在 2020年5月13日週三 12:24，Mark Wagner 寫道：
> On Tue, 12 May 2020 23:53:52 +0800
> Phake Nick wrote:
>
> > Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi
> > and motorcycle taxi.
>
> Are there any differences that can't be explained by the fact that a
> motorcycle taxi uses a
On Tue, 12 May 2020 23:53:52 +0800
Phake Nick wrote:
> Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi
> and motorcycle taxi.
Are there any differences that can't be explained by the fact that a
motorcycle taxi uses a motorcycle to carry the passengers?
For example, in the
Am Di., 12. Mai 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :
>
> Bottom line: more we look into this taxi business more interesting and
> confusing it gets.
>
IMHO it is not very confusing. There are taxis, and there are various other
kind of individual and mass transportation and leisure rides
In this context:
I have just realised that at Venice Aiport there are (at least) the
following services and corresponding counters and stop positions.
busses to various destinations. They depart from a bus-stop area, but have
different counters according to the bus company
water busses (separate
Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi and
motorcycle taxi.
在 2020年5月11日週一 16:04，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> Le 10.05.20 à 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> > imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the
> > airport and instead of a taxi
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 14:01, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> if they expect both to have the same main tag, yes. After a while when
> they have had their unpleasant experience and keep using crowd sourced
> maps, they will be more cautious, I agree.
>
Or, after they have had an unpleasant
sent from a phone
> On 12. May 2020, at 02:37, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> In short, is this tag "tagging for the tourist"? Those in the know
> will know to check if it's a motorcycle taxi or a car taxi stand.
if they expect both to have the same main tag, yes. After a while when they
have
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 11:25, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> If you arrive at the airport in Bali with your in-laws, and look on Maps.me
> for the closest taxi stand and walk over to it, you will be quite
> disappointed to find a line of motorcycles, and have to walk back to the
> other side of the
This seems very logical. This is very evident jn Thailand also. Its like
every 2 blocks in Bangkok there is a motorcycle taxi stand.
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:26 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You guys, we are not talking about mapping a taxi call centre, where you
>
You guys, we are not talking about mapping a taxi call centre, where you
use a phone number to order a cab. We are talking about mapping a taxicab
queue or stand: a spot where taxis wait for passengers.
Of course if you have 8 people in your part, and walk up to a taxicab
stand, they might tell
May 11, 2020, 13:43 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
> Am Mo., 11. Mai 2020 um 11:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> >:
>
>> May 11, 2020, 10:06 by >> dieterdre...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski <>>> ja...@piorkowski.ca>>>
Am Mo., 11. Mai 2020 um 11:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> May 11, 2020, 10:06 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
> On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
>
> Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to
> public parking
May 11, 2020, 10:06 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>>
>> Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to
>> public parking then you also need to know to check for
>> access!=private.
>>
>
>
> this
sent from a phone
> On 11. May 2020, at 10:04, Marc M. wrote:
>
> I don't imagine we're going to create several objects to describe
> that a taxi waiting area has motorcycles, "normal" cars, vehicles
> with a lot of passenger seats and vehicles with a heavy
> luggage capacity.
> on the ground
sent from a phone
> On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to
> public parking then you also need to know to check for
> access!=private.
this is indeed an unfortunate choice. Tagging a private access parking
Hello,
Le 10.05.20 à 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the
> airport and instead of a taxi (cab) they send you 3 taxi moto. Would
> that be equally ok, wouldn’t it matter, taxi is taxi?
Imagine ordering a taxi and arriving in
在 2020年5月11日週一 09:18，Jarek Piórkowski 寫道：
> On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 21:04, Phake Nick wrote:
> > I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or
> districts where taxi and motorcycle taxi would be two very different things
> to be managed.
>
> If you are managing taxis and
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 21:04, Phake Nick wrote:
> I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or districts
> where taxi and motorcycle taxi would be two very different things to be
> managed.
If you are managing taxis and motorcycle taxis then surely you know
you have to
* Also, as have already been mentioned in other replies, there are various
other differences between the two services other than number of wheels and
whether they're enclosed.
在 2020年5月11日週一 09:04，Phake Nick 寫道：
> I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or
> districts
I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or
districts where taxi and motorcycle taxi would be two very different things
to be managed.
