Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Warin]

On 5/21/2016 4:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


Il giorno 20 mag 2016, alle ore 23:21, Marc Zoutendijk  
ha scritto:

I was pointing out that what is true in one language may not be true (or even 
false) in another language.


if something is true in one language but not in another than it is likely not a 
translation but just a similar word/concept, or maybe even a "false friend".




Some 'greenhouses' are too low to enter- you simply raise the 'roof' to gain 
access.

Other 'greenhouses' are huge - tractors and trucks enter these.

For me a 'building' must have sufficient volume for a person to enter with ease.
Dictionary definition? a 'substantial structure' whatever that means.


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 20 mag 2016, alle ore 23:21, Marc Zoutendijk 
>  ha scritto:
> 
> I was pointing out that what is true in one language may not be true (or even 
> false) in another language.


if something is true in one language but not in another than it is likely not a 
translation but just a similar word/concept, or maybe even a "false friend".


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 20 mei 2016, om 21:09 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  
> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Maybe already the word greenHOUSE indicates a building (yes, likely there are 
> foo houses that aren't buildings). The picture you have linked could be 
> called building I believe, but I don't understand where we want to get to. 
> What about the 128.000 greenhouses in the db?

Martin,

We don’t have to get to anywhere. If the wiki suggests to use building for a 
greenhouse, I happily will do so, but I was pointing out that what is true in 
one language may not be true (or even false) in another language. And that 
problem is not (and will never be) solved by this discussion.
But as a result some mappers (like me) are wondering what the reason behind 
some choices was. 
And more and more mappers (not in control of UK English) don’t understand the 
concepts behind certain tags and use them in completely different/wrong ways. 
And on the other hand there are many concepts/objects in use in different 
cultures that do not have a counterpart in UK English. How are we mapping those?

On Tenerife (and in the majority of Andalucia), thousands of “greenhouses” are 
just made of large plastic sheets fixed between steel wires. I wouldn’t call 
those "sheet-houses” buildings (but I shall map them according to the “rules”).


See my diary entry on language problems [1].

Marc.


[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/marczoutendijk/diary/35936 


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 20 mag 2016, alle ore 20:35, Marc Zoutendijk 
>  ha scritto:
> 
> is by not one single person in the Netherlands called a “building" or a 
> "group of buidlings”.
> 
> And in my use of the word “green_house” is was referring to the latter.


Maybe already the word greenHOUSE indicates a building (yes, likely there are 
foo houses that aren't buildings). The picture you have linked could be called 
building I believe, but I don't understand where we want to get to. What about 
the 128.000 greenhouses in the db? 
http://taginfo.osm.org/tags/building=greenhouse


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 20 mei 2016, om 10:51 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer  > het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Actually the dutch wikipedians DO classifiy a greenhouse (kas) as nl:gebouw, 
> from wikipedia.nl  "Kas(gebouw)":
> "De traditionele negentiende-eeuwse kas was een gebouw dat werd 
> aangetroffen..." 


Martin,

Earlier in this topic you wrote:

> "Yes, the term "building" has a more narrow meaning in language than what it 
> is used for in OSM, and wikipedia reflects this, still, for OSM the osm wiki 
> is relevant, not wikipedia.”

That’s what I do also. I don’t care what wikipedia is writing if all my fellow 
countryman are talking about “De kassen in het Westland” and not “De gebouwen 
in het Westland”.

I agree with you that Palm House in Kew Gardens [1] could be considered a 
building, but this:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Westland_kassen.jpg 


is by not one single person in the Netherlands called a “building" or a "group 
of buidlings”.

And in my use of the word “green_house” is was referring to the latter.

Marc.



[1] 
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kas_%28gebouw%29#/media/File:Kew_Gardens_Palm_House,_London_-_July_2009.jpg
 


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Dave Swarthout]

Marc,

Sorry, sometimes I forget just how difficult it can be to agree about
tagging terminology when there are underlying language differences like
this that I was not aware of. I have trouble with the UK-English slant of
OSM all the time and English is my mother tongue. Of course, I'm American
so that statement might bring a smile to the face of a native British
person.

Dave

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Marc Zoutendijk 
wrote:

>
> > Op 20 mei 2016, om 00:03 heeft Dave Swarthout 
> het volgende geschreven:
> >
> > I don't know where the notion came from saying a greenhouse is not a
> building. It is not a residence but it is most certainly a building - it
> has doors, walls and a roof, Just because they're made of glass doesn't
> disqualify it from the building category.
> >
>
> Dave,
>
> That was my observation. The major problem in this discussion - as almost
> always is the case when people have different opinions - is a language
> problem. In my country, The Netherlands, we have tens of thousands of
> greenhouses but nobody will call them “building” because that word
> translates as “gebouw” and that doesn’t fit (in Dutch) to what a greenhouse
> is. We have just a different word for a greenhouse: “kas”. (and it might be
> called “bouwwerk” - something that is built; or “constructie” - something
> that is constructed; but never “gebouw” - building. )
>
> How nice would it be if all words in all languages had a one-to-one
> relationship!
> And because the lingua-franca for OSM is UK-English, more and more
> problems will arise in the future as more and more
> "non-uk-english-speakers-mappers” are trying to find out "what the heck is
> a village_green??”
>
> Marc.
>
>


