Thank you all for the discussion around changing the tag man_made.
After careful consideration I have decided to abandon this proposal -
mostly because the fact that the man_made tag is clearly a hodgepodge of
tags that probably should be redefined as separate items.
Thanks for all your input,
All of these would be acceptable to me - Preference from highest to lowest:
amenity=deceased_viewing
amenity=viewing_arrangements
amenity=place_of_mourning
amenity=mourning_room
amenity=mourning
Rob
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 19:45, wrote:
> Thanks for all the interventions.
>
> To avoid that the
I like the new options.
In Australia it would be beneficial to note which addresses don't have
power, rather than those that do so this would work well.
For remote communities in Australia, the off grid option would be good.
Many homes also have solar panels connected and this would be great
I'm not sure what you're referring to but I'll put some options here to
discuss:
Fire districts: used for declaring total for bans in Australia
https://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/warnings-restrictions/find-your-fire-district
Neighbourhood safer places in Victoria - where you can go as a last resort
in
I'll do some more research before the vote goes ahead. I've read quite a
bit of research around gendered language since first mentioning this idea.
I'll be sure to list them in the proposal but feel free to send through any
sources that are both for and against the arguments I have raised. I'm
Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where the first hour is free.
There is some more information available here:
https://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/city/parking/smarter-parking-ballarat#:~:text=Your%20first%20hour%20of%20parking,the%20Central%20Square%20car%20park%20
.
Regards, Rob
On
'her generic man' has been fixed - it was a typo.
now reads:
"confirmed that when people read or hear the generic version of 'man',
people form mental pictures of males"
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
*Link to proposal page:*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/artificial
*Definition*: A tag for identifying human-made (artificial) structures
added to the landscape.
Please discuss this proposal on the discussion page for the proposal.
Kind Regards,
Robert Delmenico
rtbk
Nope, not trolling -
I have a genuine interest in what the OSM community thinks about the
proposal.
I for one though do think there is a bias - and I am entitled to hold that
view. There are others that support my view so therefore it exists.
A proposal will still be put forward as planned.
But you could count the bridge=yes (areas) for number of bridges, and
bridge=yes (ways) for number of bridges with roads crossing them.
Rob
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 5:52 pm Andrew Harvey,
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 5:34 pm Robert Delmenico, wrote:
>
>> They mean the
How they differ has already been
> mentioned 2 or 3 times in this thread.
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 06:59 Robert Delmenico wrote:
>
>> Essentially though, they mean the same thing:
>> man_made=bridge is for areas
>> bridge=yes is for ways
>>
>> Both refer to t
=bridge is the same as bridge=yes
>
> Are you aware that we have bridge=yes
> and man_made=bridge used with a
> different meaning?
>
>
> Perhaps all of the existing man_made=[value] tags should be changed to
> [value]=yes
>
>
> Rob
>
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 9:4
machine-made,
>> and constructed" as options instead of man-made.
>
>
> Out of those options, I personally think either "MANufactured" :-), or
> "constructed" would be good choices.
>
> Of course, as mentioned, what do we do with beaver dams & wasp
I like that!
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 9:59 am Walker Bradley,
wrote:
> I certainly support Rob’s view on *=yes
>
> Or if we want something similar to man_made=*, we have natural= we could
> also have unnatural=
>
> On Oct 19, 2020, at 22:55, Robert Delmenico wrote:
>
Perhaps the use of man_made could be dropped all together as it is somewhat
superfluous.
Ie. man_made=bridge is the same as bridge=yes
Perhaps all of the existing man_made=[value] tags should be changed to
[value]=yes
Rob
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 9:46 am Robert Delmenico, wrote:
> Please r
in another email, we do use terms such as midwife.'
Midwife actually translates as 'with woman'. The wife part relates to the
person giving birth.
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 8:44 am Niels Elgaard Larsen, wrote:
> Robert Delmenico:
> >
> > I originally put the call out really to gauge i
Robert Delmenico, wrote:
>
> I originally put the call out really to gauge if there was much interest
> in changing the term man_made because of its use of 'man', and was
> interested in hearing the thoughts from other mappers as really this
> proposal isn't just mine. If there was no i
I originally put the call out really to gauge if there was much interest in
changing the term man_made because of its use of 'man', and was interested
in hearing the thoughts from other mappers as really this proposal isn't
just mine. If there was no interest I would just abandon it and move on -
Nice investigating Nathan,
I would be open to using artificial instead of human_made.
Would it be best to change the proposal or start a second proposal?
Change man_made= to artificial=
Rob
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 21:14, nathan case wrote:
> Pros and cons aside, “human-made” is not a term
Some great points here. Good to hear the points of views of all of you.
Look forward to hearing more feedback.
Kind regards,
Rob
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020, 9:19 am Graeme Fitzpatrick,
wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone - all makes sense!
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
> ___
>
m a phone
>
> > On 15. Oct 2020, at 02:57, Robert Delmenico wrote:
> >
> > I also understand that generally speaking the use of man_made is
> commonly accepted as a gender neutral term, but in reality it has been
> adapted that way due to past practices of gender bias.
&g
term, but in reality it has been
adapted that way due to past practices of gender bias.
Regardless of the outcome of this proposal, this is a worthy discussion to
be had in my mind.
Looking forward to your feedback
Yours,
Robert Delmenico
rtbk
22 matches
Mail list logo
