Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:49:51AM +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de: tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture because of the quote above I'm raising the question: is tourism a good top-category? I think in many cases it is not. Even hotels are only sometimes related to tourism, while others are related to business. The wiki states: Places and things of specific interest to tourists IMHO neither artwork, nor museums, nor picnic-sites and the least zoos are of specific interest to tourists. There’s an argument that things that tend to appear on tourist information materials and road signs for tourist attractions (brown signs with white text in the UK), but… I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably another one accomodation). …in principle I agree with an “accomodation” key, although I think cultural is too generic. I’d like to see a move away from overly‐ generic top‐level keys. It might be useful to define properties of certain keys outside the tagging in the database, for example to describe “business people use Key:accommodation”, “tourists use Key:accommodation”, or specifically for a tag “Tag:X=zoo is a tourist attraction”. (Any similarity to RDF triples is not a coincidence ;) ) Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On 24 August 2010 16:32, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote: It might be useful to define properties of certain keys outside the tagging in the database, for example to describe “business people use Key:accommodation”, “tourists use Key:accommodation”, or specifically for a tag “Tag:X=zoo is a tourist attraction”. (Any similarity to RDF triples is not a coincidence ;) ) You could always dual tag things: tourism=accommodation business=accommodation etc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:56:59AM +0200, Ulf Lamping wrote: Am 23.08.2010 23:37, schrieb John Smith: Martin, So its ok to shift stuff from tourism but not shift stuff from amenity to emergency? No it's not ok to wiki-fiddling emergency, or tourism, or cultural or whatever […] OSM is *not* about seeking the nicest possible tag name, it's about people tagging things. I hope we are flexible enough to allow our tagging to evolve and improve. especially not, if a lot of people actually disagree with that change. Fair enough, but what if many people agree with the change? What if convincing arguments are given for, many people agree with them, and the only major disagreement is “it goes against the status quo”? Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
2010/8/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: I hope we are flexible enough to allow our tagging to evolve and improve. especially not, if a lot of people actually disagree with that change. Fair enough, but what if many people agree with the change? What if convincing arguments are given for, many people agree with them, and the only major disagreement is “it goes against the status quo”? Or the only disagreement is that it will break the renderers? Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion comes up again and again because we don't have: a) clear tagging guidelines (*not* rules) b) mechanism to replace tags While I agree that tag by it's nature doesn't matter while renderers and editors treat them right, however, there are lot of things which can be cleaned up - for mappers sake. Because tagging is done by people and less the confusion is, more tagging is correct. Yes, there are some historical screwups. But do they really can't be fixed? It is not like we are trying to rearrange whole amenity or shop space. It doesn't mean that everything can and will be changed. But it does allow room for fixing error so taggers don't get confused. Said all that, I think more work is needed on cleaning up and fixing map features wiki entries. There are lot of bugs and errors. Cheers, Peter. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 04:58:47PM +1000, Ross Scanlon wrote: Fair enough, but what if many people agree with the change? What if convincing arguments are given for, many people agree with them, and the only major disagreement is “it goes against the status quo”? Or the only disagreement is that it will break the renderers? Don’t hold back tagging improvements for the sake of the renderers, fix the renderers, and use tag equivalences for compatibility. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion comes up again and again because we don't have: a) clear tagging guidelines (*not* rules) b) mechanism to replace tags Agree totally. This (b) would be easily recitified by normalising the database in regards to tags. While I agree that tag by it's nature doesn't matter while renderers and editors treat them right, however, there are lot of things which can be cleaned up - for mappers sake. Because tagging is done by people and less the confusion is, more tagging is correct. Yes, there are some historical screwups. But do they really can't be fixed? It is not like we are trying to rearrange whole amenity or shop space. It doesn't mean that everything can and will be changed. But it does allow room for fixing error so taggers don't get confused. Said all that, I think more work is needed on cleaning up and fixing map features wiki entries. There are lot of bugs and errors. +1 -- Cheers Ross ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Am 24.08.2010 09:36, schrieb Ross Scanlon: Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion comes up again and again because we don't have: a) clear tagging guidelines (*not* rules) b) mechanism to replace tags Agree totally. This (b) would be easily recitified by normalising the database in regards to tags. So how do you easily: normalise the mappers minds, renderers, editing software in regards to tags?!? Over several years past now, I have seen this discussions come and go. When someone was actually doing something, it usually ended up in a mess of wiki, mappers, editors and renderers disagreeing how to tag something. A confusion causing a *lot* more harm than any good. It's simply a misconception, that just cleaning up the tag names will lead to an easier mapping experience. Regards, ULFL ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:03:42 +0200 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 24.08.2010 09:36, schrieb Ross Scanlon: Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion comes up again and again because we don't have: a) clear tagging guidelines (*not* rules) b) mechanism to replace tags Agree totally. This (b) would be easily recitified by normalising the database in regards to tags. So how do you easily: normalise the mappers minds, renderers, editing software in regards to tags?!? Over several years past now, I have seen this discussions come and go. When someone was actually doing something, it usually ended up in a mess of wiki, mappers, editors and renderers disagreeing how to tag something. A confusion causing a *lot* more harm than any good. It's simply a misconception, that just cleaning up the tag names will lead to an easier mapping experience. Regards, ULFL You have no idea about normalising a database do you. It has nothing to do with what you have above. Rather than storing a tag as a key=value, you store it as a unique identifier. The identifier is then referenced in another table in the database which will provide the key and value. Lets take an example. Currently in osm we have a road tagged with the following: name=A street highway=residential source=xyz If the database was normalised then the following would occur. name=A street tag_id=100 tag_id=101 The tagging table would have in it: for a tag_id of 100 tag_id=100 key=highway value=residential for a tag_id of 101 tag_id=101 key=source value=xyz Now say that we decide that we no longer wish to call residential ways residential but a new name of house streets. To change the current database it would take a lot of effort but with a normalised database all we have to do is change the value=residential in the tagging database to value=house_streets and every way that was tagged residential is now tagged house streets. Tags like name would not have a tag_id as they are not unique. The renderers would simply have to look in the tagging table to see what needs to be displayed. -- Cheers Ross ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
You may also want to have a read of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_normalization -- Cheers Ross ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Am 24.08.2010 10:29, schrieb Ross Scanlon: ... The renderers would simply have to look in the tagging table to see what needs to be displayed. Sounds to me that you have absolutely no clue how OSM is actually working. Regards, ULFL ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Am 24.08.2010 10:46, schrieb Ross Scanlon: ... The renderers would simply have to look in the tagging table to see what needs to be displayed. Sounds to me that you have absolutely no clue how OSM is actually working. Regards, ULFL Typical. NFI about database use so you resort to slinging mud. I have a significant idea about how osm works as I have to integrate it into programs I write or contribute to. If the database was normalised then I'd have a reduction of about 1000 lines of code in one program alone. Hint: OSM is not about database coders saving their time. Regards, ULFL ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Typical. NFI about database use so you resort to slinging mud. I have a significant idea about how osm works as I have to integrate it into programs I write or contribute to. If the database was normalised then I'd have a reduction of about 1000 lines of code in one program alone. Hint: OSM is not about database coders saving their time. Regards, ULFL No kidding. I thought it was there to produce the most accurate map data available and then produce mapping information easily. Obviously there is no use discussing this with you as you have no understanding of normalising a relational database and only bother to hard code things, like paths in a program. This appears to be going about 60m above your head. -- Cheers Ross Leaves this thread. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
2010/8/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: Typical. NFI about database use so you resort to slinging mud. I have a significant idea about how osm works as I have to integrate it into programs I write or contribute to. If the database was normalised then I'd have a reduction of about 1000 lines of code in one program alone. Hint: OSM is not about database coders saving their time. Regards, ULFL No kidding. I thought it was there to produce the most accurate map data available and then produce mapping information easily. Obviously there is no use discussing this with you as you have no understanding of normalising a relational database and only bother to hard code things, like paths in a program. This appears to be going about 60m above your head. Don't mind me sneaking into this thread... but normalizing the database would be of little use, IMHO. More often than not, the problem is not highway=residential should not be called residential but house_street, but that a tag is not granular enough, that it needs more resolution, that the definition isn't clear, that it's being misused in some places, that different countries/cities have different defaults, or a lot of other things. Forget the discussions about soccer rather than association football - those are not the problems that make mapping harder. When people say, for example, that hours_on has a horrible definition and should be changed, the normalization would provide no benefit. Ciao, Simone ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On 23/08/2010 10:49, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichsclaudiu...@gmx.de: tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture because of the quote above I'm raising the question: is tourism a good top-category? I think in many cases it is not. Even hotels are only sometimes related to tourism, while others are related to business. I haven't read through the thread yet, but no it's not top-category. Indigenous people also go to their local art galleries, theatres, zoos etc. Tag it for what it actually is, not what the perception of it is. Certainly tourism can be added as a sub-tag if it's a popular destination for tourists. Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de: tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture because of the quote above I'm raising the question: is tourism a good top-category? I think in many cases it is not. Even hotels are only sometimes related to tourism, while others are related to business. The wiki states: Places and things of specific interest to tourists IMHO neither artwork, nor museums, nor picnic-sites and the least zoos are of specific interest to tourists. I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably another one accomodation). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