-- 
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] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-05-20 11:01 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer :

> We probably need to adapt the definition for OSM, since otherwise
> the very popular building=roof would fall through.
>



I think it might not (fall through), at least accorcing to the German LBO
§2,(2) they would still be considered buildings (if you can go under it),
as the requirement is "cover", not "enclosure". But there are other
structures that might (fall through).

Looking at common values http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/building#values I
noticed these for exmple:

- storage_tank 12862

- houseboat 11702 (well, if they are intended to remain at the same spot,
they might eventually be, in LBO (Landesbauordnung) that's §2,(1) ("oder
wenn die Anlage nach ihrem Verwendungszweck dazu bestimmt ist, überwiegend
ortsfest benutzt zu werden.").

- slurry_tank 6412

- transformer_tower 5232

- tank 3466

- dam 3379

- silo 2877

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Tom Pfeifer]

Marc Gemis wrote on 2016/05/19 20:50:


I don't know whether we want to follow the wikipedia definition or
not, but it might help to decide where we have to place future tags.


We probably need to adapt the definition for OSM, since otherwise
the very popular building=roof would fall through.

tom


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-05-20 10:08 GMT+02:00 Marc Zoutendijk :

> In my country, The Netherlands, we have tens of thousands of greenhouses
> but nobody will call them “building” because that word translates as
> “gebouw” and that doesn’t fit (in Dutch) to what a greenhouse is



Actually the dutch wikipedians DO classifiy a greenhouse (kas) as
nl:gebouw, from wikipedia.nl "Kas(gebouw)":
"De traditionele negentiende-eeuwse kas was een gebouw dat werd
aangetroffen..."

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kas_%28gebouw%29

I guess the official Dutch "building" definition is very similar to the one
I cited above from the German law, feel free to look it up and tell us more.

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 20 mei 2016, om 00:03 heeft Dave Swarthout  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> I don't know where the notion came from saying a greenhouse is not a 
> building. It is not a residence but it is most certainly a building - it has 
> doors, walls and a roof, Just because they're made of glass doesn't 
> disqualify it from the building category.
> 

Dave,

That was my observation. The major problem in this discussion - as almost 
always is the case when people have different opinions - is a language problem. 
In my country, The Netherlands, we have tens of thousands of greenhouses but 
nobody will call them “building” because that word translates as “gebouw” and 
that doesn’t fit (in Dutch) to what a greenhouse is. We have just a different 
word for a greenhouse: “kas”. (and it might be called “bouwwerk” - something 
that is built; or “constructie” - something that is constructed; but never 
“gebouw” - building. )

How nice would it be if all words in all languages had a one-to-one 
relationship!
And because the lingua-franca for OSM is UK-English, more and more problems 
will arise in the future as more and more "non-uk-english-speakers-mappers” are 
trying to find out "what the heck is a village_green??” 

Marc.


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 20 mag 2016, alle ore 07:51, Marc Gemis  ha 
> scritto:
> 
> It is also not clear to me why a water mill or wind mill are man_made
> and not a building.


I d say they could also be considered buildings, if there is some enclosed 
space that can be entered (as opposed to just a pole)

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 20 mag 2016, alle ore 07:52, Marc Gemis  ha 
> scritto:
> 
> Marc Zoutendijk wrote in his mail that he does not consider a
> greenhouse a building.


if it helps, in Germany a building is an by humans accessible structure built 
for the protection of humans, animals or things, with a cover (roof), and built 
from building products, and attached to the ground (also standing on the ground 
or on rails, and intended to remain mostly in place). By that definition a 
greenhouse is a building.

reference: 
http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/service/gesetzestexte/de/download/bauen/BauOBln.pdf
(1+2)


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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Dave Swarthout]

I don't know where the notion came from saying a greenhouse is not a
building. It is not a residence but it is most certainly a building - it
has doors, walls and a roof, Just because they're made of glass doesn't
disqualify it from the building category.

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

>
> 2016-05-19 20:50 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :
>
>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Marc Zoutendijk 
>> wrote:
>> > That's because everything that is a building should be tagged as a
>> building”
>>
>> so I looked at the wikipedia definition of building [1], and their
>> definition of non-buildings [2]
>> At this moment I think that digester/bioreactor belongs to the non-
>> building structures, as they list "Structures designed to support,
>> contain or convey liquid or gaseous matter, "
>
>
>
> actually, in osm there is some tradition in tagging non-building
> structures as buildings, indeed, there is no "non-building structure" key
> in OSM (man_made is far more generic and not referring to structures only).
> Yes, the term "building" has a more narrow meaning in language than what it
> is used for in OSM, and wikipedia reflects this, still, for OSM the osm
> wiki is relevant, not wikipedia.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> 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] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-05-19 20:50 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Marc Zoutendijk 
> wrote:
> > That's because everything that is a building should be tagged as a
> building”
>
> so I looked at the wikipedia definition of building [1], and their
> definition of non-buildings [2]
> At this moment I think that digester/bioreactor belongs to the non-
> building structures, as they list "Structures designed to support,
> contain or convey liquid or gaseous matter, "



actually, in osm there is some tradition in tagging non-building structures
as buildings, indeed, there is no "non-building structure" key in OSM
(man_made is far more generic and not referring to structures only). Yes,
the term "building" has a more narrow meaning in language than what it is
used for in OSM, and wikipedia reflects this, still, for OSM the osm wiki
is relevant, not wikipedia.

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Gemis]

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> That's because everything that is a building should be tagged as a building”

so I looked at the wikipedia definition of building [1], and their
definition of non-buildings [2]
At this moment I think that digester/bioreactor belongs to the non-
building structures, as they list "Structures designed to support,
contain or convey liquid or gaseous matter, "

When you look at [3] the subsection of agricultural buildings, you see
greenhouse listed.

I don't know whether we want to follow the wikipedia definition or
not, but it might help to decide where we have to place future tags.

regards

m


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonbuilding_structure
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_building_types#Agricultural_buildings

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Zoutendijk]

> Op 19 mei 2016, om 14:46 heeft Marc Gemis  het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Marc Zoutendijk  
> wrote:
>> And as a side note I could say:
>> Combining man_made=* AND building=* on the same object (as is often done to 
>> make it appear on the map) is as wrong as using highway=* and waterway=* on 
>> the same object. It is one or the other, but cannot be both.
> 
> Marc, it seems like the person that added the building=digester does
> not agree with you:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Travelling_salesman
> 
> ___

Yes, but he writes:

"That's because everything that is a building should be tagged as a building”

Which is the same as saying: "everything that is a tree should be tagged as a 
tree”

The point is that there is confusion about the word “building”. In my opinion 
not everything that is built is a building. A car e.g. is built, but is it a 
building? A ship is built, is it a building? 

Marc.




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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Gemis]

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
> And as a side note I could say:
> Combining man_made=* AND building=* on the same object (as is often done to 
> make it appear on the map) is as wrong as using highway=* and waterway=* on 
> the same object. It is one or the other, but cannot be both.

Marc, it seems like the person that added the building=digester does
not agree with you:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Travelling_salesman

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 18 mag 2016, alle ore 18:45, Marc Zoutendijk 
>  ha scritto:
> 
> And as a side note I could say:
> Combining man_made=* AND building=* on the same object (as is often done to 
> make it appear on the map) is as wrong as using highway=* and waterway=* on 
> the same object. It is one or the other, but cannot be both.


it can perfectly be both, e.g. a tower is also a building 

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Tom Pfeifer]

Marc Gemis wrote on 2016/05/18 17:46:

Triggered by a discussion on the Dutch forum I looked at the building
page  [1] again. I noticed a new value: digester

I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to put this under man_made [2]
just as we do with gasometer, hot water tank and similar constructions.


Fully agree, producing biogas is a function, not a building type.
Such digester would be similar in tagging to a man_made=wastewater_plant.

Further I think that man_made=bioreactor would be easier to understand
internationally than digester.

tom

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

Re: [Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Zoutendijk]

Hi,

> Op 18 mei 2016, om 17:46 heeft Marc Gemis  het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Triggered by a discussion on the Dutch forum I looked at the building
> page  [1] again. I noticed a new value: digester
> 
> I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to put this under man_made [2]
> just as we do with gasometer, hot water tank and similar constructions.
> 
> what do you think ?
> 
> 


I think I know to what discussion you refer, and me, too, had some doubts about 
“digester” being a “building”.
But there are more such “mistakes”. To me a greenhouse is NOT a building. Of 
course, it is built, but every "man made" object is built, but that doesn’t 
mean it is to be considered a building.

And as a side note I could say:
Combining man_made=* AND building=* on the same object (as is often done to 
make it appear on the map) is as wrong as using highway=* and waterway=* on the 
same object. It is one or the other, but cannot be both.

Marc.




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

[Tagging] building=digester

[Marc Gemis]

Triggered by a discussion on the Dutch forum I looked at the building
page  [1] again. I noticed a new value: digester

I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to put this under man_made [2]
just as we do with gasometer, hot water tank and similar constructions.

what do you think ?


regards

m

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:man_made

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