flowers" and never once
considered that they might be hooked up to the municipal water system
and maintained to the standard of a public drinking fountain.



yes, water taps on cemeteries, as far as I recall, have been the 
initial reason for introducing man_made=water_tap (some people had 
started mapping amenity=drinking_water drinking_water=no ;-) )




I'd still take the same safe view, drinking_water=no unless specifically 
tagged.


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

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

2022-10-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging

Do you really think that we would benefit from deprecation proposal?

(general opinion seems clear to me, but I can confirm that if you really 
want...)

Oct 10, 2022, 09:57 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:

> I oppose depreciation of the tag.
>
>
> I would support depreciation of all non-decorative 'fountains'.
>
>
> On 10/10/22 07:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> For now I
>>
>> 1) notified people who used added this tag more than once
>> (currently mapped man_made=drinking_fountain are counted)
>>
>> See notification list at
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain#Deprecation
>>
>> 2) added section "Problems" at
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain#Problems
>>
>> If noone will protest I will also mark it as deprecated and add request to
>> consider using other less problematic tags.
>>
>> If someone will protest I will likely make a deprecation proposal
>> (or leave it in limbo state if I will have no time for that).
>>
>
> ___
> 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 - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer

Accepting a particular coin or banknote is among short-living business policies 
that can change
frequently and is often harder to observe than e.g. opening_hours. Thus they 
are difficult to
maintain and likely to be outdated. In my opinion, they should not be in the 
OSM database in general.

Sometimes such changes can even have technical reasons. E.g. the metro rail in 
Berlin has separate
blocks in their ticket vending machines, for coins, bills, card to be inserted, 
cards with NFC.
They take them in and out as they like, you cannot rely on finding a particular 
one the next day.
Reasons might be defective blocks or vandalism fear on particular stations.

tom

On 09.10.2022 21:57, m.brandt...@posteo.de wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> voting has started for the proposal Payment denominations.
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Payment_denominations
> 
> 
> Have a nice week!
> 
> Kind regards,
> Michael (Discostu36)
> 

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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*


Le 10.10.22 à 09:49, Davidoskky via Tagging a écrit :
Introduction of the generic value fountain=utility, that describes the 
fountain as non-decorative.


it's vague and overlap drinking at least

I'm unsure fountain:style is the best name for the key to describe those 
fountains; if you have a better name in mind, please propose that.


at least, a namespace isn't needed (as we don't use shop:name on a 
shop=* nor shop:opening_hours on a shop=*)


I find your reasoning difficult to follow because some of the previous 
choices are repeated here and there in the message, which does not make 
what is actually being proposed very clear.

I also find that you spread yourself too thinly by talking about
ideas that you could do (but which are not done in this RFC)
generally proposals that want to change everything end up changing 
nothing (or end up making an additional scheme instead of replacing

and thus really solving the problem at hand).
I would tend to think of one or 2 simple proposals :
tap=yes/no/automatic (for the one that turns on when you approach
your hand) (and of course man_made=water_tap implie tap=yes)
but.. water_tap=yes/no already exist and I see no value to change
from water_tap=* to tap=*

for=drinking/bottle/dog/... to describe how it can be used

keep, simple.



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-10 Thread martianfreeloader


I agree, this discussion totally seems to be off topic.

Please start a new thread for it and don't spam this one with numerous 
and lengthy emails.


Cheers.



On 10/10/2022 09:56, Davidoskky via Tagging wrote:



question: is it legal in the EU not to accept certain types of Euronotes?


Just chiming in since I'm not really interested in this proposal and I 
will not vote.


It makes more sense to ask whether it is widespread in the EU not to 
accept certain types of notes rather than if it is legal.


If it is a widespread custom, it may be useful to tag it.

If it's only a couple shops in Europe that refuse to accept certain 
notes, then tagging this information in Europe would be useless...



Alright, sorry; I'm out.


___
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] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain


I oppose depreciation of the tag.


I would support depreciation of all non-decorative 'fountains'.


On 10/10/22 07:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:

For now I

1) notified people who used added this tag more than once
(currently mapped man_made=drinking_fountain are counted)

See notification list at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain#Deprecation

2) added section "Problems" at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain#Problems

If noone will protest I will also mark it as deprecated and add request to
consider using other less problematic tags.

If someone will protest I will likely make a deprecation proposal
(or leave it in limbo state if I will have no time for that).


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations





question: is it legal in the EU not to accept certain types of Euronotes?


Just chiming in since I'm not really interested in this proposal and I 
will not vote.


It makes more sense to ask whether it is widespread in the EU not to 
accept certain types of notes rather than if it is legal.


If it is a widespread custom, it may be useful to tag it.

If it's only a couple shops in Europe that refuse to accept certain 
notes, then tagging this information in Europe would be useless...



Alright, sorry; I'm out.


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

[Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

Hello,

in this message
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-October/065805.html
I proposed two different ways to go about the inability to well describe
features that provide water through pipes.

The first idea proposed was focusing on using the subtag fountain=* and
defining some sensible values that could easily be extended.

The second idea proposed was the creation of a new tag that would
include all non-decorative fountains.

I also proposed the deprecation of man_made=water_tap.

I have observed the discussion and changed my mind, I do not believe
anymore that man_made=water_tap should be deprecated but rather
redefined to only describe the tap of a fountain and not the whole
fountain. Please don't discuss about this specific point here, I'm just
describing the background information.

It appears to me that people in this mailing list prefer my first idea,
as I also do. It doesn't create a new tag and forces some order in the
fountain=* tag by solving the problems with overlapping tags.

The second idea was brought forward and a proposal about it was made,
which was quickly withdrawn since there was strong opposition and many
affirmed tags were being changed or deprecated.

I have written this as a RFC, but after a few comments I do actually
want to make a proposal. I have never made one, so I would appreciate
some advice on how to go about doing it.

*Proposal summary*

amenity=fountain describes both decorative fountains and utility
fountains, such as drinking fountains, small fountains for washing
clothes, fountains to clean people or provide water to animals; this
would not include large facilities with one single scope in mind: for
example a building where people go to wash clothes would not fall under
this tag.

Introduction of the key fountain:style=* that accepts as values all the
ones currently listed in the wiki as "Specific types of drinking water
fountains"; translation of the definition of all those fountains to
fountain=drinking, fountain:style=*.

Introduction of the key tap=yes, used to describe if the flow of a
fountain can be controlled by the user.

Introduction of the generic value fountain=decorative, that ensures the
fountain is decorative.

Introduction of the generic value fountain=utility, that describes the
fountain as non-decorative.

Deprecation of fountain=drinking_fountain in favour of fountain=drinking.

The idea is that fountains not covered by the current values can still
be tagged as either decorative or utility even if a specific tag does
not exist.

This proposal does not change the man_made=water_tap tag, but keep in
mind that a redefinition of that tag would greatly improve this proposal.

The specific names of the values I proposed can be changed, but please
don't start a world war between British and Australian English.

*RFC*

I'm unsure fountain:style is the best name for the key to describe those
fountains; if you have a better name in mind, please propose that.

You can propose other values for fountain=* but I guess those will come
with time anyway, since the idea is to make this easily extensible.

I would propose the deprecation of the value fountain=stone_block since
it could be tagged as fountain=driking, material=stone. This tag impedes
tagging the fountain with a specific value in order to describe its
material.

I'm unsure whether fountain=bottle_refill should be kept.

In the wiki it is decribed by this image:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fairmont_Sonoma_Mission_Inn_August_2019_-_Sarah_Stierch_09.jpg

The water does not come through pipes, but from a nearby water
container. I'd rather tag it as its own amenity.

This said, this is not the main point; please discuss the main points of
my proposal and let me know if I can publish this on the wiki.

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

Re: [Tagging] relevance of water taps as opposed to fountains


Similarly the tap that is part of a drinking fountain cannot represent the 
whole fountain, hence it shouldn’t be in “competition” with the fountain tag, 
it could be added as a property like tap=* but adding it as man_made to the 
amenity (which is supposed to represent the whole feature) would just be a 
misrepresentation and misleading.


+1 from the wiki page for example I would not tag these two as water_tap:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_tap_in_Frejus.jpg

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg


While I would tag this one as a water_tap:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bristol_(UK),_Brunel%27s_ss_Great_Britain_--_2013_--_1606.jpg


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

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps