Re: [Tagging] Rail replacement bus service

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 07:21, hanser  wrote:

> The suggestion is to be able to add the tag
> *rail_replacement_service=yes*
> to public_transport denoted elements.

What about operator="? There is presumably (at least, in many cases) a
bus company and a railway company, so how about:

   operator= Acme Buses
   rail_replacement_operator= Foobar Rail Co.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] dry swamps

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2023 at 10:07, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The ‘dry swamp’ has no apparent way to tag it.

Are they also known by some other name?

I ask because I can find no papers about the phenomenon, by that name,
on Google Scholar

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 05:26, Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:

> I think the best option is to deprecate water=pond and suggest using 
> water=lake for
> natural lakes, even small ones, and use water=reservoir or water=basin (or
> landuse=reservoir or =basin if you prefer) for the artificial ones.

I have a pond in my garden. I could, if I had a mind to and a decent
run up, jump over it. Not by any stretch of the imagination is it a
lake, reservoir or basin.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:04, Thibault Molleman
 wrote:
>
> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from Commons
> just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".

That is not a valid reason for deletion from Wikimedia Commons.

Commons' scope is far wider than just hosting images for Wikipedia.

> Maybe a special example but still:
> Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
> couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
> moderation team.

There is no "moderation team" on Commons; deletion decisions there are
made by the community of contributors at large (just like edits in
OSM).

Your images sound as though they would be in scope. Did you try to upload them?

Do you have an example of an image which has been deleted from Commons?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 23:56, Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
> Do we tag
>  highway=motor ?

Is anybody proposing

  footway=legs ?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 21:44, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:

> >highway=trunk_hghway

> these are different because it would be a literal repetition.

Do we tag:

   highway=trunk_road ?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 20:46, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 21. Aug 2020, at 20:53, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> >
> > What type of footway is not a walkway?
> >
> > What type of walkway is not a footway?
> >
> > The two terms are synonyms; using them twice is therefore a tautology.
>
>
> the term as I understand it is „canopy walkway“ not „walkway“.

I'm not disputing this.

"public building" and "trunk highway" are also common terms.

Do we tag

building=public_building

or

highway=trunk_hghway

?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 15:03, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:

> sent from a phone
>
> > On 21. Aug 2020, at 15:18, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> >
> > That's a tautology (consider: footway=walkway)

> it is not a tautology, it’s a subtype

[We were discussing the suggestion: footway=canopy_walkway ]

What type of footway is not a walkway?

What type of walkway is not a footway?

The two terms are synonyms; using them twice is therefore a tautology.

> > or better:
> >
> >   footway=treetop

> suggests the top of trees,

That is not how the term is used in (British, at least) English, as a
Google or similar search for "treetop" will show.

> i.e. would be less suitable for raised walkways in the middle or lower part 
> of trees, wouldn’t it?

No.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 at 22:48, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:

> > On 20. Aug 2020, at 23:18, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> Or maybe footway=canopy_walkway?

That's a tautology (consider: footway=walkway) and can be reduced to:

   footway=canopy

or better:

   footway=treetop

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 09:46, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> On 04.08.20 10:06, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> >> Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?
>
> > Which rules?
>
> Should I have written "was our voting process changed recently", or what
> exactly are you asking? I meant the established way of proposing and
> voting for tags as outlined in
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process.

What I was asking - exactly - was which were the rules to which you
referred, explicitly, both in your question and in the subject heading
of your email.

Now that you have provided a URL, I see that they are not rules at
all, and that the page includes in its introduction the caveat:

  This page is designed to assist anyone considering putting forward a tag
   proposal, with the aim of speeding the tag proposing process. It is not
   meant as a set of absolute rules, but as a guide.

and indeed that this is, as that introduction also says, merely:

   one of multiple ways to introduce and discuss new tags for features
   and properties

I'm glad we've cleared that up.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 10:26, Colin Smale  wrote:

> Putting a proposal to the vote should IMHO not be done unless the
> discussions are clearly pointing towards approval. A vote is not a
> substitute for the discussion, it should be a confirmation that
> consensus has been achieved.

With all the usual "we are not Wikipedia" caveats, this page might
make useful reading:

   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 08:57, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

Which rules?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Finger- or guide-post text

[Andy Mabbett]

I am mapping a fingerpost, aka guidepost:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dguidepost

I would like to add the inscription, for each of the three fingers,
with their compass points. I note:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination

is similar but "destination:forward" and "destination:backward" are
meaningless in this context; and many finger posts have more than four
fingers, or fingers not at 90-degree angles to each other, or to
North. I propose something like:

   destination:NNW=foo

or, using degrees:

   destination:337.5:=foo

If this would cloud the use of "destination", we could use, say:

   inscription:337.5:=foo

What do folk think?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

[Andy Mabbett]

On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 19:43, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

> 1. Draw a way around the whole building and tag it with building=terrace,
> and then add entrance nodes with addresses, or
> 2. Draw the outline of the terrace builiding, but then make ways inside the
> building to create detailed borders of the individual properties inside the
> terrace  building, and map each of those ways with building=house with the
> address.

if you're using JOSM, the "Terracer" plug-in:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Terracer

will do your second option for you, in one process, and very well.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of image tags suggestion

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 20:24, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> There are currently 28k objects with wikimedia_commons in the database.
> Your edit would treble that. I'm not convinced that automatic edits that
> massively boost a niche tag are a good idea.

"niche"?

> I am not comfortable with inventing new tags to better match Wikimedia
> Commons' namespace model.

It does not. It better matches the Mediawiki namespace model, which is
used, among many others by wiki.openstreetmap.org

> Remember, Wikimedia commons is, for us, just one of many potential image 
> providers.

Iti is not. It is the one we ask people to use:

   "Before uploading a file to OpenStreetMap wiki, please consider if
it would be more
useful to upload it to the Wikimedia Commons file repository instead."

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:Upload

> Would we want to introduce various extra tags for each?

That invokes a slippery-slope fallacy; but consider:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mapillary

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:flickr

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Adding mapillary tags to every building

[Andy Mabbett]

On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 12:14, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> Photos of buildings are even more notable then photos of bicycle parking,
> so I'll try and take photos of a few buildings and see how that goes.
>
> I probably won't be creating a category for each building, so then I will be
> linking to those pictures with the image=* tag, right?

You might like this tool:

   https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikishootme/

which will tell you whether the buildings you photograph have an entry
in Wikidata, and whether or not that entry has an image; if not, once
you upload your image to Commons, you can also link to it from
Wikidata.

(Although it can be used as I describe above, its primary purpose is
to find, for a given location, nearby Wikidata items that lack
images.)

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] URL tracking parameters

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:46, Shawn K. Quinn  wrote:
>
> On 2/25/20 4:05 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:

> > We should not, of course, remove either the full URLs nor the whole
> > PoIs, since that would open us up to attack from bad actors
> > masquerading as the companies whose commercial sites we depict. And
> > would in any case be a ridiculous over-reaction, and damaging to our
> > reputation.
>
> I don't think anyone is suggesting to remove whole URLs or POIs

Remarkable though it may seem, that's exactly what was proposed:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/051285.html

I would in these situations remove the whole POI, and
    not just the tracking parameters.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] URL tracking parameters

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 11:21, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> (Apparently in this particular case, not only the WT.mc_id parameter is
> decorative, the whole hotel name is; even
> https://www.hilton.com/en/hotels/bhxsadi-camping-in-the-woods/ directs
> you to
> https://www.hilton.com/en/hotels/bhxsadi-doubletree-stratford-upon-avon/...)

From the page headers (extraneous parameters snipped, white space added):

https://www.hilton.com/en/hotels/bhxsadi-doubletree-stratford-upon-avon/;
    >

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] URL tracking parameters

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 03:36, Jonathon Rossi  wrote:

> Does OSM have a position on these tracking parameters,
> WT.mc_id, utm_*, fbclid, etc?

I'd be in favour of their automated removal, and adding filters to
prevent their future addition.

We should not, of course, remove either the full URLs nor the whole
PoIs, since that would open us up to attack from bad actors
masquerading as the companies whose commercial sites we depict. And
would in any case be a ridiculous over-reaction, and damaging to our
reputation.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for multi-part artworks

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 12:20, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>
> I hope to find consensus for how to tag artworks with multiple parts,
> as a relation.

> We could use relation_type:set (which I used for the Moonstones) or
> define a new relation_type:artwork

To further complicate matters I have had an off-list email, suggesting
the use of:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Cluster

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for multi-part artworks

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 12:41, marc marc  wrote:
>
> Le 06.02.20 à 13:20, Andy Mabbett a écrit :
> > We could use relation_type:set
>
> why not using relation type=site that already exist ?

Because they are not a "site".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Relation for multi-part artworks

[Andy Mabbett]

I hope to find consensus for how to tag artworks with multiple parts,
as a relation. Here are some examples:

Nine 'Moonstones', including:

   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2501118658
   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2501118659
   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2501118660
   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2501127353

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Society_Moonstones

Set of three murals at Handsworth, Birmingham:

   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7112445731
   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7112445732
   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7112445733

Set of statues in Porto:

   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2996821310

   
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:People_looking_the_sky_%28Faro_district%29.JPG

We could use relation_type:set (which I used for the Moonstones) or
define a new relation_type:artwork

Thoughts?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] building=disused

[Andy Mabbett]

JOSM warns me that "building=disuse" is deprecated, but doesn't tell
me what to use instead.

On the wiki, nether [[Key:building=disused]] nor
[[Tag:building=disused]] exist, and [[Key:building]] says nothing aout
how to tag "disused", "derelict" or "empty" buildings.

Is JOSM correct, what's the preferred alternative, and why is there no
easily-found documntation for this common use case?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Vegan "cheese" shops

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 15:58, Robert Skedgell  wrote:

> I've just been to La Fauxmagerie in Shoreditch, London, a vegan "cheese"
> shop.

shop=hipster
produce=bogus

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] [Key:phone] - Suggesting wiki page changing

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 19:49, Valor Naram via Tagging
 wrote:

> I want to change the wiki page
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone throw a Proposal process
> to do certain things:

>   - Protecting the wiki page against "wild changes"

We generally do not protect Wiki pages unless they are the target of
persistent or egregious vandalism.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 21:06, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:

> 13 Sep 2019, 20:28 by a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
>
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:41, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

>>> You have examples like tagging all ways that are a part of a street with
>>> the wikidata item about that street. You can't define those parts in
>>> Wikidata.

>> Use a relation.

> Introducing pointless relation to satisfy unneded rule is pointless.

Indeed it would be.

In this case, though the relation would not be "pointless".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 09:43, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> Currently, the second most numerous wikidata tag in OSM
> is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2961670, an item that
> describes all the roman roads in historic Gaul in France. All
> those ways, close to 500 of them, have wikidata=Q296167.

Can we agree that these should all be removed, or replaced with
suitable sub-tag, ASAP? the sub-tag might be, say:

   historic:wikidata=Q2961670

>  I would give all these roads part:wikidata=Q29616

I would not.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 22:24, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> Art or memorial installations like Stolperstein[1], which
> are distributed, but have one wikidata item.

We already cater for this, using sub-tags; say:

   project:wikidata=Q314003

or:

   memorial:wikidata=Q26703203

 (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q314003 /
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26703203 )


But perhaps this is better done through the templated link to
Q26703203 on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org and/ or Q26703203
/wiki/Tag:memorial%3Dstolperstein


--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 19:48, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 19:43, Mateusz Konieczny  
> wrote:

>> It gets tricky where wikidata has a
>> single object for things like
>> lake and surrounding wetlands
>
>
> Then the wikidata item is for the wetlands, which happen to have a lake 
> within them.  Map
> the wetlands and add the wikidata tag to it.

..and create a Wikidata item for (just) the lake.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 17:02, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:

> Entries about shop brands (used in name suggestion index) got deleted.

That was over-zealous anti-spam action. Many such deletions were
challenged and reverted; any others should have been.

In such cases, including third-party identifiers (for example, Lidl
has an "EU Transparency Register ID") can help.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:58, Paul Allen  wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:35, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:

>> looking at the example, it seems here is such an issue with
> the "canonization status"=catholic saint. Why do the individual
> saints not have the property, but the group has it?

> if there is a property shared by all members of a group then it MUST be 
> marked on
> the group ALONE and not also on individual members.

This is not the rule on Wikidata.

>  DRY (don't repeat yourself) is rigidly enforced.

It is not, especially in cases like the above.

> Yes, I've been bitten by this before.  Marking up Wikimedia images as being 
> listed
> buildings.  All went fine until I happened to mark a few that were collected 
> in a group
> of "Listed buildings in ."  Those changes were reverted because the
> grouping itself was flagged as being of listed buildings.

Do you mean categories on Wikimedia Commons? That's not Wikidata.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 13:41, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> sri, 11. ruj 2019. u 14:34 Joseph Eisenberg  
> napisao je:
>>
>> Doesn't this mean that it would be better to create separate Wikidata
>> items for each separate OSM feature, rather than creating a new OSM
>> tag?

> You have examples like tagging all ways that are a part of a street with
> the wikidata item about that street. You can't define those parts in
> Wikidata.

Use a relation.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Hill figures

[Andy Mabbett]

In the UK, hill figures include:

* The Cerne Abbas Giant [1], [2], [3]
* The Fovant badges [4], [5], [6]
* RNLI Dunkirk Memorial at Margate [7], [8]
* Osmington White Horse [9], [10], [11]]

and others exist elsewhere [12]. As can be seen from my examples,
these usually significant landmarks are often not rendered on the map
- the exception in my examples is at Osmington.

Some cover areas (e.g. Osmington, which is why it renders), some are
"tramlines" (Cerne Abbas), and some (the RNLI memorial) are single
lines.

I propose we tag the latter two types as, say, artwork=hill_figure,
and request that such items be rendered at higher zoom levels.

What alternative approaches are available?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerne_Abbas_Giant

[2] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.813611=-2.474722=15#map=15/50.8136/-2.4747

[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675453847 (part)

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovant_Badges

[5] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=51.0534=-1.9783=15#map=15/51.0534/-1.9783

[6] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136177861 (single badge)

[7] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.38736/1.37969

[8] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9995162

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmington_White_Horse

[10] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.65741=-2.40438=11#map=17/50.65741/-2.40438

[11] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120665846#map=18/50.65788/-2.40433

[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_figure

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] phone vs contact:phone WAS Re: Multiple tags for one purpose

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 16:42, Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> Your model (using only phone=*) only allows an object to have a single phone 
> number. How do you propose modelling multiple phone numbers on a single 
> object? For example, one for general enquiries, one for emergencies, one for 
> staff,...

there are at least two possibilities:


phone=
phone:emergency=
phone:staff=

and:

phone=
emergency:phone=
staff:phone=

Neither of which requires "contact:"

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Opening hours syntax for non Gregorian calendar

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 13:31, Paul Allen  wrote:

> The problem with that is the same problem as allowing every language on the 
> planet to
> use their own abbreviations for month names.  Only worse.
>
> For better or worse, we standardized on three-letter abbreviations for 
> English month names.
> opening_hours to keep things simple and to prevent a problem in one affecting 
> all of them.

If only there was some sort of ISO standard for representing dates...

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - toll

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 17:34, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

>> >  NOTE: All comments attached to this mail WILL NOT BE PROCESSED!
>> > Only comments on the wiki page will be answered and worked on!
>> You do realise that the wiki is supposed to document current best
>> practice, and can not dictate it?

> You did notice she has linked to a proposal page, which is a space in the 
> wiki explicitly set up to discuss new ideas?

Yes, I did. My point stands.

Or did we change things, and agree that the Wiki is now the de jure
record of authority?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - toll

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 17:26, marc marc  wrote:
>
> Le 08.05.19 à 18:00, Andy Mabbett a écrit :
> > On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 14:50,
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> I
> >
> > Who is "I"? is "wiki_openstreetmap_org.5.kuru" really your name?

> the author of the wiki page :TBKMrt

If the OP wishes to be known (only) as TBKMrt, then that is now they
should sign their email.

> it certainly doesn't matter because the important thing is talk
> about the idea and not the person nor his nickname

I didn't say anything about wanting to discuss the person; but I do
not think it unreasonable to wan't to know /with whom/ I am discussing
the idea.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - toll

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 14:50,
 wrote:
>
> I

Who is "I"? is "wiki_openstreetmap_org.5.kuru" really your name?

>  NOTE: All comments attached to this mail WILL NOT BE PROCESSED!
> Only comments on the wiki page will be answered and worked on!

You do realise that the wiki is supposed to document current best
practice, and can not dictate it?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Incorrectly tagging locks on rivers as canals

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 20:47, François Lacombe
 wrote:

> The main difference with rivers going through cities is it's often the
> original natural course.

The River Tame, in North Birmingham and in the urban areas north of
the city, has several sections, some concrete-sided and some looking
entirely natural, that are nowhere near its original course.

Indeed, one natural-looking section runs through what is in effect a
giant pond-liner, keeping it separated from the groundwater, which is
poisoned by heavy metal as the result of past industrial activity.

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

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 13:46, Eugene Podshivalov  wrote:
>
> сб, 16 февр. 2019 г. в 16:30, Andy Mabbett :

>> Why would we tag either, when software can calculate them?

> Calculated value may differ from the official one and is error-prone

I would suggest that values entered by human mappers are more likely
to be "error prone"; and that we should be more concerned with
on-the-ground reality than "offical" figures.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@Pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 23:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:

> The Nile rises in Lake Victoria & travels to the Mediterranean with
> a length of ~6695km (depending on reference used), but the distance
> between Kampala, on the north shore of Lave Victoria & Cairo is only
> 3300km.

Why would we tag either, when software can calculate them?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 16:53, Tod Fitch  wrote:

> man_made=gantry
> name=“whatever”
> place=neighbourhood
>
> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical
> clearance that might be of use for routing.

Also:

* material= [wood|steel|brick|whatever]
* start_date= [date]
* operator= [...]

and:

* wikidata= [QID]

if applicable.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Slipways (for boats)

[Andy Mabbett]

The wiki tells us to use "leisure=slipway":

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dslipway

but many slipways are primarily for search-and-rescue, fishing craft,
small ferries or other non-leisure uses.

What would be a better tag?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] [Diversity-talk] Out of the bars and onto the map: An lgbtq:*=* tagging scheme?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 19:27, Rory McCann  wrote:

> "shop=books lgbtq=yes" is a LGBTQ book shop,

Wouldn't that be "shop=books books=lgbtq"?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 14:22, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:
>
> Is WIkipedia definition
>
> "A delicatessen or deli is a retail establishment that sells a selection of 
> unusual or
> foreign prepared foods"
>
> correct?

No. I've changed it to "fine, unusual or foreign prepared foods".

But note also that the same page says "'Deli' also denotes a small
convenience store or milk bar in [Australia]" and "In the United
States, a delicatessen (or deli) is often a combined grocery store and
restaurant".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 03:33, Joseph Eisenberg
 wrote:

> [...]
> shop=food. This tag has not yet been approved

Approved by whom?

> I checked overpass turbo in London, New York, and San Franciso. The
> latter had no uses; London has the most. The first few shop=food on
> the list are
>
> 1. “Nana’s Deli“,
> 2. “The Chelsea Cake Shop”,
> 3. “Green Apple”
> 4. “Holland And Barrett”
>
> Those should be 1. shop=deli,

Have you done a survey? Adding "Deli" to a shop name does not make it
a delicatessen.

> 3. shop=greengrocer(?).

You give neither coordinates nor a link, but depending on the
location, Google finds "Green Apple Supermarket", a convenience store.
Again, this should not be changed without a survey.

> The fourth sells vitamis, herbal supplements and "health food", so could
> be shop=health_food.

This is part of a, international chain. What are other branches tagged as?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Stolpersteine tagging scheme problem

[Andy Mabbett]

On 26 August 2018 at 12:18, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> There is also a project to log Stolpersteine in Wikidata:
>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Stolpersteine

P.S. Of course, this also involves adding a photograph of each
individual Stolperstein to Wikimedia Commons, which is then linked to
from the relevant Wikidata item. The images are grouped under:

   https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Stolpersteine

and you are encouraged to add more.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Stolpersteine tagging scheme problem

[Andy Mabbett]

On 26 August 2018 at 11:46, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> The organisation for the Stolpersteine project has a website, which says
> there will be a central database end of 2018.

There is also a project to log Stolpersteine in Wikidata:

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Stolpersteine

When a Stolperstein commemorates a notable individual, its Wikidata
item will link to the item about that person, which constitutes a
machine-readable biography, linked to items about their birthplace,
given name, occupation, notable relatives, and so on.

Please tag any Stolperstein that you add to OSM with the equivalent
Wikidata "QID". If the new database has PIDs for each Stolperstein, I
will propose a new Wikidata property to store those IDs also, so we
will be able to triangulate between the three databases.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Stolpersteine tagging scheme problem

[Andy Mabbett]

On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 at 09:13, Peter Elderson  wrote:

> In Nederland the Stolpersteine project has caught on and there is a database.

Is that online, please?

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

Re: [Tagging] areas of risk

[Andy Mabbett]

On 16 August 2018 at 22:34, seirra  wrote:

> hmmm i do see the point there about racial/class bias... i was thinking more
> about areas that were known crime spots/had associated illegal activities
> people may want to avoid

What, like tax avoidance and insider dealing?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Slash, space, or spaced hyphen in multi-lingual names

[Andy Mabbett]

On 10 August 2018 at 23:39, Paul Allen  wrote:

> This is a different problem from which separator to use.

I wondered if anyone would remember that question!

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Slash, space, or spaced hyphen in multi-lingual names

[Andy Mabbett]

On 9 August 2018 at 09:21, Marc Gemis  wrote:


>> Also many bilingual street signs in Belgium exploit grammatical
>> differences between French and Dutch; where the significant part
>> is a proper name (X), in French it might be "Rue X", in Dutch it is
>> "Xstraat", so the sign says Rue X-straat.

> That's true and I always wondered why the community didn't take that
> approach. Map what is on the sign.

Signs can use different fonts, text size, colours and "line breaks" to
indicate meaning which cannot be captured in a single line of plain
text.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Slash, space, or spaced hyphen in multi-lingual names

[Andy Mabbett]

On 9 August 2018 at 06:17, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> Can you please elaborate a bit on the reason for your question ?

To reduce the cognitive load on mappers.

> Is it because you want a map with a uniform syntax for multiple names ?

No.

> I assume it is not because  humans do not understand the meaning of
> one of the following forms Biel / Bienne, Biel/Bienne, Biel - Bienne,
> Biel (Bienne)

Indeed.

> Or do you want a uniform system for parsing ?

No.

> The name field is just a label. If you want to know the exact name in
> a certain language you look at the name:xx field.

I understand that already.

> p.s. It is not the first time this question pops up.

That can be a sign that something is amiss.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Slash, space, or spaced hyphen in multi-lingual names

[Andy Mabbett]

Please see:

   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Multilingual_names#Slash.2C_space.2C_or_spaced_hyphen.3F

where I wrote:

This page (and perhaps actual practice) is inconsistent in suggesting:

* slashes: name=L'Alguer/Alghero (New Zealand, Portugal, Sardinia)
* spaced hyphens: name=Rue du Marché aux Poulets - Kiekenmarkt (Belgium, Spain)
* spaces: name=干諾道中 Connaught Road Central (Hong Kong)
* spaced slashes: name=Le Rhin / Rhein (shared boundaries)

Greater consistency would surely be advantageous?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 June 2018 at 11:57, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> teaches:esperanto=yes

Do we really want to replicate schools' and colleges' prospectuses?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] roundtrip

[Andy Mabbett]

On 25 May 2018 at 06:48, Peter Elderson <pelder...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What is the use of the key:roundtrip?
> Explanations just say
>> roundtrip=yes/no(optional) Use roundtrip=no to indicate that a route goes 
>> from
>> A to B. Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start and finish of the route 
>> are
>> at the same location (circular route).

This seems badly named, or badly described. A vehicle that goes from A
to B, then returns along the reverse route to A, is said in British
English to perform a "round trip".

A vehicle that completes a (approximately) circular route to arrive
back at its starting point is NOT called a "round trip", whether or
not it performs that circuit just once, or multiple times.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 15 May 2018 02:36 Paul Allen, <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote:

> at least one other language makes a similar
> distinction to English in that stations are for people, not goods.

The U.K. has (or had) many places named 'Goods Station'.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Unifying large multi-location store chains

[Andy Mabbett]

On 3 May 2018 at 18:24, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd like to point out that I've seen a lot of chains like these tagged with
> a wikipedia=* tag for the brand, they should use the brand:wikipedia tag
> instead. This is a big problem for Nominatim right now, as it ranks results
> based on wiki tags. So if you are going through these it would be a great
> time to fix these as well.

It would, but it would be even better to substitute, or add,
wikidata:brand= at the same time.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Cafe run as outreach project

[Andy Mabbett]

On 12 April 2018 at 06:23, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote:

> How do you tag a cafe (or any other amenity) that is run as part of an
> outreach project ?

amenity = cafe
operator = Foobar

We don't have specific tags for other types of operators (public
company private company, sole trader, cooperative, charity, etc); why
would we need one in this case?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Attendant on amenity=fuel

[Andy Mabbett]

On 29 March 2018 at 11:58, Javier Sánchez Portero <javiers...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm looking for a key to denote if you have
> to refuel by your self or not. I meant if the station operates on self
> service mode.

There are (at least) three modes:

* Attendant service
* Self service, pay at kiosk
* Self service, pay at pump

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Rubberised playground surface

[Andy Mabbett]

"On 12 March 2018 at 13:02, Bryan Housel <br...@7thposition.com> wrote:
> Searching https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values for “rubber”
> turns up a few alternatives

> rubber 258
> rubbercrumb 170
> Rubber 7
> rubberized 6
> recycled_rubber 6
> rubber_mulch 4
> rubber_crumb 3
> rubber_grass 3

Whatever the correct value turns out to be, there's an alarming level
of redundancy there.

"Rubber" and "recycled_rubber" should both be "rubber".

"rubbercrumb" and "rubber_crumb" are clearly the same concept.

I wonder if this is typical across most of our tag values?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Rubberised playground surface

[Andy Mabbett]

On 12 March 2018 at 12:53, Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> wrote:
> On 12.03.2018 13:03, Andy Mabbett wrote:

>> Suggestions, please, for tagging the surface underneath playground
>> items like swings and slides, which is made of a soft, rubber-like
>> material.
>>
>> I've used surface=rubber, for now, but that's not really accurate.

> It might help to describe why you feel it is not accurate?

Because it's not rubber.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Rubberised playground surface

[Andy Mabbett]

Suggestions, please, for tagging the surface underneath playground
items like swings and slides, which is made of a soft, rubber-like
material.

I've used surface=rubber, for now, but that's not really accurate.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] reviving hollow way

[Andy Mabbett]

On 19 February 2018 at 09:00, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:

> As a native English speaker I have never heard the term Hollow Way

Well, as a native English speaker, I have. It's what gave the name to
"Holloway Head", in Birmingham:

   https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/430568379

   
https://billdargue.jimdo.com/placenames-gazetteer-a-to-y/places-h/holloway-head/

which is an historic street name, not a neologism.

That said, I have no view regarding the use of the term in tagging.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Urbex

[Andy Mabbett]

On 8 January 2018 at 23:39, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Witness municipalities asking us to remove their
> streets from the map

When & where did that happen?

[off-topic for the tagging list, so please feel free to point me to an
alternative venue]

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref <> no ref

[Andy Mabbett]

On 29 November 2017 at 13:05, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Le 29. 11. 17 à 12:06, Andy Mabbett a écrit :
>> On 29 November 2017 at 00:40, marc marc wrote:
>>
>>> my query shows you that you can get the same without wikidata.
>>
>> Please demonstrate how you would write a query that lists all the
>> buildings whose architect is (hypothetically) John Smith.

>> Without using Wikidata.
>
> I'm sure that 100% of those buildings are NOT mapped with
> architect:wikidata=thevalue

So am I - currently - which is why I deliberately used the word
"hypothetically".

Can you make such a query, or not?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref

[Andy Mabbett]

On 29 November 2017 at 00:40, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> my query shows you that you can get the same without wikidata.

Please demonstrate how you would write a query that lists all the
buildings whose architect is (hypothetically) John Smith.

That's the architect John Smith born in London in 1853, not the
architect John Smith born in London in 1867, nor the architect John
Smith born in Birmingham in 1853.

Without using Wikidata.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 16:40, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:

> The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the
> world's databases.  If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM and
> other databases that is great but so far i think no one has made a good
> case why this linking information should be stored in OSM rather than
> Wikidata.

Then you are not paying attention. OSM IDs are volatile - far more
volatile than Wikipedia IDs, let alone Wikidata IDs.

> Again my suggestion: Working on better ways to address features in OSM
> in a stable way from the outside would be much more productive

Great! Let us know when you have a working solution, consensus to
implement it, and tools that work with it.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 15:08, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I just got an idea that is either insigntful or stupid, and I'm not sure 
> which.

The former

> But then it occurred to me: our idea of 'Wikidata reference Q314159265'
> is 'the set of objeccts tagged with wikidata=Q314159265'. That set
> doesn't exist as a first-class object, but isn't that what Overpass is
> for?  Would it work to have links into OSM from Wikidata resolved
> as Overpass queries, rather than tied to single OSM objects?

Wikidata also uses SPARQL queries, an the linking between two such
sets is done by federating queries; a service which Wikidata offers
(and which makes use of shared identifiers; another reason to use
Wikidata IDs in OSM):

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:SPARQL_query_service/Federated_queries

Specific OSM-based services which Wikidata federates with include:

   
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:SPARQL_federation_input/Archive#Linked_Geo_Data

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:SPARQL_federation_input/Archive#LOSM

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 14:36, Kevin Kenny  wrote:

> I would need to understand the use cases and
> what value they add to the map

P.S.

The key here is to understand the concept of "linked data" [1], or
rather "linked, open data" [2]. In other words,  making inline data
more understandable by linking it to other data, using URIs.

You will have heard of Sir Tim Berners-Lee. He devised the "five stars
of open data"[3], the fifth highest level of which is "link your data
to other data to provide context". By including a Wikidata ID (which
software understands as a URI), in an OSM object (and indeed in a
tag-definition page on the OSM wiki), we link that object to an object
(item) on Wikidata, and from there, directly and indirectly, to items
in many other systems. That makes OSM part of the open data graph [4],
rather than an isolated system, separate from it. I really do urge you
to look at that last link, and to contemplate the value of making OSM
part of what t represents.


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_data

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_data

[3] http://5stardata.info/en/

[4] http://lod-cloud.net/

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 14:36, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Wikidata, to me, is mysterious.

> I don't believe that I've ever actually seen an application that
> uses it

* Google Search uses it
* Google Translate uses it
* The BBC website uses it
* The Quora website uses it [1]
* Songkick uses it [2]
* The UK Parliament uses it (or are about to)
* The International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI) Authority use it
* Wikipedia(!) uses it

These are just a few examples. Often, the end users of these systems
will not know that they are using a system that in turn uses Wikidata.

A list of other sites and services - far from complete - that use it
for authority control (i.e. disambiguation) is at:

   https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wikidata_for_authority_control


[1] https://blog.quora.com/Announcing-Wikidata-References-on-Topics

[2] 
https://blog.songkick.com/combining-forces-with-the-wikipedia-universe-38b562ced1e8

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 13:41, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote:

> On 28.11.2017 14:13, Andy Mabbett wrote:

>>> the established rule not to have external IDs in the
>>> OSM database
>>
>> What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and how?

> It's certainly not an established *rule*

Thank you for the clarification.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

[Andy Mabbett]

On 28 November 2017 at 12:18, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:

> the established rule not to have external IDs in the
> OSM database

What "established rule" would that be? Established by whom; when and how?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Emergency phones with blinking lights

[Andy Mabbett]

On 2 November 2017 at 18:15, Éric Gillet  wrote:
> 2017-11-02 15:50 GMT+01:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira :
>>
>> Is there a way to represent emergency phones (emergency=phone) which
>> have a blinking/flashing light (so they can be identified at night,
>> with fog, etc), please?

> Maybe you can reuse the lit=yes tag. It's not exactly the original meaning
> of the tag, but the effect is really close, as it means the feature is
> visible at night thanks to a light source.

Somebody needs to write some code to toggle the tag:

   lit=yes

   lit=no

and back again, in sync with the actual object.

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

[Tagging] Not houseboats

[Andy Mabbett]

We have Tag:building=houseboat:

   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhouseboat

How do we tag similar structures, that are not residential (e.g. used
as restaurants or nightclubs)?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

[Tagging] Cyphers on postal boxes

[Andy Mabbett]

We have

   royal_cypher=

for United Kingdom and Commonwealth postal boxes, but some in Ireland,
like the examples pictured at:

   https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_wallbox_SE_door.jpg

   https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Irish_post_box.jpg

have a cypher or logo, that is not "royal"

Should we change the tag to:

   cypher=

or something else?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] OSM+Wikidata intro video

[Andy Mabbett]

On 15 June 2017 at 21:02, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This service is still looking for a proper home. If you have an extra 700GB
> of space on a server, please PM.

Perhaps the WMF toolserver?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag monumental railcars

[Andy Mabbett]

On 15 May 2017 at 22:04, Mark Bradley <ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have mapped several cabooses (UK brake vans), a type of non-revenue
> car, and technically these don't fall under the categories of rolling stock,
> freight cars, or passenger cars/coaches.

As an en-GB native, and having spent ten years working at a railway
museum in England, I would say brake vans are definitely "rolling
stock" (as indeed is anything on wheels that moves on railway rails).

Both en.Wikipedia's categories (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_van ) and Wikidata agree with
that.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag monumental railcars

[Andy Mabbett]

On 10 May 2017 at 10:24, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I believe in British English it should be "waggon".

"Waggon was preferred in British English until a century ago and it
still appears occasionally, but it is fast becoming archaic. In this
century, the shorter one is preferred in all main varieties of
English."

http://grammarist.com/spelling/wagon-waggon/


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag monumental railcars

[Andy Mabbett]

On 9 May 2017 at 21:38, Mark Bradley <ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Not sure if "caboose" is only an American term or not

It's not a term used in British English, except to describe American vehicles.

BTW, historic=wagon should be avoided, as it does not distinguish
between railway wagons and other types.

Maybe historic=railway_wagon ?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] wikipedia links and copy + paste in tag definitions

[Andy Mabbett]

On 1 May 2017 at 13:18, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1. May 2017, at 12:37, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Do not falsely conflate "complex" with "worse". You original complaint
>> was, in effect, that there was a lack of complexity, now you complain
>> that there is.

> no, my main concern is that both have different scope, and that people are
> modifying wikidata without looking at the use of osm tags.

You wrote "sometimes we have multiple tags in OSM each covering a
specific aspect or subtype of what is covered by a single WP article".
I think most reasonable people would regard that as complaining about
a lack of complexity

I asked you for examples of damage caused by Wikidata definitions
changing; I note that you have not provided any.

>>> You have to follow a lot of links and definitions and there
>>> are many dependencies, everything is connected:

>> It's called "linked data" for a reason.

> yes, but it makes it completely impractical for osm users to use it as
> definitions for their tags.

It does no such thing; as evidenced by the widespread and growing use
of Wikidata IDs in tag infoboxes, about which you complained.

>> E.g. place in osm is orthogonal to administrative entities, in wikidata
>> it is not. Add a property/"instance of" to the wikidata town object like
>> "administrative territorial entity" and you changed all towns.
>
> If someone made such a ridiculous change, they would be reverted. This is
> FUD.

> rather than calling my arguments FUD, you should have a look at wikidata.

I assure you I am very familiar with Wikidata.

> I don't write out of nothing about these issues, or because I hate structured
> information. I was very interested in wikidata at first, but the more I'm
> exploring it and following links after links, the more I have become
> reluctant that it is in any usable state or even ever will be - besides
> synchronizing some numbers between different languages and similar.

So you don't like (or understand) Wikidata, and think that your
personal antipathy towards it we should stop using it, despite clear
community consensus otherwise? You are clearly in a very small
minority.

> The entity "town" ALREADY IS an administrative territorial entity in
> wikidata, and nobody has reverted it: https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3957
> At least since 2014, and a lot of people have "automatically patrolled" it
> since then, whatever that means,

So, not a sudden and after-the-fact change, which is what we were
discussing, then?

> (likely it has nothing to do with a human verification of content 
> plausibility)

Perhaps you might stop making guesses?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] wikipedia links and copy + paste in tag definitions

[Andy Mabbett]

On 30 April 2017 at 09:51, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 30. Apr 2017, at 07:09, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> No. The arguments made by Martin against linking to Wikipedia (which
>> are themselves weak) do not stand up at all for Wikidata

> actually in wikidata things are worse, because much more complex.

Do not falsely conflate "complex" with "worse". You original complaint
was, in effect, that there was a lack of complexity, now you complain
that there is.

> You have to follow a lot of links and definitions and there
> are many dependencies, everything is connected:

It's called "linked data" for a reason.

> if the meaning of a property is modified this will actually modify
> a huge lot of objects that use this property.

Do you have examples of the meanings of properties being modified,
such that things were broken in this way? Or is this mere FUD?

> E.g. place in osm is orthogonal to administrative entities, in wikidata
> it is not. Add a property/"instance of" to the wikidata town object like
> "administrative territorial entity" and you changed all towns.

If someone made such a ridiculous change, they would be reverted. This is FUD.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] wikipedia links and copy + paste in tag definitions

[Andy Mabbett]

On 29 April 2017 at 22:03, Andrew Hain <andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> What about the Wikidata links that some pages have in their infoboxes? Is
> there the same objection there?

No. The arguments made by Martin against linking to Wikipedia (which
are themselves weak) do not stand up at all for Wikidata:

> Wikipedia articles have a different scope, and quite often there
> are several articles in WP for what in OSM is tagged with the
> same tag,

Wikidata can have 'parent' items, at the equivalent level to the OSM
tag. If no such item exists, one can be created.

> and sometimes we have multiple tags in OSM each covering a
> specific aspect or subtype of what is covered by a single WP
> article.

Wikidata is much more granular; and can have an item for everything
which has an OSM tag, Again, if one dies not exist, create it!

> One recent example is the linking of the WP article castle from
> the osm tag castle, where our tag covers much more than just
> medieval fortified residences in Europe and the middle east
> (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23413e.g. what in WP is described under 
> chateau, or the Japanese
> Shiros and Russian Kremlins)

This is apparently a case where OSM (or, at ealst, the OSM wiki) is in error.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Mapping time zones as geometries (relations)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 6 March 2017 at 00:30, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote:

> you could easily build time zone
> geometries by either (a) keeping an external database that says "Time
> Zone X consists of the following administrative units" and then
> collecting the units from OSM

That database is Wikidata. make sure that the admin boundaries are
tagged with the relevant Wikidata ID.

> I still think that the mapping of time zones as geometries
> should be discouraged in OSM.

I agree.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] A place where letters & parcels are sent to be sorted so they can be delivered?

[Andy Mabbett]

On 22 February 2017 at 19:56, Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> A place where letters & parcels are sent to be sorted so they can then be
> delivered?
>
> In the Britain I think they'd normally be called a sorting office. but
> there's only 21 & 2 for postal_sorting_office from tag info

Once they were. My local one is now, formally, known as "Great Barr
Delivery Office". You can search for them by nearby postcodes,

http://www.royalmail.com/delivery-and-collection-office-finder

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of Country Names

[Andy Mabbett]

On 26 October 2016 at 23:23, David Bannon <dban...@internode.on.net> wrote:

> As has been suggested, a database of names in every conceivable language
> would be a ideal, then a renderer can deliver a map readable in an
> appropriate language. That does sound like wikidata 

Indeed.

As a matter of interest, how many countries are currently tagged with
their Wikidata ID?

If not many, would people like a bot to add such tags?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Edit war at natural=cave_entrance ?

[Andy Mabbett]

On 13 September 2016 at 11:18, Richard <ricoz@gmail.com> wrote:

>  "Cadastre" is not an english word

Really?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadastre

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cadastre

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mountaineer's mailbox

[Andy Mabbett]

On 6 September 2016 at 16:04, Santiago Díaz de Argandoña
<santiago06d...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Some mountains have a "mailbox" at the summit. When mountaineers reach it,
> they may leave a card where they write down their contact data, weather,
> date of the hike... Then, the next mountaineers who reach the summit pick
> the card in order to give it back to the owner (sending it via mail, for
> example).

This sounds very similar to geocaching.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] intelligence services

[Andy Mabbett]

On 6 September 2016 at 11:05, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> I am not sure they will appreciate being so easy to locate. Imagine someone
> printing up a poster-size map of Europe with big pushpins on the
> intelligence service installations!

Good luck to them, then:

   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-sur-Haute_military_radio_station#Controversy_over_French-language_version_of_Wikipedia_article


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 25 March 2016 at 12:19, Alexander Matheisen
<alexandermathei...@ish.de> wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 25.03.2016, 11:26 + schrieb Andy Mabbett:
>> On 20 March 2016 at 00:12, Alexander Matheisen
>> <alexandermathei...@ish.de> wrote:
>>
>> > If you have a look at the highway=* tagging: This scheme is
>> > subjective,
>> > but there is no alternative.
>>
>> Poppycock.
>
> Why?

For the reason I gave in an earlier post: it is often an objective,
verifiable legal designation.

>> > It is not possible to calculate the importance
>> > of a station just by some values.
>>
>> How do you calculate it, then? Rolling dice?
>
> I do not use any calculation based on measures?! My proposal (seems
> that you did not read it) uses a list of characteristic criterias for
> each category.

You seem to mean different things by:

* values
* measures
* characteristic criterias [sic]

Please define your terms.


> The scheme I propose can be compared to the place=* scheme.

> This definition also mentions "important", so where is the difference
> to the importance proposal?

The former does not try to quantify importance. It uses the term
descriptively in the page about the key, not as the key.

> And why is importance=* so problematic from
> the view of some mappers, while we are also using a similar scheme for
> places?

We are not; and for the reason given earlier in this thread.

>> > I also see problems in getting some of the proposed values. For
>> > example, the amount of passengers or trains per time is difficult
>> > to
>> > measure for a mapper and is not easy to be checked by other
>> > mappers.
>>
>> Please explain what measure you are using, that is *more easily
>> checked* by other mappers.
>
> If you think that the number of passengers or trains is easy to map in
> a larger scale, then please describe how you would map these values.

Please answer my question.

>> > I also see the problem that calculating the importance by a complex
>> > algorithm might be very intransparent.
>>
>> Please explain what measure you are using, that is *more
>> transparent*.
>
> As I said, I do not use any calculation based on measures.

See above regarding your terms.

> My proposal
> requires that a mapper classifies a station to one station category. It
> is more transparent because everyone can see that a station is tagged
> with a certain category. So a user easily understands why e.g. a
> station is rendered in a certain zoom level or was recognized as more
> important in the ranking of search results.

Then the tag would be transparent, but not the means used to arrive at it.

> If you just calculate the importance from a list of measurable values,
> you may get good results with a complex algorithm that recognizes many
> aspects. But then it is very difficult for a mapper to understand why
> station A was ranked more important than station B, and it is also
> difficult to influence the ranking if it is wrong. That is what I mean
> with transparency.

So long as the algorithm is published, it would be entirely transparent.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 21 March 2016 at 22:26, Daniel Koć <daniel@koć.pl> wrote:

> Using Wikidata as a base for peaks scoring is worse than basing it on
> population, because it's less universal and relies on one particular
> website, but I don't reject it at this moment.

Actually, counting the links to other Wikimedia sites from Wikidata
relies on over 300 other websites (290 Wikipedias, a dozen or more
sister projects)

> Still I think "international airport" in the name hints us something and is
> worth using this way or another to indicate importance.

Good luck getting a train to another country from Birmingham
International railway station.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 20 March 2016 at 00:12, Alexander Matheisen
<alexandermathei...@ish.de> wrote:

> If you have a look at the highway=* tagging: This scheme is subjective,
> but there is no alternative.

Poppycock.

> As the person who created that station importance draft, I will focus
> on stations, but for other features like mountain peaks the situation
> should be similar: It is not possible to calculate the importance of a
> station just by some values.

How do you calculate it, then? Rolling dice?

> I also see problems in getting some of the proposed values. For
> example, the amount of passengers or trains per time is difficult to
> measure for a mapper and is not easy to be checked by other mappers.

Please explain what measure you are using, that is *more easily
checked* by other mappers.

> I also see the problem that calculating the importance by a complex
> algorithm might be very intransparent.

Please explain what measure you are using, that is *more transparent*.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 18 March 2016 at 22:15, Michael Reichert <naka...@gmx.net> wrote:

> I agree that an importance tag for mountains is not a suitable concept
> but a importance tag for train stations (or airports) is surveyable and
> suitable for OSM. Just take the timetable or go out and stay one day on
> the platforms, count and note down all stopping trains.

That would allow you to verify (in a very loose sense) the number of
trains; not the importance of the station.

> In addition,
> more important stations often have better/more facilities for
> passengerts like a ticket shop (smaller ones only have vending
> machines), a toilet, backeries, fast food stores, waiting rooms, etc.

That would, allow you to verify a list of facilities, not the
importance of the station.

> If OSM would free of any importance-like tags, we would not have the
> highway=* tag as we have it now. Tagging is highway=primary vs.
> secondary, secondary vs. tertiary, tertiary vs. unclassified is often a
> question of importance, not only width, paving and lane count.

Tagging highways as "primary" or "secondary" is often a matter of
verifiable legal designation.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] AirBnB

[Andy Mabbett]

On 19 March 2016 at 23:18, Dave Swarthout <daveswarth...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My original intent in this post was to determine what tags to use in
> describing the guest house as an AirBnB venue.

A guest house may be listed on AirBnB and via a number of other
agencies. If we're listing one agency (and I'm not convinced we
should), we should list them all - and with a generic property.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 19 March 2016 at 17:47, John Willis <jo...@mac.com> wrote:

>> On Mar 19, 2016, at 9:18 PM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> It's nowhere near as ridiculous as trying to render them according to
>> some arbitrary and subjective "importance" (Importance to whom?
>
> All of the examples I have given are all sourced in local culture.
>
> Usually having things named after it, noted on road signs, depicted in 
> paintings, noted in historical documents, included in historic lists (of 
> famous peaks), and other *easily understood* things that provincial or 
> regional people would be able to define - but be extremely difficult for a 
> person who doesn't live in the country or region (or speak the language) to 
> verify.

So far as "importance is concerned, that's not "sourced", that's your
*subjective* interpretation.


> an argument against subjective data

You have yet to give evidence that there is any subjective data
relating to the very vague concept of "importance".

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

[Andy Mabbett]

On 19 March 2016 at 07:41, johnw <jo...@mac.com> wrote:

> OSM is for gathering data - lots of lots of locally based knowledge of
> things. Mountains are no different. Trying to decide what mountains are
> worth labeling at different zooms via some GIS data is ridiculous.

It's nowhere near as ridiculous as trying to render them according to
some arbitrary and subjective "importance" (Importance to whom? The
people who live near them? Tourists? Mountaineers? Ornithologists?
Aviators? Geologists? Climatologists? Oil prospectors?).

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Andy Mabbett]

Today:

   
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/sloped_kerb=1279361=1215962

On 7 March 2016 at 19:48, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
> Recently I believe in this case was 2010 .
>
> Simon
>
> Am 07.03.2016 um 19:39 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
>> On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
>>> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
>>> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
>>> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
>>> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
>>> preferred tagging is.
>> I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour 
>> of:
>>
>>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb
>>
>> I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
>> same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
>> whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
>> /type/ of dropped kerb it is.
>>
>> I would prefer, say:
>>
>> kerb=dropped
>> dropped-kerb=rolled
>>
>> instead of, say:
>>
>> kerb=rolled
>>
>> since the former allows the use of:
>>
>>  kerb=dropped
>>
>> alone.
>>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Andy Mabbett]

On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
> preferred tagging is.

I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour of:

   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb

I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
/type/ of dropped kerb it is.

I would prefer, say:

kerb=dropped
dropped-kerb=rolled

instead of, say:

kerb=rolled

since the former allows the use of:

     kerb=dropped

alone.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Formalising shoulder tagging

[Andy Mabbett]

On 30 January 2016 at 13:11, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> shoulder:motor_vehicle=* feels better. But you are not allowed to walk on
> the shoulder anyway, so actually something like shoulder:access=breakdown
> would be a better start.

My question was about shoulders which are for emergency use only;
except during (variable) peak periods, when any vehicle may use them
for regular driving.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Formalising shoulder tagging

[Andy Mabbett]

On 29 January 2016 at 13:14, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net> wrote:
>
> Thanks to everyone who contributed.
>
> I've accordingly formalised the page and moved it to
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shoulder .

Thanks.

What about the case (such as "managed motorways", in the UK) where a
shoulder is reserved for emergency use, except in certain periods,
where it may be used by normal traffic?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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