Re: [Tagging] Is there any tagging scheme for carillons already?

[Max]

I can add some carillon fun facts (with implications for OSM):

The largest Carillon in Europe is in Halle (Saale) [1] with 76 bells. 
They actually aimed for being the largest in the world but did bad 
research. Turns out there are two bigger ones with 77 bells in 
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan in a Presbyterian church and another one in 
South Korea.
Since it's extremely expensive to make the large bells, they went for 
many tiny ones extending the carillon in the high notes. Obviously they 
get fainter and fainter and the last bells are impossible to hear on the 
square.
Usually the bells can be played directly by jamming on wooden bars with 
your fist [2] (The bars have ropes attached to them). This is how it is 
in Halle, additionally a section of the carillon can be played from a 
Computer via MIDI. (Then they are usually excited electrically by solenoids)


In Weimar there are two Carillon curiosities:
A Meissen porcelain carillon in the townhall [3], and a glass carillon 
in the city music school [4].


What to tag: {example}
What material: brass/iron/porcelain/glass
Which notes: f4; g4; a4; c5
Which year: 1929
Control: Clavier, MIDI


[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roter_Turm_(Halle)#Carillon
[2] 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carillon#/media/File:BIG_117025309040611.jpg

[3] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Weimar_-_Rathaus_glocken.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtGi00TYfYI
[4] 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_Glocken_im_Landkreis_Weimarer_Land_und_in_Weimar#/media/Datei:Weimar-Musikschule.jpg




On 06.05.20 21:41, lukas-...@web.de wrote:

An addition to my ideas:
I think bell_tower=carillon does not really fit, because it says nothing 
about what kind of bell_tower it is, like the other values of bell_tower do.
Wikipedia says: "A *carillon *is a musical instrument 
that is typically 
housed in the bell tower 
(belfry) of a church 
" okay yes, typically. 
But that changes nothing about that it's not a type of a bell_tower, but 
a "content" of it. So that's why I would propose a new tag 
man_made=bells for it, but I see that that might be like mapping every 
antenna of a tower:type=communication. Not very useful. So I would go on 
attraction=carillon then, which could be used for the carillons when 
they are operated as an attraction.

--Lukas
*Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 06. Mai 2020 um 21:24 Uhr
*Von:* lukas-...@web.de
*An:* tagging@openstreetmap.org
*Betreff:* Re: [Tagging] Is there any tagging scheme for carillons already?
Okay. So I may conclude:
- We have those carillons inside bell towers, often we do not see them 
at all. Not sure whether to tag those, at least the attraction=* key 
would not fit for all of them.
- We have some carillons outside of bell_towers, and I think these are 
the ones which are operated as an attraction, at least in most cases.
What would you say to propose something like "man_made=bells" (not 
man_made=bell, because several bells can then mapped as one node, for 
many carillons it would not be really able to map each bell of it) and 
"bell_count" for tagging "all kinds" of bells? These tags could be used 
for carillons inside and outside of bell_towers (and maybe for "other 
bells", too), so it says nothing about being an attraction. If people 
want to map only the tower, they can do. But I believe there are bells 
outside of towers, too.
If it's purposed for people looking at it and hearing it at scheduled 
times and so on, we would need something like attraction=carillon or the 
tourism=attraction tag would have to be added to the man_made=bells, 
would be my suggestion then.

Someone likes to comment on that?
-- Lukas
*Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 06. Mai 2020 um 20:58 Uhr
*Von:* "Martin Koppenhoefer" 
*An:* "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" 


*Betreff:* Re: [Tagging] Is there any tagging scheme for carillons already?


sent from a phone

 > On 6. May 2020, at 19:54, Paul Allen  wrote:
 >
 > I'm not sure we need to tag the carillon. The ones in churches I've
 > encountered or read about aren't operated as attractions. The bells 
aren't
 > visible, the mechanisms aren't visible, the operator isn't visible 
and they're

 > not operated frequently.



I understand you are mostly interested in visual aspects, but OSM 
doesn’t have to limit itself to this, IMHO carillons are mostly about 
music so whether you can see them is not so important.



 > I don't think we need to tag the fact that a carillon is in a church 
bell tower,

 > or how many bells it has. We distinguish between a bell tower and a clock
 > tower because they are visibly very different and constitute landmarks .
 > Other than that, we don't need to know what is inside.


I disagree.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Small electric vehicles

[Max]

On 22.11.19 20:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



sent from a phone


On 22. Nov 2019, at 19:18, s8evq  wrote:

So in Belgium, I think we do need a specific access tag for speed pedelecs. 
People have been using moped_p=* for a while now, but this never went through 
the proposal process.



are there specific traffic signs for P e-bikes, or do they have to adhere to 
moped access restrictions?


Example for S-Pedelec signage in Germany:
http://extraenergy.org/main.php?language=de&category=information&subcateg=&id=100243


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

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

[Max]

Interesting. I've watched a fair amount of British media coverage about 
the horrific human trafficking a couple of weeks back and noticed the 
repeated use of lorry. In this Sky News segment they say vehicle 
(comprising of tractor and container) and lorry, but they aren't saying 
truck once.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo_SpJPJSs4


On 17.11.19 00:37, Philip Barnes wrote:

Lorry has largely fallen out of use, truck is the more used word in British 
English nowadays.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Saturday, 16 November 2019, Max wrote:

Given that OSM language is British it probably should be "lorry" not
"truck".


On 16.11.19 18:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

I have found a shop that sells Volvo and Volkswagen commercial vehicles
(large trucks). Looking in the wiki, it suggested the tag shop=car
should/could also be used for this, but I find it puzzling. How would
someone looking at the map understand, that this shop=car,
brand=Volkswagen;Volvo is only selling trucks? Wouldn't it make more
sense to tag these with a different tag. e.g. shop=truck?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcar

Cheers,
Martin

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




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






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

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

[Max]

VW Group has controlling stakes in MAN and Scania, maybe that's what he 
meant?


On 17.11.19 19:21, Marc Gemis wrote:

AFAIK, VW does not sell lorries/hgv/trucks. Their commercial vehicles
are pick ups and vans (caddy/transporter/crafter) The largest, has a
GVW of 5t.

Which tags do we have to use in case the shop only sells those vehicles?

regards

m.

On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 12:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:


I have now changed this back to shop=truck, seems the most convincing of all 
options, and the most frequently used specific tag

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


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




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

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

[Max]

Given that OSM language is British it probably should be "lorry" not 
"truck".



On 16.11.19 18:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I have found a shop that sells Volvo and Volkswagen commercial vehicles 
(large trucks). Looking in the wiki, it suggested the tag shop=car 
should/could also be used for this, but I find it puzzling. How would 
someone looking at the map understand, that this shop=car, 
brand=Volkswagen;Volvo is only selling trucks? Wouldn't it make more 
sense to tag these with a different tag. e.g. shop=truck?


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcar

Cheers,
Martin

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




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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 117, Issue 95 "copying 1 fact from another database"

[Max]

This is not tagging related and thus this list is not the right place 
for this discussion. This has been said multiple times before and still 
you did not take it elsewhere. Seems like a pattern.



On 29.06.19 18:49, Ulrich Lamm wrote:

Am 26.06.2019 um 11:22 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:


copying 1 fact from another database


That is a great understatement.
Two examples:
• An equalization of object identities between regional mappers and a regional road 
authority that provides its data under the condition "commercial use only with 
special permission, any transfer to other persons prohibited"
• A long lasting and well establlished co-operation: A local database with several 
thousands of objects actively announces each actualization to local mappers who map each 
new object, at once, but also look in the database. Condition as published in the 
impressum of the database portal , "copies, publlications or recording in databases 
as well as any commercial use and the transfer to other persons is not permitted".

Of course, there is no danger for OSM.
And any commercial exploiter simply has to leave those kinds of information out 
of his own products, on which he is not sure that commercial use is permitted. 
That is a matter of his renderer.

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




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

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

[Max]

On 26.10.18 11:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Often there are also other signs on traffic signal controlled 
intersections, like stop or give way signs, which only go into effect in 
the case of the traffic lights turned off (common situation in Germany). 
Just to clarify: In Germany you have either zebra markings or traffic 
lights, NEVER both. Zebra marking means that road traffic has to stop 
for pedestrians at any time.
I've seen in Spain that zebra markings were removed for crossings with 
traffic lights, so maybe this is becoming more of a standard in other 
places too.


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

Re: [Tagging] tagging bicycle charging stations

[Max]

On 27.06.2018 17:39, marc marc wrote:

Le 27. 06. 18 à 16:28, Paul Allen a écrit :

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

 I encountered public charging station for electric bicycles.


did you upload the photo somewhere ?


https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ebike+pedelec+charging+station&t=canonical&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images

There is currently a plenthora of different standards on electric 
bicycles (some with identical plugs, but different polarity!), but this 
will change soon as standardization happens.

http://www.energybus.org/Basics/What-is-EnergyBus



I never see a public charging station for bike.
what kind of the plugs are available ?


Should be charging:bicycle=yes,  charging:car=no,


that look like a good idea.


 I propose to use amenity=bicycle_changing_station
 (like there is amenity=bicycle_parking and amenity=parking).


that's a bad idea since this would have the same issue as for parking
with cycle and motorcycle : 2 overlapping values

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




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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sauna

[Max]

On 11.06.2018 19:28, Jyri-Petteri Paloposki wrote:

Number eight sounds like it would fit in this ”experience”, so we should
probably add that one. Is there a western spelling for that?


The romanization reads Jjimjilbang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jjimjilbang

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sauna

[Max]

Great idea to make the sauna key more useful. But it should be looked at 
in more detail and with less of a Finnish bias. :)


Some questions that the tag should address:

1. How to tag a place which has several individual saunas?
1b. What about other sauna related amenities like cold pools (how 
cold?), whirlpools, hot tubs (how hot?)... Ice buckets, etc.

2. What's the method of heating: Wood, electricity...
3. What's the designated temperature in that sauna?
4. Are occupants allowed to handle the löyly themselves or is only staff 
allowed to do that? At what times do they (often Saunas have löyly at 
the full hour/ half hour, etc)

5. how many people fit inside?
6. how to tag the opening hours if they are different for men/women/mixed?
7. is clothing allowed?
8. There ara also other types of saunas in the world that might have 
their particularities. 찜질방 in Korea come to my mind, where you can 
actually spend as much time as you want and even stay overnight. The 
very traditional types are basically a kiln and have a fire burning 
inside for a day and then the ashea are brushed out and the walls 
radiate the heat for another day.


Then there are countries where the word sauna is just a synonym for a 
place where people fuck, like it is in France. Might lead to odd 
situations if those are confused.


Some of these things on the list may indeed be concluded from the 
country specific customs, but a map and tagging scheme should at least 
consider them


m.


On 10.06.2018 14:01, Jyri-Petteri Paloposki wrote:

Hi,

proposing a new (or actually amended) use of the sauna key to specify
which kind of sauna the leisure=sauna is. The proposal can be found in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sauna.

The proposed values as of now are as follows:

– sauna=yes
   General purpose value
– sauna=hot
   A Finnish-style sauna with a temperature of over 60°C because of the
water thrown on the rocks of the stove. This kind of sauna is relatively
dry because of the high temperature.
– sauna=steam
   A Turkish-style steam sauna with a lower temperature and limited
visibility because of the steam generated.
– sauna=smoke
   A Finnish-style hot sauna in which the stove has no chimney but
instead the smoke fills the room when the sauna is prepared, and the
smoke is then ventilated out when the sauna is ready.
– sauna=dry
   A non-steam dry sauna in which water is not thrown on the stove.
– sauna=aroma
   A sauna that constantly has an aroma. A Finnish sauna with occasional
aroma liquid added to the water is tagged as sauna=hot.
– sauna=infrared
   A sauna-like construction that is used for infrared therapy.

Best regards,




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

Re: [Tagging] Campaniles tagging

[Max]

Related information: What type of bell is in there?
Just one, or a whole Carillon?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Bell
Missing info there is the material of the bells: Bronze, Glass, Porcellain

On 12.03.2018 07:54, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
> Currently there are 2 tags for campaniles, which has no difference
> between each other:
>
> * man_made=tower + tower:type=campanile
> * man_made=campanile
>
> I think we should move "man_made=campanile" to "man_made=tower +
> tower:type=campanile" combination, which will mach to the rest of a
> towers tagging scheme:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tower:type
>

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

Re: [Tagging] reviving hollow way

[Max]

On 19.02.2018 11:48, joost schouppe wrote:
Hollow way is probably a germanism; it's what sunken lanes are literally 

Right:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=hohlweg&iar=images


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

[Max]

On 2017년 11월 17일 08:01, José G Moya Y. wrote:
Martin, I don't think authorities welcome a detailed map of inner areas 
in stations/airports. They will show a security concern.


This was never a concern in OSM and it hopefully never will be. There 
can't be (self)censorship.


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

Re: [Tagging] passage only on low tide

[Max]

On 2017년 11월 04일 20:29, Andy Townsend wrote:

On 04/11/2017 07:04, Max wrote:
How to tag a way that is only passable for 3 hours during low tide? 


If it helps anyone, an example of the sort of object with this 
restriction is http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/177021004 .  I wouldn't 
take "name=Lindisfarne Causeway (Tidal Check times)" as a good example 
of tagging though.


I went with

causeway=yes
ford=tidal
tidal=yes

not sure how to say that the passable time frame is about 3 hours (with 
climate change it's getting shorter)..


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

[Tagging] passage only on low tide

[Max]

How to tag a way that is only passable for 3 hours during low tide?

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

Re: [Tagging] airstrip vs runway

[Max]

On 2017년 10월 09일 09:38, Andrew Davidson wrote:

I think we may be drifting away from Warin's original question.

If you look at the LINZ meta-data:

http://apps.linz.govt.nz/topo-data-dictionary/index.aspx?page=class-runway_poly 



their definition of what an airstrip is:

"an area that consists only of a grass (sometimes limestone) runway in a 
remote location"



https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/42.4014/-76.5581

in this area there are 7 runways. Two are called "field" three "Airport" 
and one even is called "International Airport" none of them is paved.


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

Re: [Tagging] contact:* for review websites

[Max]

On 2017년 09월 16일 00:56, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

I have seen a few mappers recently adding
contact:[ yelp | tripadvisor | foursquare ]
to businesses.

IMHO these are not means of contact, instead these are review websites. 
While I personally think that we do not need them in OSM at all, they 
certainly do not belong in the contact:* namespace.


Opinions?
Tom


Agree on both. Often the yelp, tripadvisor, forusquare, facebook page of 
a company/place/restaurant can be found easier then their own page, 
because the SEO of those pages is much better. These review sites come 
and go. They are private, commercial services. They can be easily found 
by your favourite search engine or by entering the name string of the 
place together with the city in the search of the service. I don't see 
why they should be in the OSM database.


m.

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

Re: [Tagging] Australian Solar Challenge Race

[Max]

On 2017년 05월 19일 15:21, Tijmen Stam wrote:

On 19-05-17 13:04, Warin wrote:

Hi,

There is a
relationhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7107501#map=5/-24.173/134.723 


for the World Solar Challenge that runs from Darwin to Adelaide.

Presently tagged with;

route=raceway

highway=raceway

This is run on public highways with normal traffic, so it is not a
closed raceway.

There are similar events around the world.

I would think that highway=raceway should be deleted, could be confusing
for renders.

And the route= could be changed to something like route=solar_challenge
or is there a more universal term?

Wikipedia link -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:World%20Solar%20Challenge?uselang=en


(I would like to see the other events encouraged to use OSM, anyone who
says this is not for OSM is simply discouraging use of OSM.)


I think we should NOT tag these kinds of one-off routes, with no visible 
trace on the ground.




It's not a one-off event, it exists since 1987.

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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Max]

On 2017년 03월 13일 12:17, Dalibor Jelínek wrote:

Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled?

Nope, they do not have that autobalancing device.


Do the devices have to have motors?

Aparently no.


Those two contradict. If it is self balancing it needs a motor.

Maybe interesting in this context: Most countries in the EU treat 
Pedelecs (Pedal-Electric-Cycles) as bicycles, even though they have a 
motor assistance up to 25km/h. Only when there is assistance over 25km/h 
they fall in the category of motorized vehicles.


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

Re: [Tagging] landuse=logging

[Max]

On 2017년 01월 05일 21:36, Volker Schmidt wrote:

Maybe landuse=logging is used to indicate a tree plantation for logging
as opposed to a forest where wood production is not the main purpose.


I thought that this is exactly what a landuse=forest is. A plantation of 
trees to be cut down. The other thing is natural=wood


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

Re: [Tagging] test track tagging (vs highway=raceway)

[Max]

There are also test tracks/circuits that are part of the public streets 
and just marked with tiny signs.



On 2016년 10월 20일 17:46, Richard Welty wrote:

i don't have a particular proposal in mind for this, just looking for input.

there are various tracks in the world that are not used for racing, but
for testing only. major auto manufacturers have their own tracks, and
independent organizations do too (for example, the US publication
Consumer Reports has converted an old drag racing complex in CT into
their own private test facility. likewise i believe there is a small private
test facility on the grounds of the old Brooklands oval in the UK.)

what kind of tagging do folks think is appropriate for these?

richard



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




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

Re: [Tagging] Bus bays

[Max]

BTW,
I've seen that in some places the bus bays are removed and replaced by 
the opposite. Bus peninsulas if you want. that makes the traffic stop 
when a bus is at the bus stop and removes the dangerous situation of a 
car overtaking while a bus is at the stop.



On 2016년 08월 28일 23:15, Michael Tsang wrote:

Dear all,

What is the commonly-used practice to denote if there is a bus bay at a
public_transport=stop_position and bus=yes? On two-way streets, how do you
denote which direction of buses is the bus bay for?

Michael




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

Re: [Tagging] Art galleries/museums

[Max]

The discussion seems to be happening in the wiki now
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:tourism%3Dgallery#Problems_with_the_gallery_tag

Where different people seem to be around. It's kind of tiring having to
bring up all the arguments again because some haven't followed the
discussion here.

:/

> 
> 2016-02-17 13:30 GMT+01:00 Max  <mailto:abonneme...@revolwear.com>>:
> 
> > +0.5, I'd actually make the latter contemporary_art_gallery, although 
> it is long, it removes the ambiguity that art_gallery still has
> 
> yes, but then there are galleries that are still selling works of
> (post-)modern, not necessarily contemporary artists, which they used to
> represent when they still were alive and they continue to sell off their
> stock of multiples. "Edition Block" comes to my mind, allthough there
> might be better examples as they also represent many artists which are
> still alive and contemporary.
> 
> it's complicated.
> 
> 
> 
> I would somehow still find it pertinent to call those "contemporary art
> gallery", where the artists might be defunct but once had chosen this
> gallerist to be represented by him. Even if for an art historian the
> post modernists are no more "contemporary" in 2016, the gallery still
> can be called "contemporary art gallery" if it already existed by the
> time the represented artist was contemporary himself.
> 
> Cheers,
> Martin
> 

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

Re: [Tagging] Voting rules

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 24일 11:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> "there's not much we can do about it" - this is simply untrue. Editors
> and map rendering have great power.

With power comes responsibility.

In my view the responsibility to make a map/rendering that distinguishes
itself from all the commercial maps out there that only care about
monetization. OSM is a map from humans for humans.



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

Re: [Tagging] Art galleries/museums

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 12일 09:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> Am 11.02.2016 um 23:39 schrieb Max :
>>
>> I'd say so.1. depreciate tourism=gallery for museums, make it a subtype
>> of tourism=museum.
>> For actual galleries introduce amenity=art_gallery
> 
> 
> +0.5, I'd actually make the latter contemporary_art_gallery, although it is 
> long, it removes the ambiguity that art_gallery still has

yes, but then there are galleries that are still selling works of
(post-)modern, not necessarily contemporary artists, which they used to
represent when they still were alive and they continue to sell off their
stock of multiples. "Edition Block" comes to my mind, allthough there
might be better examples as they also represent many artists which are
still alive and contemporary.

it's complicated.

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] Galleries versus art shops

[Max]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2016년 02월 15일 12:26, Craig Wallace wrote:
> On 2016-02-15 09:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> 
>> 2016-02-15 10:36 GMT+01:00 Steve Doerr > >:
>> 
>> So, in my opinion, are the Van Gogh Museum and Rijksmuseum: were
>> it not for the element 'museum' in their names, we would think of
>> these as art galleries, not museums.
>> 
>> I'm not sure for the Van Gogh Museum, but I am sure for the
>> Rijksmuseum (because I have been there), that it is correctly
>> named "museum" and not "gallery", because they do expose a lot of
>> furniture, and the word "gallery" is reserved for paintings (and
>> maybe sculptures). Maybe the Van Gogh Museum does deal with van
>> Gogh's life and not just with his work, what would explain the
>> term museum for this.
> 
> In UK English, a 'gallery' can display all sorts of art, not just 
> paintings. So it could include sculpture or furniture etc. Assuming
> the furniture is displayed because of its artistic value, not just
> because it is old.

But in UK English you can also call them Museum as well or would that
be wrong? Would it be wrong to call a house with exhibits of art
inside a Museum?

In case you haven't followed the discussion, because it starts going
in circles now: The issue with tourism=gallery is that at the moment
it puts institutional houses with art exhibitions in the same tag then
private showrooms of art for sale (trying to not use the words
"Museum" and "Gallery" because both seem to be ambivalent at this point)




-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlbBwaMACgkQ3EB7kzgMM6LQ9QCeLzsIsb5vMfTql0uOkjg9pdKY
Xw0An2VgHcwjKIItcZEfxPiKApCdFIC+
=t07s
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [Tagging] Galleries versus art shops

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 15일 02:03, Warin wrote:
>  To me a 'gallery' is a place that displays art .. not sells it. So

Have you followed the two threads of discussion at all before sending this?



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

Re: [Tagging] Galleries versus art shops

[Max]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2016년 02월 15일 00:55, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On 9 February 2016 at 02:39, Martin Koppenhoefer
>  wrote:
>> 
>> 2016-02-09 0:20 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen
>> :
>>> 
>>> What do you think, would it make sense to try to keep both
>>> shop=art and tourism=gallery?
> 
>> I'm for keeping both, but would prefer a less ambiguous tag for
>> the latter, e.g. amenity=contemporary_art_gallery
> 
> Currently, basically nobody uses tourism=gallery to tag art
> museums (even though the wiki specifies so), so I don't think there
> is a need to change the tag to something like
> tourism=contemporary_art_gallery.

I see two reasons why it would make sense:

1. the word gallery alone seems to cause so much confusion because of
its ambiguity.
2. if we depreciate tourism=gallery and introduce
amenity=contemporary_art_gallery it would make it clear which tag is
old and should be carefully reevaluated or is a new one following the
new scheme.

m.


ps: I don't like the tourism key for museum or gallery.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlbBG/EACgkQ3EB7kzgMM6I8GwCfZmjiSB4KdR3LjsCKFbeGxT/M
Lz0AnRcJDd3VKzE8Gim78HbgcOQCXaRy
=e8y+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 12일 23:24, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> I am dubious about tagging the artists that the gallery represents,
> since this is likely to change on a fairly frequent basis.  My
> impression is that most exhibitions are only for a period of a week or
> two, meaning that the tag information would frequently be out of date.

A gallery usually has contracts with an artist to allow going sales for
this artist through the gallery exclusively (sometimes with limitations
such as geographically). So a gallery has a list of artists which they
represent - it has nothing to do with what they currently have on display.




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

Re: [Tagging] Art galleries/museums

[Max]

On 2016년 01월 25일 23:44, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The wiki defines the tag tourism=gallery as 'an area or typically a
> building that displays a variety of visual art exhibitions' [1]. This
> is an officially approved tag [2]. In addition, the wiki page on
> tourism=museum [3] specifies that art galleries should be tagged as
> tourism=gallery, even if they have 'museum' in the name.

The issue is that according to the wiki museums and contemporary art
galleries are the same thing, yet they are very different things (the
main thing is that the objects are for sale (but it doesn't make it a
shop either!!)

Just look at the picture examples, where the first two are museums, the
last one is a gallery. It's plain wrong to have those in the same
category. If we find this OK we can also tag it with something=art
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dgallery#Photos

> However, practice shows that the tag tourism=gallery is not very
> frequently used. We have currently 54 951 instances of tourism=museum,
> versus only 1 505 instances of tourism=gallery. I had a look at some
> famous galleries: the MoMA in New York, the Uffizi in Florence, the
> National Gallery of Art in Washington DC, the Van Gogh Museum in
> Amsterdam, the Musée d'Orsay in Paris, and the Guggenheim Museum in
> Bilbao. It turned out that all of them are tagged as tourism=museum.

Rightly so. None of them are galleries.

> This might be partly caused by ignorant mappers, but perhaps there is
> also a more fundamental problem. The line between a gallery and a
> museum is not always easy to draw, especially in continental Europe,
> where many museums have both historic and artistic exhibitions
> (compare for instance the Louvre). Also the fact that many galleries
> are called 'museum' does not help.

I see it the opposite way. Many Art Museums call themselves Gallery. But
as I said before, that's a different meaning of the word. We are also
not tagging Galeries Lafayette or Galeria Kaufhof as tourism=gallery

> How should we continue from here? Should we try to improve the tagging
> situation? Or should we discourage tourism=gallery, making it a
> subtype of tourism=museum?

I'd say so.1. depreciate tourism=gallery for museums, make it a subtype
of tourism=museum.
For actual galleries introduce amenity=art_gallery






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

Re: [Tagging] Art galleries/museums

[Max]

On 2016년 01월 26일 15:53, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> On 26 January 2016 at 14:12, Marc Zoutendijk  wrote:
>>> I would like :
>>> - discourage tourism=gallery
>>> - subtype of tourism=museum, museum=art just like
>>> museum=railway/history, and further art=painting/...
>>> - also redirect towards shop=art for badly tagged items
>>>
>>
>> +1
>> This is a clear solution.
> 
> +1
> 
> 

Except we need a new tag for what is a "contemporary art gallery" or
short: gallery. because the current shop=art is not a gallery.

in the definition of shop=art it clearly says "The shop primarily sells
art products." Contemporary Art Galleries make their money by selling
art, but the typical visitor is not buying anything. It has a function
of display to increase awareness and knowledge about the artist (to
increase her/his value).

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dart



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


The Moma is a Museum.

By the current definition of the OSM wiki it should be tagged
tourism=gallery

Because this is confusing I support the move to remove tourism=gallery
entirely and make it museum.

For actual (contemporary) art galleries we should introduce
amenity=art_gallery or something similar.

max


On 2016년 02월 08일 23:54, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On 1 February 2016 at 20:56, Dave F 
> wrote:
>> Sorry, but a gallery is not a museum
> 
> I'm still a bit confused by this. Would you consider the MoMA a 
> gallery and/or a museum?
> 
> -- Matthijs
> 
> ___ Tagging mailing
> list Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAla5HooACgkQ3EB7kzgMM6JlGQCff3ZAN1zQgfn6c/0Q7cuNPwaU
ObYAoINI1JjZS4ARLNAfzOFefK0+/nBp
=pjBF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 03일 10:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I'd prefer amenity=museum, but I see that putting it under the tourism
> key is quite established so it would have to be discussed if a change
> would make sense (if it hurts less to do this change one and forever or
> if it is better to bear the little pain when putting tourism=museum as
> main tag on a museum).
> 
> I would be more explicit with the key names, to avoid situations like
> amenity=parking, parking=surface, surface=asphalt ;-)
> 
> amenity (or tourism)=museum
> museum_type (or museum_for or museum:topic or ...) = art / railway /
> history / war / mathematics / ...
> art_form = painting / photography / sculpture / prints / 
> art_genre = still_life / landscape / portrait / religious /  (if
> applicable, many collections will be more diverse, but some might be
> specialized)
> art_style = expressionism / futurism / impressionism / mannerism / ... 
> (if applicable)


So we are now at:
tourism=museum (nicer would be amenity, but for the sake of not changing
too much)
museum:topic= art / railway / history / war / mathematics / ...
art_form = painting / photography / sculpture / video / 
art_genre = still_life / landscape / portrait / religious /  (if
applicable, many collections will be more diverse, but some might be
specialized)
art_style = expressionism / futurism / impressionism / mannerism / ...


Additionally
amenity=contemporary_art_gallery

and
shop=art

That sounds good to me.
Maybe we should have a way to add the names of the artist this gallery
represents?

Are there any objections to this?

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 20:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> both, the two examples above, as the first two  examples on the link,
> clearly show that the word gallery has multiple meanings:
> 
>   * Many galleries display the art prints without prices - hoping to get
> more easily into an e-mail contact with their visitors.
>   * The new renaissance and baroque galleries at the Waiters Art Museum,
> Baltimore, include rooms that resemble those of a
> seventeenth-century Dutch nobleman.

I can understand where the confusion is coming from, but it is actually
not really hard to distinguish.

The art gallery is an important part of the art business. There is the
gallerist whose job it is to find promising artists to invest in. The
gallerist works with the artist to promote the artist and is selling the
artworks of the artist. Usually the gallerist has a contract with the
artist that grants the gallerist the right to represent this artist for
a country or continent.

For the layman it might be confusing that there are museums which also
call some of their rooms a gallery, or even the whole museum is called
gallery. This however is just because in this context gallery is used as
a synonym for exhibition space. Here it is more the architectural sense
of the word gallery, just like it can be used for things that are
balcony like.

If an artist says something like: "Next month I'll show my work in a
gallery in Paris" you can safely assume that the art gallery of the
first kind is what is referred to.

Sure, in a seruous gallery you will not find pricetags on the works. If
you do see them, that's a sign it might be just what is described as
shop=art in the wiki. Why? because the gallery will either have a
separate sheet of paper with the prices and the list of works, or the
gallerist prefers to negociate individually with the clients.

So your examples are not confusing at all. That there is no price tag,
is no indicator that it is a museum.
The second example is clearly using the word gallery in the
architectural or exhibition space sense, but that doesn't make it an art
gallery. It's a museum (which has some thematic rooms/exhibition spaces
a.k.a. "galleries").

Does it make sense?

Max




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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 04:16, Warin wrote:
> No. OSM amenity - important facilities.

LOL. you mean important facilities like
bar, bbq, biergarten, ice_cream, brothel, casino, cinema, gambling,
nightclub, stripclub, swingerclub, dojo, game_feeding,

> Tourism is the correct key in this instance, a place that provides 
> visual pleasure.

Hm. could probably be said about a stripclub too.
As an artist, I must say that when I go to a museum or gallery it is
mostly work.
For almost anyone I know it is too. I don't think many people of the
typical gallery visitors would agree with "tourism". Investment,
research, inspiration, socializing, networking, business, scouting would
all fit just as well - or better - as tourism does.

m.




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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 04:16, Warin wrote:
>> However, the English word "Gallery" doesn't seem to have this specific
>> meaning. Merriam-Webster includes "sculptures, etc"
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gallery
> 
> Picking nits;
> Merriam-Webster is American English.
> OSM policy is to use British English ... so the Oxford Dictionary should
> be used.

Right.

https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/gallery
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/museum

Gallery: A room or building for the display or sale of works of art: an
art gallery the National Gallery

Museum: A building in which objects of historical, scientific, artistic,
or cultural interest are stored and exhibited: [as name]: the Museum of
Modern Art

Also the British English is contradicting the use in OSM and the
definition in the OSM wiki where museum is non-art only and Gallery is a
Museum for art. That seems completely made up. Thanks Matthijs for
bringing this conversation up. Now how do we fix it?

M.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 01:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I think there is a need for sub tags in tourism=museum so that we can
> distinguish between a science, history, tech, or art museum.
> 
> actually if you call a gallery like the national gallery or the
> Gemäldegalerie in Berlin an "art museum", you are not wrong, but you
> loose one level of detail: a gallery as a kind of art museum only
> collects and exhibits paintings, while more generic art museums might
> collect anything related to art, like sculptures, video, paintings,
> prints, ...

I believe the German word "Galerie" is a short form for Gemäldegalerie
which is a place where paintings are on display.

However, the English word "Gallery" doesn't seem to have this specific
meaning. Mirriam-Webster includes "sculptures, etc"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gallery

> 2 problems with tourism=gallery: it is not clear, which kind of gallery
> is intended, and either way "tourism" is not a nice key for these
> (neither is it for museums).

What would be a proper way to tag this?


amenity=museum
museum=art


?





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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

I've edited it a bit:

An art museum is an institution which shows artworks so that the public
can see them. The artworks are usually by established artists. Shows are
developed with a concept by curators. Artworks are from the museums
collection or on loan from other museums, galleries or private
collectors. The business model of an museum is based on public funding,
donations and ticket sales. Exhibitions are permanent collections and
temporary special exhibitions which run for a couple of months.
Depending on the available space, permanent and temporary exhibitions
are often simultaneously on display (in different rooms or levels).

A gallery is showing art to the public. There is the possibility of
purchase, but it is only a tiny fraction of the audience which actually
is buying. The works are by artists the gallery represents. Shows are
designed by the artist (with help or in collaboration with the
gallerist). Am exhibition consists typically of new work by the artist
is usually on display for a couple of weeks only. The business model of
an art gallery is based on the sales from the art. A gallery usually
gets a cut of up to 50% of the price of the artwork and is doing the
dealings with the art collector.

An art shop is selling art(sy things). Visiting without buying is
possible, just as you may walk through a supermarket without buying
anything. The artworks are for sale may be more on the craft side
of the arts. They usually are of decorative nature and not of
considerable worth on the art market.
Artworks may end there as second hand goods. The
producers of these artworks may not even know their work is in the
shop. There is no special exhibition, concept or theme other than the
intent of selling the goods.


On 2016년 02월 01일 23:24, Colin Smale wrote:
> Thanks Max - that sounds clear and objective to me, and from an informed
> source.
> 
> Why don't we just copy this text to the wiki so (with a bit of luck)
> newly tagged museums/galleries/shops will follow this pattern. Then we
> can discuss the relative merits of a wholesale retagging of the "legacy"
> objects, or whether it is better to leave the existing tags in place.
> 
> //colin
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On 2016-02-01 23:10, Max wrote:
> 
>> No, that's not the difference.
>>
>> A museum is an institution which shows art works so that the public can
>> see them. The art works are usually by established artists. Shows are
>> curated thematically by curators.
>>
>> A gallery is showing art to the public. There is the possibility of
>> purchase, but it is only a tiny fraction of the audience which actually
>> is buying. The works are by artists the gallery represents. Shows are
>> designed by the artist (with help or in collaboration with the gallerist).
>>
>> An art shop is selling art(sy things). Visiting without buying is
>> possible, just as you may walk through a supermarket without buying
>> anything. The artworks are for sale are usually more on the craft side
>> of the arts. They are of decorative nature and not of considerable worth
>> on the art market. Art works may end there as second hand goods. The
>> producers of these art works may not even know their work is in the
>> shop. There is no special exhibition, concept or theme other than the
>> intent of selling the goods.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2016년 02월 01일 22:49, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>>> I always thought that an Art Gallery is a specific type of museum, i.e.
>>> an Art Museum. It can also mean a shop that exhibits and sells art.
>>> Hence tourism=gallery seems a good way indicate an Art Museum or Art
>>> Gallery, in line with tourism=museum. A shop that exhibits art with the
>>> main aim of selling it is clearly a shop=art.
>>>
>>> Volker
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 00:38, Max wrote:
> Browsing in the wiki I can see where all the confusion comes from.
> Basically the wiki is saying that anything showing art is a gallery,
> while the word museum is reserved for science and history.

Ironically the image in the wiki for tourism=museum shows the national
GALLERY. (which should be tagged museum, but the national gallery is
showing art which the wiki is not mentioning, only "exhibitions on
scientific, historical, cultural topics")
It's a mess.

> Obviously that's not the case and should be fixed.

I think there is a need for sub tags in tourism=museum so that we can
distinguish between a science, history, tech, or art museum.





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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

Browsing in the wiki I can see where all the confusion comes from.
Basically the wiki is saying that anything showing art is a gallery,
while the word museum is reserved for science and history.

Obviously that's not the case and should be fixed.


On 2016년 02월 01일 23:40, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On 1 February 2016 at 20:28, Matthijs Melissen  
> wrote:
>> I have created a proposal to discourage the tag tourism=gallery,
>> suggesting either shop=art or tourism=museum as an alternative.
>>
>> The proposal can be found here:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Discourage_tourism%3Dgallery
> 
> Note that this proposal is exactly the proposal althio formulated
> here: 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-January/028265.html
> In that thread it got a lot of support. Interesting how rapidly the
> hive-mind can change opinions...
> 
> -- Matthijs
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

I second this. Gallery, Museum and a shop that sells art are completely
different things.

"I had a look at some famous galleries: the MoMA in New York, the Uffizi
in Florence, the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC, the Van Gogh
Museum in Amsterdam, the Musée d'Orsay in Paris, and the Guggenheim
Museum in Bilbao."

Those are clearly museums, not galleries and they are correctly tagged
as museums. Sorry to say this, but that sentence clearly shows OP has
not understand what a gellery is. The wiki pages for tourism=gallery,
and shop=art do explain nicely what the difference is between those.

Source: I'm an art professor.
m.


On 2016년 02월 01일 20:56, Dave F wrote:
> Neither are really a direct alternative
> 
> Sorry, but a gallery is not a museum
> 
> Just because there are fewer 'gallery' than museum doesn't make it
> incorrect.
> 
> Just because galleries may be incorrectly tagged a 'museum' doesn't make
> them incorrect.
> 
> A shop selling art could be a sub tag of gallery (or maybe the other way
> around?)
> 
> I see no reason for discouraging tourism=galley.
> 
> Dave F.
> 
> 
> On 01/02/2016 19:28, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have created a proposal to discourage the tag tourism=gallery,
>> suggesting either shop=art or tourism=museum as an alternative.
>>
>> The proposal can be found here:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Discourage_tourism%3Dgallery
>>
>>
>> Please let me know what you think.
>>
>> -- Matthijs
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

On 2016년 02월 02일 00:03, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On 1 February 2016 at 22:17, Max  wrote:
>> Those are clearly museums, not galleries and they are correctly tagged
>> as museums. Sorry to say this, but that sentence clearly shows OP has
>> not understand what a gellery is. The wiki pages for tourism=gallery,
>> and shop=art do explain nicely what the difference is between those.
> 
> Thanks for your useful comments.
Sorry if it sounded harsh.

> I'm not sure if I fully understand your explanation. How would you
> categorize the following examples:
> 
> * http://www.mudam.lu/en/le-musee/la-collection/currently-at-mudam/
That's clearly a museum. On the page you see that the Museum has a
collection. The museum aquires works from artists for their collection.
Galleries don't do that. If museums do sell from their collection (this
happens one in a while) it is a major scandal.
You can also define it by their business model. They ask for donations.
Another indicator that it's a museum, galleries would not do this
either, because they live off the (usually 50%) fee of their sales.

> * http://www.whitewallgalleries.com/
That is a gallery. At least that's their self understanding. It is
selling crap IMHO, but let's not get into that. It seems quite
commercial, shop=art seems fair for this one as well.

> * 
> https://www.bcee.lu/en/Discover-BCEE/Discover-BCEE/The-'Am-Tunnel'-art-gallery
I would tag this as museum, not gallery. The word gallery is sometimes
used in a museum as a synonym for exhibition hall. In this case it is a
showroom for the aquisitions of a bank. It is not the intent of the
exhibition to resell these works. That said, showing the work usually
makes the work more valuable, so it is in the interest of the owner to
display the works (or lend them, sometimes permanently, to a museum).

> I'm not sure if I ever saw an art shop of the type you described. Do
> you have any example of these, perhaps a URL?

the picture in the wiki for shop=art is a good example.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

I know a few examples, but I don't think it's as common as art shops
disguising themselves as gallery (see the picture in the wiki for
shop=art, is is calling itself gallery but it clearly isn't)

An example for a gallery with the workd museum in it would be the DAM
Digital Art Museum in Berlin
http://dam.org/home

Feel free to use my definition in the wiki. Off course it is a whee
polemic and simplyfing, but as a guideline it does it's job i guess.


On 2016년 02월 01일 23:33, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> Note that the wiki currently states: 'Note that art galleries very
> often have the word "museum" in the name. Despite this, if they are
> primarily displaying art, they should probably take the tag
> tourism=gallery'.
> 
> It is not clear whether you (and the people agreeing with you) do or
> do not agree that this statement in the wiki is correct.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

[Max]

No, that's not the difference.

A museum is an institution which shows art works so that the public can
see them. The art works are usually by established artists. Shows are
curated thematically by curators.

A gallery is showing art to the public. There is the possibility of
purchase, but it is only a tiny fraction of the audience which actually
is buying. The works are by artists the gallery represents. Shows are
designed by the artist (with help or in collaboration with the gallerist).

An art shop is selling art(sy things). Visiting without buying is
possible, just as you may walk through a supermarket without buying
anything. The artworks are for sale are usually more on the craft side
of the arts. They are of decorative nature and not of considerable worth
on the art market. Art works may end there as second hand goods. The
producers of these art works may not even know their work is in the
shop. There is no special exhibition, concept or theme other than the
intent of selling the goods.




On 2016년 02월 01일 22:49, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> I always thought that an Art Gallery is a specific type of museum, i.e.
> an Art Museum. It can also mean a shop that exhibits and sells art.
> Hence tourism=gallery seems a good way indicate an Art Museum or Art
> Gallery, in line with tourism=museum. A shop that exhibits art with the
> main aim of selling it is clearly a shop=art.
> 
> Volker
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 


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

[Tagging] tank barrier

[Max]

how do you tag this barrier:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/2945111565

there are also types that are just pillars on the side of the road that
are loaded with explosives and fall on the street to block it.

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