On 13 July 2012 20:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2012/7/13 Ilari Kajaste :
>> This isn't all that surprising. "drinkable" is an attribute,
>> "drinking_water" is a service. Different types of things are used in
>> different tagging contexts.
>
> please note that there are 2 kind of drinking_wat
2012/7/13 Ilari Kajaste :
> This isn't all that surprising. "drinkable" is an attribute,
> "drinking_water" is a service. Different types of things are used in
> different tagging contexts.
please note that there are 2 kind of drinking_water: as a value
(amenity=drinking_water) which is IMHO the
On 13 July 2012 18:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> interestingly drinkable is mostly used for water that is NOT drinkable:
> no 1614 68.80%
> yes 689 29.37%
>
> while drinking_water is mostly used for drinking water:
> yes 296 44.85%
> no 23034.85%
> Yes 7811.82%
This isn't all th
2012/7/13 John Sturdy :
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>> I would like to tag a brickworks.
>> Maybe it's the heat (30 centigrades indoors), but I cannot find a specific
>> tagging for a brickworks (large site, heaps of finished bricks, well visible
>> chimney).
> How a
2012/7/13 Andrew Errington :
> OP says that "drinkable=yes/no"
> has more usage than "drinking_water=yes/no",
interestingly drinkable is mostly used for water that is NOT drinkable:
no 1614 68.80%
yes 689 29.37%
while drinking_water is mostly used for drinking water:
yes 296 44.85%
no 230
Rather than long discussions about renaming or merging tags (e.g.
drinkable, potable), perhaps we should accept that there will be
things for which more than one tag name is in use, and decide on a
format and a URL at which a synonym table can be stored, for renderers
and other tools to use?
Perha
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:45:03 Ronnie Soak wrote:
> I do understand 'potable' and I believe others can do too. You either
> use translated presets or need to look it up in the wiki/taginfo
> anyway. I also expect anyone smart enough to use an osm editor can
> also use a translation tool.
> BUT: I do
Another anecdotal example:
I'm a non-native speaker (being German) and I don't know a word in
french. But I did know the term 'potable' very well.
And so will everybody else who ever went camping in either New
Zealand, Canada and probably many other English-speaking countries.
Camp sites and also
Potable
= something that you can put into a flower pot?
+ an odd connotation to potty training...
Look! It's Friday!
Bon weekend,
-Jaakko
Sent from my BlackBerry® device from Digicel
--
Mobile: +509-37-26 91 54, Skype/GoogleTalk: jhelleranta
-Original Message-
From: Philip Barnes
Dat
John Sturdy wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
I would like to tag a brickworks.
Maybe it's the heat (30 centigrades indoors), but I cannot find a specific
tagging for a brickworks (large site, heaps of finished bricks, well visible
chimney).
How about:
land_use=ind
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:02:27AM +0300, Ilari Kajaste wrote:
> On 13 July 2012 05:35, Andrew Errington wrote:
> > Anyway, I don't think we should assume other people are stupid and
> > choose 'simple' words just for the sake of it. It seems that we all
> > know what potable means, but we are wo
+1
Apart from a water company person, I have never heard anyone use potable, in
English it is jargon used in the industry. My understanding came from
recognising a French word.
Workplace taps are labelled as either drinking water, or not drinking water. I
have never seen potable used.
Phil
--
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> I would like to tag a brickworks.
> Maybe it's the heat (30 centigrades indoors), but I cannot find a specific
> tagging for a brickworks (large site, heaps of finished bricks, well visible
> chimney).
How about:
land_use=industrial
industr
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> The suggestion of "migrating" drinkable=* to potable=* is just silly.
> In practice, it's very hard to 'migrate' any tag at all - even when
> there is a good reason, like the power=station mess. So let's just
> drop that idea.
Bad example.
On 13 July 2012 05:35, Andrew Errington wrote:
> Anyway, I don't think we should assume other people are stupid and
> choose 'simple' words just for the sake of it. It seems that we all
> know what potable means, but we are worried that other mappers, whom
> we have never met, won't understand.
15 matches
Mail list logo
