I fear at this stage we can only agree to disagree : to me using
e-cigarettes *is* smoking. I don't care much for the physicist's
definition of smoke. It's the social/medical definition that matters
here, the one that gets turned into laws and ultimately into osm tags.
No offence but it is
Am 24.04.2015 um 00:01 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
It's the social/medical definition that matters
here
yes, but also there it is not the same. Around here, vaping is allowed and at
least tolerated if not accepted socially indoors, eg in a restaurant.
Medically, you
Am 24.04.2015 um 02:51 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com:
An i-phone is still considered a phone.
-1, a Mercedes is still considered a car.
And now?
Smoking is about inhaling smoke, a telephone is about speaking remotely and a
car is a means of transport.
cheers
Martin
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, but also there it is not the same. Around here, vaping is allowed and
at least tolerated if not accepted socially indoors, eg in a restaurant.
Medically, you don't inhale smoke, so there are big
On 24/04/2015, Thorsten Alge li...@thorsten-alge.de wrote:
I fear at this stage we can only agree to disagree : to me using
e-cigarettes *is* smoking. I don't care much for the physicist's
definition of smoke. It's the social/medical definition that matters
here, the one that gets turned into
On 23/04/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
you're suggesting smoking as a single namespace, which doesn't apply to
vaporizers. Maybe inhaling?
On the other hand, smoking is also forbidden when not inhaling... ;-)
I think different namespaces make sense here, because they
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 24, 2015, at 7:01 AM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote:
to me using
e-cigarettes *is* smoking.
+1
An i-phone is still considered a phone.
The rules governing e-cigs will stem from smoking in most places.
I'm not going to include BBQs in smoking
2015-04-23 0:24 GMT+02:00 moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
Your scheme uses exactly as many keys as mine for
a given usecase. The only difference is that I put everything under a
single namespace, which makes it tidyer and more discoverable.
you're suggesting smoking as a single
On 22/04/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-04-22 9:19 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
Well, electronic cigarettes aren't really smoking in the first place,
unless you want to claim that a teapot boiling is smoking, which is
something most people realize
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:34 AM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
smoking=yes/no/outside/etc for the general value
smoking:type=yes/no/etc for exceptions
With type being any of cigarette, e-cigarette, hooka, marijuana, opium,
etc.
That would quickly get unwieldy, trying to tag
However just repeating the smoking tagging scheme can cover all cases
the smoking tag does:
smoking=no
vaporizing=no
vaporizing:outside=separated
smoking:outside=no
Remember there's no need to tag something that's already a legal
restriction (such as the
area I live in which
Am 22.04.2015 um 19:17 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
Remember there's no need to tag something that's already a legal restriction
(such as the
area I live in which has a blanket ban)
where do you get this from? It's the first time I read this. Remember our data
users
I haven't been back to America for a while, but the no smoking signs had and
e-cigarettes added to the bottom when I was back last year.
It may not be technically a cigarette, but it is perceived to be in the same
family as other things that protrude from your mouth and allow for nicotine
On 22/04/2015, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:34 AM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
smoking=yes/no/outside/etc for the general value
smoking:type=yes/no/etc for exceptions
With type being any of cigarette, e-cigarette, hooka, marijuana, opium,
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:47 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 21/04/2015, Thorsten Alge li...@thorsten-alge.de wrote:
is there a tag to express that the use of electronic cigarettes is
permitted at a location? If not I'd like to suggest the use ecigarette=*
or
2015-04-22 9:19 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
Well, electronic cigarettes aren't really smoking in the first place,
unless you want to claim that a teapot boiling is smoking, which is
something most people realize isn't the case by the time they're 10...
+1, e-cigarettes
Hi,
is there a tag to express that the use of electronic cigarettes is
permitted at a location? If not I'd like to suggest the use ecigarette=*
or vaporizing=* with the same values as smoking=*.
Opinions?
Thorsten
___
Tagging mailing list
On 21/04/2015, Thorsten Alge li...@thorsten-alge.de wrote:
is there a tag to express that the use of electronic cigarettes is
permitted at a location? If not I'd like to suggest the use ecigarette=*
or vaporizing=* with the same values as smoking=*.
I've never seen a place that permitted one
I stumbled upon it a few weeks ago. In a restaurant were smoking is only
allowed outdoors vaporizing is allowed indoors. I asked in a few other
restaurants and it's the same there.
On 2015-04-21 22:47, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 21/04/2015, Thorsten Alge li...@thorsten-alge.de wrote:
is there
19 matches
Mail list logo
