Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> Not sure what the British English equivalent would be to central office.
>

Telephone Exchange.

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

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Clifford Snow]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 3:50 AM Simon Poole  wrote:

>
> Wasn't there just a longish discussion about this, and that its origin
> goes back to marketing language used by Bell?-


 As a former Bell System employee I can tell you we used the term central
office to describe buildings that contained a main frame (MDF), a cable
(local loop) entrance, a telephone switch and usually some sort of
emergency power. It wasn't so much as a marketing term but an engineering
term to describe the buildings function. For example other buildings might
be a repeater station or main station. Early telephone central office did
have windows. Sometime during the 60s and 70s buildings were built without
windows, and some even bricked over, especially on the ground level. I left
just as the VOIP was being introduced so I'm not sure how many switches
still exist. But my sense is there are still many in operation. With the
smaller size of equipment, the telephone exchange may still exist, but they
now rent out space.

There are enough central offices left that I would keep the tag until the
buildings are repurposed. I know of one in Seattle that is now an apartment
building on the upper floors and a glass blowing studio on the ground level
floor.

Not sure what the British English equivalent would be to central office.


@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 16. Sep 2018, at 13:57, François Lacombe  wrote:
> 
> Building=central_office is less consistent
> Building=service is more suitable


for me, both would be ok, I definitely would not use building=industrial which 
is clearly a step back, although it is used quite frequently, I would not 
consider it a good tag for anything that you know what it is. At the very 
least, industrial buildings could be divided in production buildings and 
storage. Storage will be for either resources or products. 

Although industrial areas are often very big, we currently have mostly not 
developed specific tagging which would allow us to map a big industrial plant 
in a way that it can roughly be understood ((speaking of very generic detail, 
nothing too specific), nor do we have ways to tag different areas within these 
plants. Every industry will have their own requirements, e.g. chemical 
industry, automotive, steel, textile, electronics, furniture, aviation 
industry, construction, glass, ships, toys, mining, power production, etc.

We are way behind the detail in industrial areas compared to what we add in 
residential or commercial areas of the same scale. Generally, these are private 
properties, and this may be part of the reason, but although the possibility of 
surveys is reduced to be either performed by people working there, or in areas 
that may be visited by the public, there are usually sufficient possibilities 
to get information through research on their webpage and from other publicly 
available material, and by looking at the structure (sometimes, e.g. steel 
production). 

Besides the parts, often you can’t even tell by looking at the tags what the 
whole industry is about, e.g. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6789235#map=13/52.4389/10.7655
no mention, at least currently, of automotive.

tl;dr: We need more detail for industrial “things” (at all scales), not less.

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

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:57 PM, François Lacombe <
fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Please have a look to RFC
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Telecom_local_loop
>
> We wish to introduce telecom=* to specify functional role of such
> facilities
> Building=central_office is less consistent
> Building=service is more suitable
>

Yep.  "Central office" could apply to any organization.  It's Bell-speak
for "Exchange.."   I'm glad to see it go.

Except a lingering trace remains.  The first sub-heading under "Tagging" is
"Central Office."  Should be "Exchange."

-- 
Paul


> All the best
>
> François
>
>
> Le dim. 16 sept. 2018 à 12:51, Simon Poole  a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:53 schrieb Andy Townsend:
>> > Re "central office", it's not really an English term.
>>
>> Wasn't there just a longish discussion about this, and that its origin
>> goes back to marketing language used by Bell?
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Telephone exchange

[François Lacombe]

Sent from a phone

Hi all

Please have a look to RFC
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Telecom_local_loop

We wish to introduce telecom=* to specify functional role of such facilities
Building=central_office is less consistent
Building=service is more suitable

All the best

François


Le dim. 16 sept. 2018 à 12:51, Simon Poole  a écrit :

>
>
> Am 16.09.2018 um 11:53 schrieb Andy Townsend:
> > Re "central office", it's not really an English term.
>
> Wasn't there just a longish discussion about this, and that its origin
> goes back to marketing language used by Bell?
>
> ___
> 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] Telephone exchange

[Simon Poole]

Am 16.09.2018 um 11:53 schrieb Andy Townsend:
> Re "central office", it's not really an English term.

Wasn't there just a longish discussion about this, and that its origin
goes back to marketing language used by Bell?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Andy Townsend]

Re "central office", it's not really an English term.  I'm guessing that 
it was translated from French - see 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-June/037016.html 
and 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Telecom_local_loop 
.  The English term that matches this concept is "Telephone Exchange".  
"amenity=telephone_exchange" is of course in common use, and if a 
building looks like a telephone exchange (certainly many in the UK have 
a common design) then "building=telephone_exchange" may also make sense.


"building=central_office" won't mean much to data consumers beyond 
"building=yes", but like Chris said, people can use whatever tags they like.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Warin]

Not all of them have no windows.
I'd tag it as what it is, building=telephone_exchange. That would be 
suitable with or without windows.


I have added a section on them to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:WikiProject_Telecoms#Telephone_Exchange


You can attempt to contact the original mapper .. they may well point to 
the OSM wiki telecoms page, that looks to be the source of it.


On 16/09/18 18:48, Anton Klim wrote:

Hi,
The telecom tagging scheme (on wiki) definitely had a tag for 
telephone exchanges.

For a building without windows, I’d suggest building=service


16 сент. 2018 г., в 8:48, José G Moya Y. > написал(а):



Hi!

Path 374362033 ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/374362033 ) is a 
building with no windows in Calle del Fúcar, 28014 Madrid that 
contains a phone exchange (originally it was a gigantic relay system 
for the phones of the area, now probably replaced with smaller 
computers and microcontrollers).

It is tagged as "building=central office", a non-standard tag.
I wonder if tagging it as "building=industrial" would be better, 
despite of the whole neigbourhood being officially classified as 
"tertiary use" (non-industrial).


Or maybe "building=yes" would be just enough. Path 28996211 ( 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28996211 ) is a similar phone 
exchange building, near Delicias, Madrid, enough old to be announced 
as "phone booths that way" on the street. It is tagged as "building=yes".


Do you think I should change the tag on 374362033?

Yours,
José Moya
Madrid


___
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] Telephone exchange

[Chris Hill]

On 16/09/2018 08:48, José G Moya Y. wrote:

Hi!

Path 374362033 ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/374362033 ) is a 
building with no windows in Calle del Fúcar, 28014 Madrid that 
contains a phone exchange (originally it was a gigantic relay system 
for the phones of the area, now probably replaced with smaller 
computers and microcontrollers).

It is tagged as "building=central office", a non-standard tag.
I wonder if tagging it as "building=industrial" would be better, 
despite of the whole neigbourhood being officially classified as 
"tertiary use" (non-industrial).


Or maybe "building=yes" would be just enough. Path 28996211 ( 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28996211 ) is a similar phone 
exchange building, near Delicias, Madrid, enough old to be announced 
as "phone booths that way" on the street. It is tagged as "building=yes".


Do you think I should change the tag on 374362033?



Any mapper can use any tag they like, there are no approved or standard 
tags, only well-used and (sometimes) documented tags. building=central 
office may mean something to the mapper.


I would contact the mapper with a friendly message asking what they were 
trying to do and suggesting more widely used tags if that seems useful, 
but don't force a change.


As a data consumer, I think that any value on a key that I don't 
specifically use is the same as key=yes, so I would treat 
building=central office in the same way as building=yes.


--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)


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

Re: [Tagging] Telephone exchange

[Anton Klim]

Hi,
The telecom tagging scheme (on wiki) definitely had a tag for telephone 
exchanges. 
For a building without windows, I’d suggest building=service


> 16 сент. 2018 г., в 8:48, José G Moya Y.  написал(а):
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Path 374362033 ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/374362033 ) is a building 
> with no windows in Calle del Fúcar, 28014 Madrid that contains a phone 
> exchange (originally it was a gigantic relay system for the phones of the 
> area, now probably replaced with smaller computers and microcontrollers). 
> It is tagged as "building=central office", a non-standard tag.
> I wonder if tagging it as "building=industrial" would be better, despite of 
> the whole neigbourhood being officially classified as "tertiary use" 
> (non-industrial). 
> 
> Or maybe "building=yes" would be just enough. Path 28996211 ( 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28996211 ) is a similar phone exchange 
> building, near Delicias, Madrid, enough old to be announced as "phone booths 
> that way" on the street. It is tagged as "building=yes".
> 
> Do you think I should change the tag on 374362033?
> 
> Yours, 
> José Moya
> Madrid
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Telephone exchange

[José G Moya Y .]

Hi!

Path 374362033 ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/374362033 ) is a
building with no windows in Calle del Fúcar, 28014 Madrid that contains a
phone exchange (originally it was a gigantic relay system for the phones of
the area, now probably replaced with smaller computers and
microcontrollers).
It is tagged as "building=central office", a non-standard tag.
I wonder if tagging it as "building=industrial" would be better, despite of
the whole neigbourhood being officially classified as "tertiary use"
(non-industrial).

Or maybe "building=yes" would be just enough. Path 28996211 (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28996211 ) is a similar phone exchange
building, near Delicias, Madrid, enough old to be announced as "phone
booths that way" on the street. It is tagged as "building=yes".

Do you think I should change the tag on 374362033?

Yours,
José Moya
Madrid
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging