Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=clothes subtags

You forgot to merge shop=jewelry with shop=clothes (*) Maybe the next tags we can merge are shop=car, bicycle, truck, motorcycle, car_repair, car_parts, tires. After all they are all vehicle related. something like shop=vehicle; vehicle:type=car; ... perhaps ? Do we really want to merge

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=clothes subtags

what do we gain with those changes ? Why should a shoe store be a sub tag of a clothes store ? On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Koć wrote: > I have created a proposal for sorting things out with clothes and shoes > shops according to our discussions on this list: > >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

Yeah, but in Australia they do not use "boutique" to refer to any shop neither. Still people think it should be removed for this reason. Tagging is done in British-English, if the word used in the tagging means something else in your language, too bad. You have to make sure that the editors have

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

On 30 August 2017 at 13:20, Marc Gemis wrote: > A cafe is a place where they sell > beer, not ? > Not in Australia, no! > Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

Does this mean that we will drop/change amenity=cafe as well ? Because it is confusing in Dutch & French. A cafe is a place where they sell beer, not ? m. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Severin Menard wrote: > Hi, > > IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

>> >> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-) >> >> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique & >> =fashion, leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's >> etc >> -1, there are shop that sell clothes and jewelry and accessoires

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

I also agree with dropping shop=boutique and fashion. 2017-08-29 20:42 GMT-03:00 Graeme Fitzpatrick : > Hi Daniel > > Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely > > >> In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=clothes subtags

I have created a proposal for sorting things out with clothes and shoes shops according to our discussions on this list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags -- "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. Muzalyev]

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

Hi Daniel Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely > In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also > drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion. > > > And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is? > Especially

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

Hi Severin Thank you for that very detailed explanation! :-) Looks like yet another time when the same word means different things in different languages Thanks Graeme On 30 August 2017 at 03:27, Severin Menard wrote: > Hi, > > IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

W dniu 29.08.2017 o 19:27, Severin Menard pisze: IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts. Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or also in other cultural contexts? In Poland we use

[Tagging] shop=fashion

Hi, IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts. Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop. More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not very large ("magasin" would then

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

Christoph, The Deva river is a great example, thanks. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Tuesday 29 August 2017, Ilya Zverev wrote: > > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rivers_Classifi > >cation > > I originally thought i'd

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

On Tuesday 29 August 2017, Ilya Zverev wrote: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rivers_Classifi >cation I originally thought i'd stay out of these discussions on importance tags for rivers (because in the end i don't think there is anything to be gained from it) but this

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

Ilya, please don't use the word "subjective" for this. Subjective tagging has no place in OSM because it is not verifiable; we don't want that and we shouldn't let people think we do. What you seem to propose does however not look "subjective" since you are keying your suggested tags to the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

Ilya, This seems to make sense as a way to help differentiate rivers. It is also good because in will work with intermittent=yes. I have a couple of comments: 1) When a mapper is looking at a river to trace in a localized area they know the river is big or small only by looking at the width of

Re: [Tagging] ferry relations

Thank you, David! I tried to contact the user that made that change in the wiki page. As he didn't answered, I reverted partially his edit. 2017-08-17 12:33 GMT-03:00 David Groom : > -- Original Message -- > From: "wille" > To: "Tag

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - River Classification

Hi everyone, After a proposal about waterways classification by Daniel Koć, I decided to make an alternative one. To me, using subjective values and criteria for classifying rivers is a better way, since it can work in any country regardless of the official classification. It could be adjusted