Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
2015-05-11 14:22 GMT+02:00 SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk: You could argue that prefixing all access tags with access: might make it easier for mappers, but only if you simultaneously submit patches for iD, P2, JOSM, Vespucci, et al, _and_ get a general concensus that the existing accepted values should be mechanically edited. Good luck with that. I willl argue that prefixes like contact:, addr: or maybe access: actually make mapping less comfortable for mappers that use autocompletion rather than presets. I believe it is justified in the case of address, as an exception, thankfully that's only 5 digits, but I wouldn't like to make tag prefixing more common. (who uses prevalently autocompletion will probably agree: addresses make a perfect exception to use a preset). Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Also, it would break all current data consumers. I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on this tagging list, then among actual data consumers. For example: Any decent data consumer needs to process *both*: *phone=XXX +* *contact:phone=XXX* Else they're missing 100,000 data points. So even if *phone* was mechanically retagged to* contact:phone* (or the other way around) data consumers would* not even notice.* It's the 18 pages of tag soup from http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/search?q=phone that hides phone numbers from data consumers, not a potential well discussed and documented improvement to the tagging architecture. In fact worst case is not all that bad with a mechanical retag process: if a data consumer breaks, it's because they're years out of date on following evolving tag preference. The access tags, and contact tags are both large tag spaces created before namespaces. If invented today, they'd problably use namespaces. There are strong advantages for data processing, to have them groupable. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Mon, 11 May 2015 00:27:55 -0700 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on this tagging list, then among actual data consumers. For example: Any decent data consumer needs to process *both*: *phone=XXX +* *contact:phone=XXX* Else they're missing 100,000 data points. So even if *phone* was mechanically retagged to* contact:phone* (or the other way around) data consumers would* not even notice.* For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports for example access:foot. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports for example access:foot. I think the point is that transition of tagging practice, even if it takes a few years, is possible. foot=yes is widely processed as an access tag, for sure. dog=, stroller= and fishing_boat= however are far less likely to be recognized as access tags even if used correctly. If access: started off with the odd cases, it could build momentum, to the point where the transition could be seamless. Contact and access are huge tag spaces that contain members that are semantically fuzzy. Data consumers tend to ignore tags with too much uncertainty. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: foot=yes is widely processed as an access tag, for sure. dog=, stroller= and fishing_boat= however are far less likely to be recognized as access tags even if used correctly. If access: started off with the odd cases, it could build momentum, to the point where the transition could be seamless. That would be confusing IMHO. Either you have to bite the sour apple and go (at least propose) for a complete move of access tags to their own name space or just leave everything as it is now. regards m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
2015-05-11 9:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com: It's the 18 pages of tag soup from http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/search?q=phone that hides phone numbers from data consumers, not a potential well discussed and documented improvement to the tagging architecture. actually if you have a look at this list (here the most used values): 494 060 *phone* http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/phone 99 706 contact:*phone* http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/contact%3Aphone 10 592 payment:tele*phone*_cards http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/payment%3Atelephone_cards 10 045 openGeoDB:tele*phone*_area_code http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/openGeoDB%3Atelephone_area_code 8 093 communication:mobile_*phone* http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/communication%3Amobile_phone 1 648 emergency_tele*phone*_code http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/emergency_telephone_code 1 079 tele*phone* http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/telephone These are not actually telephone numbers (besides the first 2) but mostly other telephone related attributes (have a look at the values, e.g. here: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/telephone#values ) with a few exceptions (low usage). What come after these on the following 16 pages are tags with very few usage (all below 1000) and will be fixed sooner or later or is not about a phone number. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On 2015-05-11 09:27, Bryce Nesbitt wrote : On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Also, it would break all current data consumers. I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on this tagging list, then among actual data consumers. For example: Any decent data consumer needs to process both: phone=XXX + contact:phone=XXX Else they're missing 100,000 data points. So even if phone was mechanically retagged to contact:phone (or the other way around) data consumers would not even notice. The problem is that if you don't find a phone number you may miss a phone call but that if you use wrong access or routing tags you will instantly have GPSes send cars, bikes or pedestrian on the wrong road. It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software blindly obeys rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same rules for the GPSes to work. The many many routing tags errors are a real PITA. Even wrong instructions in the documentation causing contributors to be misinformed. Is OSM suitable for GPS Cheers André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:42 AM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software blindly obeys rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same rules for the GPSes to work. The many many routing tags errors are a real PITA. Even wrong instructions in the documentation causing contributors to be misinformed. Is OSM suitable for GPS That remains to be seen. But it's an advantage for the more verbose tags. hgv=designated is not all that clear to a starting mapper. access:hgv=designated at least gives a hint to those who read English. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote That would be confusing IMHO. Either you have to bite the sour apple and go (at least propose) for a complete move of access tags to their own name space or just leave everything as it is now. The transition to a namespace is already underway http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Ahorse http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Abus The question then becomes: is there energy to hurry that process along, try and stop that process, or clean up the ones that don't fit like: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Aroof http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Acustomer ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On 11/05/2015 09:42, André Pirard wrote: The problem is that if you don't find a phone number you may miss a phone call but that if you use wrong access or routing tags you will instantly have GPSes send cars, bikes or pedestrian on the wrong road. It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software blindly obeys rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same rules for the GPSes to work. The many many routing tags errors are a real PITA. Even wrong instructions in the documentation causing contributors to be misinformed. Is OSM suitable for GPS Hell yes* :) Seriously, I presume that's a rhetorical question. I've been using OSM data in a car satnav (in the UK) for years, and when in someone else's car sometimes end up playing the BMW-vs-Google-vs-OSM-on-an-eTrex game, and (apart from postcodes, which is a different issue to access tags) OSM pretty much always wins. I suspect that that might not be the case in e.g. raw TIGER-infested areas of the US, but in the UK and in Australia I genuinely haven't had a problem. Cheers, Andy * Sorry, I've been been watching far too much general election coverage over the last few weeks. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On 11/05/2015 08:32, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: On Mon, 11 May 2015 00:27:55 -0700 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on this tagging list, then among actual data consumers. Agreed. For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports for example access:foot For my own use I've been doing it for a while, ever since (some) people started using it: https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L351 You could argue that prefixing all access tags with access: might make it easier for mappers, but only if you simultaneously submit patches for iD, P2, JOSM, Vespucci, et al, _and_ get a general concensus that the existing accepted values should be mechanically edited. Good luck with that. Cheers, Andy PS: Not OSM or map related in any way, but sometimes very relevant to this list: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog18.html ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 1:30 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: Do you plan to use the same prefix for vehicle, foot, ... ? Or just for the categories that you listed ? The thought here is to group all access tags, current and those invented in the future. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 12:22:07AM -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO it would make editing and using data harder. It sounds like something that should be improved by a better interface for editors (grouping similar tags together). Exactly the problem. How can a computer tell that dog hgv and mofa should all be grouped? With a prefix, a consumer like a smartphone app can group all the restrictions,. Right now building automated tools against the data is fragile. For example the access for boats is spread across quite a number of tags. Even determining if a facility is applicable to a boat would require the consumer to keep up with all the various boat tags. Having a class hierarchy would enable generic actions for watercraft, even if the data consumer did not understand all the options (e.g. generic watercraft which might be a fishing boat, wave runner, rowboat). makes a lot of sense for me, the old system makes it pretty difficult to keep track of all possible tag combinations. The transition from the old to the new system would probably take some time where the old and new system would have to coexist. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
Do you plan to use the same prefix for vehicle, foot, ... ? Or just for the categories that you listed ? regards m On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: There was discussion about the contact: prefix... now how about the access tags? There are a lot of them, and trying to gather and present them is very hard: hov boat motorboat canoe bulk tanker mofa moped dog hazmat bicycle imdg ice_skates ... ... ... These could be mechanically retagged into a namespace: access:hov=yes access:boat=yes access:motorboat=yes access:canoe=yes access:bulk=yes access:tanker=yes access:mofa=no access:moped=yes access:dog=yes access:hazmat=destination access:bicycle=customers access:imdg=yes access:ice_skates=designated Or perhaps semicolons: access:designated=bicycle access:no=dog;mofa;moped;canoe;ice_skates And perhaps a small set of superclasses could emerge, for use in rendering: foot watercraft human_powered_vehicle motor_vehicle motor_cycle heavy_motor_vehicle mobility_aid (e.g. wheelchair) animal With the present rich set of tags showing up at level three or more: access:animal=yes access:animal:cat=no access:animal:dog=designated Thoughts? ___ 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] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Sat, 9 May 2015 21:45:46 -0700 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: There was discussion about the contact: prefix... now how about the access tags? There are a lot of them, and trying to gather and present them is very hard: hov boat motorboat canoe bulk tanker mofa moped dog hazmat bicycle imdg ice_skates ... ... ... These could be mechanically retagged into a namespace: access:hov=yes access:boat=yes access:motorboat=yes access:canoe=yes access:bulk=yes access:tanker=yes access:mofa=no access:moped=yes access:dog=yes access:hazmat=destination access:bicycle=customers access:imdg=yes access:ice_skates=designated Or perhaps semicolons: access:designated=bicycle access:no=dog;mofa;moped;canoe;ice_skates And perhaps a small set of superclasses could emerge, for use in rendering: foot watercraft human_powered_vehicle motor_vehicle motor_cycle heavy_motor_vehicle mobility_aid (e.g. wheelchair) animal With the present rich set of tags showing up at level three or more: access:animal=yes access:animal:cat=no access:animal:dog=designated Thoughts? IMHO it would make editing and using data harder. It sounds like something that should be improved by a better interface for editors (grouping similar tags together). Especially access:no=dog;mofa;moped;canoe;ice_skates is ugly. Also, it would break all current data consumers. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO it would make editing and using data harder. It sounds like something that should be improved by a better interface for editors (grouping similar tags together). Exactly the problem. How can a computer tell that dog hgv and mofa should all be grouped? With a prefix, a consumer like a smartphone app can group all the restrictions,. Right now building automated tools against the data is fragile. For example the access for boats is spread across quite a number of tags. Even determining if a facility is applicable to a boat would require the consumer to keep up with all the various boat tags. Having a class hierarchy would enable generic actions for watercraft, even if the data consumer did not understand all the options (e.g. generic watercraft which might be a fishing boat, wave runner, rowboat). I suppose there is one more option: a comprehensive list of which otherwise random tags ( dog hgv and mofa) have access semantics. One could similarly group contacts (e.g. phone website www are all part of group contacts). And some list somewhere could define the twelve boat tags as having semantic meaning access plus semantic meaning waterway. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)
There was discussion about the contact: prefix... now how about the access tags? There are a lot of them, and trying to gather and present them is very hard: hov boat motorboat canoe bulk tanker mofa moped dog hazmat bicycle imdg ice_skates ... ... ... These could be mechanically retagged into a namespace: access:hov=yes access:boat=yes access:motorboat=yes access:canoe=yes access:bulk=yes access:tanker=yes access:mofa=no access:moped=yes access:dog=yes access:hazmat=destination access:bicycle=customers access:imdg=yes access:ice_skates=designated Or perhaps semicolons: access:designated=bicycle access:no=dog;mofa;moped;canoe;ice_skates And perhaps a small set of superclasses could emerge, for use in rendering: foot watercraft human_powered_vehicle motor_vehicle motor_cycle heavy_motor_vehicle mobility_aid (e.g. wheelchair) animal With the present rich set of tags showing up at level three or more: access:animal=yes access:animal:cat=no access:animal:dog=designated Thoughts? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
