2014-11-18 8:46 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
Martin - Do you have any suggestion for cleaning up the civic=* subkey I
was suggesting for building=civic in this way?
I assume we need a big generic key, and then a many subcategories that
fall under that key.
Building=civic
+
2014-11-14 5:03 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a
good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their
own landuse(s).
this can be very different from one country to another. E.g. in Italy there
are
2014-11-14 12:09 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
I don't think we need a civic subkey in landuse. When I see the
growing list, it will finally generate very small landuse polygons in
OSM. This is not the intend of the OSM landuse.
there is no indication of this, the wiki remains very
On Nov 17, 2014, at 9:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-11-14 5:03 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com:
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good
idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them
On Nov 17, 2014, at 9:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
there will be more people with even more ideas and classification needs.
Therefor the foo=bar, bar=x way of subtyping, which implies there is only one
kind of subtyping, should generally be deprecated in
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:03 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good
idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own
landuse(s).
I don't think we need a civic subkey in landuse. When I see the
growing
On Nov 14, 2014, at 8:09 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:03 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good
idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own
landuse(s).
these
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic.
My concern is about splitting a landuse polygon just to refine
information that could be stored on buildings themselves for instance.
Pieren
On Nov 14, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic.
My concern is about splitting a landuse polygon just to refine
information that could be stored on
Updated and clarified the split of civic into 3 separate keys - civic_admin,
civic_service, and civic_safety. Also discussed judicial and penal.
civic_safety and penal are interesting, because there is no landuse for police
stations, fire stations, jails or prisons. Martin suggested splitting
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good
idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own
landuse(s).
Safety could cover the lifeguard/ski patrol/ranger buildings that are public or
privately operated for the purposes of interacting
If we are to split landuse=civic into civic_services and civic_admin, Then I
would like some feedback on the categories things fall into.
On the discussion page, I listed out some building types that would fall into
either one, and I would like opinions on removals or additions to the lists.
On Fri Nov 07 2014 07:30:30 GMT+ (GMT), Colin Smale wrote:
I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ
to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will
have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably
leased from a
Yes I agree we should not include them, for two main reasons:
- landuse should not describe ownership, by any means. Ownership
is not publicly verifiable, they remain closed source. Even
when land registries (fr/cadastre de/Kataster) now publish
property boundaries, the owner remains
2014-11-07 8:30 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ to
change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will have
changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably leased from
a property
2014-11-07 11:02 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org:
Yes I agree we should not include them, for two main reasons:
- landuse should not describe ownership, by any means. Ownership
is not publicly verifiable, they remain closed source.
for publicly owned land it is often
To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check
if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases
that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started
with some examples, on the Talk page.
Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21:
Matthijs Melissen wrote
What about buildings of public transport companies (bus, train, airplane)
that are owned and operated by the government. I assume they should be
added to the civic part ?
I know more and more countries are turning those companies into privately
owned, but there are probably countries where this
That is an interesting question. I think that falls outside the goal of this
tag but I am unsure. In America, Amtrak is nationalized, but I think most of
their facilities would fall under transportation related things - railway
stations, etc. but their main office, which is not a train station,
My question was indeed for their offices (head-quarters etc.)
regards
m
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 7:54 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote:
That is an interesting question. I think that falls outside the goal of
this tag but I am unsure. In America, Amtrak is nationalized, but I think
most of
I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ
to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will
have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably
leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same.
Just the
2014-11-05 1:23 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
To me, Civic is short for Civic Services. Maybe I should make that
clear. I updated the RFC page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
IMHO you should make that clear by naming the tag accordingly, i.e.
2014-11-05 2:28 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
To me, governmental is more legislative.
governments are typically divided into a legislative and an executive
branch, plus the judiciary to control them.
Civic implies for the citizens. Perhaps it's just a style choice, but
it's my
Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27:
I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply
landuse=governmental?
Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread.
We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the
Talk page, feel free to
2014-11-03 20:13 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org:
What about landuse=civil ?
Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their
concerns,
as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and
in law as relating to private relations between members of a
Hm hm, somebody could not wait to start the page ;-)
I went through the mail thread so far, and tried to populate the
Talk page with some of the arguments, please add if I missed a point.
Maybe Martin could add some arguments why =public_administration
should be preferred?
tom
Martin
To me, Civic is short for Civic Services. Maybe I should make that clear. I
updated the RFC page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civic
: of or relating to a city or town or the people who live there
: relating to
On 5 November 2014 00:23, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
Business-government-citizen-military-religion-farm-park. There's some mixing
between them, but those are the big developed-land landuses ones to me.
Civic covers the missing hole pretty well. The last missing hole.
I agree that a tag that
To me, governmental is more legislative. Civic implies for the citizens.
Perhaps it's just a style choice, but it's my preference, and goes well with
the existing approved building=civic.
I've been throwing out civic for a bit, but if it was approved governmental
it's wouldn't matter too to
Thanks tom. ^_^ I was so surprised to see the info in the talk page. When we
first talked about landuse=civic a few months ago, I wanted to make an RFC
page, but, honestly, the guidelines didn't really show me how to actually _make
the page_ , and while I'm really good with a screwdriver or
So far we have discussed pros and cons of
landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic}
What about landuse=civil ?
Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their
concerns,
as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and
in law as relating to private
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up
for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t.
I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse -
eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is
up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t.
I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse
- eg: we have
and the line between public and private is not one OSM singles out very much
(is is a public school vs a private school?), but things are separated by
function. and the functions are of a civic government (pnsion offices, taxes,
judicial, etc). I would use the word public or “government” but
ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public}
For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some
ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider.
I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,
Assembling a draft page. it is my first draft page, so my syntax is kinda
crap. I will be working on the details of the proposal later today.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
Javbw
On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
On Oct 5, 2014, at 6:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Il giorno 04/ott/2014, alle ore 06:58, johnw jo...@mac.com ha scritto:
Usually the government services are monopolistic - courts, police, elected
officials (there's only 1 mayor) tax offices, DMV, etc,
2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional
offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people
have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it
is a really important
I hope we can come to some sort of agreement on this topic as there are
many large parcels of land here in Thailand that serve various government
functions. It seems every time I notice a big, well appointed structure
over here my Thai partner tells me that's a government building.
Irrigation and
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 7, 2014, at 10:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional
offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy
Would schools and hospitals fit into this new landuse tag?
Dana 3. 10. 2014. 20:33 osoba Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org
napisala je:
Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32:
I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g.
Il giorno 04/ott/2014, alle ore 06:58, johnw jo...@mac.com ha scritto:
Usually the government services are monopolistic - courts, police, elected
officials (there's only 1 mayor) tax offices, DMV, etc, whereas NGO s and
non-profits are a business model to support some activity.
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32:
2014-10-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer:
I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative use,
maybe in the context of further civic use.
We do have office=administrative and office=government but no appropriate
2014-10-03 18:14 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32:
2014-10-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer:
I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative
use,
maybe in the context of further civic use.
We do have
Il giorno 03/ott/2014, alle ore 19:14, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org
ha scritto:
Yes absolutely. Any commercial administration can keep the commercial landuse.
what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging
Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32:
I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g.
landuse=public_administration
+1
I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see
it in use, though there is a small
a few months ago I laid out the case for landuse=civic It's literal definition
is a little restrictive, but basically all government admin and services. from
a brance office of the city hall to the UN building. local to supranational.
There was so much back and forth over it - do we need a
47 matches
Mail list logo
