Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - pickup
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 4:20 PM Marc_marc wrote: > Le 11.10.22 à 21:33, Evan Carroll a écrit : > > We could map these onto the building polygon explicitly > > please : one element = one object > building <> the user of the building. > so imho it's best to have one object for the buildinng, > another for the shop or the pickup or whatever. > ex of issue : name on a object building+shop : it's the name > of the building or the name of the shop ? > I don't understand what you're trying to say. Evan Carroll - m...@evancarroll.com System Lord of the Internets web: http://www.evancarroll.com ph: 281.901.0011 <+1-281-901-0011> ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 at 20:10, Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > I don't think the wall is so important frankly, but let's assume we agree > on that. > > This fountain has the wall and thus is decorative and is amenity=fountain. > > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Water_fountain_without_tap_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg Personally, looking at that photo, I don't think that the whole thing was originally built as a fountain? Just looking at the quality of the construction & carving on the wall itself, then the fairly rough & shoddy plumbing, I think it looks more like the wall was built as a decorative feature, & then at some later stage, a couple of holes were cut through it & two water pipes installed, draining into an added trough. So what does that make it? A decorative fountain? I wouldn't have said so. Drinking tap? Non-potable so no. I'm thinking maybe just an amenity=watering_place https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:amenity%3Dwatering_place would be the best option? Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote: >>> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities, >> residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial >> mixes because of noise and pollution, at least in theory. >> Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning. > > In some places the local authorities have lots to do with landuse and > everything to do with zoning. To the extent of taking people to court > and forcing them to stop their present landuse. Of course they do. But you are blurring two things: OSM maps actual land use. OSM does not map zoning. Governments use zoning to control landuse. So after they have controlled there is an actual landuse to map. So the government using force to control landuse is not something we map. Given that, I don't see what point you are trying to make. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps
Oct 13, 2022, 10:15 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > I see no point in depreciating anything at the moment .. 'we' need a solution > first before even thinking of depreciation. > I described what I found/considered at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Deprecate_man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain/alternatives but nothing seems viable and superior. Have I missed something? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
Just a remark: I think a mainly decorative object is not an amenity. An amenity may be near it, or attached to it, but that still does not make the object an amenity. An object that provides water for actual use, such as a tap or a pipe from which water permanently flows, is an amenity. It may be decorated, or fitted to a decorative object, but still is an amenity. The BE word fountain, I understand, primarily means the decorative structure including the decorative waterflow. So, to me, any tagging using amenity=fountain sounds like a contradiction. Peter Elderson Op vr 14 okt. 2022 om 12:22 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 12:10 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > >> This other fountain doesn't have such wall, thus it is not decorative >> and it cannot be tagged as amenity=fountain (assuming we disregard the >> recreational utility mentioned in the wiki). >> >> > >> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Water_fountain_with_water_basin_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg >> >> > > this other fountain happens to be decorated as well. Let's ignore this for > a moment, and assume it wasn't. It could still be a decorative fountain, if > it can be seen as street decor. Setting up a fountain requires some effort, > so there will usually be a purpose, even if it isn't necessary now as it > was when it was constructed. I would generally see amenity=fountain > applicable for any fountain that is not only a drinking fountain and that > is not set up as a watering place for animals only. > > > > >> The shape and use of these two fountains looks the same to me. >> Why would you tag them as different features? >> > > > I wouldn't > > > >> >> I'm not necessarily saying they need to be tagged as amenity=fountain, >> but I would expect their main tagging to be the same and maybe differ in >> some secondary parameter. > > > > maybe, if you come up with an idea about these secondary parameters, we > can discuss them. > > 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] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 12:10 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > This other fountain doesn't have such wall, thus it is not decorative > and it cannot be tagged as amenity=fountain (assuming we disregard the > recreational utility mentioned in the wiki). > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Water_fountain_with_water_basin_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg > > this other fountain happens to be decorated as well. Let's ignore this for a moment, and assume it wasn't. It could still be a decorative fountain, if it can be seen as street decor. Setting up a fountain requires some effort, so there will usually be a purpose, even if it isn't necessary now as it was when it was constructed. I would generally see amenity=fountain applicable for any fountain that is not only a drinking fountain and that is not set up as a watering place for animals only. > The shape and use of these two fountains looks the same to me. > Why would you tag them as different features? > I wouldn't > > I'm not necessarily saying they need to be tagged as amenity=fountain, > but I would expect their main tagging to be the same and maybe differ in > some secondary parameter. maybe, if you come up with an idea about these secondary parameters, we can discuss them. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
On 14/10/22 11:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: no, I see the wall behind the trough with the water spout as part of the fountain, it is a rock carved decorated wall. Or do you believe it is there just for coincidence? I don't think the wall is so important frankly, but let's assume we agree on that. This fountain has the wall and thus is decorative and is amenity=fountain. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Water_fountain_without_tap_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg This other fountain doesn't have such wall, thus it is not decorative and it cannot be tagged as amenity=fountain (assuming we disregard the recreational utility mentioned in the wiki). https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Water_fountain_with_water_basin_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg The shape and use of these two fountains looks the same to me. Why would you tag them as different features? I'm not necessarily saying they need to be tagged as amenity=fountain, but I would expect their main tagging to be the same and maybe differ in some secondary parameter. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 10:22 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > On 14/10/22 06:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It seems we are seeing different things, I can’t help if you cannot > > recognize that the fountain is clearly decorated. It is not just an > > utility, the wall is a part, isn’t it? > > > > Yep.. there is the problem ... 'we' see different things even from the > same photo. > > > To me a 'fountain' is a decorative object... at that spout of water from > a wall into a trough is utilitarian not decorative. And you disagree. > no, I see the wall behind the trough with the water spout as part of the fountain, it is a rock carved decorated wall. Or do you believe it is there just for coincidence? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM
Oct 14, 2022, 09:58 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > > On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote: > >>> There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities, >>> residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial mixes >>> because of noise and pollution, at least in theory. >>> >> Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning. >> > > > In some places the local authorities have lots to do with landuse and > everything to do with zoning. To the extent of taking people to court and > forcing them to stop their present landuse. > > If they don't the authorities can take the land and charge them for any > necessary work. > Maybe it would be better to say that in landuse=residential landuse=industrial landuse=retail landuse=commercial we are mapping actual land use, not their legal status? But zoning and local authorities can influence actual land use. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps
On 14/10/22 00:03, Davidoskky via Tagging wrote: On 13/10/22 10:15, Warin wrote: I see no point in depreciating anything at the moment .. 'we' need a solution first before even thinking of depreciation. I do agree and appreciate this approach. A solution for tagging man_made=drinking_fountain already exists, that is fountain=bubbler. I see no problem in deprecating that since a good and valid solution that does not present the same amount of problems does already exist, I believe this is well explained in the deprecation proposal. I am trying to propose some solutions, but I'm rather inexperienced at doing that and thus I'm trying to follow advice of people who know more than me. I have made a proposal which clearly has some problems and I will try to fix those problems as soon as I get time to do so. OT: to all the threads I left unreplied up to now, sorry guys I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Yek. There are too many of them for me to cope with. I need to take a photo of a tap and then upload 2 photos and add them to man_made=water_tap.. that may help answer some of the posts. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
On 14/10/22 06:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: It seems we are seeing different things, I can’t help if you cannot recognize that the fountain is clearly decorated. It is not just an utility, the wall is a part, isn’t it? Yep.. there is the problem ... 'we' see different things even from the same photo. To me a 'fountain' is a decorative object... at that spout of water from a wall into a trough is utilitarian not decorative. And you disagree. So where too from here? I don't think we can map the same or similar things with different tags depending on where you are in the world .. we do have different tags for different languages but there is no conflict there as they coexist. Need some sort of solution... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
On 11/10/22 20:03, Marc_marc wrote: Le 11.10.22 à 10:19, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 09:53 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky : I would propose the deprecation of the value fountain=stone_block since it could be tagged as fountain=driking, material=stone. There are many fountains made of stone, but not all them are instances of "stone block". a better improvement is material=stone_block No. material=stone -- the shape is not relevant to the material, so don't add it to the key 'material'. A block can be a cube, a sphere ... it does not say much. I'd suggest shape=* ... ??? or stone:block (like we did with concrete:plate) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fairmont_Sonoma_Mission_Inn_August_2019_-_Sarah_Stierch_09.jpg I agree with this. These machines are no "fountains" for me, neither the indoor versions to add a mess to the mess, in french, it's a called "fountaine à eau" (yes it's a bit funny) I don't really see the functional difference with other objects of the same kind made of metal or pirate Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM
On 13/10/22 02:42, Evan Carroll wrote: There is such a thing as mixed use with our local authorities, residential+commercial. I wouldn't think residential and industrial mixes because of noise and pollution, at least in theory. Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning. In some places the local authorities have lots to do with landuse and everything to do with zoning. To the extent of taking people to court and forcing them to stop their present landuse. If they don't the authorities can take the land and charge them for any necessary work. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
