Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Erkin Alp Güney]

education=sports for academically oriented sports schools,
education=cram_school otherwise. education=driving also for boat, train and
aero driving schools. Advanced levels of those non-road driving
schools(e.g. ADR training, multi-engine plane driving) go to
education=specialty.

2017-09-18 0:22 GMT+03:00 Graeme Fitzpatrick :

> Thanks for clarification re "types" of training schools.
>
> Carrying on along the driving side of things but diverging a bit - how
> about flying & boating training schools? It was mentioned that for driver
> training, the school only teaches the student how to drive, then they must
> go to the Transport Dept office for their practical & theory tests. For
> flying & boating (at least in Australia), the schools also do all the
> testing (to Govt standards) & decide whether the student has passed.
>
> Same sort of thing for Scuba diving - you have dedicated Scuba diving
> schools to train & qualify new divers - education or sport?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
Yours, faithfully
Erkin Alp
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Thanks for clarification re "types" of training schools.

Carrying on along the driving side of things but diverging a bit - how
about flying & boating training schools? It was  mentioned that for driver
training, the school only teaches the student how to drive, then they must
go to the Transport Dept office for their practical & theory tests. For
flying & boating (at least in Australia), the schools also do all the
testing (to Govt standards) & decide whether the student has passed.

Same sort of thing for Scuba diving - you have dedicated Scuba diving
schools to train & qualify new divers - education or sport?


Thanks

Graeme


On 17 September 2017 at 19:11, Erkin Alp Güney 
wrote:

>
> I do not know of any jurisdiction where a driving school is entitled to
> license a driver by itself. These examinations are government regulated
> otherwise driving schools would just skip the practical portion of
> driver education and try to license an incompetent driver just for more
> profit.
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 17. Sep 2017, at 10:52, Tobias Knerr  wrote:
> 
> . If we were to reform
> the tagging system, my ideal solution would be a "type"/"thing"/"class"
> key that is used for the main tag of all features.


the downside with this approach is that many things are kind of a mixture of 
basic things/concepts, so this would lead to a lot more of different main 
features, as if you could create them by combination.

E.g. hotel and restaurant are combinable today (up to a certain point, 
sometimes you still have to split things into several objects due to different 
properties they have, that you want to map).

Maybe we could overcome this problem in your proposal by adding combination 
relations, that e.g. say: these 2 (basic) objects are the same business / part 
of this complex object, with the same name, operator, parking lot, etc.

You can have entrance=yes exit=emergency on the same object and don't have to 
decide whether it's mostly an entrance or an emergency exit.


> Other than this
> unlikely step, the next best solution is continued use of amenity as a
> catch-all for most features.


+1, I agree there's no point in moving universities or schools away from 
amenity, and there's generally no such thing as a "crowded" key (what is 
frequently brought up for amenity with the proposal to move things from amenity 
to other keys).

For dataconsumers it can make things easier when there's different keys at a 
toplevel, e.g. if you're only interested in streets you can reasonably filter 
them by looking at the presence of a highway key (you'll still get a bit more 
than streets), similarly for railways or waterways and areas. Or buildings. etc.

It's nothing we couldn't solve, you'd have to look at other tags and find the 
same things, but any system will have to decide how to deal with many special 
cases (due to the complexity of the world), and a shift to a system with 
basically a "main object tag" and k/v properties for the rest will not lead to 
something simpler (if it wants to differentiate all these cases), it would only 
be different (shifting the doubt from one tag to another).

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Erkin,

Am 17.09.2017 um 07:54 schrieb Erkin Alp Güney:
> Two RFCs by me are ready. One of them are education reform(actually
> delayed a bit). This brings education key instead of amenity=school.
> Full proposal at
> 
> Another is magnetic levitation trains, this one having completed its
> draft quickly. This brings railway=maglev tag and its associated
> rendering. 
> 

Could you please write two separate emails to the mailing list for two
proposals (i.e. write an additional email for your maglev proposal)?
Otherwise there is not clear distinction between the propoals in the thread.

Best regards

Michael


-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Colin Smale]

I would suggest there needs to be a separation between the school as an 
organisation, a campus, a building, and the courses provided. Here in NL there 
are many mixed colleges, which provide statutory education to kids  (16+), 
adult academic education and vocational training. Such colleges often have 
multiple locations, and do not always offer everything at all locations. 
Multiple schools can be overseen by a common board of governors as well.
Driving schools have an office for the administration, but the actual education 
is delivered elsewhere - on the road, or in some classrooms in the case of 
theory education. The examinations take place in yet another location, which 
has nothing to do with the driving schools - it is operated by a government 
agency.

IMHO the structure of the tagging scheme should reflect the real world, unless 
we agree that certain distinctions are not relevant to OSM, as we can then 
agree to simplify the model. The exact spelling or choice of word is of 
secondary importance.

