Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Di., 24. März 2020 um 05:28 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:

> > ...the centre of Paris in a Nolliplan: http://www.iad
> bs.de/site/assets/files/1954/schwarzplan.jpg
>
> > All the areas where the streets widen significantly at junctions with
> other streets are likely squares (you can’t see the smaller ones in this
> scale). The surrounding buildings will often accentuate the square (raised
> corners, main facade to the square etc.)
>
> So is evey street intersecton in the Eixample part of Barcelona a
> place=square?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eixample
> "The Eixample is characterized by long straight streets, a strict grid
> pattern crossed by wide avenues, and square blocks with chamfered
> corners"



Yes, this could be one interpretation, and probably the intention of the
design, although they are so tiny compared to the street widths that you
could also say they are not. It's an edge case.

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Di., 24. März 2020 um 05:25 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:

> "Here’s an example of a square in Berlin in a residential early 20th
> century area:"
>
> Is this mapped as a leisure=park in Openstreetmap? If so, then I don't
> see any need to also map the same area as a square.
>



Yes, it is mapped as park: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24638848
But as I tried to explain, the park does not cover the same area as the
square. This area is considered a square, so I do see benefit in describing
it as such in OSM.




>
> > I would still count them in, or we will end up splitting hair about how
> much of a square must be paved in order to be a square.
>
> Why is this a problem? When mapping areas with some trees, a mapper
> must decide how much of the ground is covered by tree canopy to make
> it a woodland (natural=wood) instead of a grassland savana
> (natural=grassland) or pasture with a few trees (landuse=meadow).
>
> Mappers always have to make decisions on border cases, and usually the
> decision will come down to "what is most of the area covered with?"



ok, but for square it is not clear/agreed whether the cover/paving should
be a criterion or not. This is somehow different to e.g. forest, where
there is generally agreement that trees are required.
>From my point of view, what speaks in favor is the configuration
(hardscape, surrounded by buildings, "cut out space"), but the fact they
are inside the barracks and not open to the public could also count for
seeing them as a different "main" thing.

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> ...the centre of Paris in a Nolliplan: http://www.iad 
> bs.de/site/assets/files/1954/schwarzplan.jpg

> All the areas where the streets widen significantly at junctions with other 
> streets are likely squares (you can’t see the smaller ones in this scale). 
> The surrounding buildings will often accentuate the square (raised corners, 
> main facade to the square etc.)

So is evey street intersecton in the Eixample part of Barcelona a place=square?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eixample
"The Eixample is characterized by long straight streets, a strict grid
pattern crossed by wide avenues, and square blocks with chamfered
corners"

-- Joseph

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

"Here’s an example of a square in Berlin in a residential early 20th
century area:"

Is this mapped as a leisure=park in Openstreetmap? If so, then I don't
see any need to also map the same area as a square.

> I would still count them in, or we will end up splitting hair about how much 
> of a square must be paved in order to be a square.

Why is this a problem? When mapping areas with some trees, a mapper
must decide how much of the ground is covered by tree canopy to make
it a woodland (natural=wood) instead of a grassland savana
(natural=grassland) or pasture with a few trees (landuse=meadow).

Mappers always have to make decisions on border cases, and usually the
decision will come down to "what is most of the area covered with?"

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/24/20, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 23. Mar 2020, at 15:07, Joseph Eisenberg
>> In Indonesia an "alun-alun" is never small, they are always rather
>> large to very large open areas.
>
>
> so these are likely not the only kind of squares in Indonesia (if you decide
> they are squares at all, or some of them), there will probably also be
> smaller ones.
>
>
>>
>> Many are grassy fields with a few trees, planted north and south of an
>> old palace, or as a parade ground for the military back in the
>> colonial era, and these are mostly tagged as leisure=park, because
>> they are grass and trees now. These are mainly for recreation and for
>> looking nice.
>>
>> Some are now playing fields, like soccer pitches + volleyball /
>> basketball courts
>>
>> A few are still police/military parade grounds (not many), grass or
>> grass/dirt.
>>
>> But some have pavement (often pavers, sometimes bricks, concrete,
>> asphalt, stone etc) and are used for temporary markets, rallies,
>> public events, etc. - these seem similar to a European square.
>
>
> seems so by this description, although festival grounds would typically not
> fall in the square definition IMHO.
>
> I’m unsure about military parade grounds, but would tend to include them
> (thinking of central open areas used for mustering and surrounded by
> barracks)
>
>
>>
>> Should I map all of these as "place=square" since "square" =>
>> "alun-alun", even though many of these alun-alun could be a
>> leisure=park, leisure=garden, leisure=pitch instead?
>
>
> You should get rid of the either or idea, they can be both (or squares can
> contain areas which are gardens, parks, maybe pitches. Actually I would
> exclude dedicated sports grounds generally but there could be exceptions.
>
>
>>
>> "You would usually need to see the context in order to understand
>> whether these are just parks or parks on squares."
>>
>> So what about the context will tell me whether or not it is a
>> place=square?
>
>
> their position in the road network and the surrounding areas (is it inside a
> built up area?)
>
>
>> It can't be out in the countryside, can it?
>
>
> within a village or maybe even hamlet yes, in the open countryside usually
> no.
>
>
>> Or a parade
>> ground in a military base?
>
>
> maybe
>
>
>> A grass lawn in the middle of an apartment
>> complex?
>
>
> no
>
>
>> A patio in a park?
>
>
> I don’t understand this meaning of patio, can you post an example? A patio
> to me means an open space inside a block of buildings or within a building
> (inner courtyard)
>
>
>>
>> I think there should be a practical, physical definition of what is a
>> place=square. If it doesn't have to be hardscaped (whether paved or
>> just packed soil), should it at least lack tall vegetation which
>> blocks views and movement?
>
>
> It could have tall vegetation as a means of structuring it, or to separate
> it from surrounding streets, but this would usually be partial and allow
> passing.
>
>
>>
>> Perhaps a flat area with mostly short grass can still be a square, but
>> certainly not if it is mostly covered by trees, shrubs and flower
>> beds.
>
>
> Here’s an example of a square in Berlin in a residential early 20th century
> area:
>
>
> http://www.stern-berlin.com/assets/content/images/stadtquartiere/stadterneuerung/SG-Kollwitzplatz-Luftbild.jpg
>
> https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/0f/e5/cd/c8/photo1jpg.jpg
>
> https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Kollwitzplatz_(Berlin-Prenzlauer_Berg)
>
>
> It boasts all of the features you mention (scrubs, tall trees, etc.)
> From my understanding, the square polygon would share nodes with the
> surrounding buildings, while the park/garden is contained, but smaller (the
> square minus the outer sidewalk minus the street minus the inner sidewalk).
>
>
>> That's a park or garden, even if it is called "Plaza de Armas"
>> or "Old Village Square".
>>
>
>
> I agree that these cases could eventually be questioned, one could argue
> they have been squares before and are now parks. I would still count them
> in, or we will end up splitting hair about how much of a square must be
> paved in order to be a square.
>
> WRT pedestrian spaces, here’s the 

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 23. Mar 2020, at 15:07, Joseph Eisenberg
> In Indonesia an "alun-alun" is never small, they are always rather
> large to very large open areas.


so these are likely not the only kind of squares in Indonesia (if you decide 
they are squares at all, or some of them), there will probably also be smaller 
ones.


> 
> Many are grassy fields with a few trees, planted north and south of an
> old palace, or as a parade ground for the military back in the
> colonial era, and these are mostly tagged as leisure=park, because
> they are grass and trees now. These are mainly for recreation and for
> looking nice.
> 
> Some are now playing fields, like soccer pitches + volleyball /
> basketball courts
> 
> A few are still police/military parade grounds (not many), grass or 
> grass/dirt.
> 
> But some have pavement (often pavers, sometimes bricks, concrete,
> asphalt, stone etc) and are used for temporary markets, rallies,
> public events, etc. - these seem similar to a European square.


seems so by this description, although festival grounds would typically not 
fall in the square definition IMHO. 

I’m unsure about military parade grounds, but would tend to include them 
(thinking of central open areas used for mustering and surrounded by barracks)


> 
> Should I map all of these as "place=square" since "square" =>
> "alun-alun", even though many of these alun-alun could be a
> leisure=park, leisure=garden, leisure=pitch instead?


You should get rid of the either or idea, they can be both (or squares can 
contain areas which are gardens, parks, maybe pitches. Actually I would exclude 
dedicated sports grounds generally but there could be exceptions.


> 
> "You would usually need to see the context in order to understand
> whether these are just parks or parks on squares."
> 
> So what about the context will tell me whether or not it is a
> place=square?


their position in the road network and the surrounding areas (is it inside a 
built up area?)


> It can't be out in the countryside, can it?


within a village or maybe even hamlet yes, in the open countryside usually no.


> Or a parade
> ground in a military base?


maybe 


> A grass lawn in the middle of an apartment
> complex?


no


> A patio in a park?


I don’t understand this meaning of patio, can you post an example? A patio to 
me means an open space inside a block of buildings or within a building (inner 
courtyard)


> 
> I think there should be a practical, physical definition of what is a
> place=square. If it doesn't have to be hardscaped (whether paved or
> just packed soil), should it at least lack tall vegetation which
> blocks views and movement?


It could have tall vegetation as a means of structuring it, or to separate it 
from surrounding streets, but this would usually be partial and allow passing.


> 
> Perhaps a flat area with mostly short grass can still be a square, but
> certainly not if it is mostly covered by trees, shrubs and flower
> beds.


Here’s an example of a square in Berlin in a residential early 20th century 
area:


http://www.stern-berlin.com/assets/content/images/stadtquartiere/stadterneuerung/SG-Kollwitzplatz-Luftbild.jpg

https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/0f/e5/cd/c8/photo1jpg.jpg

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Kollwitzplatz_(Berlin-Prenzlauer_Berg)


It boasts all of the features you mention (scrubs, tall trees, etc.)
From my understanding, the square polygon would share nodes with the 
surrounding buildings, while the park/garden is contained, but smaller (the 
square minus the outer sidewalk minus the street minus the inner sidewalk).


> That's a park or garden, even if it is called "Plaza de Armas"
> or "Old Village Square".
> 


I agree that these cases could eventually be questioned, one could argue they 
have been squares before and are now parks. I would still count them in, or we 
will end up splitting hair about how much of a square must be paved in order to 
be a square.

WRT pedestrian spaces, here’s the centre of Paris in a Nolliplan: 
http://www.iad-bs.de/site/assets/files/1954/schwarzplan.jpg
All the areas where the streets widen significantly at junctions with other 
streets are likely squares (you can’t see the smaller ones in this scale). The 
surrounding buildings will often accentuate the square (raised corners, main 
facade to the square etc.)
Usually there will be a relationship of streets and squares.

Another type of squares are those in front of significant/important/monumental 
buildings (e.g. churches, public buildings like town halls, train stations, 
parliaments, castles, ...)

Cheers Martin 

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[António Madeira via Tagging]

Although in Portugal squares are very well defined, either from their
physical significance or from their name, this is surely not the case in
every country.
Maybe one of their main common characteristics is that they're open
urban areas, a point of confluence where people can gather for social or
cultural events.
I think it won't be possible to find a better common denominator and
that's why there should be good examples on the English wiki and on
other countries' wiki.


Às 06:42 de 23/03/2020, Martin Koppenhoefer escreveu:



Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 06:26 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg
mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>>:

"Praça ou largo: Praça, praceta ou largo: espaço numa zona urbana,
normalmente sem edifícios (apenas a volta desta), que constitui um
espaço público aberto"

This translates back to English as (approximately):
"Praça, praceta or largo: space in an urban area, usually without
buildings (except for around it), which constitutes a public open
space"



sounds reasonable (apart that there may be buildings on a square, is
not untypical)


 I'll update this to the new definition from the English page.




Which you keep reverting to your interpretation of square. It
currently reads "A town or village square: a hardscaped open public
space, generally of architectural significance, which is surrounded by
buildings in a built-up area such as a city, town or village."


While I do not object that this is describing a part of all squares, I
do object that these are criteria which are suitable to exclude
objects. For example  "surrounded by buildings" is a typical
situation, but is not a strict requirement. A public square surrounded
by walls would be equally ok, for instance. A square which is not
paved would be ok as well (not usual in many parts of the world, but
quite common in others, where road paving is generally rare). Let me
post some more examples of squares here:


Example for a famous square with buildings on it (Krakov):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.06164/19.93764

Example for a square that is not mainly hardscaped (although in a
developed country), Strausberger Platz in Berlin (socialist urbanism)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.51865/13.42866

Two adjacent squares, with significant parts not hardscaped: Platz vor
dem Neuen Tor, and Robert-Koch-Platz in Berlin
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.52851/13.37865

Another example for a socialist square, mostly open / flowing space,
center is a traffic junction: Platz der Vereinten Nationen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.52328/13.42999

Square that is not surrounded / delimited by buildings (but by walls):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24534437

Another example for a square that is not at all delimited by buildings:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2743565

Example for a minor square without a lot of "architectural
significance" (well, this may depend on your definition of
significance, significant compared to what? One could also say thisi
is significant, as it clearly stands out as open space from the road
grid): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125988144


I've also created an Indonesian page, which gives a couple examples of
"alun-alun" in Indonesia which fit the definition:

1)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Alun-alun_Garut.jpg/400px-Alun-alun_Garut.jpg

2)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg/400px-Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg

But there are many other alun-alun that are grassy urban parks,
not squares:

A)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zpwpVxKz0q0/UXoUmFzUAXI/BpI/brIHP9_dQQY/s400/images.jpg

B)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alun-alun_Tugu_-_Bunder_-_panoramio.jpg

C)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Square_Trenggalek_-_Alun-Alun_Trenggalek_-_panoramio_(10).jpg



From photos it is hard to judge these, because you would usually need
to see the context in order to understand whether these are just parks
or parks on squares. I also notice that these are all huge. Try to
think of small squares as well, e.g. places like this:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/83/41/da/8341dab9b3f5b929cc136f06b01bb3cb.jpg
http://www.italymoviewalks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/fontana-delle-tartarughe-roma-movie-walks.jpg

Cheers
Martin


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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Volker Schmidt]

Please leave the description vague. Every one of us will be able to come up
with a list of "squares" that don't fulfil the criteria we will define.
They often have the role of landmarks for the population, long after the
original square (as empty space for the people) has disappeared.

Or maybe a completely different approach could bring all the different
meanings into one framework:
place=square
plus
suare:type=

The square type values could handle all the regional variants, including
using the local type names.




Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Mon, 23 Mar 2020, 10:46 Martin Koppenhoefer, 
wrote:

>
>
> Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 09:56 Uhr schrieb Lionel Giard <
> lionel.gi...@gmail.com>:
>
>> My only problem with "fixing unnamed place=square" is that i know at
>> least 2 locations where the village center open area is definitely a
>> place=square (i.e. an open area with some car parks, and open just in front
>> of the church that was historically the place for gathering people but also
>> cattle (and now used for people, cars, market, village gathering,...)) *but
>> they have no name, it is just an open area.*
>>
>
>
> indeed, while names are very common, they should not necessarily be a hard
> requirement, if everyone agrees that the area in question is indeed a
> square / place. Btw., place=locality without a name doesn't make more sense
> than place=square, but less.
>
> 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] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> reads "A town or village square: a hardscaped open public space, generally
> of architectural significance, which is surrounded by buildings in a
> built-up area such as a city, town or village."
>
> While I do not object that this is describing a part of all squares, I do
> object that these are criteria which are suitable to exclude objects. For
> example  "surrounded by buildings" is a typical situation, but is not a
> strict requirement. A public square surrounded by walls would be equally
> ok, for instance. A square which is not paved would be ok as well (not
> usual in many parts of the world, but quite common in others, where road
> paving is generally rare). Let me post some more examples of squares here:
> ...

> [Indonesian alun-alun]
> From photos it is hard to judge these, because you would usually need to
> see the context in order to understand whether these are just parks or
> parks on squares.

In Indonesia an "alun-alun" is never small, they are always rather
large to very large open areas.

Many are grassy fields with a few trees, planted north and south of an
old palace, or as a parade ground for the military back in the
colonial era, and these are mostly tagged as leisure=park, because
they are grass and trees now. These are mainly for recreation and for
looking nice.

Some are now playing fields, like soccer pitches + volleyball /
basketball courts

A few are still police/military parade grounds (not many), grass or grass/dirt.

But some have pavement (often pavers, sometimes bricks, concrete,
asphalt, stone etc) and are used for temporary markets, rallies,
public events, etc. - these seem similar to a European square.

Should I map all of these as "place=square" since "square" =>
"alun-alun", even though many of these alun-alun could be a
leisure=park, leisure=garden, leisure=pitch instead?

"You would usually need to see the context in order to understand
whether these are just parks or parks on squares."

So what about the context will tell me whether or not it is a
place=square? It can't be out in the countryside, can it? Or a parade
ground in a military base? A grass lawn in the middle of an apartment
complex? A patio in a park?

I think there should be a practical, physical definition of what is a
place=square. If it doesn't have to be hardscaped (whether paved or
just packed soil), should it at least lack tall vegetation which
blocks views and movement?

Perhaps a flat area with mostly short grass can still be a square, but
certainly not if it is mostly covered by trees, shrubs and flower
beds. That's a park or garden, even if it is called "Plaza de Armas"
or "Old Village Square".

-- Joseph Eisenberg

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 at 09:44, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> From photos it is hard to judge these, because you would usually need to
> see the context in order to understand whether these are just parks or
> parks on squares. I also notice that these are all huge. Try to think of
> small squares as well
>

Or this?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08014=-4.66030#map=19/52.08014/-4.66030

Sorry for the Google image: https://goo.gl/maps/rh1ha5yjhjoV25Re7

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 09:56 Uhr schrieb Lionel Giard <
lionel.gi...@gmail.com>:

> My only problem with "fixing unnamed place=square" is that i know at least
> 2 locations where the village center open area is definitely a place=square
> (i.e. an open area with some car parks, and open just in front of the
> church that was historically the place for gathering people but also cattle
> (and now used for people, cars, market, village gathering,...)) *but they
> have no name, it is just an open area.*
>


indeed, while names are very common, they should not necessarily be a hard
requirement, if everyone agrees that the area in question is indeed a
square / place. Btw., place=locality without a name doesn't make more sense
than place=square, but less.

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 23. März 2020 um 06:26 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:

> "Praça ou largo: Praça, praceta ou largo: espaço numa zona urbana,
> normalmente sem edifícios (apenas a volta desta), que constitui um
> espaço público aberto"
>
> This translates back to English as (approximately):
> "Praça, praceta or largo: space in an urban area, usually without
> buildings (except for around it), which constitutes a public open
> space"
>


sounds reasonable (apart that there may be buildings on a square, is not
untypical)


 I'll update this to the new definition from the English page.
>



Which you keep reverting to your interpretation of square. It currently
reads "A town or village square: a hardscaped open public space, generally
of architectural significance, which is surrounded by buildings in a
built-up area such as a city, town or village."


While I do not object that this is describing a part of all squares, I do
object that these are criteria which are suitable to exclude objects. For
example  "surrounded by buildings" is a typical situation, but is not a
strict requirement. A public square surrounded by walls would be equally
ok, for instance. A square which is not paved would be ok as well (not
usual in many parts of the world, but quite common in others, where road
paving is generally rare). Let me post some more examples of squares here:


Example for a famous square with buildings on it (Krakov):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.06164/19.93764

Example for a square that is not mainly hardscaped (although in a developed
country), Strausberger Platz in Berlin (socialist urbanism)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.51865/13.42866

Two adjacent squares, with significant parts not hardscaped: Platz vor dem
Neuen Tor, and Robert-Koch-Platz in Berlin
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.52851/13.37865

Another example for a socialist square, mostly open / flowing space, center
is a traffic junction: Platz der Vereinten Nationen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.52328/13.42999

Square that is not surrounded / delimited by buildings (but by walls):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24534437

Another example for a square that is not at all delimited by buildings:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2743565

Example for a minor square without a lot of "architectural significance"
(well, this may depend on your definition of significance, significant
compared to what? One could also say thisi is significant, as it clearly
stands out as open space from the road grid):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125988144




> I've also created an Indonesian page, which gives a couple examples of
> "alun-alun" in Indonesia which fit the definition:
>
> 1)
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Alun-alun_Garut.jpg/400px-Alun-alun_Garut.jpg
>
> 2)
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg/400px-Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg
>
> But there are many other alun-alun that are grassy urban parks, not
> squares:
>
> A)
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zpwpVxKz0q0/UXoUmFzUAXI/BpI/brIHP9_dQQY/s400/images.jpg
>
> B)
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alun-alun_Tugu_-_Bunder_-_panoramio.jpg
>
> C)
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Square_Trenggalek_-_Alun-Alun_Trenggalek_-_panoramio_(10).jpg
>
>

>From photos it is hard to judge these, because you would usually need to
see the context in order to understand whether these are just parks or
parks on squares. I also notice that these are all huge. Try to think of
small squares as well, e.g. places like this:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/83/41/da/8341dab9b3f5b929cc136f06b01bb3cb.jpg
http://www.italymoviewalks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/fontana-delle-tartarughe-roma-movie-walks.jpg

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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Lionel Giard]

My only problem with "fixing unnamed place=square" is that i know at least
2 locations where the village center open area is definitely a place=square
(i.e. an open area with some car parks, and open just in front of the
church that was historically the place for gathering people but also cattle
(and now used for people, cars, market, village gathering,...)) *but they
have no name, it is just an open area.* We just refer it to the "Place"
(literally "Square" in french), and sometimes we say "Place du village"
(Village square). Do you think that adding the name = "Place" is preferable
? It might be what we want even if it is not official ? Or would you map it
otherwise, maybe place=locality (but it seems wierd to me) ? :-)

Regards,
Lionel

Le lun. 23 mars 2020 à 06:26, Joseph Eisenberg 
a écrit :

> > the keywords from the preset translation
>
> Yes, thank you. (Sorry, I use a satellite internet connection, so iD
> doesn't work too well for me):
>
> "Praça ou largo: Praça, praceta ou largo: espaço numa zona urbana,
> normalmente sem edifícios (apenas a volta desta), que constitui um
> espaço público aberto"
>
> This translates back to English as (approximately):
> "Praça, praceta or largo: space in an urban area, usually without
> buildings (except for around it), which constitutes a public open
> space"
>
> This definition is taken from the Data Item
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q6077 - where it is by far
> the most complete definition.
>
> Most of the others are just "A named square" translated into the local
> language:
>
> Una plaza con nombre.
> Une place nommée.
> Piazza.
> Pojmenované náměstí
> Ein öffentlicher Platz
>
> I'll update this to the new definition from the English page.
>
> I've also created an Indonesian page, which gives a couple examples of
> "alun-alun" in Indonesia which fit the definition:
>
> 1)
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Alun-alun_Garut.jpg/400px-Alun-alun_Garut.jpg
>
> 2)
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg/400px-Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg
>
> But there are many other alun-alun that are grassy urban parks, not
> squares:
>
> A)
> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zpwpVxKz0q0/UXoUmFzUAXI/BpI/brIHP9_dQQY/s400/images.jpg
>
> B)
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alun-alun_Tugu_-_Bunder_-_panoramio.jpg
>
> C)
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Square_Trenggalek_-_Alun-Alun_Trenggalek_-_panoramio_(10).jpg
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> > When you say description, are you referring to the definition from the
> > wiki, or the keywords from the preset translation?
> > This?
> > https://i.imgur.com/Id8xOaJ.png
> >
> > Or this?
> > https://i.imgur.com/tXXb0Yr.png
> >
> >
> > Às 22:25 de 22/03/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:
> >> So in iD does it just show "uma praça" as the description for
> >> place=square?
> >>
> >> -- Joseph Eisenberg
> >>
> >> On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> >>> In Portuguese it's "Praça", similar to Piazza, which comes from the
> >>> Latin "platea".
> >>> Depending on its size and location, it can be named officially as
> >>> "Praça", "Largo"or "Praceta".
> >>>
> >>> The English description of place=square in iD is empty.
> >>>
> >>> https://i.imgur.com/AIqEuuC.png
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Às 21:41 de 22/03/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:
>  Curious: what is the translation used in Portuguese?
> 
>  Do you also know the English description of place=square used in iD?
> 
>  On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> > I agree that the place=square needs some kind of polishing, specially
> > regarding name tag, which should be mandatory.
> > In Portugal, the definition of square can have three meanings,
> > depending
> > on its size and region, but it's easy to map them because they all
> > have
> > name.
> >
> > The problem with iD can be its translation/localization. The
> > Portuguese
> > community had to discuss what was the best translation so that
> newbies
> > could get it right more often via iD.
> > Maybe this must be done also in Germany.
> >
> >
> > Às 10:46 de 22/03/2020, Tom Pfeifer escreveu:
> >> Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for
> >> _unnamed_ objects.
> >> As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is
> >> known by a particular name,
> >> a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.
> >>
> >> (As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)
> >>
> >> In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:
> >>
> >> 1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant
> >> paved
> >> surfaces, like a round piece of footway in a park, the service yard
> >> of
> >> a fire station, or similar.
> >>
> >> 2. they were all added 

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> the keywords from the preset translation

Yes, thank you. (Sorry, I use a satellite internet connection, so iD
doesn't work too well for me):

"Praça ou largo: Praça, praceta ou largo: espaço numa zona urbana,
normalmente sem edifícios (apenas a volta desta), que constitui um
espaço público aberto"

This translates back to English as (approximately):
"Praça, praceta or largo: space in an urban area, usually without
buildings (except for around it), which constitutes a public open
space"

This definition is taken from the Data Item
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q6077 - where it is by far
the most complete definition.

Most of the others are just "A named square" translated into the local language:

Una plaza con nombre.
Une place nommée.
Piazza.
Pojmenované náměstí
Ein öffentlicher Platz

I'll update this to the new definition from the English page.

I've also created an Indonesian page, which gives a couple examples of
"alun-alun" in Indonesia which fit the definition:

1) 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Alun-alun_Garut.jpg/400px-Alun-alun_Garut.jpg

2) 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg/400px-Alun_-_Alun_Bandung_Masjid_Raya_Bandung.jpg

But there are many other alun-alun that are grassy urban parks, not squares:

A) 
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zpwpVxKz0q0/UXoUmFzUAXI/BpI/brIHP9_dQQY/s400/images.jpg

B) 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alun-alun_Tugu_-_Bunder_-_panoramio.jpg

C) 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Square_Trenggalek_-_Alun-Alun_Trenggalek_-_panoramio_(10).jpg

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> When you say description, are you referring to the definition from the
> wiki, or the keywords from the preset translation?
> This?
> https://i.imgur.com/Id8xOaJ.png
>
> Or this?
> https://i.imgur.com/tXXb0Yr.png
>
>
> Às 22:25 de 22/03/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:
>> So in iD does it just show "uma praça" as the description for
>> place=square?
>>
>> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>>
>> On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
>>> In Portuguese it's "Praça", similar to Piazza, which comes from the
>>> Latin "platea".
>>> Depending on its size and location, it can be named officially as
>>> "Praça", "Largo"or "Praceta".
>>>
>>> The English description of place=square in iD is empty.
>>>
>>> https://i.imgur.com/AIqEuuC.png
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Às 21:41 de 22/03/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:
 Curious: what is the translation used in Portuguese?

 Do you also know the English description of place=square used in iD?

 On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> I agree that the place=square needs some kind of polishing, specially
> regarding name tag, which should be mandatory.
> In Portugal, the definition of square can have three meanings,
> depending
> on its size and region, but it's easy to map them because they all
> have
> name.
>
> The problem with iD can be its translation/localization. The
> Portuguese
> community had to discuss what was the best translation so that newbies
> could get it right more often via iD.
> Maybe this must be done also in Germany.
>
>
> Às 10:46 de 22/03/2020, Tom Pfeifer escreveu:
>> Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for
>> _unnamed_ objects.
>> As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is
>> known by a particular name,
>> a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.
>>
>> (As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)
>>
>> In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:
>>
>> 1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant
>> paved
>> surfaces, like a round piece of footway in a park, the service yard
>> of
>> a fire station, or similar.
>>
>> 2. they were all added by the iD editor, typically since 2018.
>>
>> Thus my assumption is that place=square is suggested in an iD preset
>> to unsuitable features.
>> Could somebody with sufficient iD insight check what that preset
>> suggests, and why it does not ask for names?
>>
>> Further I recommend that everybody checks their area for place=square
>> _without a name_, evaluate what it is and adjust the tagging. This
>> can
>> not (!) be done mechanically, besides the issues with mechanical
>> edits, because the correct tagging will differ (e.g. highway=service
>> +
>> area=yes; or highway=footway + area=yes), or the tag was correct
>> indeed and the name has been forgotten.
>>
>> Query for unnamed square in a bounding box:
>> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ROw
>>
>> I also suggest to update wiki descriptions of place=* tags, upgrading
>> the "name=*" from "useful combination" to "required", and add that to
>> validators.
>>
>> tom
>>

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[António Madeira]

In Portuguese it's "Praça", similar to Piazza, which comes from the
Latin "platea".
Depending on its size and location, it can be named officially as
"Praça", "Largo"or "Praceta".

The English description of place=square in iD is empty.

https://i.imgur.com/AIqEuuC.png



Às 21:41 de 22/03/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:

Curious: what is the translation used in Portuguese?

Do you also know the English description of place=square used in iD?

On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:

I agree that the place=square needs some kind of polishing, specially
regarding name tag, which should be mandatory.
In Portugal, the definition of square can have three meanings, depending
on its size and region, but it's easy to map them because they all have
name.

The problem with iD can be its translation/localization. The Portuguese
community had to discuss what was the best translation so that newbies
could get it right more often via iD.
Maybe this must be done also in Germany.


Às 10:46 de 22/03/2020, Tom Pfeifer escreveu:

Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for
_unnamed_ objects.
As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is
known by a particular name,
a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.

(As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)

In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:

1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant paved
surfaces, like a round piece of footway in a park, the service yard of
a fire station, or similar.

2. they were all added by the iD editor, typically since 2018.

Thus my assumption is that place=square is suggested in an iD preset
to unsuitable features.
Could somebody with sufficient iD insight check what that preset
suggests, and why it does not ask for names?

Further I recommend that everybody checks their area for place=square
_without a name_, evaluate what it is and adjust the tagging. This can
not (!) be done mechanically, besides the issues with mechanical
edits, because the correct tagging will differ (e.g. highway=service +
area=yes; or highway=footway + area=yes), or the tag was correct
indeed and the name has been forgotten.

Query for unnamed square in a bounding box:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ROw

I also suggest to update wiki descriptions of place=* tags, upgrading
the "name=*" from "useful combination" to "required", and add that to
validators.

tom

On 21.03.2020 01:32, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

A few of us have been updating the Tag:place=square page, and Square:
Unfortunately, this tag has been used rather inconsistently around the
world, often for any feature that includes the word "square" or a
translation of that word, or which might be considered similar in the
local language.

Some poorly mapped examples are shown on github:

*https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593045858

*
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046473
*
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046673

Check if any of the place=square features in your area should instead
be junction=yes (for a named street intersection or road junction) or
leisure=park or place=neighborhood.

___
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



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

Re: [Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Curious: what is the translation used in Portuguese?

Do you also know the English description of place=square used in iD?

On 3/23/20, António Madeira  wrote:
> I agree that the place=square needs some kind of polishing, specially
> regarding name tag, which should be mandatory.
> In Portugal, the definition of square can have three meanings, depending
> on its size and region, but it's easy to map them because they all have
> name.
>
> The problem with iD can be its translation/localization. The Portuguese
> community had to discuss what was the best translation so that newbies
> could get it right more often via iD.
> Maybe this must be done also in Germany.
>
>
> Às 10:46 de 22/03/2020, Tom Pfeifer escreveu:
>> Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for
>> _unnamed_ objects.
>> As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is
>> known by a particular name,
>> a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.
>>
>> (As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)
>>
>> In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:
>>
>> 1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant paved
>> surfaces, like a round piece of footway in a park, the service yard of
>> a fire station, or similar.
>>
>> 2. they were all added by the iD editor, typically since 2018.
>>
>> Thus my assumption is that place=square is suggested in an iD preset
>> to unsuitable features.
>> Could somebody with sufficient iD insight check what that preset
>> suggests, and why it does not ask for names?
>>
>> Further I recommend that everybody checks their area for place=square
>> _without a name_, evaluate what it is and adjust the tagging. This can
>> not (!) be done mechanically, besides the issues with mechanical
>> edits, because the correct tagging will differ (e.g. highway=service +
>> area=yes; or highway=footway + area=yes), or the tag was correct
>> indeed and the name has been forgotten.
>>
>> Query for unnamed square in a bounding box:
>> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ROw
>>
>> I also suggest to update wiki descriptions of place=* tags, upgrading
>> the "name=*" from "useful combination" to "required", and add that to
>> validators.
>>
>> tom
>>
>> On 21.03.2020 01:32, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>> A few of us have been updating the Tag:place=square page, and Square:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, this tag has been used rather inconsistently around the
>>> world, often for any feature that includes the word "square" or a
>>> translation of that word, or which might be considered similar in the
>>> local language.
>>>
>>> Some poorly mapped examples are shown on github:
>>>
>>> *https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593045858
>>>
>>> *
>>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046473
>>> *
>>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046673
>>>
>>> Check if any of the place=square features in your area should instead
>>> be junction=yes (for a named street intersection or road junction) or
>>> leisure=park or place=neighborhood.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[António Madeira]

I agree that the place=square needs some kind of polishing, specially
regarding name tag, which should be mandatory.
In Portugal, the definition of square can have three meanings, depending
on its size and region, but it's easy to map them because they all have
name.

The problem with iD can be its translation/localization. The Portuguese
community had to discuss what was the best translation so that newbies
could get it right more often via iD.
Maybe this must be done also in Germany.


Às 10:46 de 22/03/2020, Tom Pfeifer escreveu:

Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for
_unnamed_ objects.
As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is
known by a particular name,
a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.

(As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)

In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:

1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant paved
surfaces, like a round piece of footway in a park, the service yard of
a fire station, or similar.

2. they were all added by the iD editor, typically since 2018.

Thus my assumption is that place=square is suggested in an iD preset
to unsuitable features.
Could somebody with sufficient iD insight check what that preset
suggests, and why it does not ask for names?

Further I recommend that everybody checks their area for place=square
_without a name_, evaluate what it is and adjust the tagging. This can
not (!) be done mechanically, besides the issues with mechanical
edits, because the correct tagging will differ (e.g. highway=service +
area=yes; or highway=footway + area=yes), or the tag was correct
indeed and the name has been forgotten.

Query for unnamed square in a bounding box:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ROw

I also suggest to update wiki descriptions of place=* tags, upgrading
the "name=*" from "useful combination" to "required", and add that to
validators.

tom

On 21.03.2020 01:32, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

A few of us have been updating the Tag:place=square page, and Square:



Unfortunately, this tag has been used rather inconsistently around the
world, often for any feature that includes the word "square" or a
translation of that word, or which might be considered similar in the
local language.

Some poorly mapped examples are shown on github:

*https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593045858

*
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046473
*
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046673

Check if any of the place=square features in your area should instead
be junction=yes (for a named street intersection or road junction) or
leisure=park or place=neighborhood.


___
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] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

[Tom Pfeifer]

Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for _unnamed_ 
objects.
As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is known by a 
particular name,
a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong.

(As the world is not black and white, there might be exceptions.)

In Germany alone I found >600 such taggings, and all I probed were:

1. not squares as in the definition, but small and insignificant paved surfaces, like a round piece 
of footway in a park, the service yard of a fire station, or similar.


2. they were all added by the iD editor, typically since 2018.

Thus my assumption is that place=square is suggested in an iD preset to 
unsuitable features.
Could somebody with sufficient iD insight check what that preset suggests, and why it does not ask 
for names?


Further I recommend that everybody checks their area for place=square _without a name_, evaluate 
what it is and adjust the tagging. This can not (!) be done mechanically, besides the issues with 
mechanical edits, because the correct tagging will differ (e.g. highway=service + area=yes; or 
highway=footway + area=yes), or the tag was correct indeed and the name has been forgotten.


Query for unnamed square in a bounding box: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ROw

I also suggest to update wiki descriptions of place=* tags, upgrading the "name=*" from "useful 
combination" to "required", and add that to validators.


tom

On 21.03.2020 01:32, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

A few of us have been updating the Tag:place=square page, and Square:



Unfortunately, this tag has been used rather inconsistently around the
world, often for any feature that includes the word "square" or a
translation of that word, or which might be considered similar in the
local language.

Some poorly mapped examples are shown on github:

*https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593045858
* 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046473
* 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046673

Check if any of the place=square features in your area should instead
be junction=yes (for a named street intersection or road junction) or
leisure=park or place=neighborhood.


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