2010/8/23 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de: tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture because of the quote above I'm raising the question: is tourism a good top-category? I think in many cases it is not. Even hotels are only sometimes related to tourism, while others are related to business. The wiki states: Places and things of specific interest to tourists IMHO neither artwork, nor museums, nor picnic-sites and the least zoos are of specific interest to tourists. I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably another one accomodation). But does it matter? After long discussion about emergency I'm not so sure. Yes, things which are can be interesting to tourists are mostly cultural. But they don't exclude each other, so where is problem? It is still matter how map is rendered and which data are selected to be viewed. In fact, culture is so overwhelmingly general word, that it can be anything. I would avoid to use it. It would help to see which old tags you think must be under new cultural toplevel tag. Cheers, Peter. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
2010/8/23 Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.com: 2010/8/23 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de: I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably another one accomodation). In fact, culture is so overwhelmingly general word, that it can be anything. I would avoid to use it. actually I chose it because it is quite generic and there is a lot of feature which best fits in there IMHO (libraries, museums, artwork, theatres, cinemas, etc.) It would help to see which old tags you think must be under new cultural toplevel tag. For museums but especially for artwork like sculptures and mosaics (the description is kind of suboptimal on the wiki, see: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dartwork ) I do despute that they belong to tourism. Why should a sculpture be associated with tourism? But also the already mentioned picnic-site and zoos have the least to do with tourism. Almost any feature can on the other hand be associated with tourism (beach, river, lake, forest, tree, mountains, fountains, churches, ...), even prisons ;-). Another point is that we already have leisure. Tourism is probably a subclass of leisure, some of the tourism-features might fit better in leisure (e.g. picnic-site, zoo). (but it can also be seen the other way round: leisure is a subclass of tourism, see below). The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people who travel to and stay in places outside their usual environment for more than twenty-four (24) hours and not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes not related to the exercise of an activity remunerated from within the place visited. I would not use tourism in OSM at all, as it can easily be devided into the things that are now (partly) subsummized: accomodation, eating and drinking, places of historical and/or cultural interest, amenities like picnic places, natural features, leisure features like zoos, etc. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Martin, So its ok to shift stuff from tourism but not shift stuff from amenity to emergency? On 8/24/10, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/8/23 Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.com: 2010/8/23 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de: I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably another one accomodation). In fact, culture is so overwhelmingly general word, that it can be anything. I would avoid to use it. actually I chose it because it is quite generic and there is a lot of feature which best fits in there IMHO (libraries, museums, artwork, theatres, cinemas, etc.) It would help to see which old tags you think must be under new cultural toplevel tag. For museums but especially for artwork like sculptures and mosaics (the description is kind of suboptimal on the wiki, see: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dartwork ) I do despute that they belong to tourism. Why should a sculpture be associated with tourism? But also the already mentioned picnic-site and zoos have the least to do with tourism. Almost any feature can on the other hand be associated with tourism (beach, river, lake, forest, tree, mountains, fountains, churches, ...), even prisons ;-). Another point is that we already have leisure. Tourism is probably a subclass of leisure, some of the tourism-features might fit better in leisure (e.g. picnic-site, zoo). (but it can also be seen the other way round: leisure is a subclass of tourism, see below). The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people who travel to and stay in places outside their usual environment for more than twenty-four (24) hours and not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes not related to the exercise of an activity remunerated from within the place visited. I would not use tourism in OSM at all, as it can easily be devided into the things that are now (partly) subsummized: accomodation, eating and drinking, places of historical and/or cultural interest, amenities like picnic places, natural features, leisure features like zoos, etc. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my mobile device ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
Am 23.08.2010 23:37, schrieb John Smith: Martin, So its ok to shift stuff from tourism but not shift stuff from amenity to emergency? No it's not ok to wiki-fiddling emergency, or tourism, or cultural or whatever - especially not, if a lot of people actually disagree with that change. I've seen that you're trying to win a battle against the state of the art*, seems you think it's a good idea to confuse a lot of people by editing the wiki. OSM is *not* about seeking the nicest possible tag name, it's about people tagging things. Regards, ULFL * http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrantaction=history ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?
On 24 August 2010 08:56, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: No it's not ok to wiki-fiddling emergency, or tourism, or cultural or whatever - especially not, if a lot of people actually disagree with that change. It's not about confusing anyone, especially if most people use presets they won't be confused at all. I've seen that you're trying to win a battle against the state of the art*, seems you think it's a good idea to confuse a lot of people by editing the wiki. What about when a lot of people agree with the change? OSM is *not* about seeking the nicest possible tag name, it's about people tagging things. Exactly, by using a little grouping it makes it easier to find similar tags without needing to search through a million different amenity tags. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