//colin

On 17 September 2017 11:05:02 CEST, "Erkin Alp Güney"  
wrote:
>I have partly inspired by Turkish standardized education institution
>identification guide. Most of the school kinds mentioned, except
>universities, including ministry itself has distinct color codes
>identifying what kind of education institution they are (for example,
>all secondary schools have to use signs with yellow backgrounds). Since
>renders can only display data that are already in database, we have to
>identify these subtypes somehow using data model if we want them to be
>able to render differently. Another use case, you are going to be able
>to search for all education ministries in the world by simple tag
>search
>for education=administrative or all driving schools in the world by
>similar search for education=driving with this new scheme. Previously
>impractical.
>
>
>17-09-2017 11:52 tarihinde Tobias Knerr yazdı:
>> In my opinion, and speaking broadly, the job of the OSM tagging
>system
>> is to answer two questions:
>>
>> - What kind of feature is this?
>> - What properties does this feature have?
>
>> Contrary to this, some mappers (and your proposal) prefer to use the
>> superfluous key as a makeshift category system. I feel that's the
>wrong
>> way to go, though: How to best group features into categories depends
>on
>> the application you have in mind, and providing a categorization is
>not
>> any more the tagging system's job than making rendering style
>decisions
>> is. OSM data tells you that there is an education ministry in that
>> location. Whether that feature is filed under the "education",
>"office"
>> or "government" heading is an application developer's responsibility,
>> and should be of no concern for the OSM data model.
>>
>> tl;dr: Keys are not categories.
>Yours, faithfully
>Erkin Alp
>
>
>___
>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 Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Erkin Alp Güney]

These are applied educational research centers and should be tagged 
"education=applied_education". Completely different from a cram school.
I do not know of any jurisdiction where a driving school is entitled to
license a driver by itself. These examinations are government regulated
otherwise driving schools would just skip the practical portion of
driver education and try to license an incompetent driver just for more
profit.


17-09-2017 12:01 tarihinde José G Moya Y. yazdı:
> Thanks for your response, Erkin. The idea of putting driving license
> and some speciality schools under "cram" schools came from the fact
> that, despite of needind a special license, in my country (Spain)
> these centers do not make exams, they only prepare for an official
> exam done by the government. But I think you're right.
>
> In this tagging list someone asked about farm schools (private
> education centers that teach enviromental concerns to kids). Similar
> to these, there are also "enviromental education" or "environment
> interpretation"  centers (public education centers put inside parks or
> natural parks that make some environment-related teaching). 
> How would you classsify farm schools and environmental education centers?
>
>
Yours, faithfully
Erkin Alp

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Erkin Alp Güney]

I have partly inspired by Turkish standardized education institution
identification guide. Most of the school kinds mentioned, except
universities, including ministry itself has distinct color codes
identifying what kind of education institution they are (for example,
all secondary schools have to use signs with yellow backgrounds). Since
renders can only display data that are already in database, we have to
identify these subtypes somehow using data model if we want them to be
able to render differently. Another use case, you are going to be able
to search for all education ministries in the world by simple tag search
for education=administrative or all driving schools in the world by
similar search for education=driving with this new scheme. Previously
impractical.


17-09-2017 11:52 tarihinde Tobias Knerr yazdı:
> In my opinion, and speaking broadly, the job of the OSM tagging system
> is to answer two questions:
>
> - What kind of feature is this?
> - What properties does this feature have?

> Contrary to this, some mappers (and your proposal) prefer to use the
> superfluous key as a makeshift category system. I feel that's the wrong
> way to go, though: How to best group features into categories depends on
> the application you have in mind, and providing a categorization is not
> any more the tagging system's job than making rendering style decisions
> is. OSM data tells you that there is an education ministry in that
> location. Whether that feature is filed under the "education", "office"
> or "government" heading is an application developer's responsibility,
> and should be of no concern for the OSM data model.
>
> tl;dr: Keys are not categories.
Yours, faithfully
Erkin Alp


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[José G Moya Y .]

Thanks for your response, Erkin. The idea of putting driving license and
some speciality schools under "cram" schools came from the fact that,
despite of needind a special license, in my country (Spain) these centers
do not make exams, they only prepare for an official exam done by the
government. But I think you're right.

In this tagging list someone asked about farm schools (private education
centers that teach enviromental concerns to kids). Similar to these, there
are also "enviromental education" or "environment interpretation"  centers
(public education centers put inside parks or natural parks that make some
environment-related teaching).
How would you classsify farm schools and environmental education centers?

Another


El 17/9/2017 10:44, "Erkin Alp Güney"  escribió:

That was a leftover from previous proposal. Edited proposal page to
reflect that all educational institutions are covered.


17-09-2017 09:26 tarihinde marc marc yazdı:
> Le 17. 09. 17 à 07:54, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit :
>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=
Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative
> +1 for good inventory work
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=
Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Features_
not_covered_by_this_proposal
> you said that driving school is not covered by this proposal.
> but a little further, you talk about the tag education=driving
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=
Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Abandoned
> a typo (min_age <> max_age)
> the same typo a little further in "Additional tags" section
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Tobias Knerr]

On 17.09.2017 07:54, Erkin Alp Güney wrote:
> This brings education key instead of amenity=school.

In my opinion, and speaking broadly, the job of the OSM tagging system
is to answer two questions:

- What kind of feature is this?
- What properties does this feature have?

The first question can usually be answered by a single word, such as
"university" or "driving school". The second is more naturally answered
with key-value pairs: The "name" is "Foobar University", the "website"
is "http://example.com; and so on.

So while our key-value tags lend themselves well to the second job, they
are a bit of an awkward fit for the first job. We need to put something
in the key even though it does not add any meaningful information. An
education=university would not be any different from an
amenity=university – all the information is already there in the value.

My preferred response to this situation is to minimize the significance
and required brain space for this vestigial key. If we were to reform
the tagging system, my ideal solution would be a "type"/"thing"/"class"
key that is used for the main tag of all features. Other than this
unlikely step, the next best solution is continued use of amenity as a
catch-all for most features.

Contrary to this, some mappers (and your proposal) prefer to use the
superfluous key as a makeshift category system. I feel that's the wrong
way to go, though: How to best group features into categories depends on
the application you have in mind, and providing a categorization is not
any more the tagging system's job than making rendering style decisions
is. OSM data tells you that there is an education ministry in that
location. Whether that feature is filed under the "education", "office"
or "government" heading is an application developer's responsibility,
and should be of no concern for the OSM data model.

tl;dr: Keys are not categories.

Tobias

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Erkin Alp Güney]

That was a leftover from previous proposal. Edited proposal page to
reflect that all educational institutions are covered.


17-09-2017 09:26 tarihinde marc marc yazdı:
> Le 17. 09. 17 à 07:54, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit :
>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative
> +1 for good inventory work
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Features_not_covered_by_this_proposal
> you said that driving school is not covered by this proposal.
> but a little further, you talk about the tag education=driving
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Abandoned
> a typo (min_age <> max_age)
> the same typo a little further in "Additional tags" section
> ___
> 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 Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Erkin Alp Güney]

They go under education=specialty. education=vocational is intended for
post-secondary vocational schools. Regarding other question, yes, you
can tag specialty=* or vocation=* to denote which subjects are trained,
however, I do not think OSM database can cope with a generic
university's whole swath of specialties. Therefore, specialty and
vocation taggings should only be used with specialty schools, vocational
schools and cram-schools.


17-09-2017 09:42 tarihinde Graeme Fitzpatrick yazdı:
> Looks good Erkin
>
> Question, thanks.
>
> We have Security Training "schools" (companies to train private
> security guards) & also Language Schools (usually to teach English to
> non-English speakers).
>
> Would these come under =speciality, or possibly =vocational?
>
> Would it be possibly be an idea to also then include an additional
> tag: speciality / vocational=* (eg Security; English language etc)?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Looks good Erkin

Question, thanks.

We have Security Training "schools" (companies to train private security
guards) & also Language Schools (usually to teach English to non-English
speakers).

Would these come under =speciality, or possibly =vocational?

Would it be possibly be an idea to also then include an additional tag:
speciality / vocational=* (eg Security; English language etc)?

Thanks

Graeme


On 17 September 2017 at 15:54, Erkin Alp Güney 
wrote:

> Two RFCs by me are ready. One of them are education reform(actually
> delayed a bit). This brings education key instead of amenity=school.
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[José G Moya Y .]

Hi, Erick.

I'm just a newbie in tagging, but I find a reason for keeping school and
university at the "amenity" tag. These educative institutions are often
easy to spot (they span over an entire building and in many cases they have
a campus or playground), while other "education" institutions or businesses
in your proposal usually span over a small office inside a building.
Schools and universities can work as points of reference in places where
street names or numbers are difficult to spot (that's why I map electric
poles in open field: they are points of reference).

This said, I find your classification of educational businesses useful, and
I think that adding additional tags to already mappped schools is easy,
because your categories are probably easier to understand than ISCED.

Just a question. A school where you prepare exams to get a position in a
bank, in the government or in the police is also a "cram school"? And why a
school where you prepare an exam to get a driving license is not?


Yours,
José Moya
Spain

El 17/9/2017 7:56, "Erkin Alp Güney"  escribió:

> Two RFCs by me are ready. One of them are education reform(actually
> delayed a bit). This brings education key instead of amenity=school.
> Full proposal at
>  Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative>
> Another is magnetic levitation trains, this one having completed its
> draft quickly. This brings railway=maglev tag and its associated
> rendering.
>  Magnetic_levitaiton_train>
>
> Yours, faithfully
> Erkin Alp
>
> ___
> 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 Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

[marc marc]

Le 17. 09. 17 à 07:54, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit :

> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative

+1 for good inventory work

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Features_not_covered_by_this_proposal
you said that driving school is not covered by this proposal.
but a little further, you talk about the tag education=driving

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative#Abandoned
a typo (min_age <> max_age)
the same typo a little further in "Additional tags" section
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging