Re: [Tagging] craft=builder definition?

[johnw]

It’s interesting that wherever you go, the “builder” people all seem to have 
their own culture and identity - and uniform. The "construction workers" in 
america that frame houses all seem to be part of of a big club, and the 
specialty wooden house people here in Japan - daiku-san (大工さん) , with their 
long pants with gigantic oversized cuffs and split toe shoes also have an 
instantly recognizable uniform, just through tradition.  As in america, a lot 
of residential houses here are wooden framed, constructed onsite (not so much 
prefab work) - the job title fits the work - framers - but overall, just 
“construction worker” is good.

whereas in America the “handyman” or “repairman” would help you with house 
repairs - a “carpenter” (大工さん) title is still used for a general handyman here 
in Japan. 

This seems to be separate from people who work on steel trussed buildings, or 
are specialists, such as welders, pipe-fitters, etc. 


“A person or company who takes part in the construction, maintenance, and 
repair of common residential and commercial structures (and their systems), 
usually consisting of wood, concrete, or other easy to work with materials.

Known by several names depending on when they work on the structure 
(construction worker, handyman, repairman, carpenter, etc), the title of 
builder encompasses them all, as a single person or company usually performs a 
variety of tasks to complete their various jobs. “

sounds like a good def to me. 

-Javbw


> On Dec 17, 2014, at 2:36 AM, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> 
> On 16/12/2014 17:05, Andreas Goss wrote:
>> Just found this tag (craft=builder) on Taginfo and it has been used by a few 
>> times, but it does not seem very clear what it means: 
>> 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder  
>> 
>> So is there any good definition for this tag or should I just create a Wiki 
>> page that people should use more spefific craft etc. tags? 
>> 
> 
> Of the links there, "The Builders 
> , a Fawlty Towers episode" might 
> be most useful.  :-)
> 
> In English this sense of "builder" normally means a (usually small) company 
> that performs (house) building work, or a person that works for such a 
> company.  
> 
> A larger company that designs and oversees the construction of large housing 
> estates (or other commercial or industrial property) might also be described 
> as a "firm of builders", but it's not as good a fit.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> ___
> 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] city walls

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Razed would be much better for this kind of object (though I am not a big
fan fan of razed, sooner or later completely mundane things without any
kind of recognition are tagged this way).

But at least it is not misrepresenting things.

2014-12-16 22:20 GMT+01:00 Zecke :
>
>
>  "interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate"
>
>>
>>  It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that
>> completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped.
>
>
>  typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of
> cities that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in physical
> terms. The roads that once passed the gates are still the "arterial" roads,
> the squares are still named after the gates (typically) and the whole area
> often still has that name (e.g. referring here to my birth town Tübingen,
> where everybody would still know "Neckartor" (dismantled 1804), "Lustnauer
> Tor" or "Haagtor" (and 2 others, all of which non-existent physically but
> very existent in daily life/communication, e.g. to set up a place to meet)).
>
>
> Actually we recommend to map such objects with the razed: prefix for
> objects that once existed but now there are only barely remnants or even
> indirect indications thereof.
> As long as there is a historical interest in them and there is a slight
> indication of its position we are willing to map them in the historic map.
>
> Cheers,
> Zecke
>
> ___
> 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] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)

[Dave Swarthout]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:

typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of cities
> that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in physical terms.


Agreed. Here in Chiang Mai Thailand there are a number of such gates dating
from around 1200 AD, non-existent in the present except in name. Chiang Mai
Gate, Chang Phuak Gate are two. The Tha Phae Gate is still in existence
although it has been restored. It is the center of the Chiang Mai tourist
area and very well known to all who live here.


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance

[Dave Swarthout]

I tag an adit as a node, the opening through which you enter the
underground part of a cave or mine.

Cheers,

Dave

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 4:26 AM, Zecke  wrote:
>
>  Am 16.12.2014 19:19, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
>
> 2014-12-09 16:39 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann :
>>
>> I get the point. However, man_made=adit has been defined in the wiki to be
>> the entrance only, since August 2010. The tag is used 2309 times that way,
>> i.e. on nodes. It does not seem right to re-define a tag that has been in
>> use for so long.
>>
>
> well, an "entrance" doesn't have to be a door or door like opening, an
> entrance to a mine could well be a horizontal passage that leads to the
> actual "digging zone", or am I missinterpreting this?
>
>
> Here I would also opt to leave adit with the meaning it has for years now.
> The more as the english wikipedia seems to support this definition (cannot
> judge whether this is correct). There's just no need to redefine well
> established tags without need. And I would see only the opening gate
> (Portal, Stolleneingang) as the entrance, not the passage (Stollen) itself
> that leads to the digging zone ("Abbauort") which might be extended but
> which also might be the dead end. The passage might be quite long and I see
> no reason to call it an entrance.
>
> Cheers
> Zecke
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>

-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Adding values to usage=* key for power transmission

[François Lacombe]

2014-12-16 17:50 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> could be. I am also generally for splitting different entities into
> separate objects, for the same reasons you describe below. Still with
> common values like "abandoned" in the railway key, stuff becomes less
> clear, and a combined object of power=* and railway=* could have its sense.
>

No it couldn't since the abandoned railway feature will have an end_date=*
key and the power=* one won't.

Merging two different feature in one is only a commodity question.


>
> when we don't know, we shouldn't judge ("an error").
>

We don't know because the features are merged. It is an error since we
can't distinguish them.
I'm sorry but a railway can't be transformed in a power line in reality.

In a quality point of view, when consumer can't make such a difference
(between a railway and a power line, but with many other stuff), there is a
QA issue.



> I think there is a big difference between "operator" and "usage": the
> latter is most probably intended to be a formal tag with a limited, well
> defined set of values, while the former is a free text field with any value
> possible. Mixing up "usage" in different contexts makes life harder for
> documentation, taginfo users, etc.
> Adding context by applying a namespace would help.
>

All keys in OSM are supposed to have free-text values. Let's start to
consider this question widely and tags as a whole. Not only for power,
railway, usage or operators.

The wiki gives information about which are most commonly encountered
together.
If tools aren't able to deal with this, they should be improved.

Secondly, if all keys have to summary the context in which they are used,
we'll obtain an endless loop.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Moveable objects tagged as building=*

[John F. Eldredge]

Another common use for such temporary buildings is as the office at a major 
construction site. They may sit in one place until the construction project is 
completed, or may be relocated for different phases of the project. Once the 
project is completed, the construction office trailers are removed.


On December 16, 2014 8:30:31 AM CST, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, John Willis  wrote:
> >
> > Semi temporary buildings are usually called portables. Schools I
> have been
> > to in the US will have them in place for several years, though they
> lack a
> > foundation and can be moved away whole or in sections as a truck
> trailer -
> > similar to a mobile home. Although the method is not similar, the
> office
> > bus I wrote about is used in a similar manner. Perhaps building =
> portable?
> 
> 
> Well, wondering if portable is starting to become a misnomer for "just
> plain cheaping out," since everyplace I've seen 'em (mostly southern
> California and western Oregon) park 'em once, then use them until they
> rot
> and collapse 4 decades later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, 
Jr.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance

[Zecke]

Am 16.12.2014 19:19, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2014-12-09 16:39 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann >:


I get the point. However, man_made=adit has been defined in the
wiki to be
the entrance only, since August 2010. The tag is used 2309 times
that way,
i.e. on nodes. It does not seem right to re-define a tag that has
been in
use for so long.


well, an "entrance" doesn't have to be a door or door like opening, an 
entrance to a mine could well be a horizontal passage that leads to 
the actual "digging zone", or am I missinterpreting this?


Here I would also opt to leave adit with the meaning it has for years 
now. The more as the english wikipedia seems to support this definition 
(cannot judge whether this is correct). There's just no need to redefine 
well established tags without need. And I would see only the opening 
gate (Portal, Stolleneingang) as the entrance, not the passage (Stollen) 
itself that leads to the digging zone ("Abbauort") which might be 
extended but which also might be the dead end. The passage might be 
quite long and I see no reason to call it an entrance.


Cheers
Zecke
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] city walls

[Zecke]

"interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate"


It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that
completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped.


typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of 
cities that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in 
physical terms. The roads that once passed the gates are still the 
"arterial" roads, the squares are still named after the gates 
(typically) and the whole area often still has that name (e.g. 
referring here to my birth town Tübingen, where everybody would still 
know "Neckartor" (dismantled 1804), "Lustnauer Tor" or "Haagtor" (and 
2 others, all of which non-existent physically but very existent in 
daily life/communication, e.g. to set up a place to meet)).


Actually we recommend to map such objects with the razed: prefix for 
objects that once existed but now there are only barely remnants or even 
indirect indications thereof.
As long as there is a historical interest in them and there is a slight 
indication of its position we are willing to map them in the historic map.


Cheers,
Zecke
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[John F. Eldredge]

The existing tagging scheme supports various levels of government, from local 
up through national.


On December 16, 2014 2:50:48 AM CST, Simone Savio  
wrote:
> The issue is that in Italy a government office, for example,
> corresponds to the
> prefecture.
> An office, such as that of the Informagiovani, is very different
> because it
> operates at a local level and it is a specific office for young
> people.
> 
> Simone
> 
> 2014-12-16 3:35 GMT+01:00 johnw :
> >
> > working on a proposal for civic landuses, and a subtag for
> building=civic
> > for all kinds of governmental buildings and services.
> >
> > Your input is appreciated.
> >
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
> >
> > javbw
> >
> >
> > > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:30 AM, John F. Eldredge
> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12/15/2014 08:31 AM, Simone Savio wrote:
> > >> Hi propose
> > >>
> > >>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ufficio_pubblico
> > >> <
> >
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth
> > >
> > >>
> > >> becaus I want create  a specific tag for public institutions in
> Italy
> > >> such as informagiovani because this concept does not exist in
> English.
> > >>
> > >> Looking forward for any comments and suggestions.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> Tagging mailing list
> > >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> > >>
> > >
> > > What is informagiovani?  An information office?  The concept
> exists in
> > English.
> > >
> > > Ufficio pubblico looks like it would translate as "public office";
> > again, the concept exists in English.
> > >
> > > --
> > > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> > > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
> > > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
> > > Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Dr. Martin Luther King, 
Jr.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wiki - contact: & Map Features

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 19:15 GMT+01:00 Andreas Goss :
>
> The try to make the Wiki page sound like they are still present more often
> in the database.



actually the "idea" to prefix phone etc. with "contact:" was never more
popular than the simple form. The "contact:"-form was proposed later and
never set actually foot compared to the simple version. I have also tried
in the past to convince mappers by sending them messages, to not use the
prefix in order to avoid sprawl, but they have demonstrated themselves
patient and insistent ;-)

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-09 16:39 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann :
>
> I get the point. However, man_made=adit has been defined in the wiki to be
> the entrance only, since August 2010. The tag is used 2309 times that way,
> i.e. on nodes. It does not seem right to re-define a tag that has been in
> use for so long.
>



well, an "entrance" doesn't have to be a door or door like opening, an
entrance to a mine could well be a horizontal passage that leads to the
actual "digging zone", or am I missinterpreting this?

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Wiki - contact: & Map Features

[Andreas Goss]

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

Honestly the people supporting this tag are annoying me more and more. 
They try to push that tag everywhere even when the tag without the 
prefix is used 10x more. The try to make the Wiki page sound like they 
are still present more often in the database. Put it on the MapFeatures 
Page. On shop/craft Wiki pages they try to push it as supplementary 
tags. Another guy does a mass edit for all social media tags and puts 
the contact: prefix in front of it (still not sure all facebook tags 
have been reverted).


Is there any solution to this? It's really no fun when I come back to 
edit a Wiki again and see that it happened again. Especially this 
replacing and not even trying to give the user a choice.



═══ Talk:Map_Features ═══

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Map_Features#Last_changes_by_Xxzme.3F


  Not only that. Why do you want to remove tags that are in widespread use in 
OSM? Xxzme (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)



  Because this page should list only major OSM features in widespread use.



  It is not written anywhere. This is only your subjective opinion about how big 
"Map Features" should be.
  You are trying to enforce your opinion about how "wiki should look like". 
Instead of single view enforced by single user, users should compare multiple approaches 
and pick one for them. Do not remove valid information. Xxzme (talk) 10:39, 5 December 
2014 (UTC)


Picked out this Quote, there is a lot more to read. I completely agree 
with the view that MapFeatures really is just for major features or at 
least for tags where there is no disagreement. Something that's not 
clear should not be there. And especially a tag or whole template that's 
used far less than a equivalent tag should not be there.


__
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 18:16 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny :
>
> "interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate"
>
> It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that
> completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped.





typically city gates have had such a huge impact on the structure of cities
that they normally persist even if there is nothing left in physical terms.
The roads that once passed the gates are still the "arterial" roads, the
squares are still named after the gates (typically) and the whole area
often still has that name (e.g. referring here to my birth town Tübingen,
where everybody would still know "Neckartor" (dismantled 1804), "Lustnauer
Tor" or "Haagtor" (and 2 others, all of which non-existent physically but
very existent in daily life/communication, e.g. to set up a place to meet)).

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] craft=builder definition?

[SomeoneElse]

On 16/12/2014 17:05, Andreas Goss wrote:
Just found this tag (craft=builder) on Taginfo and it has been used by 
a few times, but it does not seem very clear what it means:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder

So is there any good definition for this tag or should I just create a 
Wiki page that people should use more spefific craft etc. tags?




Of the links there, "The Builders 
, a /Fawlty Towers/ episode" 
might be most useful.  :-)


In English this sense of "builder" normally means a (usually small) 
company that performs (house) building work, or a person that works for 
such a company.


A larger company that designs and oversees the construction of large 
housing estates (or other commercial or industrial property) might also 
be described as a "firm of builders", but it's not as good a fit.


Cheers,

Andy

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)

[Mateusz Konieczny]

"interesting to map dismantled city gates as historic=city_gate"

It is OK to map ruins/remmants, archeological site - but note that
completely destroyed objects should NOT be mapped.

2014-12-16 11:51 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>
> 2014-12-16 10:10 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>>
>> (Opening a new thread to keep the conversations clean)
>>
>> Thanks for this improvement that made appear many walled cities in Veneto
>> on your map.
>>
>> Then I spot checked Rome and found some pieces of city walls that are not
>> shown as such.
>>
>> They are all tagged with historic=citywalls. Taginfo gives 5489 hits. So
>> you should add this tag as well
>
>
>
>
>
> yes, there are 2 established tags for city walls, one is
> historic=citywalls and the other is barrier=city_wall
> Not to forget historic=city_gate in this context.
>
> There are also very few (i.e. not well established as of now)
> barrier=city_gate.
>
> Usually all these objects (if yet existing) are best represented by areas.
> Particularly for city gates it might also be interesting to map dismantled
> city gates as historic=city_gate (but not as barrier=city_gate).
>
> 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

[Tagging] craft=builder definition?

[Andreas Goss]

Just found this tag (craft=builder) on Taginfo and it has been used by a 
few times, but it does not seem very clear what it means:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder

So is there any good definition for this tag or should I just create a 
Wiki page that people should use more spefific craft etc. tags?



Btw. do we have a tag for General contractor? I guess office=* would
be the best fit?

__
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Adding values to usage=* key for power transmission

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-06 23:23 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe :
>
> I guess no one should tag a single feature with both power=* and railway=*
> since they are actually separated in reality.
>


could be. I am also generally for splitting different entities into
separate objects, for the same reasons you describe below. Still with
common values like "abandoned" in the railway key, stuff becomes less
clear, and a combined object of power=* and railway=* could have its sense.



>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/167556124 is an error : is it an
> abandoned railway with power feeder remaining on landscape or a power line
> built on the abandoned railway ?
> We don't know really...
>


when we don't know, we shouldn't judge ("an error").




> So tags like usage=*, location=*, operator=*, ... should be domain-less
> and get a worldwide extent for each field of knowledge which require them.
>
> operator=* sounds to be the perfect example : everyone should use them but
> all companies in the world won't operate all features.
> We didn't create power:operator and railway:operator.
>


I think there is a big difference between "operator" and "usage": the
latter is most probably intended to be a formal tag with a limited, well
defined set of values, while the former is a free text field with any value
possible. Mixing up "usage" in different contexts makes life harder for
documentation, taginfo users, etc.
Adding context by applying a namespace would help.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Distinction between amenity=restaurant and fast_food

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-12 15:15 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski :
>
> they also classify it as
> casual/not-casual.
>
> What do folks think of this as an alternative classification?
>


not sure about this. Around here you can come dressed as you like to any
kind of restaurant, or is this casual/not-casual referring to the waiters
and staff? Or the availability/complexity of table cloth, napkins etc.? Or
to the eating manners? I am not saying that this destinction might not work
in some settings/contexts, but fast_food vs. restaurant seems way more
useful and easier to decide where I map. Additionally where I find it
useful I am adding the tag "restaurant:type:it" to all kind of places where
you can find something to eat (even bars and cafes etc.) and add a list of
semicolon separated autodeclarations (buzzwords the business has on its
signage besides the name) of the place (in the local language) as values:
http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/restaurant%3Atype%3Ait I believe this is
usefull as there are no English words to catch the fine nuances of the
original words.

cheers,
Martin

btw: regarding the McDonald's places I have seen I think there is no doubt
that these don't belong into the restaurant category of OSM. I would be
more inclined to tag them as leisure=playground than as amenity=restaurant
;-)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Moveable objects tagged as building=*

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 14:44 GMT+01:00 John Willis :
>
> Semi temporary buildings are usually called portables. Schools I have been
> to in the US will have them in place for several years, though they lack a
> foundation and can be moved away whole or in sections as a truck trailer -
> similar to a mobile home.



What I get from a google image search for portable building all looks
perfectly fine as building in OSM:
https://www.google.it/images?q=portable+building&oi=image_result_group

Not sure if "portable" is a nice building type for OSM, I'd see this more
as an attribute and use something like "cabin" or "hut" or "shed" (or
whatever it is) to describe the typology (in terms of function and
structure / aspect / image).

You can find examples for temporary buildings also in looking at the
designs for emergency shelter, eg.

complete concrete shelter put up in one day:
http://designboom.com/weblog/images/images_2/andy/00_aerobics2012/pop-up_sample_lesson/07.jpg
(this will be quite permanent due to the nature of concrete)

the opposite, a light-weight structure:
http://designboom.com/weblog/images/images_2/andy/00_aerobics2012/pop-up_sample_lesson/03.jpg

this one is more like a tent, but if it sits there for years...
http://designboom.com/weblog/images/images_2/andy/00_aerobics2012/pop-up_sample_lesson/02.jpg

african style:
http://designboom.com/weblog/images/images_2/andy/00_aerobics2012/pop-up_sample_lesson/08.jpg
http://designboom.com/weblog/images/images_2/andy/00_aerobics2012/pop-up_sample_lesson/09.jpg

Who wouldn't call this a house (it's made of shipping containers):
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/160722280425530628/

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Moveable objects tagged as building=*

[Paul Johnson]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:44 AM, John Willis  wrote:
>
> Semi temporary buildings are usually called portables. Schools I have been
> to in the US will have them in place for several years, though they lack a
> foundation and can be moved away whole or in sections as a truck trailer -
> similar to a mobile home. Although the method is not similar, the office
> bus I wrote about is used in a similar manner. Perhaps building = portable?


Well, wondering if portable is starting to become a misnomer for "just
plain cheaping out," since everyplace I've seen 'em (mostly southern
California and western Oregon) park 'em once, then use them until they rot
and collapse 4 decades later.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Moveable objects tagged as building=*

[John Willis]

Semi temporary buildings are usually called portables. Schools I have been to 
in the US will have them in place for several years, though they lack a 
foundation and can be moved away whole or in sections as a truck trailer - 
similar to a mobile home. Although the method is not similar, the office bus I 
wrote about is used in a similar manner. Perhaps building = portable?

Javbw 


> On Dec 16, 2014, at 9:33 PM, fly  wrote:
> 
> So we are talking about objects which are movable but nearly do not move
> and are used similar to buildings.
> 
> Instead of using key building we could use man_made or even some new one.
> 
> For the fact that these objects are movable we need an additional key
> with perhaps some values.
> 
> To distinguish between self-powered or not might be useful, as well.
> 
> Just, my 2 ct
> fly
> 
>> Am 15.12.2014 um 12:21 schrieb johnw:
>> One of the driving schools I went to is a permanent course laid out on a
>> flood plain ( as is the soccer fields and helipads), but as it is inside
>> a leveed flood canal, they are not allowed to build permanent buildings. 
>> 
>> So the driving school uses a bus. It has a desk, a waiting room, and
>> everything.  It has parked in the same spot for years, day in and day
>> out, occasionally moved to higher ground during a typhoon. It is a
>> drivable vehicle.
>> 
>> I tagged that bus as a building (and named it “バス” - “bus" in
>> Japanese) - it's where you need to go for the driving school, and it is
>> always there. 
>> 
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/36.32157/138.99813  
>> 
>> 
>> - Javbw
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 13, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Pieren >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Perhaps the attribute of 'moveable' or not should be specified in a
>>> separate tag (without significant deconstruction efforts or
>>> foundations because basically all buildings can be moved
>>> theoritically). I also don't see a problem to keep "building" for
>>> permanent structures, floating on water or on wheels (caravan).
>>> 
>>> Pieren
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[fly]

Am 16.12.2014 um 13:04 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> 
> 2014-12-16 12:36 GMT+01:00 johnw mailto:jo...@mac.com>>:
> 
> Building=Civic + civic=civic_services if it offers something to them
> (a place for activities, government funded things or services) 
> 
> or 
> 
> building=civic + civic=civic_admin if it is a place where they go
> for paperwork, IDs or whatnot, or both admin and services together
> (admin takes priority). 
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't tag any service by using the building tag. "Building" is
> about buildings, not services (which might be implied in some cases).

+1

> Agree with you about an new amenity, IMHO something like "counseling" or
> consulting service would be the direction for the specific case of
> informagiovani, together with subtags (for whom etc.) or maybe use
> office=employment_agency and some subtags.

What kind of amenity ?
Do we really need it ?

Think this fits well with office=* either as subtag of an existing value
or as subtag of a new value like consulting_service.

cu fly

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Moveable objects tagged as building=*

[fly]

So we are talking about objects which are movable but nearly do not move
and are used similar to buildings.

Instead of using key building we could use man_made or even some new one.

For the fact that these objects are movable we need an additional key
with perhaps some values.

To distinguish between self-powered or not might be useful, as well.

Just, my 2 ct
fly

Am 15.12.2014 um 12:21 schrieb johnw:
> One of the driving schools I went to is a permanent course laid out on a
> flood plain ( as is the soccer fields and helipads), but as it is inside
> a leveed flood canal, they are not allowed to build permanent buildings. 
> 
> So the driving school uses a bus. It has a desk, a waiting room, and
> everything.  It has parked in the same spot for years, day in and day
> out, occasionally moved to higher ground during a typhoon. It is a
> drivable vehicle.
> 
> I tagged that bus as a building (and named it “バス” - “bus" in
> Japanese) - it's where you need to go for the driving school, and it is
> always there. 
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/36.32157/138.99813  
> 
> 
> - Javbw
> 
> 
>> On Dec 13, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Pieren > > wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps the attribute of 'moveable' or not should be specified in a
>> separate tag (without significant deconstruction efforts or
>> foundations because basically all buildings can be moved
>> theoritically). I also don't see a problem to keep "building" for
>> permanent structures, floating on water or on wheels (caravan).
>>
>> Pieren
>>
>> ___
>> 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] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[johnw]

Ah - I made a mistake!

the civic_admin and civic_service was the values for the landuse. My mistake. 

it would be: 

Building=civic + civic=[ youth center?], or whatever value he would want to 
create. 

the civic=* subtag I’m suggesting would fill out the missing types of civic 
buildings - the big list of them on the suggestion page -  are you suggesting 
to abandon that idea and just toss everything on that civic=* list into the 
amenity tag? 


PS: the description of the pizza made me hungry - especially since the local 
pizza here is horrid and the only acceptable slices are at Costco. I had no 
idea there were so many kinds of pizza in Italy!^__^

Javbw


> On Dec 16, 2014, at 9:04 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 2014-12-16 12:36 GMT+01:00 johnw mailto:jo...@mac.com>>:
> Building=Civic + civic=civic_services if it offers something to them (a place 
> for activities, government funded things or services) 
> 
> or 
> 
> building=civic + civic=civic_admin if it is a place where they go for 
> paperwork, IDs or whatnot, or both admin and services together (admin takes 
> priority). 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't tag any service by using the building tag. "Building" is about 
> buildings, not services (which might be implied in some cases). Agree with 
> you about an new amenity, IMHO something like "counseling" or consulting 
> service would be the direction for the specific case of informagiovani, 
> together with subtags (for whom etc.) or maybe use office=employment_agency 
> and some subtags.
> 
> 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] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 12:36 GMT+01:00 johnw :
>
> Building=Civic + civic=civic_services if it offers something to them (a
> place for activities, government funded things or services)
>
> or
>
> building=civic + civic=civic_admin if it is a place where they go for
> paperwork, IDs or whatnot, or both admin and services together (admin takes
> priority).
>


