Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Dolly Andriatsiferana]

>
> I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do not
> have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia. For
> example:
> a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a few
> families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small place
> of worship)
> A village has some services but only for the local community; people do
> not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
> hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
> of place of worship.
> A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
> hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
> specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
> entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
> always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
> visited.
> A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
> institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
> organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
> cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
> business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
> have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
> (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
> luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
> global cities however)
> By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than 100),
> and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
> cut-offs vary by region.
> A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a relatively
> small population if it has the only high school, government office,
> supermarket and airport on a large island, for example - in this case the
> whole population of the island comes to the town for services even if they
> do not live there, so I would be comfortable tagging a settlement of 4000
> people as a town on an island with 200,000 people but no other settlements
> over 1000 people in size.


+1

I totally agree with Joseph Eisenberg on this. When classifying settlements
(place=*), I think that their 'relative importance' should be valued more
than administrative status or population, although there are often overlaps
(administrative unit centers are often where services exist, such as
hospitals, schools, markets, offices etc.). That's according to the part of
the world that I know, there might be exceptions for some countries.

All the best.

Le mer. 2 janv. 2019 à 07:45, Allan Mustard  a écrit :

> I put some examples in the table located here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure
>
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 11:17 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It depends on if it is part of a continuous urban settlement or not.
>>
>> I use “suburb” and “neighborhood” for places that are considered to be
>> part of a larger place. Usually these are mainly urban places, where most
>> people are involved in services and industry rather than agriculture or
>> forestry or fishing, and a significant percentage of worker travel to the
>> larger town center for work.
>>
>> Sometimes a suburb has it’s own government and town council, as is common
>> in the USA. In other cases (Eg Shanghai), a municipality includes area of
>> farmland and villages that are clearly separate settlements. So I don’t
>> think that the government status can be the distinguishing characteristic.
>>
>> Perhaps you have a particular example in mind?
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:30 PM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>>
>>> By that definition, then, calling an autonomous village with its own
>>> council a "neighbourhood" would be erroneous, correct?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 10:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 In OSM a neighborhood is a named part of a larger settlement, usually a
 town or suburb or city, though in Indonesia some “desa” (villages) consist
 of a dozen named “kampung” (neighborhoods).

 Suburbs are also considered parts of larger towns or cities. So a city
 can be divided into a dozen suburbs, each of which is divided into a
 half-dozen neighborhoods
 On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:19 AM Allan Mustard 
 wrote:

> Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are
> defined in law and involve both size (though population data are secret)
> and type of governance structure (for full details please see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).
>
>
> Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a
> governance structure (a village council with a chair who serves 
> effectively
> as the municipal 

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Allan Mustard]

I put some examples in the table located here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 11:17 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> It depends on if it is part of a continuous urban settlement or not.
>
> I use “suburb” and “neighborhood” for places that are considered to be
> part of a larger place. Usually these are mainly urban places, where most
> people are involved in services and industry rather than agriculture or
> forestry or fishing, and a significant percentage of worker travel to the
> larger town center for work.
>
> Sometimes a suburb has it’s own government and town council, as is common
> in the USA. In other cases (Eg Shanghai), a municipality includes area of
> farmland and villages that are clearly separate settlements. So I don’t
> think that the government status can be the distinguishing characteristic.
>
> Perhaps you have a particular example in mind?
>
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:30 PM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>
>> By that definition, then, calling an autonomous village with its own
>> council a "neighbourhood" would be erroneous, correct?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 10:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In OSM a neighborhood is a named part of a larger settlement, usually a
>>> town or suburb or city, though in Indonesia some “desa” (villages) consist
>>> of a dozen named “kampung” (neighborhoods).
>>>
>>> Suburbs are also considered parts of larger towns or cities. So a city
>>> can be divided into a dozen suburbs, each of which is divided into a
>>> half-dozen neighborhoods
>>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:19 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>>>
 Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are defined
 in law and involve both size (though population data are secret) and type
 of governance structure (for full details please see
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).


 Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a
 governance structure (a village council with a chair who serves effectively
 as the municipal manager/mayor)?  In my experience a "neighbourhood" lacks
 any sort of governance structure aside from (sometimes) Neighborhood Watch.

 apm-wa

 On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:32 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
 joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
> boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?
>
> These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a
> node at the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling 
> or
> farm.
>
> While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these
> settled places, in the past they were defined by available services in
> England. A city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time)
> marketplace, a village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its 
> own
> church but had more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM
> system, though in modern times the standards are less certain.
>
> I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do
> not have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia.
> For example:
>
> a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a
> few families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small
> place of worship)
>
> A village has some services but only for the local community; people
> do not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms 
> or
> hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
> of place of worship.
>
> A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
> hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
> specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
> entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. 
> Towns
> always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I 
> have
> visited.
>
> A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
> institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
> organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
> cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
> business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
> have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
> (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
> luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
> global cities however)
>
> By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Joseph Eisenberg]

It depends on if it is part of a continuous urban settlement or not.

I use “suburb” and “neighborhood” for places that are considered to be part
of a larger place. Usually these are mainly urban places, where most people
are involved in services and industry rather than agriculture or forestry
or fishing, and a significant percentage of worker travel to the larger
town center for work.

Sometimes a suburb has it’s own government and town council, as is common
in the USA. In other cases (Eg Shanghai), a municipality includes area of
farmland and villages that are clearly separate settlements. So I don’t
think that the government status can be the distinguishing characteristic.

Perhaps you have a particular example in mind?

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:30 PM Allan Mustard  wrote:

> By that definition, then, calling an autonomous village with its own
> council a "neighbourhood" would be erroneous, correct?
>
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 10:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In OSM a neighborhood is a named part of a larger settlement, usually a
>> town or suburb or city, though in Indonesia some “desa” (villages) consist
>> of a dozen named “kampung” (neighborhoods).
>>
>> Suburbs are also considered parts of larger towns or cities. So a city
>> can be divided into a dozen suburbs, each of which is divided into a
>> half-dozen neighborhoods
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:19 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>>
>>> Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are defined
>>> in law and involve both size (though population data are secret) and type
>>> of governance structure (for full details please see
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).
>>>
>>>
>>> Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a
>>> governance structure (a village council with a chair who serves effectively
>>> as the municipal manager/mayor)?  In my experience a "neighbourhood" lacks
>>> any sort of governance structure aside from (sometimes) Neighborhood Watch.
>>>
>>> apm-wa
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:32 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
 boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?

 These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a
 node at the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling or
 farm.

 While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these
 settled places, in the past they were defined by available services in
 England. A city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time)
 marketplace, a village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its own
 church but had more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM
 system, though in modern times the standards are less certain.

 I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do
 not have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia.
 For example:

 a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a
 few families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small
 place of worship)

 A village has some services but only for the local community; people do
 not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
 hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
 of place of worship.

 A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
 hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
 specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
 entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
 always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
 visited.

 A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
 institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
 organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
 cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
 business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
 have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
 (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
 luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
 global cities however)

 By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than
 100), and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
 cut-offs vary by region.

 A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a
 relatively small population if it has the only high school, government
 office, supermarket and airport on a large island, for 

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Allan Mustard]

Not according to the wiki.  It seems nodes are the accepted way of
identifying a settlement, municipal or otherwise.

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 2. Jan 2019, at 00:44, Allan Mustard  wrote:
> >
> > What do you think?
>
>
> I have never understood why people wanted to add place tags to
> administrative territorial entities like countries, states or
> municipalities. Aren’t these thoroughly defined with
> boundary=administrative and the related admin_level?
>
>
> 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] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Joseph Eisenberg]

That’s the American million, you remove 3 zeros from the British version,
right? Like how a trillion is a billion? Something like that. :-)
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/million_billion_trillion.png
(See hover-over text)
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:48 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 10:32, Joseph Eisenberg 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
>> million people on one island),
>>
>
> Wow, I knew java was crowded ... :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> 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] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 10:32, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

>
> But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
> million people on one island),
>

Wow, I knew java was crowded ... :-)

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Allan Mustard]

By that definition, then, calling an autonomous village with its own
council a "neighbourhood" would be erroneous, correct?

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 10:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> In OSM a neighborhood is a named part of a larger settlement, usually a
> town or suburb or city, though in Indonesia some “desa” (villages) consist
> of a dozen named “kampung” (neighborhoods).
>
> Suburbs are also considered parts of larger towns or cities. So a city can
> be divided into a dozen suburbs, each of which is divided into a half-dozen
> neighborhoods
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:19 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>
>> Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are defined
>> in law and involve both size (though population data are secret) and type
>> of governance structure (for full details please see
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).
>>
>>
>> Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a
>> governance structure (a village council with a chair who serves effectively
>> as the municipal manager/mayor)?  In my experience a "neighbourhood" lacks
>> any sort of governance structure aside from (sometimes) Neighborhood Watch.
>>
>> apm-wa
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:32 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
>>> boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?
>>>
>>> These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a node
>>> at the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling or farm.
>>>
>>> While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these
>>> settled places, in the past they were defined by available services in
>>> England. A city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time)
>>> marketplace, a village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its own
>>> church but had more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM
>>> system, though in modern times the standards are less certain.
>>>
>>> I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do
>>> not have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia.
>>> For example:
>>>
>>> a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a
>>> few families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small
>>> place of worship)
>>>
>>> A village has some services but only for the local community; people do
>>> not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
>>> hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
>>> of place of worship.
>>>
>>> A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
>>> hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
>>> specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
>>> entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
>>> always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
>>> visited.
>>>
>>> A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
>>> institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
>>> organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
>>> cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
>>> business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
>>> have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
>>> (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
>>> luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
>>> global cities however)
>>>
>>> By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than
>>> 100), and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
>>> cut-offs vary by region.
>>>
>>> A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a relatively
>>> small population if it has the only high school, government office,
>>> supermarket and airport on a large island, for example - in this case the
>>> whole population of the island comes to the town for services even if they
>>> do not live there, so I would be comfortable tagging a settlement of 4000
>>> people as a town on an island with 200,000 people but no other settlements
>>> over 1000 people in size.
>>>
>>> This is how I tag places in eastern Indonesia, where many villages and
>>> towns are very isolated. Perhaps this is similar in your country?
>>>
>>> But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
>>> million people on one island), even a settlement with 20,000 people might
>>> just be a conglomeration of farming villages that hardly qualifies as a
>>> town, and a town could grow to 200,000 residents and still lack any
>>> characteristics of a city.
>>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:46 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>>>
 Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Joseph Eisenberg]

In OSM a neighborhood is a named part of a larger settlement, usually a
town or suburb or city, though in Indonesia some “desa” (villages) consist
of a dozen named “kampung” (neighborhoods).

Suburbs are also considered parts of larger towns or cities. So a city can
be divided into a dozen suburbs, each of which is divided into a half-dozen
neighborhoods
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:19 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:

> Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are defined in
> law and involve both size (though population data are secret) and type of
> governance structure (for full details please see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).
>
>
> Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a governance
> structure (a village council with a chair who serves effectively as the
> municipal manager/mayor)?  In my experience a "neighbourhood" lacks any
> sort of governance structure aside from (sometimes) Neighborhood Watch.
>
> apm-wa
>
> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:32 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
>> boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?
>>
>> These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a node
>> at the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling or farm.
>>
>> While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these
>> settled places, in the past they were defined by available services in
>> England. A city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time)
>> marketplace, a village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its own
>> church but had more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM
>> system, though in modern times the standards are less certain.
>>
>> I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do not
>> have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia. For
>> example:
>>
>> a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a
>> few families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small
>> place of worship)
>>
>> A village has some services but only for the local community; people do
>> not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
>> hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
>> of place of worship.
>>
>> A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
>> hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
>> specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
>> entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
>> always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
>> visited.
>>
>> A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
>> institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
>> organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
>> cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
>> business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
>> have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
>> (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
>> luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
>> global cities however)
>>
>> By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than
>> 100), and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
>> cut-offs vary by region.
>>
>> A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a relatively
>> small population if it has the only high school, government office,
>> supermarket and airport on a large island, for example - in this case the
>> whole population of the island comes to the town for services even if they
>> do not live there, so I would be comfortable tagging a settlement of 4000
>> people as a town on an island with 200,000 people but no other settlements
>> over 1000 people in size.
>>
>> This is how I tag places in eastern Indonesia, where many villages and
>> towns are very isolated. Perhaps this is similar in your country?
>>
>> But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
>> million people on one island), even a settlement with 20,000 people might
>> just be a conglomeration of farming villages that hardly qualifies as a
>> town, and a town could grow to 200,000 residents and still lack any
>> characteristics of a city.
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:46 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>>
>>> Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the
>>> dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions
>>>
>>> The nub is that I advocate classifying Turkmenistan's municipalities
>>> based on 

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Allan Mustard]

Very interesting.  In the Turkmen case, the classifications are defined in
law and involve both size (though population data are secret) and type of
governance structure (for full details please see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Structure).


Is it fair to call a settlement a "neighbourhood" when it has a governance
structure (a village council with a chair who serves effectively as the
municipal manager/mayor)?  In my experience a "neighbourhood" lacks any
sort of governance structure aside from (sometimes) Neighborhood Watch.

apm-wa

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:32 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
> boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?
>
> These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a node
> at the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling or farm.
>
> While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these
> settled places, in the past they were defined by available services in
> England. A city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time)
> marketplace, a village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its own
> church but had more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM
> system, though in modern times the standards are less certain.
>
> I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do not
> have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia. For
> example:
>
> a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a few
> families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small place
> of worship)
>
> A village has some services but only for the local community; people do
> not travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
> hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
> of place of worship.
>
> A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
> hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
> specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
> entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
> always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
> visited.
>
> A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
> institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
> organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
> cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
> business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
> have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
> (though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
> luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
> global cities however)
>
> By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than 100),
> and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
> cut-offs vary by region.
>
> A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a relatively
> small population if it has the only high school, government office,
> supermarket and airport on a large island, for example - in this case the
> whole population of the island comes to the town for services even if they
> do not live there, so I would be comfortable tagging a settlement of 4000
> people as a town on an island with 200,000 people but no other settlements
> over 1000 people in size.
>
> This is how I tag places in eastern Indonesia, where many villages and
> towns are very isolated. Perhaps this is similar in your country?
>
> But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
> million people on one island), even a settlement with 20,000 people might
> just be a conglomeration of farming villages that hardly qualifies as a
> town, and a town could grow to 200,000 residents and still lack any
> characteristics of a city.
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:46 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>
>> Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the
>> dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions
>>
>> The nub is that I advocate classifying Turkmenistan's municipalities
>> based on their official status according to the host government (see the
>> wiki article Districts in Turkmenistan).  Another mapper, Aka_Bob,
>> disagrees and insists that there are OSM guidelines based on population (I
>> note that the OSM place=village article says a village can have up to
>> 10,000 population, which in the United States is laughable--that would be a
>> town or a city).  Aka_Bob edited that section of the wiki article
>> unilaterally without first consulting local mappers.  I have no intention
>> of entering into an edit war, 

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Other big peninsulas: Yucatán (in Mexico), Baja California,
Patagonia(Argentina/Chile), Iberia (Spain and Portugal), the Malay
peninsula (southern Thailand and Malaysia), and Korea.

Most of Arabia could be considered a very large peninsula as well.

Certainly these are different than the node that defines the end of a cape
or headland or point, though it can be harder to define the landward limit
of a peninsula.

I’d suggest encouraging mappers to use a node in the center of a large
peninsula, as is done for continents and seas, rather than trying to map it
as an area.
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:47 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 2. Jan 2019, at 00:14, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
>
> The state of Florida is a peninsula as is India, at least by someone's
> definition.
>
>
>
> also a significant part of Italy:
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Peninsula
>
>
> 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] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Those municipalities are relations of type=boundary and
boundary=administrative with an appropriate admin_level, no?

These are different from the OSM settlements, which are mapped as a node at
the center of a city, town, village, hamlet or isolated dwelling or farm.

While the pages suggest certain population ranges for each of these settled
places, in the past they were defined by available services in England. A
city had a cathedral or university, a town had a (full-time) marketplace, a
village had a church, and a hamlet was too small for its own church but had
more than one family. That’s the historic basis for the OSM system, though
in modern times the standards are less certain.

I suspect this sort of classification can work even in places that do not
have good population figures available, like where I map in Indonesia. For
example:

a farm or isolated dwelling has only 1 or 2 households, a hamlet has a few
families but no services (maybe there is a tiny kiosk or a very small place
of worship)

A village has some services but only for the local community; people do not
travel to a village to go shopping, except from the closest farms or
hamlets. Probably there is a primary school, certainly there is some sort
of place of worship.

A town is a significant local destination. People from the surrounding
hamlets and villages will go to the nearest town to buy clothing, tools,
specialty foods and other necessities. There may be some cultural and
entertainment options, and usually some level of government services. Towns
always have secondary education (high schools) in the countries that I have
visited.

A city has all this as well as major healthcare and educational
institutions, and is often as administrative center for businesses,
organizations (NGOs, religious) and local government. People travel to
cities from the whole surrounding region, including from towns, for
business, entertainment, cultural facilities etc. generally a city should
have just about all of the services that a middle-class person would use
(though the rich may need to go to larger cities for some specialty and
luxury services - OSM doesn’t have a special class for large cities or
global cities however)

By population a hamlet has less than 1000 residents (often less than 100),
and a city has over 50,000 (usually over 100,000), but the population
cut-offs vary by region.

A very isolated settlement may still qualify as a town with a relatively
small population if it has the only high school, government office,
supermarket and airport on a large island, for example - in this case the
whole population of the island comes to the town for services even if they
do not live there, so I would be comfortable tagging a settlement of 4000
people as a town on an island with 200,000 people but no other settlements
over 1000 people in size.

This is how I tag places in eastern Indonesia, where many villages and
towns are very isolated. Perhaps this is similar in your country?

But in a densely populated region, like Java (where there are 120,000
million people on one island), even a settlement with 20,000 people might
just be a conglomeration of farming villages that hardly qualifies as a
town, and a town could grow to 200,000 residents and still lack any
characteristics of a city.
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 8:46 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:

> Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the
> dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions
>
> The nub is that I advocate classifying Turkmenistan's municipalities based
> on their official status according to the host government (see the wiki
> article Districts in Turkmenistan).  Another mapper, Aka_Bob, disagrees and
> insists that there are OSM guidelines based on population (I note that the
> OSM place=village article says a village can have up to 10,000 population,
> which in the United States is laughable--that would be a town or a city).
> Aka_Bob edited that section of the wiki article unilaterally without first
> consulting local mappers.  I have no intention of entering into an edit
> war, but rather want to take this out to the community for discussion.
>
> I'd like to hear what people think.  Opening classification of Turkmen
> muncipalities to free interpretation rather than a standard official
> classification strikes me as a recipe for chaos, particularly since
> official population data have not been published for over a decade (the
> 2012 and 2017 censuses were made secret) but maybe that's just me.  What do
> you think?
>
> Best regards and Happy New Year to all!
>
> apm-wa
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Kevin Kenny]

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 7:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
> I have never understood why people wanted to add place tags to administrative 
> territorial entities like countries, states or municipalities. Aren’t these 
> thoroughly defined with boundary=administrative and the related admin_level?

Around here, it's because there are a fair number of places that don't
have any form of self-government, but are still identifiable villages.
Their boundaries are generally indefinite, but those that live in them
would give the names of those places when asked for their home town.
In New York State, these get mapped (admin_level=8) if their
boundaries are definite (generally, fixed by defining legislation of
the township of which they are a part), and as place=* nodes
otherwise. They range in size from settlements with a handful of
houses to small cities with populations up to about 60,000.

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

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[marc marc]

Le 02.01.19 à 00:44, Allan Mustard a écrit :
> Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the 
> dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions

it seems useful to me that each country/local community:
- keeps as much as possible the same general principle (different value 
to describe that there is a difference between a hamlet of a few houses 
and the largest city with some intermediate value between the 2)
- adapts the criteria between these categories according to the local 
context (if no population measures exist but an official classification 
gives an idea, it seems to me a good idea to use it)

but for administrative subdivisions, place=* look like wrong,
boundary=administrative + admin_level is the good schema
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Kevin Kenny]

On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 6:46 PM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>
> Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the 
> dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions
>
> The nub is that I advocate classifying Turkmenistan's municipalities based on 
> their official status according to the host government (see the wiki article 
> Districts in Turkmenistan).  Another mapper, Aka_Bob, disagrees and insists 
> that there are OSM guidelines based on population (I note that the OSM 
> place=village article says a village can have up to 10,000 population, which 
> in the United States is laughable--that would be a town or a city).  Aka_Bob 
> edited that section of the wiki article unilaterally without first consulting 
> local mappers.  I have no intention of entering into an edit war, but rather 
> want to take this out to the community for discussion.

I once laboured under the same misconception, and mismapped some
villages in New York before more experienced mappers showed me the
error of my ways. The consensus appears to be that Aka_Bob is right.
With that said, there will always be some overlap among the
categories, and it is possible that population may not be the only
criterion in a given locality, but legal status is usually a rather
poor indication.

In the US, at least, we use admin_level to track the legal status of
villages, towns, et cetera, and instead follow population guidelines.
Anything else for New York State, for instance, would lead to absurd
results. We have some legal 'hamlets' (e.g., Brentwood, Levittown)
that are actually small cities with population around 60,000 - and a
chartered 'city' with a population of about 3,000. Our 'towns' range
in population from 38 (Red House) to about 760,000 (Hempstead), and
our 'villages' from 11 (Dering Harbor) to 54,000 (Hempstead Village).
(Yes, our largest 'hamlet' is larger than our largest 'village'!)

Since in practice, what place=* is used for is to rate 'relative
importance' (and so guide at what zoom level a name will appear, and
how big a font will be used for it), the population guideline works
better in practice than an attempt to follow the legal definition.

There's been fairly extensive discussion, here and in talk-us, that
led up to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level
for the US admin levels.  I'd suspect that a similar approach would
work well for the administrative boundaries in Turkmenistan.

I understand that the UK is an exception, because the status of
'town', 'village', 'city' and so on relates to whether a given
settlement has a church, a market, and similar facilities, and
therefore does reflect somewhat the status of the settlement relative
to its hinterland. (That scheme would surely not work for the US,
where for instance, we have many country churches that are not part of
larger settlements; it may be that the rectory is the only house
within a couple of km in any direction.)

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

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 2. Jan 2019, at 00:44, Allan Mustard  wrote:
> 
> What do you think?


I have never understood why people wanted to add place tags to administrative 
territorial entities like countries, states or municipalities. Aren’t these 
thoroughly defined with boundary=administrative and the related admin_level?


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 2. Jan 2019, at 00:14, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> 
> The state of Florida is a peninsula as is India, at least by someone's 
> definition.


also a significant part of Italy: 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Peninsula


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

[Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

[Allan Mustard]

Looking for some guidance here from the tagging experts.  Please see the
dispute section on the Turkmenistan wiki discussion page
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmenistan#Disputed:_Suggested_Place_Tags_for_Administrative_Subdivisions

The nub is that I advocate classifying Turkmenistan's municipalities based
on their official status according to the host government (see the wiki
article Districts in Turkmenistan).  Another mapper, Aka_Bob, disagrees and
insists that there are OSM guidelines based on population (I note that the
OSM place=village article says a village can have up to 10,000 population,
which in the United States is laughable--that would be a town or a city).
Aka_Bob edited that section of the wiki article unilaterally without first
consulting local mappers.  I have no intention of entering into an edit
war, but rather want to take this out to the community for discussion.

I'd like to hear what people think.  Opening classification of Turkmen
muncipalities to free interpretation rather than a standard official
classification strikes me as a recipe for chaos, particularly since
official population data have not been published for over a decade (the
2012 and 2017 censuses were made secret) but maybe that's just me.  What do
you think?

Best regards and Happy New Year to all!

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Dave Swarthout]

Agree with Graeme. I like the illustration he shared too, "a cape can be
found at the end of a peninsula (and, in my experience, often are) while
you'll never see a peninsula at the end of a cape." The state of Florida is
a peninsula as is India, at least by someone's definition.

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:42 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 02:01, Markus  wrote:
>
>>
>> Is the distinction of peninsulas from capes correct (see section See
>> also)?
>>
>
> I have concerns about the definition of peninsula that you've used "a
> piece of land nearly surrounded by water and *connected to a larger land
> area by an isthmus, that is a narrow strip of land*"
>
> I did see that definition, but most definitions of peninsula that I have
> found don't mention the "narrow strip of land" eg peninsula:  A piece of
> land projecting into water from a larger land mass; cape: A piece or
> point of land, extending beyond the adjacent coast into a sea or lake; a
> promontory; a headland.
>
> Another good explanation, with some examples:
> https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-a-cape-and-a-peninsula-They-seem-to-have-different-definitions-that-are-in-practice-actually-the-same-thing.
> As they put it "a cape can be found at the end of a peninsula. Peninsulas
> are not found at the end of capes"
>
> I also give you Cape York Peninsula,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_York_Peninsula which is a peninsula
> terminating in Cape York - definitely no "narrow strips of land" involved!
> :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] request for review: OSM wiki rewording of tourism=motel based on Wikipedia

[Dave Swarthout]

LeTopographeFou wrote:

> I also reached this conclusion some time ago but looking at how it is
difficult to change something regarding tagging I stop authorizing myself
thinking that such situation CAN be changed. However I'm not >affraid of
such major change if it can bring enhancement. I'm ok to consider a
proposal which would lead to the tourism=accomodation schema.

I think such a page would be useful and I encourage you to write it as a
proposal. It's going to be an uphill battle to promote a change in the
basic tagging at this late date but an accommodation page would be a great
start. As for mappers in countries where the distinction between types of
accommodation is set in legal terms, they can just continue tagging the way
it's always been done.

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 5:47 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 23:52, LeTopographeFou 
> wrote:
>
>> I'm ok to consider a proposal which would lead to the
>> tourism=accomodation schema.
>>
>> But I think that whatever we do (new schema vs existing schema) an
>> "Accomodation" wiki page (routing to hotel/motel/... tags) will be helpfull
>> to today route to existing tags and maybe tomorrow explain the new schema.
>>
>
> I agree with most of what has been said here, especially "the only
> practical distinction today is the name on the front sign", however
>
>> Le 01/01/2019 à 03:23, Silent Spike a écrit :
>>
>> the current information there considers motels to be a subclass of hotels
>> (so all motels are hotels, not all hotels are motels).
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 6:27 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:
>
>> Local licensing authorities do not differentiate between them and
>> they are regulated identically,
>>
> As I mentioned previously, in Australia at least, licensing
> authorities *do* differentiate between them, in that a hotel is licensed
> to sell alcohol, while a motel isn't. Granted, that doesn't effect
> accommodation options, but a motel is not, strictly speaking, a hotel.
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> 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] request for review: OSM wiki rewording of tourism=motel based on Wikipedia

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 23:52, LeTopographeFou 
wrote:

> I'm ok to consider a proposal which would lead to the tourism=accomodation
> schema.
>
> But I think that whatever we do (new schema vs existing schema) an
> "Accomodation" wiki page (routing to hotel/motel/... tags) will be helpfull
> to today route to existing tags and maybe tomorrow explain the new schema.
>

I agree with most of what has been said here, especially "the only
practical distinction today is the name on the front sign", however

> Le 01/01/2019 à 03:23, Silent Spike a écrit :
>
> the current information there considers motels to be a subclass of hotels
> (so all motels are hotels, not all hotels are motels).
>
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 6:27 AM Allan Mustard  wrote:

> Local licensing authorities do not differentiate between them and they
> are regulated identically,
>
 As I mentioned previously, in Australia at least, licensing authorities
*do* differentiate between them, in that a hotel is licensed to sell
alcohol, while a motel isn't. Granted, that doesn't effect accommodation
options, but a motel is not, strictly speaking, a hotel.

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 02:01, Markus  wrote:

>
> Is the distinction of peninsulas from capes correct (see section See also)?
>

I have concerns about the definition of peninsula that you've used "a piece
of land nearly surrounded by water and *connected to a larger land area by
an isthmus, that is a narrow strip of land*"

I did see that definition, but most definitions of peninsula that I have
found don't mention the "narrow strip of land" eg peninsula:  A piece of
land projecting into water from a larger land mass; cape: A piece or point
of land, extending beyond the adjacent coast into a sea or lake; a
promontory; a headland.

Another good explanation, with some examples:
https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-a-cape-and-a-peninsula-They-seem-to-have-different-definitions-that-are-in-practice-actually-the-same-thing.
As they put it "a cape can be found at the end of a peninsula. Peninsulas
are not found at the end of capes"

I also give you Cape York Peninsula,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_York_Peninsula which is a peninsula
terminating in Cape York - definitely no "narrow strips of land" involved!
:-)

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] request for review: OSM wiki rewording of tourism=motel based on Wikipedia

[Markus]

On Monday, December 31, 2018, Tobias Wrede  wrote:

>
> Now that several comments here indicate that the only practical
> distinction today is the name on the front sign I come to think that we
> could abandon the tag altogether.
>

+1
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Markus]

Hello everyone,

Thanks for your comments so far! I've changed the proposed tag to
natural=peninsula:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:natural%3Dpeninsula

Is the distinction of peninsulas from capes correct (see section See also)?

Wishing you all a happy new year!

Regards

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

Re: [Tagging] request for review: OSM wiki rewording of tourism=motel based on Wikipedia

[LeTopographeFou]

I also reached this conclusion some time ago but looking at how it is 
difficult to change something regarding tagging I stop authorizing 
myself thinking that such situation CAN be changed. However I'm not 
affraid of such major change if it can bring enhancement. I'm ok to 
consider a proposal which would lead to the tourism=accomodation schema.


But I think that whatever we do (new schema vs existing schema) an 
"Accomodation" wiki page (routing to hotel/motel/... tags) will be 
helpfull to today route to existing tags and maybe tomorrow explain the 
new schema.


Yours,

LeTopographeFou

Le 01/01/2019 à 03:23, Silent Spike a écrit :
I've recently been more involved with wikidata and come to appreciate 
the benefits of having a structured set of data interlinked by well 
defined properties. You can see here 
 that the current information 
there considers motels to be a subclass of hotels (so all motels are 
hotels, not all hotels are motels). Which makes sense to me, hotels 
are the short term accommodation part of your definition and then this 
can be further specified as a motel if it's build around a car parking 
area as the main attraction of the hotel.


In terms of the splitting hairs and tagging conversation, this seems 
to support the tourism=accommodation idea mentioned, but yeah existing 
tags are so widely used already...


On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 9:57 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:


I am getting the same feeling for intermittent/seasonal and
ephemeral ... should all be one top level tag. Sigh.

n 01/01/19 02:37, Dave Swarthout wrote:

Tobias wrote:

"Now that several comments here indicate that the only practical
distinction today is the name on the front sign I come to think
that we could abandon the tag altogether."

+1

I agree. We tend to "split hairs" in OSM, when in some cases it
simply isn't worth the effort. These objects are just temporary
accommodations that, granted, have varying characteristics. Here
in Thailand, it's virtually impossible to differentiate between a
guest_house and a hotel. And how should one tag facilities that
label themselves as a "resort" (รีสอร์ท)? A better approach might
(have been) to use a generic term like tourism=accommodation as a
top level and then describe the facility more fully with subtags.
Of course, we're pretty much stuck with the present imperfect
tagging situation.

Dave

On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 10:18 PM Tobias Wrede
mailto:l...@tobias-wrede.de>> wrote:

In Germany my experience is that actually most hotels in the
cities charge for parking. On the other hand you find very
very few that call themselves "motel". I can only think of
one currently that does, and it is located within a motorway
rest area. The exception is the chain Motel One which is a
very typical _h_otel often located in city centers offering
only limited parking.

When I think of a motel I always picture those with doors
opening to the car park from US movies. Now that several
comments here indicate that the only practical distinction
today is the name on the front sign I come to think that we
could abandon the tag altogether. What value does it generate
for the data consumer if tourism=motel and tourism=hotel is
all but the same and practical distinction could for both be
made by subtags parking=y/n, parking:fee=y/n, etc?

Tobias


Am 24.12.2018 um 01:12 schrieb Joseph Eisenberg:

In the USA, we would also assume a motel offers free
parking. Hotels may charge extra for parking, especial if
located downtown or next to an airport.

Is this also the case in Europe and Australia?
On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 8:55 AM Dave Swarthout
mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

"Today the main difference seems to be the sign out
front.  If a hostelry calls itself a motel, it is a
motel.  If it calls itself a hotel, it is a hotel. Local
licensing authorities do not differentiate between them
and they are regulated identically, so far as I can
tell.  I'd say the definition should be based on what is
written on the sign on the hostelry."

+1

That's my main criterion for tagging an accommodation as
a  motel. I agree with Volker's points and Allan's view
on this.

Happy Holidays

Dave

On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 6:27 AM Allan Mustard
mailto:al...@mustard.net>> wrote:

Motel = MOtor hoTEL

The major difference between a 'hotel" and a "motel"
originally was the configuration of the building
with respect to 

Re: [Tagging] Trailhead tagging

[Peter Elderson]

At this point, I settle for just requiring that it's a named location
visibly designated as access point for one ore more recreational routes.

So just a node tagged highway=trailhead and name=.

Which node? Well, if it's just the start with a name on a guidepost, use
the guidepost node. If it's an information board with the name, use that.
If there is a flagpole or a stele or say a statue of the pioneer who walked
it first, use that. If there is none of that, use the location which
presents itself naturally as a starrting point when you get there. If there
is no such location, then it's not a trailhead!

Anything else: optional, map and tag as seems appropriate.



Op ma 31 dec. 2018 om 16:23 schreef Dave Swarthout :

> I think tagging trailheads as nodes would work for the great majority of
> the trailheads I've seen over the years. The first node of a designated
> footway can be tagged as highway=trailhead, a name or other related tagging
> added to that, and other amenities such as parking lots, waste bins,
> toilets and the like can be tagged as nodes, or in some cases, relations.
> Many of the trailheads I've mapped have no other facilities associated with
> them, they are merely the beginning of a designated footway or hiking
> trail. In the definition in the Wiki, one could make it legal for relations
> to be tagged this way in order to accommodate those trailheads that
> encompass a range of amenities along with the trailhead itself.
>
> Dave
>
> PS: Happy New Year 2019
>
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 9:52 PM Tobias Wrede  wrote:
>
>> Hi eveyone,
>>
>> Am 21.12.2018 um 19:55 schrieb Peter Elderson:
>> > Well, in Nederland I'm through, got them all. To initiate a rendering
>> > on osm-carto the usage should increase by some 500+ (now on 1400+). I
>> > need Germany or Italy!
>>
>> While on vacation I have mapped trail heads in the US pretty much the
>> way Kenny has described it. I've never come across the trail head tag so
>> far. In the US trail heads I have encountered were often marked as such
>> having some signpost giving information on length, difficulty,
>> accessibility etc. And often there was a road sign saying "xyz trail
>> head". Often there is a single or very few trails departing there and
>> each trail only has one or two access points that are called a trail
>> head. (disclaimer: I am sure there are other situations but these are
>> the ones I have encountered while on vacation).
>>
>> In Germany, though, the concept of trail head is not so widely used for
>> hiking trails. Very often trails are interconnected forming a mesh and
>> are accessible from various locations. What we rather have are marked
>> parking lots called "Wanderparkplatz", i. e. "hiking parking lot". There
>> is even an official traffic sign:
>>
>> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Zeichen_317_-_Wandererparkplatz,_StVO_1992.svg.
>>
>> The more fancy ones have a map of the surroundings showing all hiking
>> trails of the area, possibly with length, hiking duration and
>> difficulty. Often there is a waste bin, sometimes a pickinick table,
>> very often it's only a few parking spots off the road crossing a forest.
>> These hiking parking lots are very often not dedicated to a certain
>> trail, though. Often you find them in places where there are footways
>> but no marked or named hiking trails at all.
>>
>> As far as I see we don't currently designate these hiking parking lots
>> as such. They are just amenity parking connected to some paths/hiking
>> routes plus possibly having an information board mapped. I wouldn't be
>> opposed somehow tagging the Wanderparkplatz designation, not sure a
>> highway-tag would be right with the amenity, though.
>>
>> Having this said there are of course also some trail heads in Germany
>> that more fit to what I described for the US or what you might have in
>> the Netherlands. But they are the minority here I would say.
>>
>> all the best for the new Year
>> Tobias
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging