Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?
Hello, sorry I'm late to this discussion. I added a bunch of Klingon language
country names to OSM a few days ago, which were reverted.
Regardless about whether the OSM community think names in {tlhIngan Hol} should get the {HISlaH} "yea" or {ghobe'}
"nay", I think it's important that any rule about multilingual names should be written in such a way to not exclude
indigenous and minority language communities. What counts as a "full" or "real" language is actually a hard
problem even among professional linguists. Ultimately whether a language is a language doesn't have to do with how it came to
exist, it has to do with whether it has a lexicon and grammar that can be used to communicate, and whether it is used among a
community of people. Making rules about what kinds of communities or domains of use should count as valid quickly becomes a
thorny political exercise. There are a number of indigenous language communities who do not have living native speakers due to
historical efforts to suppress their languages, but have active language development and language revival efforts, and could want
to make use of maps for them. Excluding minority languages from official recognition and contemporary media is exactly the kind
of thing that has been used to suppress them in the past. It can be difficult to write sensible rules excluding conlangs that
wouldn't impact such communities. I would object to rules that require large numbers of native speakers or first-language
speakers for "notable" languages, for reasons that have nothing to do with constructed languages.
Less seriously, while nations, major cities, and famous places do have a lot of
language tags, I don't think a flood of conlang names is actually a problem. To
my knowledge Sindarin doesn't have names for Earth places because it is a
language of Middle-Earth and the elves were more concerned with places like
Thangorodrim than ones like Barcelona. This is often the case with alien or
fantasy conlangs—Dothraki don't need directions in Denver. Auxlangs like
Esperanto conceive of themselves as international projects and thus may have a
large number of names for countries. However, as a practical matter, there are
only a few historically important conlangs that have a ISO 639-3 code at all.
While there are ongoing revisions to those standards, unfortunately in recent
years the body has consistently rejected new codes for conlangs. Specifically,
a number were proposed in 2017 but rejected under new criteria adopted at that
time. Esperanto has first-language speakers and would meet that criteria, but
Klingon has been alive only for decades, not for generations yet. So it's very
unlikely that aside from a few grandfathered exceptions, there will be new ISO
639-3 codes for conlangs for people to worry about, at least for a few decades.
A more urgent problem might be how to support names in conlangs and other
languages that don't yet have ISO 639-3 codes.
https://iso639-3.sil.org/code_changes/change_request_index/data/2017
https://iso639-3.sil.org/sites/iso639-3/files/criteria_for_coded_languages.pdf
While the toponymy of {Qo'noS} is well outside the scope of OSM, certainly some Klingon country, city, and
state names for places here on {tera'} are verifiable within the contemporary human Klingon community. The
Klingon language community runs the Klingon Language Institute, there is a very active Learn Klingon Facebook
group, klingonwiki.net, and two major annual conventions: {qep'a'} "Great Meeting" in Indianapolis
in July, and {qepHom} "Little Meeting" in Saarbrücken in November, as well as occasional smaller
{qepHommey} "Little Meetings". Klingonists are active on social media platforms such as Twitter and
YouTube as well as producing podcasts, zines, books, operas, and plays. (You may not have seen or
participated in fluent conversations conducted in Klingon, but I certainly have, and I'd be happy provide
examples.) One could easily approach Klingonists in any of these venues about these names and get the same
answers. Maintainability is a problem with a variety of data in OSM, but the major conlangs have very active
online communities in general, and I wouldn't have put the Klingon names in if I didn't intend to keep them
updated. The reason I added Klingon country names to OSM is because I've been an active OSM editor for years
with thousands of edits, am also a Klingonist, and thought that adding Klingon-langage names would enable the
Klingon-language community to make use of OSM in cool ways. {'etlh QorghHa'lu'chugh ragh 'etlh nIvqu' 'ej
jejHa'choH.} [1]
In Klingon, we don't have more than a few dozen agreed-upon names for countries as well
as a handful of major cities and regions. The usual process for new vocabulary, including
toponyms, in Klingon is to submit suggestions for new words to the {chabal tetlh} in
spring for discussion and clarification, and an official list of {mu'mey chu'} "new
words" is
[Tagging] Indoor highway=steps+repeat_on=*
I've been tagging some indoor routes in buildings already mapped with Simple Indoor Tagging, using highway=footway+indoor=yes, but am having a problem with flights of stairs. With most elements that are repeated between floors (and would thus have identical lat/longs), such as elevator or stairwell doors, you use repeat_on=* to specify additional levels that it's found on, and the levels are specified with either a semicolon or a hyphen to denote level ranges. However, this doesn't work with elements that span multiple floors and are repeated on multiple floor ranges, such as flights of stairs. Compare this (correct) https://projets.pavie.info/id-indoor/#background=Bing=w762348666=0=22.20/-85.71469/38.25695 with this (incorrect I guess) https://projets.pavie.info/id-indoor/#background=Bing=w742518979=0=22.20/-85.71456/38.25689 Is there any way to tag these flights of stairs with repeat_on=*? I want to do this because step_count=* is potentially useful information for visually impaired travelers, and it's much more useful to say that a specific flight of stairs has 9 steps than that a whole staircase has 72 steps. Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Indoor routes: highway=corridor or highway=footway+indoor=yes ?
It seems like there are two competing de facto standards for marking indoor routes; many people are familiar with highway=corridor but highway=footway+indoor=yes is actually more widely used. According to taginfo, highway=corridor is used on 14,183 ways, while highway=footway+indoor=yes is used on 34,645 elements. In tagging new indoor routes, which of these is better to use? Jeremiah ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - footway=indoor
This proposal has been up for three weeks, so I'm changing it to Voting status. footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor Thanks, Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor
I've updated this RFC with some of the comments received over the last week. footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor Thanks, Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor
>I can see some value in mapping routes through a >room which is full of obstacles, but I don't like >the idea of using this where a routing graph >could be calculated from indoor=corridor/area/room >polygons just fine. >While the slow progress of OSM-based routing >engines in this regard is regrettable, trading >extra mapper hours for something that could be >realistically automated always seems wasteful to me. Yes, I've thought that this the best way to handle routing with SIT...but is this more of a potential solution or research project versus something that can be used for indoor routing in the near term. There would be a non-trivial amount of work involved, for sure, to add this tagging. It amounts to mapping a building in SIT, then going back to map indoor routes. The issue of obstacles is big, though. There is a huge number and variety of obstacles indoors, both temporary and permanent--everything from sunken floor pits to stationary exhibits, all kinds of things. We can make up tags, of course, but for the most part I think a lot of this will just not be mapped. I think about different kinds of rooms, like a lobby where the best route is a straight line from door to door, versus a conference room where there are usually varied arrangements of tables or temporary seating that always leaves an aisle down the center of the room or around the walls; some of this is venue-specific. I work with a lot of travelers who are blind and for whom those kinds of decisions are not apparent. For example, a few months ago I guided a colleague through a museum that used temporary walls to display artworks within a large gallery room (which formed a series of "traps" for him), and changed the layout of these walls every few months. They always used a common walkway that would be easy to mark, though, and much more feasible to maintain than all those movable walls. I'll add a statement emphasizing that this is to be used in addition to rather than instead of SIT. The points about using highway=footway instead of another tag are important ones, and I'll add them to the discussion section. Jeremiah >>From: Jeremiah Rose >>Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 12:41 PM >>To: tagging@openstreetmap.org; ind...@openstreetmap.org >>Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor >> >>Here's a proposal for marking indoor routes within a building mapped with >>Simple Indoor Tagging. >> >>footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor >> >>Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor
> How is this different from highway=corridor? The wiki for highway=corridor says that it was part of an older indoor tagging scheme, but doesn't link to that scheme, so it's hard to understand how it would fit into that scheme. The biggest difference of course is that footway=indoor tags highway=footway while highway=corridor is a different highway=* tag. If highway=corridor is used for indoor routes, there probably should be some discussion in the wiki of how it is to be used with SIT's indoor=corridor, which describes space in a very different way. Should highway=corridor be used to mark routes through non-corridors? Museum and hotel lobbies, conference spaces, and similar areas are tagged as indoor=room in SIT. I discussed this with a few other people at SOTM US, and a couple of other uses for highway=corridor have been mentioned. For example, it's been mentioned as being used for an exterior passage that goes through a building, which I associate with tunnel=building_passage. It was also mentioned as being used for an underground shopping corridor, such as you might find in a large underground urban train station. There are a lot of examples of highway=corridor in taginfo, I hope the use of this tag could be better documented. Jeremiah >>From: Jeremiah Rose >>Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 12:41 PM >>To: tagging@openstreetmap.org; ind...@openstreetmap.org >>Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor >> >>Here's a proposal for marking indoor routes within a building mapped with >>Simple Indoor Tagging. >> >>footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor >> >>Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor
Here's a proposal for marking indoor routes within a building mapped with Simple Indoor Tagging. footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor Jeremiah Rose ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Linking to accessible menus at restaurants?
OSM has a variety of ways to link to external resources, like url=* and contact:website=*, but are there good ways to link to more specific kinds of resources? We work with visually-impaired users who need to find accessible versions of restaurant menus. Restaurants frequently host their own menus, but the accessible version might be available at a third-party website. The Disabilitydescription tags, such as blind:website:en=* , appear to be for long descriptive text. Would a tag such as url:menu=* or url:accessible_menu=* be feasible? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