I wouldn't tag any service by using the building tag. "Building" is about
buildings, not services (which might be implied in some cases). Agree with
you about an new amenity, IMHO something like "counseling" or consulting
service would be the direction for the specific case of informagiovani,
together with subtags (for whom etc.) or maybe use office=employment_agency
and some subtags.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[johnw]

> On Dec 16, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Simone Savio  wrote:
> 
> The issue is that in Italy a government office, for example, corresponds to 
> the prefecture.
> An office, such as that of the Informagiovani, is very different because it 
> operates at a local level and it is a specific office for young people.


Building=Civic + civic=civic_services if it offers something to them (a place 
for activities, government funded things or services) 

or 

building=civic + civic=civic_admin if it is a place where they go for 
paperwork, IDs or whatnot, or both admin and services together (admin takes 
priority). 

a rec center, community center, community hall, or other place where citizens 
go for administration or service fits the bill - weather it is old peole or 
young people. 

I suggest a new amenity=* value to further differentiate the service (since you 
feel it is not represented well) - but it certainly would fall into that 
category of building=civic and civic=*   - just as a city hall, a rec center, 
or community center would fall into that category as well, and all are further 
defined by their amenity tag. 

Javbw



> 
> Simone
> 
> 2014-12-16 3:35 GMT+01:00 johnw mailto:jo...@mac.com>>:
> working on a proposal for civic landuses, and a subtag for building=civic for 
> all kinds of governmental buildings and services.
> 
> Your input is appreciated.
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic 
> 
> 
> javbw
> 
> 
> > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:30 AM, John F. Eldredge  > > wrote:
> >
> > On 12/15/2014 08:31 AM, Simone Savio wrote:
> >> Hi propose
> >>
> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ufficio_pubblico 
> >> 
> >>  >>  
> >> >
> >>
> >> becaus I want create  a specific tag for public institutions in Italy
> >> such as informagiovani because this concept does not exist in English.
> >>
> >> Looking forward for any comments and suggestions.
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Tagging mailing list
> >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
> >> 
> >>
> >
> > What is informagiovani?  An information office?  The concept exists in 
> > English.
> >
> > Ufficio pubblico looks like it would translate as "public office"; again, 
> > the concept exists in English.
> >
> > --
> > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com 
> > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
> > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
> > Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combining gas stations & convenience stores

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 4:12 GMT+01:00 johnw :
>
> As long as it’s a pizza shop, it’s all cuisine=pizza, right?



;-)

The main distinction in Italy (and you can find similar differences in the
offering probably also in other countries, think Pizza Hut vs. a nice
Italian restaurant) is between "round pizza" and "pizza slices" [1], where
you will get the first mostly in restaurant like places (prepared after you
order) and the slices in fast food like dedicated places (already baked
typically, often no seating), bakeries, etc., with the variation of fried
pizza (e.g. "pizza fritta napoletana") [3]. And then there are the
"pizzette" (small round pizza) [2]. And the pizza tonda (round) is often
distinguished in "alta" (high) and "bassa" (flat), with only a few places
offering both types (different pastry needed).
Next distinction is the oven: wood fired or electrical (obviously the "real
pizza" comes out of an oven=wood_fired).


Cheers,
Martin

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza_al_taglio
[2]
https://www.google.it/search?q=pizzette&safe=off&prmd=ivnse&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ehKQVPPfNNX3atv9gqgD&ved=0CAUQ_AU
[3]
http://www.verapizza.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/pizza-fritta-verapizza.jpg?bd5854
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-12-16 10:10 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
>
> (Opening a new thread to keep the conversations clean)
>
> Thanks for this improvement that made appear many walled cities in Veneto
> on your map.
>
> Then I spot checked Rome and found some pieces of city walls that are not
> shown as such.
>
> They are all tagged with historic=citywalls. Taginfo gives 5489 hits. So
> you should add this tag as well





yes, there are 2 established tags for city walls, one is historic=citywalls
and the other is barrier=city_wall
Not to forget historic=city_gate in this context.

There are also very few (i.e. not well established as of now)
barrier=city_gate.

Usually all these objects (if yet existing) are best represented by areas.
Particularly for city gates it might also be interesting to map dismantled
city gates as historic=city_gate (but not as barrier=city_gate).

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[Mateusz Konieczny]

"operates at a local leve" "it is a specific office for young people."

It may expressed by additional tags - it is unnecessary to create top-level
rags for every single subtle variation.

Also, something intended to function in this way was present in Poland
during Soviet occupation, it is not
something specific to Italy.

2014-12-16 9:50 GMT+01:00 Simone Savio :
>
> The issue is that in Italy a government office, for example, corresponds
> to the prefecture.
> An office, such as that of the Informagiovani, is very different because
> it operates at a local level and it is a specific office for young people.
>
> Simone
>
> 2014-12-16 3:35 GMT+01:00 johnw :
>>
>> working on a proposal for civic landuses, and a subtag for building=civic
>> for all kinds of governmental buildings and services.
>>
>> Your input is appreciated.
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
>>
>> javbw
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:30 AM, John F. Eldredge 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 12/15/2014 08:31 AM, Simone Savio wrote:
>> >> Hi propose
>> >>
>> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ufficio_pubblico
>> >> <
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth
>> >
>> >>
>> >> becaus I want create  a specific tag for public institutions in Italy
>> >> such as informagiovani because this concept does not exist in English.
>> >>
>> >> Looking forward for any comments and suggestions.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ___
>> >> Tagging mailing list
>> >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> >>
>> >
>> > What is informagiovani?  An information office?  The concept exists in
>> English.
>> >
>> > Ufficio pubblico looks like it would translate as "public office";
>> again, the concept exists in English.
>> >
>> > --
>> > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
>> > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
>> > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
>> > Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > 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
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] city walls (was: Watermill attributes)

[Volker Schmidt]

(Opening a new thread to keep the conversations clean)

Thanks for this improvement that made appear many walled cities in Veneto
on your map.

Then I spot checked Rome and found some pieces of city walls that are not
shown as such.

They are all tagged with historic=citywalls. Taginfo gives 5489 hits. So
you should add this tag as well

Regards

Volker



On 15 December 2014 at 20:22, Zecke  wrote:
>
> Coming back to city walls. Our walls in Padova are massive, were built mid
>> 1500 and are still there. They are at present not tagged "historic" and
>> hence don't show up on the history map.
>>
>
> Thanks Volker for pointing us at that.  The citywalls are tagged
> correctly. However there was a bug in our selection mechanism which
> prevented them from being rendered as such. This should be fixed by now.
>
> http://geschichtskarten.openstreetmap.de/historische_
> objekte/?zoom=14&lat=45.40335&lon=11.88057&layers=
> BFFFTFFFTFFFT
>
> Cheers,
> Zecke
>
> ___
> 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] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico

[Simone Savio]

The issue is that in Italy a government office, for example, corresponds to the
prefecture.
An office, such as that of the Informagiovani, is very different because it
operates at a local level and it is a specific office for young people.

Simone

2014-12-16 3:35 GMT+01:00 johnw :
>
> working on a proposal for civic landuses, and a subtag for building=civic
> for all kinds of governmental buildings and services.
>
> Your input is appreciated.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
>
> javbw
>
>
> > On Dec 16, 2014, at 7:30 AM, John F. Eldredge 
> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/15/2014 08:31 AM, Simone Savio wrote:
> >> Hi propose
> >>
> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ufficio_pubblico
> >> <
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amenity_features#kids_area.3Dno.2Findoor.2Foutdoor.2Fboth
> >
> >>
> >> becaus I want create  a specific tag for public institutions in Italy
> >> such as informagiovani because this concept does not exist in English.
> >>
> >> Looking forward for any comments and suggestions.
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Tagging mailing list
> >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >>
> >
> > What is informagiovani?  An information office?  The concept exists in
> English.
> >
> > Ufficio pubblico looks like it would translate as "public office";
> again, the concept exists in English.
> >
> > --
> > John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> > "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
> > Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
> > Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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