Even if you view it from the viewpoint of people trying to get a ride, I
would not expect cross-display of the two types of mobility items
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 18:35, Phake Nick wrote:
> At the end of the day we are not taking motorcycle taxi and taxi themselves.
> What's being tagged are waiting area for taxi or motorcycle taxis. What
> matters is that, if one is created as an optional subtag of another, would
> not using such
At the end of the day we are not taking motorcycle taxi and taxi
themselves. What's being tagged are waiting area for taxi or motorcycle
taxis. What matters is that, if one is created as an optional subtag of
another, would not using such subtag result in incorrect analysis of data
when someone
Le dim. 10 mai 2020 à 01:25, Martin Koppenhoefer a
écrit :
> On 9. May 2020, at 22:50, Florimond Berthoux
> wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's the point...
>
> Keep it simple.
> You know taxi key ? You know motorcycle key ? Yeah, you can contribute
> without checking yet another wiki tag page.
>
> By the
sent from a phone
> On 10. May 2020, at 17:24, Yves wrote:
>
> Also, it's not like taxis are a must have for renderers, there will be no
> drama if a map shows a taxi station inaccurately for a few months
all maps actually ;-)
Cheers Martin
___
And a tag refinement with a sub tag would work if the decision to tag as such
is advertised : renderers will follow, editor softwares too.
A successful vote may help, opening issues at major editors and renderers once
settled will certainly.
Also, it's not like taxis are a must have for
sent from a phone
> On 10. May 2020, at 14:43, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Either way, it's going to give the wrong results if renderers don't support
> it, the question is which wrong way is preferable: ojeks aren't rendered or
> ojeks
> are rendered as taxis.
ojeks getting rendered as cab
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 13:34, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> > On 10. May 2020, at 14:24, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > Technically, either approach to
> > tagging would work
>
>
> I would question this. It would work if all data consumers would evaluate
> the subtag, i.e. add support for it and it
sent from a phone
> On 10. May 2020, at 14:24, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Technically, either approach to
> tagging would work
I would question this. It would work if all data consumers would evaluate the
subtag, i.e. add support for it and it would mean we would require two tags for
taxis:
在 2020年5月10日週日 16:24，Martin Koppenhoefer 寫道：
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 10. May 2020, at 01:31, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > If you use amenity=taxi + vehicle=* you
> > guarantee that any carto which renders amenity=taxi will render ojek
> ranks
> > incorrectly at first, and perhaps
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 09:24, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> > On 10. May 2020, at 01:31, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > If you use amenity=taxi + vehicle=* you
> > guarantee that any carto which renders amenity=taxi will render ojek
> ranks
> > incorrectly at first, and perhaps incorrectly for all
sent from a phone
> On 10. May 2020, at 01:31, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> If you use amenity=taxi + vehicle=* you
> guarantee that any carto which renders amenity=taxi will render ojek ranks
> incorrectly at first, and perhaps incorrectly for all time (if they decide
> they're
> going to ignore
在 2020年5月10日週日 07:08，François Lacombe 寫道：
>
> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 19:20, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>>
>> What you said doesn't make sense.
>> The existence of a space within the word doesn't inherently make them
>> separateable.
>> Like for the tag amenity=charging_station, do you think the space
On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 19:33, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 00:25, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the airport
>> and instead of a taxi (cab) they send you 3 taxi moto. Would that be equally
>> ok, wouldn’t it
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 00:25, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the
> airport and instead of a taxi (cab) they send you 3 taxi moto. Would that
> be equally ok, wouldn’t it matter, taxi is taxi?
>
It would matter a hell of a lot if
On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 00:08, François Lacombe
wrote:
> Finally, Paul, I find your point about taxonomy thinking interesting and
> will try to develop it a bit in future.
>
I'm starting to wonder if the taxonomy adopted is influenced by the language
of the person doing the classifying. If
sent from a phone
> On 9. May 2020, at 22:50, Florimond Berthoux
> wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's the point...
>
> Keep it simple.
> You know taxi key ? You know motorcycle key ? Yeah, you can contribute
> without checking yet another wiki tag page.
>
> By the way, this how a taxi moto looks
Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 19:20, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
> What you said doesn't make sense.
> The existence of a space within the word doesn't inherently make them
> separateable.
> Like for the tag amenity=charging_station, do you think the space mean ot
> make sense to change the tagging scheme
Key chaining is the more complex form of representation, especially when
there are no obvious relationship between different types of objects being
represented.
在 2020年5月10日週日 04:50，Florimond Berthoux 寫道：
> Yeah, that's the point...
>
> Keep it simple.
> You know taxi key ? You know motorcycle
Yeah, that's the point...
Keep it simple.
You know taxi key ? You know motorcycle key ? Yeah, you can contribute
without checking yet another wiki tag page.
By the way, this how a taxi moto looks like in Paris
https://www.city-bird.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/DSC3972_R1_optimise_bas.jpg
Le
May 9, 2020, 14:33 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 02:29, Paul Allen <> pla16...@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>
>
>> Motorcycle taxi is different from 4-wheeled taxi because they provide a
>> different experience with different speed, charge different fare, have
>> different
在 2020年5月9日週六 20:35，François Lacombe 寫道：
> Hi Paul,
>
> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 02:29, Paul Allen a écrit :
>
>>
>> This isn't just about optimizing the number of tags used, it's about
>> aligning with
>> how most people's mental models work. And not just the mental models
>> of local mappers but
On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 13:35, François Lacombe
wrote:
>
> Tourists aren't supposed to refer to tags to know which kind of taxi
> service they can use.
>
But the query tool is there. Or are you proposing banning tourists from
using it?
That would be possible - login required to use the query
Hi Paul,
Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 02:29, Paul Allen a écrit :
>
> This isn't just about optimizing the number of tags used, it's about
> aligning with
> how most people's mental models work. And not just the mental models
> of local mappers but also the mental models of tourists: locals don't
在 2020年5月9日週六 07:07，François Lacombe 寫道：
> Hi
>
> Le ven. 8 mai 2020 à 20:48, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>> motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
>>
>
> Then may I ask you why ?
> I pay a driver to take me where I want to with his vehicle.
>
"I pay a driver to take me where
On 5/7/20 1:49 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> So, what's the next step?
>
> 1) Propose using taxi=motorcar, =motorcycle, =boat, =airplane, and get
> that idea officially rejected (it appears it would be certain to fail),
> or is that a waste of everyone's time?
taxi=* is already used as an
On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 00:59, François Lacombe
wrote:
We're not having an argument about making a difference or not between
> motorcycles or cars
>
What we're having is an argument about taxonomy.
Some people have mental models that distinguish between a taxi, an ojek and
a rickshaw, pther
Hi Joseph,
Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 01:28, Joseph Eisenberg a
écrit :
> François,
>
> Have you personally hired a motorcycle before, or is the assumption that
> this is the same service based on theory rather than experience?
>
I've hired some before lockdown, independently as cars when alone.
François,
Have you personally hired a motorcycle before, or is the assumption that
this is the same service based on theory rather than experience?
The proposal gave several reasons that using amenity=taxi was not a good
idea, including these:
"Motorcyles have different abilities.
"In contrast
Hi
Le ven. 8 mai 2020 à 20:48, Phake Nick a écrit :
> motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
>
Then may I ask you why ?
I pay a driver to take me where I want to with his vehicle.
> The reaso why you get the feeling of people saying "you don't understand"
> to you is
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 09:05, Phake Nick wrote:
> On 2020-05-08 Fri 20:45, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>> How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
>> oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
>> that, they think that. A discussion would just
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 18:30, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> > (especially those approved after, say, 2012)
>
> The proposal process became more difficult after March 2015, when the
> standard for approval was changed from >50% to >74%:
>
>
> (especially those approved after, say, 2012)
The proposal process became more difficult after March 2015, when the
standard for approval was changed from >50% to >74%:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal_process=revision=1150734=1143140
This has been helpful in
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 09:05, s8evq wrote:
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 08:43:27 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski
> wrote:
> > How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> > oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> > that, they think that. A discussion
The tag motorcycle=yes is already documented as defining legal access
restrictions for motorcycle riders, like access=yes or foot=yes
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:motorcycle%3Dyes
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 1:34 PM Florimond Berthoux <
florimond.berth...@gmail.com>
Hi,
5) As a French I have to give you again the universal answer : amenity=taxi
+ motorcycle=yes + whateveryourvehicle*=yes|*designated :)
Tags is an intermediate language between human and machine, at the end its
just characters with definitions, but some are easier to use for mapping
and
That they exists doesn't mean they make a different. Taxi with low
pollution and taxi with electric power are same type of taxi as regular
taxi while motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
That is like saying we shouldn't have a separate tag for bus versus cars
because there
May 8, 2020, 19:23 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 08.05.20 à 19:06, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>> Your argument was like saying we should use a amenity=stop tag for all
>> bus stop, taxi stop, helicopter stop, and cruise ship stop because they
>> are just "services
>>
>
> public_transport=*
Le 08.05.20 à 19:06, Phake Nick a écrit :
> Your argument was like saying we should use a amenity=stop tag for all
> bus stop, taxi stop, helicopter stop, and cruise ship stop because they
> are just "services
public_transport=* was invented for a service and relegate
the mode of transport to a
apart from the joke with the foot_taxi, I used all the others, what to
reply to someone who tells me it's not common and therefore gives the
impression that only this usecase is important and therefore requires a
top-level tag just for that ?
that's why it gives the impression that you're saying
在 2020年5月8日週五 23:47，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> > If these arguments were given beforehand
>
> except memory problem, I exposed this opinion here during the RFC
> (=consider that taxi is a service independent of the propulsion
> of the engine which is a sub-tag), and I have the impression that
>
On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 09:17 -0700, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> There used to be human-pulled rickshaws, but these no longer exist.
> They were take over by pedicabs / aka bicycle rickshaws, since those
> are much more efficient.
Not so. I've seen human-pulled rickshaws in Japan. And they probably
For the record, I responded to Marc Marc’s comment on this list, and there
was not a response back:
“ On 2/20/20, marc marc wrote:
> Le 20.02.20 à 12:45, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
>> Can't we have an easy to use top-level feature tag, instead of having
>> to add 3 tags like amenity=taxi +
Hello,
> If these arguments were given beforehand
except memory problem, I exposed this opinion here during the RFC
(=consider that taxi is a service independent of the propulsion
of the engine which is a sub-tag), and I have the impression that
the answer was "you didn't understand".
I would
On 08/05/2020 14:04, s8evq wrote:
And then some people in this very thread suggest to just ignore a
rejection and start using it anyway. What's the use of the whole
voting system then?
Frankly, not much.
Why even bother writing a proposal in the first place? I'll just do
whatever.
"I'll
On Fri, 8 May 2020 08:43:27 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 02:27, s8evq wrote:
> >
> > Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand
> > on the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any
> > discussion beforehand. That
On 2020-05-08 Fri 20:45, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> that, they think that. A discussion would just print the arguments
> back and forth.
>
Given the
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 02:27, s8evq wrote:
>
> Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand on
> the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any discussion
> beforehand. That doesn't seem correct. It should not be possible to be
> suddenly faced
Le 07.05.20 à 20:49, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
> Opposing voters preferred using amenity=taxi + motorcycle=yes
> So, what's the next step?
propose that :) (maybe with motorcycle=only variant if needed)
it allow to have "zone when you request to be transported by individual
transport" with
sent from a phone
> On 8. May 2020, at 00:43, Paul Norman via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> As a next step, I'd map motorcycle taxis as amenity=motorcycle_taxi. Vote
> with your mapping.
+1, most people who voted no supposedly never saw a motorcycle taxi in their
life...
Cheers Martin
Since the wiki say,
> Rejected features may be resubmitted, modified, and moved back to the RFC
process.
, and given most reason appeared on the voting page, I would say the
correct action right now is to improve the reasons listed in the paragraph
on why alternative tagging are not available,
Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand on
the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any discussion
beforehand. That doesn't seem correct. It should not be possible to be suddenly
faced with this fait accompli.
On Thu, 7 May 2020 11:49:43
On 8/5/20 8:41 am, Paul Norman via Tagging wrote:
On 2020-05-07 11:49 a.m., Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
So, what's the next step?
As a next step, I'd map motorcycle taxis as amenity=motorcycle_taxi.
Vote with your mapping.
+1
If those opposed don't come up with something better then they
On 2020-05-07 11:49 a.m., Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
So, what's the next step?
As a next step, I'd map motorcycle taxis as amenity=motorcycle_taxi.
Vote with your mapping.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
"1) Propose using taxi=motorcar, =motorcycle, =boat, =airplane"
I believe at least with this key it would be a waste of time, yes, because taxi=yes is already an access tag and then we get into a chaos. If really wanted it would have to be something like "taxi:type", but this was just for
74 matches
Mail list logo
