Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Neil Matthews
I have some sympathy for expressing defaults within a bounded area. However, some thought needs to be put into the logistics when mapping / inputting data. I would "hope" that there would be editor support -- otherwise how does one determine whether a given tag/value combination can be omitted

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Warin
On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a cost of all involved parties ? This is a

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Warin
On 02-Sep-17 06:33 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: On 1 September 2017 19:35:01 BST, Marc Gemis wrote: Do you find the difference between supermarket and convenience store helpful ? Or do you just search (as in OsmAnd) for places that sell food ? So why bother to have 2 tags

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Tod Fitch
In the jurisdiction I live, I would apply the state’s default residential speed to OSM residential and unclassified highways. I would apply the state’s default 55 MPH for untagged roads to OSM tertiary, secondary, primary and trunk highways. I would apply the state 65 MPH limit for freeways to

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
Tod, Can you clarify what residential and rural roads mean to you? Is a residential road corresponding to the osm tag? When is a road rural? Can you determine this for each osm way? Regards m Op 1 sep. 2017 18:53 schreef "Tod Fitch" : > I take exception to the comment

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-01 Thread Viking
If we want to remove fire_hydrant: namespace, what's about transform fire_hydrant:diameter=# in diameter=# ? It is already documented its use with hydrants: [0] And about fire_hydrant:style=*, fire_hydrant:count=# and fire_hydrant:class=* ? I would keep these tags as they are now. [0]

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Philip Barnes
On 1 September 2017 19:58:10 BST, Marc Gemis wrote: >On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain > wrote: >> Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, >whether >> working from planets, editing where these tags could

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-01 Thread Viking
Hi Walter. > when you say "hydrant", you meen "emergency=fire_hydrant" ok? Yes. > and the substag fire_hydrant:type will specify the subtypes > (underground, pillar, ...) ok? Currently we think to put the subtype in fire_hydrant=underground/pillar... instead of using

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Philip Barnes
On 1 September 2017 19:35:01 BST, Marc Gemis wrote: > >Do you find the difference between supermarket and convenience store >helpful ? Or do you just search (as in OsmAnd) for places that sell >food ? So why bother to have 2 tags for those kind of shops ? > Actually that

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Colin Smale
On 2017-09-01 21:32, Nick Bolten wrote: > I also don't know the best way to establish a hierarchy for *which* boundary > settings to honor, if a given street is within admin boundaries for city, > region, and national having different maxspeeds. It makes sense to assume > that the most-local

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Nick Bolten
I'd like to second Tod's point that defaults are difficult when they depend on regional variation. When a tag's default has significant geographical variation, one has to have corresponding regional geodata to figure out what value to use - shouldn't that geodata be in OSM? Perhaps a compromise

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain wrote: > Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether > working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used, > searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain wrote: > Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether > working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used, > searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a cost of all involved parties ? But forget about that for a moment. What are the

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Andrew Hain
Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used, searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags shop=boutique or shop=fashion helpful or wish there were more of them? -- Andrew

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Clifford Snow
I have been following this discussion on default maxspeed tagging. Searching the wiki hasn't been helpful. There is an inactive proposal [1], a wiki page on country default speeds [1] but nothing definitive on how to map. The default scheme seems to be a reasonable approach for jurisdictions that

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 96, Issue 3

2017-09-01 Thread Severin Menard
> Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 12:48:25 +0200 > From: Jean-Marc Liotier > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique > Message-ID: <20170901124825.76716...@manantali.encara.local.ads> >

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Tod Fitch
I take exception to the comment that “there will be too many exceptions to the rule”. In the country I live in each state has a set of “prima facia” speed limits for various types of roads. Those are basically default speed limits to be enforced unless otherwise posted by sign. Virtually no

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Dave F
On 31/08/2017 17:40, Daniel Koć wrote: It's the same word, just nested, so it doesn't help, because we still don't know what it really means. =} But we do know basically what it means. Putting it on a subtag allows renderers to ignore the minutiae and foibles of the fashion industry & tag

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Dave F
Hi André Assuming or defining a default should be based on the number of different values within the set. For the examples you give: maxspeed shouldn't have a default. Apart from on motorway classed roads, speed limits varies depending on local topography. There will be too many exceptions

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Daniel Koć
W dniu 01.09.2017 o 17:51, Marc Gemis pisze: So no, this group is not really representative for the community as a whole. But what is representative? And what about standardization? I would be happy if we find a way to communicate things with wider community, but this is what we have now.

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
> The community is also this list. > I don't believe that. This list certainly lacks diversity. Most participants here can discuss fluently in English, most are male (if not all). So a huge group is missing. I've met several people that do not want to participate in this mailing list as they do

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-08-31 13:49 GMT+02:00 André Pirard : > >- The Belgian Flemish community wants to tag *maxspeed*=* > on every road >instead of using a default. Is this a new specification and where is it >written?

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Daniel Koć
W dniu 01.09.2017 o 13:27, Marc Gemis pisze: because other mappers thought it was needed to distinguish the two ? But what if "distinguishing" is just an illusion? We had about 700k+ uses of landuse=farm, but now it's deprecated (with about 45k uses), because it was not clear. Who are we

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
because other mappers thought it was needed to distinguish the two ? Who are we (the people using this mailing list) to decide that other mappers cannot tag a shop=boutique if it is already used 11.000 times ? So if you want to tag that shop as shop=clothes with subtags fine, do it. Document it,

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

2017-09-01 Thread François Lacombe
Hi Andre, i wasn't aware of this proposal and read it right now. It's a good explanation and pretty easy to understand But question : Why do we need to put conditions to set a default values to a collection of features ? The only purpose is to activate the default on matching features only. Then

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Jean-Marc Liotier
I still don't understand the need for anything other than shop=clothes used with assorted modifiers. Fashion is subjective and I do not see why exclusive distribution channels should be tagged differently as they are essentially clothes shop with no price tags and an attitude. shop=car covers

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
As for all the things I listed, the word "typical" was important, it would certainly not require them all. Maybe some were not well chosen. The idea was that is you see a shop that has a number of those features, it is more likely to be a boutique As for the linked with fashion houses, Isn't it

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
there are specialty shops that sell outfits for emergency services, construction workers, kitchen personnel, etc (e.g. http://www.belprotect.be/) Certainly not a shop where the average family goes for an outfit :) m. On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-09-01 7:58 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis : > Let's try to find some characteristics for boutique > > typically > > * has "boutique" somewhere on the window or logo (as Dave F wrote) > wouldn't require this > * smaller than shops from chains (limited collections) > not

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-08-31 15:30 GMT+02:00 Daniel Koć : > Important questions to decide: > >> - Can a boutique sell second hand items - or just the new ones? >> > IMHO they wouldn't typically sell second hand items, on the other hand, second hand is a property in OSM and can be added to

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-09-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-08-30 9:37 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole : > Naturally in the end this doesn't actually answer my question as to what > the defining aspects of shop=fashion are :-). > IMHO it indicates a shop selling very "fashionable"/trendy things. Naturally, most shops selling clothes will

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-09-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-08-30 5:17 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis : > >> > >> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-) > >> > >> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique & > >> =fashion,... > Furthermore I find that non-experts should not discuss dropping a

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-09-01 Thread Marc Gemis
Let's try to find some characteristics for boutique typically * has "boutique" somewhere on the window or logo (as Dave F wrote) * smaller than shops from chains (limited collections) * not part of a chain * only for women * sells only certain "expensive" brands * no denim nor sports * side-line