Re: [Tagging] Proposal - voting finished - man_made=lamp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 11/24/2013 09:45 AM, Manuel Hohmann wrote: In the two voting periods that this proposal has run through the following results have been obtained: - First voting period: 6 times yes. - Second voting period: 18 times yes, 18 times no, 1 partial approve. This means that by any traditional reading, the proposal has been rejected, even though you seem to avoid the word. This result therefore suggests the following possibilities for proceeding with this proposal: - Those who voted against the proposal need to agree on how to change it such that it will become more acceptable. I don't see why the onus should be on those who voted against the proposal. I could also say that those who voted for the proposal need to work on it to make it more acceptable. - Use the proposed features as they are. Yes, anyone is free to use any features, proposed or not, rejected or not. For this reason the status has for now been reset to proposed, until there is further progress. That's a great idea, we simply get rid of the rejected status and anything that is not accepted remains in proposed forever ;) Of course this opens the question - what if someone wanted to propose a *different* tagging of lamps, should they then overwrite the page with their proposal or should we simply have a ton of proposals in parallel? Bye Frederik - -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSkwTzAAoJEOx/uhGAJu9Hf1oH/A1qEcYczVXITa1MVJXJaUhL K8iPkjDtwnFlRDy3KpDXQaaPkyuzkFgb8IPCQXfvoyKQFm+lhRHD2xCnonlghrOG DMWtnlyB9AaJEbEBMD8NOQB7bwj8Uytndq5Bv9bAeMhS9DIPwcNl7W3d7BQgp0lH hqGgFE//k+vNRPV0d6A+SLsy+h2XOgu2uP7SI1zQYGjlK1F+ESRefuRr15OXt5nH nlmeIhFHb9zlMWahfE1gp3Jw8zyhzua+wGnVkEnWNeeLAnOQ8wdGWRt4YCNHO/TM JI45HqiX0hH3IFoPRDQva0efpDsvaQ51wQ2YjVljoRcI4T5qh1eDBBEeCwjd6kQ= =RtJ4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
Hi, Coming from mapping in Mongolia in Downtown Ulaanbaatar. There a lot of convenient stores sometimes also sell cellphone credits on scratch-off cards. In other countries it is sold by brand staff in the streets (through scratch-off or by running a USSD from their phone) but here it is a permanent, physical location. Sincerely, Severin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] tag for co-working spaces
Hi, Seems this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking does not exist yet. Here is the taginfo situation http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=working_space#values What about a office=co_working_space or office=co-working_space? Sincerely, Severin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tag for co-working spaces
2013/11/25 Severin MENARD severin.men...@gmail.com Hi, Seems this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking does not exist yet. Here is the taginfo situation http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=working_space#values What about a office=co_working_space or office=co-working_space? Hi, I'd prefer something like office=coworking, which is used http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=coworking#values (the amenity tag shoudn't be used imho) Sincerely, Severin Regards, Stefano ___ 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] tag for co-working spaces
2013/11/25 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: 2013/11/25 Severin MENARD severin.men...@gmail.com Hi, Seems this does not exist yet. Here is the taginfo situation http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=working_space#values What about a office=co_working_space or office=co-working_space? Hi, I'd prefer something like office=coworking, which is used http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=coworking#values office=coworking sounds nice (the amenity tag shoudn't be used imho) +1 Dan Sincerely, Severin Regards, Stefano ___ 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] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
Hi Severin The English word is Mobile Phone, cell phone is American. In the UK most topups are done by a card which is swiped though a machine. Most, if not all supermarkets, convenience stores, garages, newsagents do this. You can also top up at cash points. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 25/11/2013 11:10 Severin MENARD wrote: Hi, Coming from mapping in Mongolia in Downtown Ulaanbaatar. There a lot of convenient stores sometimes also sell cellphone credits on scratch-off cards. In other countries it is sold by brand staff in the streets (through scratch-off or by running a USSD from their phone) but here it is a permanent, physical location. Sincerely, Severin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal - voting finished - man_made=lamp
2013/11/24 Manuel Hohmann mhohm...@physnet.uni-hamburg.de voting for the proposed man_made=lamp has been finished. The result and further proceeding can be found here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/lamp#Results To summarize the results: In the two voting periods that this proposal has run through the following results have been obtained: - - First voting period: 6 times yes. - - Second voting period: 18 times yes, 18 times no, 1 partial approve. i.e. the proposal has been rejected. The reasons for opposing the proposal can be summarized as follows: - - Replacement / deprecation of the widely used highway=street_lamp. - - Introduction of new tags for a more complicated tagging. - - Introduction of tags which are not differentiated between light fixture, lamp and light. the question for the last point was not, whether this should all be tagged with different tags, but that you apparently want to map light fixtures and have chosen the wrong word for it (lamp). The reasons for approving the proposal can be summarized as follows: - - Deprecation of highway=street_lamp, since a lamp ultimately is not a highway or a part thereof. -1, not all lights are part of highways, but there are lights on highways and they can well be seen as part of the highway (it depends on your interpretation, but IMHO there are more arguments to see them as part of the road than not, see for instance the tag lit=yes. Those lights wouldn't be there if there was no highway). I am also not sure if it is a problem to have more than one tag for a kind of light, e.g. one for street lights and one or more for other kind of lights. Deprecating a highly used tag is almost never working. - - Introduction of new tags that allow a more detailed mapping of lamps. - - Introduction of new tags for light sources which are not street lamps. maybe you should focus on these without trying to deprecate other tags. There is no need to. - - Those who voted against the proposal need to agree on how to change it such that it will become more acceptable. they could (and here I am), but they do not need to. It is up to who wants change to convince the rest, not the other way round. - - Use the proposed features as they are. you can always do that, but your proceeding doesn't look very logical then: usually you start a proposal and voting in order to find problems with the suggested tags, and if a proposal voting doesn't show a good majority it usually indicates that it was either poorly drafted or has some other serious problems e.g. with the proposed tags. In this case I wouldn't continue using these tags as if nothing happened. Further, it is likely to happen anyway, since the result has shown that there is a clear interest in detailed lamp mapping from parts of the community. lamp mapping or lights mapping? The proposed tagging will evolve further through practical tag usage. I don't understand this, could you explain? For this reason the status has for now been reset to proposed, until there is further progress. IMHO you should start a new proposal and set the current one to rejected, because that's what it is. Two times actually. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tag for co-working spaces
2013/11/25 Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com office=coworking sounds nice (the amenity tag shoudn't be used imho) +1 +1 btw., there is also leisure=hackerspace, maybe in some cases (no money is earned and the work is experimental) this might be a better tag ;-) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
2013/11/25 Severin MENARD severin.men...@gmail.com Hi, Coming from mapping in Mongolia in Downtown Ulaanbaatar. There a lot of convenient stores sometimes also sell cellphone credits on scratch-off cards. In other countries it is sold by brand staff in the streets (through scratch-off or by running a USSD from their phone) but here it is a permanent, physical location. If I get you right, these shops are not mainly telephone card shops, but other shops that also sell telephone cards and/or phone credit. In this case I'd use an attribute, e.g. sell:telephone_card or sell:mobile_phone_prepaid_credit / sell:mobile_phone_credit (admittedly not quite elegant). Otherwise there is shop=mobile_phone http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=mobile_phone cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
Thanks for raising this up, Severin. I see a pretty strong similarity to ATM or restaurant with this. The points being: * the tag should work as stand-alone and also (ref. amenity=atm/restaurant) * as a part of other service/amenity (ref. atm/restaurant=yes) shop=mobile_phone alone is not good (enough) as there are many mobile phone stores that don't topup/recharge your credit. How about shop=mobile_topup and mobile_topup=yes as alternative options? I haven't digged into this much but do we have good tags for mobile money (transactions points)? These are similarly and increasingly important around the world. Cheers, -Jaakko -- jaa...@helleranta.com * Skype: jhelleranta * Mobile: +505-8845-3391 (Nicaragua) * Voice(mail) / SMS / What's app: +1-202-730-9778 * http://about.me/jaakkoh On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/11/25 Severin MENARD severin.men...@gmail.com Hi, Coming from mapping in Mongolia in Downtown Ulaanbaatar. There a lot of convenient stores sometimes also sell cellphone credits on scratch-off cards. In other countries it is sold by brand staff in the streets (through scratch-off or by running a USSD from their phone) but here it is a permanent, physical location. If I get you right, these shops are not mainly telephone card shops, but other shops that also sell telephone cards and/or phone credit. In this case I'd use an attribute, e.g. sell:telephone_card or sell:mobile_phone_prepaid_credit / sell:mobile_phone_credit (admittedly not quite elegant). Otherwise there is shop=mobile_phone http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=mobile_phone cheers, Martin ___ 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] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 11:48 -0500, Jaakko Helleranta.com wrote: Thanks for raising this up, Severin. I see a pretty strong similarity to ATM or restaurant with this. The points being: * the tag should work as stand-alone and also (ref. amenity=atm/restaurant) * as a part of other service/amenity (ref. atm/restaurant=yes) shop=mobile_phone alone is not good (enough) as there are many mobile phone stores that don't topup/recharge your credit. How about shop=mobile_topup and mobile_topup=yes as alternative options? +1 In most cases mobile_topup=yes would work as mobile phone topups are not the primary service offered. It would work well as a sub-tag for a shop, or for an ATM. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: If I get you right, these shops are not mainly telephone card shops, but other shops that also sell telephone cards and/or phone credit. In this case I'd use an attribute, e.g. sell:telephone_card or sell:mobile_phone_prepaid_credit / sell:mobile_phone_credit (admittedly not quite elegant). There are two different things that the term telephone card might be taken to mean: mobile phone topup cards, and the scratch cards that give you the PIN for a pre-loaded disposable account with a cheap international carrier, so we should make our terminology clear on which one of these it is. (I expect many shops that sell one kind will also sell the other, though, but still I'd prefer to distinguish them clearly.) __John ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] opening_hours extension: combined time range with open end as 18:00-22:00+
Hi everyone I would like to have some level of clarity about tagging a time range directly followed by an open end time. So I started a voting here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:opening_hours#Voting_addon_18:00-22:00.2B I probably did not correctly follow the process for Proposals. I am sorry for that. If a longer time range for voting is usual or something please adopted it. The reason for this voting is my ongoing development around the tag opening_hours. Tool for evaluation: http://robin.de.marissa.hostorama.ch/osm/opening_hours.js/demo.html Map: http://robin.de.marissa.hostorama.ch/osm/opening_hours_map/opening_hours_map.html -- Live long and prosper Robin Schneider ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposal - voting finished - man_made=lamp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This means that by any traditional reading, the proposal has been rejected, even though you seem to avoid the word. I am not avoiding anything, I am simply stating facts. And as a matter of fact, there are 19 positive votes, 18 negative ones, and one partial approval. By any mathematical reading, 19 18. I don't see why the onus should be on those who voted against the proposal. I could also say that those who voted for the proposal need to work on it to make it more acceptable. For those who voted for the proposal it is already acceptable. But exactly as I stated before, the desires of the those opposing the proposal go in opposite directions, and since a proposal cannot be changed in both suggested directions simultaneously, this needs to be clarified. And this can only be done by those who have an actual desire which contradicts the proposal in its current form. That's a great idea, we simply get rid of the rejected status and anything that is not accepted remains in proposed forever ;) This is not a discussion about the rejected status in general. If there is a majority against a proposal and the creator buries it, of course he can do so. But if there are 1. 50% positive votes and 2. those who opposed the proposal indicate in their comments, that the reason for this was the single aspect of deprecating a high-use tag, there is more than enough justification to continue working on the proposal. Of course this opens the question - what if someone wanted to propose a *different* tagging of lamps, should they then overwrite the page with their proposal or should we simply have a ton of proposals in parallel? Of course anyone is free to propose whatever he wants to, including a different tagging of lamps, or to work on and improve an existing proposal. So am I. i.e. the proposal has been rejected. As stated above, there are more positive than negative votes. the question for the last point was not, whether this should all be tagged with different tags, but that you apparently want to map light fixtures and have chosen the wrong word for it (lamp). This is your opinion, but not even native speakers share this opinion. Let me remind you that the current tag is street_lamp, not street_light, and one may ask for the reason for this outcome. they could (and here I am), but they do not need to. It is up to who wants change to convince the rest, not the other way round. I have no intention to convince anyone to do anything. My intention is and always has been to propose a new tagging scheme, in other words, to develop such a scheme and to offer it to mappers who wish to use it. Who decides to use it and who decides not to use it is beyond my intention. you can always do that, but your proceeding doesn't look very logical then: usually you start a proposal and voting in order to find problems with the suggested tags, and if a proposal voting doesn't show a good majority it usually indicates that it was either poorly drafted or has some other serious problems e.g. with the proposed tags. In this case I wouldn't continue using these tags as if nothing happened. This is exactly what I have done. There has been a long discussion about these tags in the OSM forum, many suggestions have been made and included into the proposal, and as many positive comments from the same forum discussion indicate, they have lead to significant improvements of the proposal. Getting opinions on this proposed tagging, improving it and making it visible to the community, who can then use it or not, was my motivation for creating a proposal. Besides, I have nowhere indicated that I would proceed as if nothing happened. lamp mapping or lights mapping? Whatever you want to call them. I don't understand this, could you explain? No. But as a hint, tagging practice by a large number of mappers has usually more influence on tag usages than the status of proposals. IMHO you should start a new proposal and set the current one to rejected, because that's what it is. Two times actually. If you read carefully, you will find that the first voting was not even completed, but interrupted by myself after receiving 6 positive votes in the first two days. The reason was that there were some suggested improvements that I included into the proposal. And as I already stated before, the second voting received 50% of positive votes. And again, as I wrote before, comments indicate that for most people the only reason to oppose was the deprecation of a high-use tag, and this (and again further positive comments in the forum) justifies continued work on this proposal. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSk7n9AAoJEPvf9RrsekSyvd4H/j62YFJvg1/6VK+UAfQnNBW7 wSVNdnIMD08Vp3mIFLNl8+psLzmOW45UcNffYmAIpGSiwWnt3jeuW+PykEjTFY74
Re: [Tagging] Telecoms local loops connections nodes
Hi, Before creating anything on wiki, let's try to summarize quickly what have been said above. Unfortunately, I can't find the Australian discussion dealing with telecom networks. And telecom=* is merely used in France, man_made=MDF in Germany... http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=telecom#map Central office (US) and Telephone exchange (UK) both imply a PSTN switch hosted in the building, which is not always the case. Local loops nodes can be located remote from the switch. As I want to map local loops connection nodes prior to specialized PSTN switches, I will need a better term than telecom=central_office. It's corresponding to what Florian Lohoff called a MDF previously. It sounds good : such connection nodes always have a main distribution frame inside. Since OSM have massively imported buildings, mapping such features would be great if we are tagging existing buildings without trying to give additional indoor details. But currently, many technologies are rolled out to improve existing local loops : fiber, copper and coax. A same building can host all those different types inside. May we keep *man_made=MDF* or introduce* telecom=connection_node* for building where those lines are terminating regardless of technology, regardless of switch hosting too ? I'm in favor of a telecommunication tags group. *connection_node=** would be optionally here to give details about technologies if known. (e.g *connection_node=copper;fiber*) We need a telecom=* tag here since building=* is concerning the whole building and telecom=* isn't. Try to imagine a big office building with a small central office inside... which is actually the case here : https://www.google.fr/maps/preview#!data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-73.984201!3d40.754742!2m2!1f251.88!2f138.32!4f75!2m7!1e1!2m2!1sbgW1O-lPanMGByWrv9YD6A!2e0!5m2!1sbgW1O-lPanMGByWrv9YD6A!2e0fid=5 Knowing that, we could optionally introduce *telecom=connection_point*later for cabinets we can encounter in the street. Which are components of local loops, usually installed to split cables and lines to customers. *telecom=connection_point* is established with the BT/Openreach (UK) terminology : PCP standing for Primary Connection Point https://www.google.fr/search?q=BT+PCP References for all those functional points must be setup locally since operators aren't using the same terminology. CLLI in US, 42C in France, ONKZ/ASB in Germany... I won't deal with services offered on local loops here. DSL, Telephone, TV are services DSLAM, switches, routers are devices which offer services inside buildings. That's information which is hard to keep up to date. Information about building must be needed first. Looking forward to your feedbacks, cheers. *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Taginfo for specific geographies
I would like to find all of the tags that are used over a user specified geography (could be a country or a bounding box). Is there anyway to do this for geographies other than those listed here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taginfo/Sites Mike ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
