Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Richard]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 09:44:50AM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged 
> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

if similar stuff occurs frequently I would suggest opening also a JOSM validator
ticket

Richard

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

28 Oct 2019, 18:29 by pla16...@gmail.com:

> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 17:17, Kevin Kenny <> kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com 
> > > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:54 AM Tom Pfeifer <>> t.pfei...@computer.org 
>> >> > wrote:
>>  > >>> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
>>  > >>> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign 
>> 
>>  
>>  I concur with all those who said this is a horrible idea.
>>
>
> So far I've resisted the temptation to agree this is a horrible idea because 
> it so obviously is
> a horrible idea that I'd just be adding noise to the list.  I've seen nobody 
> say that it's not a
> horrible idea.  There's only one person who might disagree with changing the 
> wiki and the
> overwhelming consensus is against him/her.  So somebody please fix the wiki. 
>
This idea is removed from wiki, vote page was also fixed (it was misleadingly 
described as
approved in vote - based on a very creative vote counting).

Thanks to Polarbear - see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Relation:destination_sign=1917489=1797734
 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Relations/Proposed/Destination_Signs=1917486=437212
 


I also edited later metadata in proposal and on page to remove incorrect 
"approved" status.

Thanks to all comments.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Jorge Pinho]

A segunda, 28 de out de 2019, 08:46, Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com> escreveu:

> "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
>
> For me it seems a horrible and unacceptable tagging - amenity=hospital
> should be on hospitals
> and nothing else.
>
+1

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Simon Poole]

Am 28.10.2019 um 11:11 schrieb marc marc:
> Le 28.10.19 à 09:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
>> "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged 
>> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
> Yes it's horrible
>
> the next line said destination:symbol=hospital
> it's better.

And using it would be consistent with using destinations on lanes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Destination_details#destination:symbol


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



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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 17:17, Kevin Kenny  wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:54 AM Tom Pfeifer 
> wrote:
> > >>> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> > >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
>
> I concur with all those who said this is a horrible idea.
>

So far I've resisted the temptation to agree this is a horrible idea
because it so obviously is
a horrible idea that I'd just be adding noise to the list.  I've seen
nobody say that it's not a
horrible idea.  There's only one person who might disagree with changing
the wiki and the
overwhelming consensus is against him/her.  So somebody please fix the
wiki.

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:54 AM Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
> >>> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

I concur with all those who said this is a horrible idea.

> I had a look at the original proposal, and it does not contain the word 
> 'amenity'.
> Thus I conclude it had been later fiddled into the wiki page.
>
> Anyway looking into the voting results the whole proposal looks fiddled,
> the proposer counts some of the No votes as approvals :-o

https://tinyurl.com/y2rptqrd

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Simon Poole]

There are some other "weird" things, for example using "intersection"
instead of "via" for the via role, which means that the handling needs
to be special cased relative to turn restrictions and similar relations.

Am 28.10.2019 um 15:51 schrieb Tom Pfeifer:
 type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
>
> I had a look at the original proposal, and it does not contain the
> word 'amenity'.
> Thus I conclude it had been later fiddled into the wiki page.
>
> Anyway looking into the voting results the whole proposal looks fiddled,
> the proposer counts some of the No votes as approvals :-o
>
> tom
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[François Lacombe]

Le lun. 28 oct. 2019 à 09:46, Mateusz Konieczny  a
écrit :

> For me it seems a horrible and unacceptable tagging - amenity=hospital
> should be on hospitals
> and nothing else.
>

+1

Same kind of directions are given for marker=* key
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:marker#How_to_map
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Tom Pfeifer]

type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign


I had a look at the original proposal, and it does not contain the word 
'amenity'.
Thus I conclude it had been later fiddled into the wiki page.

Anyway looking into the voting results the whole proposal looks fiddled,
the proposer counts some of the No votes as approvals :-o

tom

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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Andrew Harvey]

+1 I'd support updated the wiki page to favour tagging the symbol and not
using amenity=hospital.

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 21:13, marc marc  wrote:

> Le 28.10.19 à 09:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
> > "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
> > type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
>
> Yes it's horrible
>
> the next line said destination:symbol=hospital
> it's better.
> ___
> 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] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/10/2019 10:11, marc marc wrote:

Le 28.10.19 à 09:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :

"sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

Yes it's horrible

the next line said destination:symbol=hospital
it's better.


There are only 12 in the database (Germany / Italy / Denmark):

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Nuz

so removing the offending line from the wiki and changing the data 
shouldn't be too difficult to do manually.  There are 69 if you include 
other amenities such as "school".


Best Regards,




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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 28/10/2019 09:42, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

On 10/28/19 03:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

"sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

For me it seems a horrible and unacceptable tagging - amenity=hospital
should be on hospitals
and nothing else.

+1

Maybe destination:amenity=hospital instead?


+1

Mateusz, have you search for other similar signs? I'm sure it's not the 
first.


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

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[marc marc]

Le 28.10.19 à 09:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
> "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged 
> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

Yes it's horrible

the next line said destination:symbol=hospital
it's better.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 10/28/19 03:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
> type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
> 
> For me it seems a horrible and unacceptable tagging - amenity=hospital
> should be on hospitals
> and nothing else.

+1

Maybe destination:amenity=hospital instead?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

[Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

"sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged 
type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign

For me it seems a horrible and unacceptable tagging - amenity=hospital should 
be on hospitals
and nothing else.

Is it just me, or is this sentiment shared by others?

I encountered an editor issue caused by type=destination_sign relation
and at this moment I plan to consider it as a tagging issue, eliminate tag 
(railway=station in this case)
and add to wiki info that such tagging is at best proplematic.

But I want to check is my opinion shared by other - maybe anyone processing any 
data needs
to add type!=destination_sign checks.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging