Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique / subtags

[Thilo Haug]

shop=car, car_repair, car_parts
is a good example, if you compare it with
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmotorcycle
see taginfo for combinations :
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/motorcycle%3Arepair#combinations

You're more flexible to tag shops that offer different services
(such as also repairing other types of vehicles in this example)
if you just use the "main" purpose of the shop for the shop=* tag
and then the appropriate subkeys.
 

Am 01.09.2017 um 20:31 schrieb Marc Gemis:
> Can we apply this criteria/formula/checklist  to the following group
> of tags and see whether the have to be changed into subtags ?
>
> shop=clothes, boutique
> shop=supermarket, deli, convenience
> man_made/power=tower, mast, pole, flag_pole
> building=residential, house, semi-detached, apartment, villa
> shop=car, car_repair, car_parts, tire
>
> * is having a wikipedia page in 10 or more languages a criteria ? apparently 
> no
> * is having a large number of objects tagged like that in OSM a
> criteria ? apparently no
> * is knowing how many people have searched for each of those
> individual items a criteria ? Don't know, wouldn't know how we can
> count that.
>
> This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
> about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.
>
> regards
>
> m.
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
>> W dniu 01.09.2017 o 17:51, Marc Gemis pisze:
>>
>>> So no, this group is not really representative for the community as a
>>> whole.
>>
>> But what is representative? And what about standardization? I would be happy
>> if we find a way to communicate things with wider community, but this is
>> what we have now. As I said - one can always disagree and use "any tag you
>> like" rule and that's OK for me. Standardization does not mean anybody
>> enforcing, just creating guidelines - and this is what we try to do.
>>
>> --
>> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
>> Muzalyev]
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856
Festnetz : +49 7121 3826414



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[José G Moya Y .]

Phil said:

>> Supermarkets for example will have a fresh meat >> counter, fresh fish
counter which is important stuff >>when you are camping.

Oh, really? Then I have to retag everyting.

Here in Spain we call "supermarket" a medium-sized self-service store,
while we call "convenience store" a 24/7 (or at least 14/7) small to medium
store where you can buy 25%-150% overprized last-resource goods. In
Spanish, both terms are translations from English, and "convenience store"
is a legal category.

A countryside Spanish "supermarket" will have a fresh grocery counter but meat
will be freezed, while a Spanish "convenience store" will have no grocery
or meat at all. (If you are camping in countryside Spain, you have to wait
for the weekly fish truck if you want fish).

(I think this example will be useful for the cultural difference between
boutique and fashion).

Phil (trigpoint)

El 2/9/2017 0:56, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> escribió:

> On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
>> Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
>> used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
>> that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a
>> cost of all involved parties ?
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
>> about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.
>>
>
> I lack the understanding of what is meant by 'boutique' and 'fashion'.
>
> I think the terms could be used for a very wide variety of features.
>
> The tag shop=cloths I understand and don't see any confusion over it.
>
> If 'fashion' simply means cloths with some added parameters then I would
> think it should be a sub tag. The same for 'boutique'.
>
> If they mean something different from cloths .. then what are they? And I
> don't want terms like - more expensive, finer materials, better design -
> these are either subjective and/or sub tags.
>
> Fuel stations that do not sell diesel are not given a separate main tag -
> they get a sub tag.
> And yes some things in OSM have been given main tags where, with more
> organisation, they could have been better with sub tags. 'Path' and
> footpath spring to mind.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Rafael Avila Coya]

No. It means boutique could be moved to:

shop=clothes
clothes=boutique

In fact, the key clothes=* has clothes=fashion already, so we can add 
clothes=boutique too. 

Cheers, 

Rafael. 

El 2 de septiembre de 2017 12:10:19 CEST, Marc Gemis  
escribió:
>Please read e.g.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clothes_shop
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boutique
>
>Does your reply mean we can remove the word boutique from the English
>dictionary ?
>
>On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>>>
>>> Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
>>> used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
>>> that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing
>a
>>> cost of all involved parties ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think
>the
>>> about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.
>>
>>
>> I lack the understanding of what is meant by 'boutique' and
>'fashion'.
>>
>> I think the terms could be used for a very wide variety of features.
>>
>> The tag shop=cloths I understand and don't see any confusion over it.
>>
>> If 'fashion' simply means cloths with some added parameters then I
>would
>> think it should be a sub tag. The same for 'boutique'.
>>
>> If they mean something different from cloths .. then what are they?
>And I
>> don't want terms like - more expensive, finer materials, better
>design -
>> these are either subjective and/or sub tags.
>>
>> Fuel stations that do not sell diesel are not given a separate main
>tag -
>> they get a sub tag.
>> And yes some things in OSM have been given main tags where, with more
>> organisation, they could have been better with sub tags. 'Path' and
>footpath
>> spring to mind.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Enviado desde mi dispositivo Android con K-9 Mail. Por favor, disculpa mi 
brevedad.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

So if price and quality are no criteria for different tag, why do we have
deli and convenience store? Or is that difference bigger?

Or fast food and restaurant? The difference is only quality, price and
perhaps service. But even that is not always the case.

If we drop boutique as a tag for clothes shops, how does that solve the
tagging in West Africa? Or should we tell the mappers there to change their
tagging anyway?

Op 2 sep. 2017 00:56 schreef "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
>> Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
>> used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
>> that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a
>> cost of all involved parties ?
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
>> about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.
>>
>
> I lack the understanding of what is meant by 'boutique' and 'fashion'.
>
> I think the terms could be used for a very wide variety of features.
>
> The tag shop=cloths I understand and don't see any confusion over it.
>
> If 'fashion' simply means cloths with some added parameters then I would
> think it should be a sub tag. The same for 'boutique'.
>
> If they mean something different from cloths .. then what are they? And I
> don't want terms like - more expensive, finer materials, better design -
> these are either subjective and/or sub tags.
>
> Fuel stations that do not sell diesel are not given a separate main tag -
> they get a sub tag.
> And yes some things in OSM have been given main tags where, with more
> organisation, they could have been better with sub tags. 'Path' and
> footpath spring to mind.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

Please read e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clothes_shop
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boutique

Does your reply mean we can remove the word boutique from the English
dictionary ?

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>>
>> Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
>> used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
>> that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a
>> cost of all involved parties ?
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
>> about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.
>
>
> I lack the understanding of what is meant by 'boutique' and 'fashion'.
>
> I think the terms could be used for a very wide variety of features.
>
> The tag shop=cloths I understand and don't see any confusion over it.
>
> If 'fashion' simply means cloths with some added parameters then I would
> think it should be a sub tag. The same for 'boutique'.
>
> If they mean something different from cloths .. then what are they? And I
> don't want terms like - more expensive, finer materials, better design -
> these are either subjective and/or sub tags.
>
> Fuel stations that do not sell diesel are not given a separate main tag -
> they get a sub tag.
> And yes some things in OSM have been given main tags where, with more
> organisation, they could have been better with sub tags. 'Path' and footpath
> spring to mind.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Warin]

On 02-Sep-17 04:31 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:

Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a
cost of all involved parties ?



This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.


I lack the understanding of what is meant by 'boutique' and 'fashion'.

I think the terms could be used for a very wide variety of features.

The tag shop=cloths I understand and don't see any confusion over it.

If 'fashion' simply means cloths with some added parameters then I would think 
it should be a sub tag. The same for 'boutique'.

If they mean something different from cloths .. then what are they? And I don't 
want terms like - more expensive, finer materials, better design - these are 
either subjective and/or sub tags.

Fuel stations that do not sell diesel are not given a separate main tag - they 
get a sub tag.
And yes some things in OSM have been given main tags where, with more 
organisation, they could have been better with sub tags. 'Path' and footpath 
spring to mind.



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Warin]

On 02-Sep-17 06:33 AM, Philip Barnes wrote:


On 1 September 2017 19:35:01 BST, Marc Gemis  wrote:

Do you find the difference between supermarket and convenience store
helpful ? Or do you just search (as in OsmAnd) for places that sell
food ? So why bother to have 2 tags for those kind of shops ?


Actually that is one of the failings of Osmand in that mappers carefully map 
supermarkets or convenience shops but then the app I want to use to find a 
supermarket when away from home lumps the two together.

Supermarkets for example will have a fresh meat counter, fresh fish counter 
which is important stuff when you are camping.



When your far enough away from 'civilisation' the 'supermarket' has 'fresh' 
bread in the freezer and you ignore the date stamp.



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Philip Barnes]

On 1 September 2017 19:58:10 BST, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain
> wrote:
>> Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database,
>whether
>> working from planets, editing where these tags could already have
>been used,
>> searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags
>shop=boutique
>> or shop=fashion helpful or wish there were more of them?
>
>A more extreme example. Do you only use building=yes, or do you use
>any of the specific types of building ? Have you ever searched for one
>of those specific types, or know anyone who did ? (besides SK53)
>
Certainly use it, and from some of the discussions on #osm tonight, its 
something that streetcomplete should use to avoid daft questions like what is 
the house number of schools. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Philip Barnes]

On 1 September 2017 19:35:01 BST, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>
>Do you find the difference between supermarket and convenience store
>helpful ? Or do you just search (as in OsmAnd) for places that sell
>food ? So why bother to have 2 tags for those kind of shops ?
>
Actually that is one of the failings of Osmand in that mappers carefully map 
supermarkets or convenience shops but then the app I want to use to find a 
supermarket when away from home lumps the two together.

Supermarkets for example will have a fresh meat counter, fresh fish counter 
which is important stuff when you are camping.

Phil (trigpoint) 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain  wrote:
> Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether
> working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used,
> searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags shop=boutique
> or shop=fashion helpful or wish there were more of them?

A more extreme example. Do you only use building=yes, or do you use
any of the specific types of building ? Have you ever searched for one
of those specific types, or know anyone who did ? (besides SK53)

regards

m

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Hain  wrote:
> Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether
> working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used,
> searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags shop=boutique
> or shop=fashion helpful or wish there were more of them?

we'll never know unless maps.me, OsmAnd etc start collecting those
numbers from their users and share it with the community.

Do you find the difference between supermarket and convenience store
helpful ? Or do you just search (as in OsmAnd) for places that sell
food ? So why bother to have 2 tags for those kind of shops ?

regards

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

Is ignoring what the community did so far, a guideline ? People have
used the tag boutique. So why cannot we take this practice and use
that as the guideline ? Why change the currently used tags, causing a
cost of all involved parties ?

But forget about that for a moment. What are the
criteria/formula/checklist one has to use to decide whether 2
different tags are appropriate or when a subtag has to be used.

Can you and Jean-Marc give me those ?

Can we apply this criteria/formula/checklist  to the following group
of tags and see whether the have to be changed into subtags ?

shop=clothes, boutique
shop=supermarket, deli, convenience
man_made/power=tower, mast, pole, flag_pole
building=residential, house, semi-detached, apartment, villa
shop=car, car_repair, car_parts, tire

* is having a wikipedia page in 10 or more languages a criteria ? apparently no
* is having a large number of objects tagged like that in OSM a
criteria ? apparently no
* is knowing how many people have searched for each of those
individual items a criteria ? Don't know, wouldn't know how we can
count that.

This is a serious question. I want to understand why people think the
about differences are ok, but clothes and boutique not.

regards

m.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 01.09.2017 o 17:51, Marc Gemis pisze:
>
>> So no, this group is not really representative for the community as a
>> whole.
>
>
> But what is representative? And what about standardization? I would be happy
> if we find a way to communicate things with wider community, but this is
> what we have now. As I said - one can always disagree and use "any tag you
> like" rule and that's OK for me. Standardization does not mean anybody
> enforcing, just creating guidelines - and this is what we try to do.
>
> --
> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
> Muzalyev]
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Andrew Hain]

Let’s put it this way: how many people who use the map database, whether 
working from planets, editing where these tags could already have been used, 
searching for objects by tags or any other way, find the tags shop=boutique or 
shop=fashion helpful or wish there were more of them?

--
Andrew

From: Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com>
Sent: 01 September 2017 12:27:38
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

because other mappers thought it was needed to distinguish the two ?
Who are we (the people using this mailing list) to decide that other
mappers cannot tag a shop=boutique if it is already used 11.000 times
?
So if you want to tag that shop as shop=clothes with subtags fine, do
it. Document it, we'll see in a couple of years which one of the 2
methods is more popular.
But please do not write that one is better than the other at this
moment, nor  mark one as obsolete. Let the (whole) community decide.

and now we all go back to mapping :-)

m.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org> wrote:
> I still don't understand the need for anything other than shop=clothes
> used with assorted modifiers. Fashion is subjective and I do not see
> why exclusive distribution channels should be tagged differently as
> they are essentially clothes shop with no price tags and an attitude.
>
> shop=car covers both the average Volskwagen dealership and the workshop
> that sells handmade locally built overpriced exotics with golden urinal
> that you never heard of. Why should it be different for clothes ?
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Dave F]

On 31/08/2017 17:40, Daniel Koć wrote:
It's the same word, just nested, so it doesn't help, because we still 
don't know what it really means. =}


But we do know basically what it means. Putting it on a subtag allows 
renderers to ignore the minutiae and foibles of the fashion industry & 
tag it with their standard 'clothes' icon.




If we think that accessories are the core feature, it probably won't 
fit in clothes anyway,


I claimed the opposite of that.

but it's not clear yet. It's also interesting how being an outlet and 
selling second hand or handmade items relates to boutique.


I'm not convinced those are important criteria.

DaveF.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 01.09.2017 o 17:51, Marc Gemis pisze:

So no, this group is not really representative for the community as a 
whole. 


But what is representative? And what about standardization? I would be 
happy if we find a way to communicate things with wider community, but 
this is what we have now. As I said - one can always disagree and use 
"any tag you like" rule and that's OK for me. Standardization does not 
mean anybody enforcing, just creating guidelines - and this is what we 
try to do.


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

> The community is also this list.
>

I don't believe that. This list certainly lacks diversity. Most
participants here can discuss fluently in English, most are male (if
not all). So a huge group is missing.

I've met several people that do not want to participate in this
mailing list as they do not believe in the way this group defines
tags.

You might have seen that in the past a proposal didn't get any
comments from this mailing list anymore, but was still rejected when
it was opened for voting. This means that not everybody is
participating in this discussion via the mailing list.

I mentioned this tag to some other mappers, and they said, o no,
didn't see it we only use telegram.

So no, this group is not really representative for the community as a whole.

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 01.09.2017 o 13:27, Marc Gemis pisze:

because other mappers thought it was needed to distinguish the two ?


But what if "distinguishing" is just an illusion? We had about 700k+ 
uses of landuse=farm, but now it's deprecated (with about 45k uses), 
because it was not clear.



Who are we (the people using this mailing list) to decide that other
mappers cannot tag a shop=boutique if it is already used 11.000 times
?


This list is about tagging issues. One can always use "any tag you 
like", but standardization and defining things is important.



But please do not write that one is better than the other at this
moment, nor  mark one as obsolete. Let the (whole) community decide.


The community is also this list.

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

because other mappers thought it was needed to distinguish the two ?
Who are we (the people using this mailing list) to decide that other
mappers cannot tag a shop=boutique if it is already used 11.000 times
?
So if you want to tag that shop as shop=clothes with subtags fine, do
it. Document it, we'll see in a couple of years which one of the 2
methods is more popular.
But please do not write that one is better than the other at this
moment, nor  mark one as obsolete. Let the (whole) community decide.

and now we all go back to mapping :-)

m.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier  wrote:
> I still don't understand the need for anything other than shop=clothes
> used with assorted modifiers. Fashion is subjective and I do not see
> why exclusive distribution channels should be tagged differently as
> they are essentially clothes shop with no price tags and an attitude.
>
> shop=car covers both the average Volskwagen dealership and the workshop
> that sells handmade locally built overpriced exotics with golden urinal
> that you never heard of. Why should it be different for clothes ?
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

I still don't understand the need for anything other than shop=clothes
used with assorted modifiers. Fashion is subjective and I do not see
why exclusive distribution channels should be tagged differently as
they are essentially clothes shop with no price tags and an attitude.

shop=car covers both the average Volskwagen dealership and the workshop
that sells handmade locally built overpriced exotics with golden urinal
that you never heard of. Why should it be different for clothes ?

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

As for all the things I listed, the word "typical" was important, it
would certainly not require them all. Maybe some were not well chosen.
The idea was that is you see a shop that has a number of those
features, it is more likely to be a boutique

As for the linked with fashion houses, Isn't it possible that e.g.
Escada (*), Dior, YvesSaintLaureant have shops that exclusively sell
items from their brand ? Those shops will always be boutiques for me.

m.

(*) no, my nickname was not inspired by this brand. :-)

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
>
> 2017-09-01 7:58 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :
>>
>> Let's try to find some characteristics for boutique
>>
>> typically
>>
>> * has "boutique" somewhere on the window or logo (as Dave F wrote)
>
>
>
> wouldn't require this
>
>
>>
>> * smaller than shops from chains (limited collections)
>
>
>
> not sure this is a good criterion, would drop it
>
>
>>
>> * not part of a chain
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
>>
>> * only for women
>
>
>
> not sure either, surely there are many shops for men calling themselves
> "boutique"
>
>
>>
>> * sells only certain "expensive" brands
>
>
>
> might sell also "no brand" or "no common / well-known" brand.
>
>
>>
>> * no denim nor sports
>
>
>
> there are "exclusive" denim products you might find in a boutique, maybe
> true for sports though
>
>
>>
>> * side-line for other products (as Dave F also wrote)
>
>
>
> might be, not a requirement IMHO
>
>
>>
>> * might be linked with fashion houses
>
>
>
> What do you mean by "linked"? How I understand this, I'd rather say no.
>
>
>> * owner in the shop (?)
>
>
>
> Not a strict requirement, but more likely than in other clothing shops.
>
>
> * personnel/owner will advice you
>
>
> yes, but I'd expect this from any clothing shop save the cheapest clothing
> discounters
>
>
>
>>
>> * has no racks/bags with cheap stuff ("pick 3 for the price of 2")
>
>
>
> +1
>
>
>> * no racks outside the store
>>
>>
>
>
>
> +1, likely not
>
>
>
> 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] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

there are specialty shops that sell outfits for emergency services,
construction workers, kitchen personnel, etc (e.g.
http://www.belprotect.be/) Certainly not a shop where the average
family goes for an outfit :)

m.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
>
> 2017-08-30 9:37 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole :
>>
>> Naturally in the end this doesn't actually answer my question as to what
>> the defining aspects of shop=fashion are :-).
>
>
>
> IMHO it indicates a shop selling very "fashionable"/trendy things.
> Naturally, most shops selling clothes will follow current trends (even
> second hand shops typically do), but some clothes are more timeless than
> others and some are so trendy that you likely would want to wear them in
> 5-10 years. I also agree with a previous comment, that a "boutique" is
> usually not a chain store (e.g. I wouldn't a an H, C, Orsay, GAP, Zara
> etc. a "boutique"), a fashion store might be.
>
> Brands (key brand) and prize section aside, I would like to be able to
> distinguish (sorry, not sure about English words, so am using German here):
> - Herrenausstatter / Bekleidungshaus / Damenausstatter (i.e. men, women,
> kids or all of a shop type which has everything from underwear to
> pants/trousers, socks, t-shirts, shirts, jackets/coats, but isn't a
> department store because it is specialized in clothes).
> - a shirts shop (shirts and ties)
> - underwear / pyjamas (only)
> - chain retailers like the above mentioned
> - boutiques (small individual shops, usually specialized for either men or
> women, usually higher quality at higher prices)
>
> and maybe some more (e.g. jeans shop, sports shop, outdoor clothing, ...).
>
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-09-01 7:58 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> Let's try to find some characteristics for boutique
>
> typically
>
> * has "boutique" somewhere on the window or logo (as Dave F wrote)
>


wouldn't require this



> * smaller than shops from chains (limited collections)
>


not sure this is a good criterion, would drop it



> * not part of a chain
>


+1



> * only for women
>


not sure either, surely there are many shops for men calling themselves
"boutique"



> * sells only certain "expensive" brands
>


might sell also "no brand" or "no common / well-known" brand.



> * no denim nor sports
>


there are "exclusive" denim products you might find in a boutique, maybe
true for sports though



> * side-line for other products (as Dave F also wrote)
>


might be, not a requirement IMHO



> * might be linked with fashion houses
>


What do you mean by "linked"? How I understand this, I'd rather say no.


* owner in the shop (?)
>


Not a strict requirement, but more likely than in other clothing shops.


* personnel/owner will advice you


yes, but I'd expect this from any clothing shop save the cheapest clothing
discounters




> * has no racks/bags with cheap stuff ("pick 3 for the price of 2")
>


+1


* no racks outside the store
>
>
>


+1, likely not



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-08-31 15:30 GMT+02:00 Daniel Koć :

> Important questions to decide:
>
>> - Can a boutique sell second hand items - or just the new ones?
>>
>

IMHO they wouldn't typically sell second hand items, on the other hand,
second hand is a property in OSM and can be added to everything




> - What about "hand made" - is it the core property of boutique or just an
>> option?
>>
>

Aren't all clothes "hand made"? Nowadays typically in countries with low
wages and weak labor unions.



> We should also answer these questions:
> - is every boutique an outlet or is it not required?
>


Following this definition: "a brick and mortar or online store in which
manufacturers sell their stock directly to the public, cutting out the
middle-men." I'd say that not every boutique is an outlet.



> - if there are no accesories, just elegant clothes, is it still boutique
> or just a shop=clothes?
>


IMHO a "boutique" doesn't have to sell accessories.



> - do we need the outlet=* tag?
>
>

I'd see it as an additional property and would keep it.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-08-30 9:37 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole :

> Naturally in the end this doesn't actually answer my question as to what
> the defining aspects of shop=fashion are :-).
>


IMHO it indicates a shop selling very "fashionable"/trendy things.
Naturally, most shops selling clothes will follow current trends (even
second hand shops typically do), but some clothes are more timeless than
others and some are so trendy that you likely would want to wear them in
5-10 years. I also agree with a previous comment, that a "boutique" is
usually not a chain store (e.g. I wouldn't a an H, C, Orsay, GAP, Zara
etc. a "boutique"), a fashion store might be.

Brands (key brand) and prize section aside, I would like to be able to
distinguish (sorry, not sure about English words, so am using German here):
- Herrenausstatter / Bekleidungshaus / Damenausstatter (i.e. men, women,
kids or all of a shop type which has everything from underwear to
pants/trousers, socks, t-shirts, shirts, jackets/coats, but isn't a
department store because it is specialized in clothes).
- a shirts shop (shirts and ties)
- underwear / pyjamas (only)
- chain retailers like the above mentioned
- boutiques (small individual shops, usually specialized for either men or
women, usually higher quality at higher prices)

and maybe some more (e.g. jeans shop, sports shop, outdoor clothing, ...).

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-08-30 5:17 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> >>
> >> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)
> >>
> >> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique &
> >> =fashion,...
> Furthermore I find that non-experts should not discuss dropping a tag.
> What's the problem having 3 different tags ?



+1, IMHO writing that you don't think you know enough about the topic and
in the next sentence advocate "dropping tags" from this very domain doesn't
make sense. Also there aren't definitions that restrict those shops to
women's clothes.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

Let's try to find some characteristics for boutique

typically

* has "boutique" somewhere on the window or logo (as Dave F wrote)
* smaller than shops from chains (limited collections)
* not part of a chain
* only for women
* sells only certain "expensive" brands
* no denim nor sports
* side-line for other products (as Dave F also wrote)
* might be linked with fashion houses
* owner in the shop (?)
* personnel/owner will advice you
* has no racks/bags with cheap stuff ("pick 3 for the price of 2")
* no racks outside the store


these are just some characteristics that we could look at.


On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 31.08.2017 o 14:07, marc marc pisze:
>
>> for shop=boutique, I think you are wrong.
>> A shop=boutique (except from the translation+wiki being corrected)
>> is something totally different from a shop=clothes.
>> You can define the additional tags needed to have a shop=boutique
>> (handmade, high range), but even so, in my opinion it is not
>> enough to move all shop=boutique to shop=clothes.
>> I think that shop=boutique must continue to exist
>
>
> OK, it's possible, but _how_ is it different then? How can we tune/replace
> the current definition to make it easier to recognize, because we have some
> problems with showing the difference:
>
> "small shopping outlet, especially one that specializes in elite and
> fashionable items like clothing and accessories."
>
> Important questions to decide:
> - Can a boutique sell second hand items - or just the new ones?
> - What about "hand made" - is it the core property of boutique or just an
> option?
> - What other hints would be useful for a mapper?
>
> --
> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
> Muzalyev]
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 31.08.2017 o 18:09, Dave F pisze:
shop=boutique. Shops in my locale who describe themselves as 
'boutiques' ("for the discerning and stylish woman.") are primarily 
based around clothing, but often have a side-lines of other products, 
such as jewellery, handbags, beauty products & even homeware. Would 
shop=clothes. clothes=boutique clarify?


It's the same word, just nested, so it doesn't help, because we still 
don't know what it really means. =}


If we think that accessories are the core feature, it probably won't fit 
in clothes anyway, but it's not clear yet. It's also interesting how 
being an outlet and selling second hand or handmade items relates to 
boutique.


Thanks for sharing your 2 cents!

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Dave F]

My 2 cents

shop=fashion is subjective & wide ranging. Remember when some considered 
the shell suit the thing to be seen in? it needs deprecating.


shop=boutique. Shops in my locale who describe themselves as 'boutiques' 
("for the discerning and stylish woman.") are primarily based around 
clothing, but often have a side-lines of other products, such as 
jewellery, handbags, beauty products & even homeware. Would 
shop=clothes. clothes=boutique clarify?


shop=shoes is a standalone shop & should not be amalgamated into 
'clothes'. Point out a shop with shoes in the window & ask "What's 
that"? 99% of people will say "it's a shoe shop".


 DaveF


On 31/08/2017 13:07, marc marc wrote:

Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit :

deprecate shop=fashion

I agree that shop=fashion is a "no meaning" tag


shop=boutique as part of making things clear in this field.

for shop=boutique, I think you are wrong.
A shop=boutique (except from the translation+wiki being corrected)
is something totally different from a shop=clothes.
You can define the additional tags needed to have a shop=boutique
(handmade, high range), but even so, in my opinion it is not
enough to move all shop=boutique to shop=clothes.
I think that shop=boutique must continue to exist

  > My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference
  > between shop clothes and boutique.
  > Shop boutique relates to shop clothes like restaurant
  > relates to fast food
I agree with that for shop=boutique

but can your wallet, your wife or a fashion addict explain
a difference between shop=fashion and shop=clothes
If all shop=fashion are also shop=clothes and vice versa,
perhaps the merger is usefull

  >> a member of
  >> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture#Liste_des_membres
  >> or same for worldwide shop
  > Shop types are not members of anything like that

I think that in France, the term "haute couture" is protected,
in the same way that you can not claim to be an architect
without formalities in certain countries. I'll check that out.
Of course on a world level, it must be more flexible but there are
still some notions that makes that Wallmark had no shop=boutique
department even if it creates a ray of high quality handmade

  > what about tagging exclusive/luxury goods? Do we need it?
all your additional tag are useull and I agree to create them.
but even so, I do not think shop=boutique must be depreciated
___
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] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 31.08.2017 o 14:44, Daniel Koć pisze:

"small shopping outlet, especially one that specializes in elite and 
fashionable items like clothing and accessories."


Important questions to decide:
- Can a boutique sell second hand items - or just the new ones?
- What about "hand made" - is it the core property of boutique or just 
an option?

- What other hints would be useful for a mapper?


Propositions:
- elite -> luxury
- accesories -> clothing accesories (bags, shoes, jewellery etc.)

I think the "outlet" concept should be explained using these informations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlet_store

We should also answer these questions:
- is every boutique an outlet or is it not required?
- if there are no accesories, just elegant clothes, is it still boutique 
or just a shop=clothes?

- do we need the outlet=* tag?

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 31.08.2017 o 14:07, marc marc pisze:


for shop=boutique, I think you are wrong.
A shop=boutique (except from the translation+wiki being corrected)
is something totally different from a shop=clothes.
You can define the additional tags needed to have a shop=boutique
(handmade, high range), but even so, in my opinion it is not
enough to move all shop=boutique to shop=clothes.
I think that shop=boutique must continue to exist


OK, it's possible, but _how_ is it different then? How can we 
tune/replace the current definition to make it easier to recognize, 
because we have some problems with showing the difference:


"small shopping outlet, especially one that specializes in elite and 
fashionable items like clothing and accessories."


Important questions to decide:
- Can a boutique sell second hand items - or just the new ones?
- What about "hand made" - is it the core property of boutique or just 
an option?

- What other hints would be useful for a mapper?

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 31.08.2017 o 06:57, Marc Gemis pisze:


No only that, a boutique usually sells more than just clothes
(jewellery, handbags, ...) and I assume you get a more personal
service as well than in the shop=clothes of large chains.
I don't understand the reason for having fashion, but even I know when
to use boutique (I think).


The whole point is finding good enough definition. shop=fashion seems to be 
doomed, because we have no idea how it's different from shop=clothes, but if we 
can show differences for shop=boutique, we can decide if it should be 
deprecated or just update wiki.

Definition needs to have core properties which allow to classify shop type, but 
may also contain hints (optional secondary properties). How would you describe 
it then?


And for me a shoe store is not a clothes stores. That does not mean


For me too - I don't propose to deprecate it. It's easy to define and 
popular enough. It can be just extended with subtags like shoes:for=* 
and similar and this is all I propose.



Unless you change your proposal to just changing shop=fashion (and I
still haven't seen really good arguments for that change -- and no, a
few male mappers that do not understand the current wiki definition is
not a good reason) my vote will be against your proposal.


I want to use the input from discussion to update this proposition 
eventually, but we're still talking, so no rush.


But definition is a universal tool - no matter what 
sex/gender/age/nationality/profession you are, it should be easy to say 
if it's a car shop or motorcycle shop for example, even if you're not 
interested in the subject.


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[Marc Gemis]

>
>  > My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference
>  > between shop clothes and boutique.
>  > Shop boutique relates to shop clothes like restaurant
>  > relates to fast food
> I agree with that for shop=boutique
>
> but can your wallet, your wife or a fashion addict explain
> a difference between shop=fashion and shop=clothes
> If all shop=fashion are also shop=clothes and vice versa,
> perhaps the merger is usefull
>

As I wrote elsewhere, I don't understand the need for the
shop=fashion. But that's just me.

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

[marc marc]

Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit :
> deprecate shop=fashion
I agree that shop=fashion is a "no meaning" tag

> shop=boutique as part of making things clear in this field.

for shop=boutique, I think you are wrong.
A shop=boutique (except from the translation+wiki being corrected)
is something totally different from a shop=clothes.
You can define the additional tags needed to have a shop=boutique 
(handmade, high range), but even so, in my opinion it is not
enough to move all shop=boutique to shop=clothes.
I think that shop=boutique must continue to exist

 > My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference
 > between shop clothes and boutique.
 > Shop boutique relates to shop clothes like restaurant
 > relates to fast food
I agree with that for shop=boutique

but can your wallet, your wife or a fashion addict explain
a difference between shop=fashion and shop=clothes
If all shop=fashion are also shop=clothes and vice versa,
perhaps the merger is usefull

 >> a member of
 >> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture#Liste_des_membres
 >> or same for worldwide shop
 > Shop types are not members of anything like that

I think that in France, the term "haute couture" is protected,
in the same way that you can not claim to be an architect
without formalities in certain countries. I'll check that out.
Of course on a world level, it must be more flexible but there are
still some notions that makes that Wallmark had no shop=boutique 
department even if it creates a ray of high quality handmade

 > what about tagging exclusive/luxury goods? Do we need it?
all your additional tag are useull and I agree to create them.
but even so, I do not think shop=boutique must be depreciated
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 30.08.2017 o 20:45, Marc Gemis pisze:
>
>> My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference between shop clothes
>> and boutique.
>
>
> So maybe it's just "luxury" or "hand made" clothes (or both)?
>

No only that, a boutique usually sells more than just clothes
(jewellery, handbags, ...) and I assume you get a more personal
service as well than in the shop=clothes of large chains.
I don't understand the reason for having fashion, but even I know when
to use boutique (I think).

And for me a shoe store is not a clothes stores. That does not mean
that there might be clothes stores that sell some shoes or shoe stores
that have a limited about of clothing. Is a shoe store a
store=clothes; clothes=no; shoes=only stop ? Isn't that far fetched ?
I really do not understand why we try to have so much structure in our
tagging. Shoe store and boutique are normal English words. Please
allow us to use them instead of some handful of tags that try to turn
a clothes shop into a shoe store.

Yes, we can come up with (imho crazy) schema's such as Education 2.0,
but we need to keep it simple and let mappers use English words they
are familiar with.

If you want more structure, start defining a meta language in which
you can categorize all shops the way you want, but please do not
enforce a view with a lot of subtags onto the rest of the mappers.
I remember SK53 writing a blog post on how he groups stores for the
purpose he had at that time.

Unless you change your proposal to just changing shop=fashion (and I
still haven't seen really good arguments for that change -- and no, a
few male mappers that do not understand the current wiki definition is
not a good reason) my vote will be against your proposal.

regards

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 30.08.2017 o 20:33, marc marc pisze:

what's style=skate ? I don't understand this word 


Skateboarding fashion. Another example of fashion style could be punk 
fashion. I try to be inclusive with this subtag.



did you need to prefix all tag ?
could it be commodity:*=* ?


It could be anything if it's more clear. For example 
handmade=yes/no/only might be useful here, because not only clothes can 
be made this way.



a member of
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture#Liste_des_membres
or same for worldwide shop


Shop types are not members of anything like that - and membership can 
come and go. But English Wikipedia definition sounds more promising:


"(the creation of) exclusive custom-fitted clothing"

So shop=clothes + handmade=yes probably. So what about tagging 
exclusive/luxury goods? Do we need it?


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 30.08.2017 o 20:45, Marc Gemis pisze:
I still have a bad feeling by this proposal. Some none experts do not 
understand the difference and decide to change the tagging. Why not 
asking owners of boutiques whether they see themselves as a sub 
category? Or ask more people that frequently shop in boutiques.


For the same reason we don't ask anybody else - we want some universal, 
easy to describe and objective properties. It's sometimes painful and 
not intuitive process to define the "simple" things that "everybody 
knows", but it helps to limit the inevitable mess when dealing with the 
whole world.


My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference between shop 
clothes and boutique.


So maybe it's just "luxury" or "hand made" clothes (or both)?

Shop boutique relates to shop clothes like restaurant relates to fast 
food imho. So I hope your next project is to merge those two.


If you ask McDonald's, they use a "restaurant" label - so much for 
asking operators...


As far as I remember the operational definition we use is if you pay 
before (fast food) or after (restaurant). This is very clear and 
objective rule for me. I just miss something more general when you don't 
know about payment (amenity=food?), but with shop=clothes + subtags it 
will be easy (just skip the subtags you're not sure about).


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

I still have a bad feeling by this proposal. Some none experts do not
understand the difference and decide to change the tagging. Why not asking
owners of boutiques whether they see themselves as a sub category? Or ask
more people that frequently shop in boutiques.

My feeling is that my wallet will know the difference between shop clothes
and boutique.

Shop boutique relates to shop clothes like restaurant relates to fast food
imho. So I hope your next project is to merge those two.

Regards

m

Op 30 aug. 2017 20:18 schreef "Daniel Koć" :

> W dniu 30.08.2017 o 19:36, marc marc pisze:
>
>> Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit :
>>
>>> That's why I haven't proposed an example value for it in my
>>> clothes/shoes subtag proposal
>>>
>> sorry I didn't see it. can you give me its url again ?
>>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%
> 3Dclothes_subtags
>
> shop=boutique with a meaning "haute couture" could be deprecated
>> only if it is a good subtag to use.
>> because in France, it is a specific type of high-range shop
>> as you can see in the english wikipedia page
>> maybe range=high or another word with this kind of meaning
>>
>
> But it's still not definied what "haute couture" means in turn - how can
> one describe it?
>
> Maybe this means simply clothes:style=elegant?
>
> --
> "Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O.
> Muzalyev]
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[marc marc]

Le 30. 08. 17 à 20:16, Daniel Koć a écrit :
> W dniu 30.08.2017 o 19:36, marc marc pisze:
>> Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit :
>>> That's why I haven't proposed an example value for it in my
>>> clothes/shoes subtag proposal
>> sorry I didn't see it. can you give me its url again ?
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags 
Thanks
what's style=skate ? I don't understand this word
did you need to prefix all tag ?
could it be commodity:*=* ?

>> shop=boutique with a meaning "haute couture" could be 
>> deprecated only if it is a good subtag to use.
>> because in France, it is a specific type of high-range shop
>> as you can see in the english wikipedia page
>> maybe range=high or another word with this kind of meaning
> But it's still not definied what "haute couture" means in turn
> how can one describe it?
a member of
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haute_couture#Liste_des_membres
or same for worldwide shop

> Maybe this means simply clothes:style=elegant?

no, I could be casual or elegantIt's more handmade, high quality, expensive
maybe add a handmade tag and range tag
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 30.08.2017 o 19:36, marc marc pisze:

Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit :

That's why I haven't proposed an example value for it in my
clothes/shoes subtag proposal

sorry I didn't see it. can you give me its url again ?


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dclothes_subtags


shop=boutique with a meaning "haute couture" could be deprecated
only if it is a good subtag to use.
because in France, it is a specific type of high-range shop
as you can see in the english wikipedia page
maybe range=high or another word with this kind of meaning


But it's still not definied what "haute couture" means in turn - how can 
one describe it?


Maybe this means simply clothes:style=elegant?

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 30.08.2017 o 18:54, marc marc pisze:

But this doesn't answer the first question : what is a fashion shop ?
What store would like to say : we sell clothes that aren't "fashion"?
nearly none. maybe it could be moved to a subtag, making data more
usable for example query shop=clothes with "mid-range man wedding"


I have no idea what subtag should be used to describe it, probably 
because "fashion" is in general synonym of "clothing" (with some 
exceptions like workwear probably). Even clothing chains with "plain" 
stuff are designing it with every seasonal "collection".


That's why I haven't proposed an example value for it in my 
clothes/shoes subtag proposal and deprecate shop=fashion and 
shop=boutique as part of making things clear in this field.


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[marc marc]

Le 30. 08. 17 à 18:20, Marc Gemis a écrit :
> shop=boutique is Q1068824 (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1068824) 
> and the label is how such a shop is called in each language.
> 
> But I have the impression that the French label & description for 
> this shop is incorrect in Wikidata. When I read the Dutch and English
> versions of Wikipedia linked by that Wikidata item, it's about
> clothes, juwelry & luxury goods. That is missing from both the French
> and English description. Probably the French label is wrong as well.

Yes, wikidata french label and description are wrong.I have send a email 
to the french-speaking mailing
Let us have a few days to find a translation that all agree.
it 'll be like :
shop=boutique : magasin de Haute couture
shop=fashion : magasin de vêtements et accessoires de mode

feel free to also fix label & description in other languages
with native speakers in these languages.

But this doesn't answer the first question : what is a fashion shop ?
What store would like to say : we sell clothes that aren't "fashion"?
nearly none. maybe it could be moved to a subtag, making data more 
usable for example query shop=clothes with "mid-range man wedding"
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

Thanks Joost, you probably explained better what I wanted to say.

As for your blob=26, this is exactly what Wikidata does. shop=boutique
is Q1068824 (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1068824) and the label
is how such a shop is called in each language.

But I have the impression that the French label & description for this
shop is incorrect in Wikidata. When I read the Dutch and English
versions of Wikipedia linked by that Wikidata item, it's about
clothes, juwelry & luxury goods. That is missing from both the French
and English description. Probably the French label is wrong as well.

m.


On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 5:58 PM, joost schouppe
 wrote:
>>> Tagging is done in British-English, if the word used in the tagging
>>> means something else in your language, too bad.
>>
>>
>> I personally totally disagree with this opinion. You are confusing
>> signifier and signified. We all use English (I would not say the British
>> one, as soccer is an existing value, despite football has been created in
>> UK) because it is the current lingua franca. But we cannot map the whole
>> world with tagging concepts related only to the UK context. We need to be
>> firstly generic.
>
>
> I'm sorry if this is completely missing the point of what you were trying to
> say. If so, please elaborate and ignore the following.
>
> That tagging is done in British-English is not an opinion, but a statement
> of fact. In the OSM universe, the signifier almost always tells something
> about the signified. And it does this based on the British-English
> definition of the concept. This can be quite confusing for people elsewhere.
> A naive approach would be to look at the tag amenity=cafe and thinking this
> applies to the things you call café in your own language. In Flemish Dutch
> however, you have to ignore the fact that "amenity=cafe" sounds a lot like
> café, because in our use of the word, it clearly means amenity=pub. This is
> the basic reason we have a wiki, and the reason why editors (especially
> those oriented to inexperienced mappers) have user interfaces where the tags
> are hidden behind localised descriptions.
>
> So in fact the relation between signifier and signified is not necesary at
> all. We could as well write blob=26, if we have user interfaces describing
> what that means. In some cases, mappers have stretched the meaning of tags
> in such a way that the original relation between signifier and signified has
> been largely lost. A good example would be village_green. But that is not
> necessarily a problem, as it is the wiki that explains what a thing is, and
> not just the tag.
>
> Of course nobody is saying we should only map things where a British-English
> word can be found.
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

> I personally totally disagree with this opinion. You are confusing signifier
> and signified. We all use English (I would not say the British one, as
> soccer is an existing value, despite football has been created in UK)
> because it is the current lingua franca. But we cannot map the whole world
> with tagging concepts related only to the UK context. We need to be firstly
> generic.


I just said that if you see boutique as value for the shop key, you
apply the EN-UK definition of boutique, not the French one, not the
German one, not whatever other language you speak.
IMHO you cannot reject a value for the shop tag (or any other tag
besides names, description, inscription) because it means something
else in your language.

And yes there are a few tags that got created that should have been
defined using the EN-UK word instead of the UK-US word.
But that is no reason to say that new tags should not follow the EN-UK
dictionary.

And it is likely that some words do not translate well or does not
exist in EN-UK and for those we need to find a solution (e.g.
school:FR) But that's another topic.

m.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[joost schouppe]

>
> Tagging is done in British-English, if the word used in the tagging
>> means something else in your language, too bad.
>
>
> I personally totally disagree with this opinion. You are confusing
> signifier and signified. We all use English (I would not say the British
> one, as soccer is an existing value, despite football has been created in
> UK) because it is the current lingua franca. But we cannot map the whole
> world with tagging concepts related only to the UK context. We need to be
> firstly generic.
>

I'm sorry if this is completely missing the point of what you were trying
to say. If so, please elaborate and ignore the following.

That tagging is done in British-English is not an opinion, but a statement
of fact. In the OSM universe, the signifier almost always tells something
about the signified. And it does this based on the British-English
definition of the concept. This can be quite confusing for people
elsewhere. A naive approach would be to look at the tag amenity=cafe and
thinking this applies to the things you call café in your own language. In
Flemish Dutch however, you have to ignore the fact that "amenity=cafe"
sounds a lot like café, because in our use of the word, it clearly means
amenity=pub. This is the basic reason we have a wiki, and the reason why
editors (especially  those oriented to inexperienced mappers) have user
interfaces where the tags are hidden behind localised descriptions.

So in fact the relation between signifier and signified is not necesary at
all. We could as well write blob=26, if we have user interfaces describing
what that means. In some cases, mappers have stretched the meaning of tags
in such a way that the original relation between signifier and signified
has been largely lost. A good example would be village_green. But that is
not necessarily a problem, as it is the wiki that explains what a thing is,
and not just the tag.

Of course nobody is saying we should only map things where a
British-English word can be found.

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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

[Severin Menard]

> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 05:35:14 +0200
> From: Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
> Message-ID:
> 

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[marc marc]

Simon Poole a écrit :
>>> Translations for shop=boutique
>>> iD: Petit magasin de mode
 >> JOSM uses "Haute Couture"
 > on the OSM website, fixed that too.
1) for boutique :
We need a specific criterion to describe this tag
Ask the french mailing to agree on a common translation
for iD / wiki / Josm is easy, when you know what
you want to translate :)
Small or not (for me, it is not the criterion)
Luxury or not (it seems to the criterion in the english wiki page)

2) for fashion
What store would like to say : we sell clothes that aren't "fashion"?
nearly none.

3) french translation
"Haute Couture" is really far away from "Petit magasin de mode"
for me, as native french speaker,
shop=boutique : magasin de Haute couture
shop=fashion : magasin de vêtements et accessoires de mode
I'll ask french mailing
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Andy Townsend]

On 30/08/2017 09:01, Marc Gemis wrote:

It would be nice if shop=boutique would show an icon with clothes or
something similar instead of a dot on the default osm-style. So people
would see they made a mistake.

Now the that style is using lua it should be easier for them to process 
the data a bit more sensibly before throwing it at Carto CSS / Mapnik.


https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=21=52.9208316=-1.4780079 



does exactly that, based on processing here:

https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L1390 



Best Regards,

Andy

(2nd time lucky, this time to the list, not just Marc)


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

The other place where shop=boutique was translated to Boutique was on
the OSM website, fixed that too.


Am 30.08.2017 um 11:09 schrieb Simon Poole:
>
> Sorry that was wrong, JOSM uses "Haute Couture"
>
>
> Am 30.08.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Simon Poole:
>>
>> Translations for shop=boutique
>>
>> iD: Petit magasin de mode
>>
>> JOSM: Boutique
>>
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> PS: vespucci didn't have a translation, now it is the same as iD
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

Sorry that was wrong, JOSM uses "Haute Couture"


Am 30.08.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Simon Poole:
>
> Translations for shop=boutique
>
> iD: Petit magasin de mode
>
> JOSM: Boutique
>
>
> Simon
>
> PS: vespucci didn't have a translation, now it is the same as iD
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

Translations for shop=boutique

iD: Petit magasin de mode

JOSM: Boutique


Simon

PS: vespucci didn't have a translation, now it is the same as iD



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[marc marc]

> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rkV
>> I guarantee that every single one of these shop=boutique in the Dakar
>> Peninsula are these shop=(convenience|kiosk) that most French-speaking
>> West-Africans name "boutique"

Le 30. 08. 17 à 10:01, Marc Gemis a écrit :
 > It would be nice if shop=boutique would show an icon with clothes
 > orsomething similar instead of a dot on the default osm-style.
 > So people would see they made a mistake.

+1
and maybe also look which editor has been used,
it may be missing a translation in the editor
and/or in the wiki
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

Am 30.08.2017 um 10:01 schrieb Marc Gemis:
> It would be nice if shop=boutique would show an icon with clothes or
> something similar instead of a dot on the default osm-style. So people
> would see they made a mistake.

Not only that.  Any translations and the like should (naturally) give a
name/description in the language that is appropriate.  With other words
using "boutique" as the French translation of shop=boutique would be a
bad idea and I'm wondering if we have this problem with some of the
editors, or if there are other reasons why there is so much confusion,.

Simon

>
> m.
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier  wrote:
>> (late message because antispam rejected before)
>>
>> On 2017-08-29 19:27, Severin Menard wrote:
>>> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively
>>> used for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store,
>>> selling food and non food items all over the walls, up to the
>>> ceiling, where you ask at a desk what you want. This makes it a kind
>>> of kiosk, even if many are not separate shops but taking one part of
>>> the basement of a building. And they are not chic at all. And they
>>> are very, very numerous: in a large city you find one every 50 or 100
>>> meters. For sure there are more African boutiques in the world than
>>> the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new African
>>> contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for their
>>> own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
>>> false-cognates.
>> Here is what Séverin is talking about: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rkV
>> I guarantee that every single one of these shop=boutique in the Dakar
>> Peninsula are these shop=(convenience|kiosk) that most French-speaking
>> West-Africans name "boutique". We regularly correct them but they
>> sprout even faster - so much that it may indeed be argued that we
>> should go with the flow.
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

It would be nice if shop=boutique would show an icon with clothes or
something similar instead of a dot on the default osm-style. So people
would see they made a mistake.

m.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier  wrote:
> (late message because antispam rejected before)
>
> On 2017-08-29 19:27, Severin Menard wrote:
>>
>> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively
>> used for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store,
>> selling food and non food items all over the walls, up to the
>> ceiling, where you ask at a desk what you want. This makes it a kind
>> of kiosk, even if many are not separate shops but taking one part of
>> the basement of a building. And they are not chic at all. And they
>> are very, very numerous: in a large city you find one every 50 or 100
>> meters. For sure there are more African boutiques in the world than
>> the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new African
>> contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for their
>> own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
>> false-cognates.
>
> Here is what Séverin is talking about: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rkV
> I guarantee that every single one of these shop=boutique in the Dakar
> Peninsula are these shop=(convenience|kiosk) that most French-speaking
> West-Africans name "boutique". We regularly correct them but they
> sprout even faster - so much that it may indeed be argued that we
> should go with the flow.
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

(late message because antispam rejected before)

On 2017-08-29 19:27, Severin Menard wrote:
>
> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively
> used for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store,
> selling food and non food items all over the walls, up to the
> ceiling, where you ask at a desk what you want. This makes it a kind
> of kiosk, even if many are not separate shops but taking one part of
> the basement of a building. And they are not chic at all. And they
> are very, very numerous: in a large city you find one every 50 or 100
> meters. For sure there are more African boutiques in the world than
> the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new African
> contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for their
> own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
> false-cognates.  

Here is what Séverin is talking about: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rkV
I guarantee that every single one of these shop=boutique in the Dakar
Peninsula are these shop=(convenience|kiosk) that most French-speaking
West-Africans name "boutique". We regularly correct them but they
sprout even faster - so much that it may indeed be argued that we
should go with the flow.

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Pander]

Hi all,

I am not in favour of possible confusing meanings of names of tages and values 
in other languages than English influence these. Otherwise there is no end to 
this. Better add properly translated pages to the wiki.

Best,

Pander

On August 30, 2017 9:37:50 AM GMT+02:00, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
>I'm afraid we would start running out of usable words real fast if we
>could only use those with non-confusing meanings in their original and
>other languages (maybe Kindergarten, oh perhaps rather not :-)).
>
>Seriously the term boutique is so firmly anchored in the English
>language that doing away with the term in OSM is likely not going to
>work. As to Daniels suggestion of adding more subtags, it doesn't seem
>to be sensible to replace the existing clothes tag with clothes:type
>(minus a couple of values) just so that things are a bit more
>systematic. Adding the others, and using them on boutique, fashion and
>clothes (plus the other garment related top level objects) why not.
>
>Naturally in the end this doesn't actually answer my question as to
>what
>the defining aspects of shop=fashion are :-).
>
>Simon
>
>Am 29.08.2017 um 19:27 schrieb Severin Menard:
>> Hi,
>>
>> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most
>> confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>>
>> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning
>> shop. More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not
>> very large ("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells
>to
>> his/her family after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I
>will
>> open the boutique now". We have an expression for "boutique de"
>> (literally shop of) something, that can be used for clothes from
>which
>> I guess derivates the shop=boutique concept. Is it only in the
>> Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or also in other
>> cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far as I know people do not use
>> boutique, while they are quite fond of French words (like maison
>> meaning house) for shops that want to be considered as "chique".
>>
>> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively
>> used for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store,
>> selling food and non food items all over the walls, up to the
>ceiling,
>> where you ask at a desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk,
>> even if many are not separate shops but taking one part of the
>> basement of a building. And they are not chic at all. And they are
>> very, very numerous: in a large city you find one every 50 or 100
>> meters. For sure there are more African boutiques in the world than
>> the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new African
>> contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for their
>> own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
>false-cognates.
>>
>> So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as
>> possible, not reflecting only one specific cultural context and
>> avoiding using boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate
>> ready-to-wear and hand-made would fit. What do you think?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Severin
>>
>>
>> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
>> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>>         <tagging@openstreetmap.org
><mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
>> Message-ID:
>>        
>>
><cap4zaxr9b_5p0fwck5w-32xkwpsuv19oh-kxsohygue7y-x...@mail.gmail.com
>>
><mailto:cap4zaxr9b_5p0fwck5w-32xkwpsuv19oh-kxsohygue7y-x...@mail.gmail.com>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>>
>> Her take:
>>
>> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping
>> centres /
>> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>>
>> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>>
>> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
>> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>>
>> Hope that helps?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

I'm afraid we would start running out of usable words real fast if we
could only use those with non-confusing meanings in their original and
other languages (maybe Kindergarten, oh perhaps rather not :-)).

Seriously the term boutique is so firmly anchored in the English
language that doing away with the term in OSM is likely not going to
work. As to Daniels suggestion of adding more subtags, it doesn't seem
to be sensible to replace the existing clothes tag with clothes:type
(minus a couple of values) just so that things are a bit more
systematic. Adding the others, and using them on boutique, fashion and
clothes (plus the other garment related top level objects) why not.

Naturally in the end this doesn't actually answer my question as to what
the defining aspects of shop=fashion are :-).

Simon

Am 29.08.2017 um 19:27 schrieb Severin Menard:
> Hi,
>
> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most
> confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>
> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning
> shop. More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not
> very large ("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells to
> his/her family after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I will
> open the boutique now". We have an expression for "boutique de"
> (literally shop of) something, that can be used for clothes from which
> I guess derivates the shop=boutique concept. Is it only in the
> Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or also in other
> cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far as I know people do not use
> boutique, while they are quite fond of French words (like maison
> meaning house) for shops that want to be considered as "chique".
>
> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively
> used for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store,
> selling food and non food items all over the walls, up to the ceiling,
> where you ask at a desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk,
> even if many are not separate shops but taking one part of the
> basement of a building. And they are not chic at all. And they are
> very, very numerous: in a large city you find one every 50 or 100
> meters. For sure there are more African boutiques in the world than
> the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new African
> contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for their
> own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of false-cognates.
>
> So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as
> possible, not reflecting only one specific cultural context and
> avoiding using boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate
> ready-to-wear and hand-made would fit. What do you think?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com
> <mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>         <tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
> Message-ID:
>        
> <cap4zaxr9b_5p0fwck5w-32xkwpsuv19oh-kxsohygue7y-x...@mail.gmail.com
> 
> <mailto:cap4zaxr9b_5p0fwck5w-32xkwpsuv19oh-kxsohygue7y-x...@mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi
>
> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>
> Her take:
>
> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping
> centres /
> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>
> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>
> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>
> Hope that helps?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

Yeah, but in Australia they do not use "boutique" to refer to any shop
neither. Still people think it should be removed for this reason.

Tagging is done in British-English, if the word used in the tagging
means something else in your language, too bad. You have to make sure
that the editors have a proper translation for the tag in your
language.

Furthermore tagging is open. People should be able to use the word
they feel describes the feature the best. Preferably they should
document the value as good as possible. But there should not be a
committee of X people saying, we do not understand the difference,
let's get rid of it.

regards

m

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick
 wrote:
>
> On 30 August 2017 at 13:20, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>
>>  A cafe is a place where they sell
>> beer, not ?
>
>
>  Not in Australia, no!
>
>>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On 30 August 2017 at 13:20, Marc Gemis  wrote:

>  A cafe is a place where they sell
> beer, not ?
>

 Not in Australia, no!


> Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

Does this mean that we will drop/change amenity=cafe as well ? Because
it is confusing in Dutch & French. A cafe is a place where they sell
beer, not ?


m.

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:27 PM, Severin Menard
<severin.men...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
> tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>
> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
> More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not very large
> ("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells to his/her family
> after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I will open the boutique
> now". We have an expression for "boutique de" (literally shop of) something,
> that can be used for clothes from which I guess derivates the shop=boutique
> concept. Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or
> also in other cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far as I know people do not
> use boutique, while they are quite fond of French words (like maison meaning
> house) for shops that want to be considered as "chique".
>
> In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively used
> for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store, selling food
> and non food items all over the walls, up to the ceiling, where you ask at a
> desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk, even if many are not
> separate shops but taking one part of the basement of a building. And they
> are not chic at all. And they are very, very numerous: in a large city you
> find one every 50 or 100 meters. For sure there are more African boutiques
> in the world than the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course, new
> African contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for
> their own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
> false-cognates.
>
> So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as possible,
> not reflecting only one specific cultural context and avoiding using
> boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate ready-to-wear and hand-made
> would fit. What do you think?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
>> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>> <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <cap4zaxr9b_5p0fwck5w-32xkwpsuv19oh-kxsohygue7y-x...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>>
>> Her take:
>>
>> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping centres /
>> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>>
>> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>>
>> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
>> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>>
>> Hope that helps?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] shop=fashion

[Marc Gemis]

>>
>> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)
>>
>> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique &
>> =fashion, leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's
>> etc
>>

-1, there are shop that sell clothes and jewelry and accessoires beside clothes.
They do not fit in the "pure" shop=clothes category imho. So we need
to keep at least one other, be it boutique or fashion.

Furthermore I find that non-experts should not discuss dropping a tag.
What's the problem having 3 different tags ? Any data consumer can
take them together if they do not want to differentiate. And maybe a
lot of people understand the difference, but do not participate in
this discussion.

If you don't  know the difference, just use shop=clothes, maybe
another mapper will turn that into boutique/fashion later on.

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[wille]

I also agree with dropping shop=boutique and fashion.

2017-08-29 20:42 GMT-03:00 Graeme Fitzpatrick :

> Hi Daniel
>
> Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely
>
>
>> In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also
>> drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.
>>
>
>
>
>>
>> And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is?
>>
>
> Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)
>
> From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique &
> =fashion, leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's
> etc
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Wille
http://wille.blog.br
http://maption.com.br/
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi Daniel

Thanks to you as well - what you've said backs Severin's comments up nicely


> In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also
> drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.
>



>
> And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is?
>

Especially if it's a man tagging women's clothing stores! :-)

>From these comments, I would agree with dropping both =boutique & =fashion,
leaving only shop=clothes, with type=men's / women's / children's etc

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi Severin

Thank you for that very detailed explanation! :-)

Looks like yet another time when the same word means different things in
different languages

Thanks

Graeme

On 30 August 2017 at 03:27, Severin Menard  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
> tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.
>
> Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 29.08.2017 o 19:27, Severin Menard pisze:
IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most 
confusing tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.


Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word boutique means this or 
also in other cultural contexts?


In Poland we use "butik" as a clothes fashion shop, however I would also 
drop shop=boutique and shop=fashion.



shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping
centres /
towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market

shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores

shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc



And how should a typical tagger know what market segment it really is? 
What about luxury chain stores and cheap second-hand by a single person 
with shiny clothes which try too look as luxury?


For me all this is really not working.

--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]

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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

[Severin Menard]

Hi,

IMHO, I would drop shop=boutique because it is one of the most confusing
tag, especially in French-speaking contexts.

Basically in French from France, boutique is a generic word meaning shop.
More than what it sells, it designates the place, generally not very large
("magasin" would then more used). A French butcher tells to his/her family
after the breakfast: "Have a good day everyonem, I will open the boutique
now". We have an expression for "boutique de" (literally shop of)
something, that can be used for clothes from which I guess derivates the
shop=boutique concept. Is it only in the Anglo-sphere that the word
boutique means this or also in other cultural contexts? Eg in Brazil as far
as I know people do not use boutique, while they are quite fond of French
words (like maison meaning house) for shops that want to be considered as
"chique".

In French-speaking African countries, this generic word is massively used
for the most generic shop by far: a small convenience store, selling food
and non food items all over the walls, up to the ceiling, where you ask at
a desk what you want. This makes it a kind of kiosk, even if many are not
separate shops but taking one part of the basement of a building. And they
are not chic at all. And they are very, very numerous: in a large city you
find one every 50 or 100 meters. For sure there are more African boutiques
in the world than the boutiques of hand-made fashion clothes. Of course,
new African contributors in these countries logically use shop=boutique for
their own cultural reality so some streets in Africa are full of
false-cognates.

So IMHO I would tag these fashionable shop the most generic way as
possible, not reflecting only one specific cultural context and avoiding
using boutique. I think a subtag to differentiate ready-to-wear and
hand-made would fit. What do you think?

Sincerely,

Severin


Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 14:42:38 +1000
> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com>
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>     <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion
> Message-ID:
>  x...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi
>
> Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)
>
> Her take:
>
> shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping centres /
> towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market
>
> shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores
>
> shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
> mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc
>
> Hope that helps?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi

Just consulted with an authority in these matters - my wife! :-)

Her take:

shop=clothes is chain stores (ie same shop in multiple shopping centres /
towns) aimed at lower-middle end of the market

shop=fashion is middle - higher end, but still chain stores

shop=boutique is "one-off" shops eg selling hand-made rather than
mass-produced clothes; niche / speciality items etc

Hope that helps?


Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Thilo Haug]

Hi Simon,

I also can't see a difference
between boutique and fashion.
Both might be a shop
with other items than clothes
according to these definitions :

"A small shop selling fashionable clothes or accessories"
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/boutique
"a small store that sells stylish clothing, jewelry, or other usually
luxury goods".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boutique

"A popular or the latest style of clothing, hair, decoration, or behaviour."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fashion
"Fashion is a popular style or practice, especially in clothing,
footwear, accessories, makeup, body, or furniture."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion

Possibly a
shop=fashion
with
fashion:type=accessories;clothes

I think this system may be described properly
without causing confusion.
Please let me know which "lot of reasons" you mean.

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 27.08.2017 um 15:04 schrieb Simon Poole:
>
> There is a big difference between a limited number of binary options
> and  essentially moving all values in to key space (and I can give a
> lot of reasons why it is a really really bad idea in a free form, user
> extendible tagging system).
>
> But it seems to be rather off-topic in this thread in any case: I
> simply wanted to know if there is a clear characterisation of
> shop=fashion that can serve as disambiguation between it and
> shop=boutique and shop=clothes (with appropriate additional tags).
>
> We have one voice saying that it should be considered a cheap variant
> of boutique limited to clothes, and the others suggesting that it is
> an upmarket shop=clothes and that shop=boutique should have a broader
> not only clothes definition.
>
> One takeaway is that adding the "clothes" tag both to fashion and
> boutique would be a good idea.
>
> Simon
>
> Am 26.08.2017 um 13:53 schrieb Thilo Haug:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm in favor of a namespace solution,
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace
>> e.g.
>>
>> ski:clothes=yes
>> surfing:clothes=yes
>> motorcycle:clothes=yes
>> any_other_sport:clothes=yes
>>
>> and so on.
>>
>> This way you may also tag other shops (not just shop=clothes)
>> in a way which exactly describes their offers,
>> in this example possibly a shop=sports.
>>
>> The same works also for other services they offer,
>> like
>> ski:repair=yes
>> ski:rental=yes
>> ski:parts=yes
>>
>> This way there's no need to create a new shop type
>> or decide whether it's MORE one type of shop (bicycle vs. motorcycle
>> vs. car or similar)
>> in case they offer very various things.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Thilo
>>
>>
>> Am 26.08.2017 um 13:13 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>>>
>>>
>>> sent from a phone
>>>
>>> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole >> > wrote:
>>>
 the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
 should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap
 with
 shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
 particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
 have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
 (but without a conclusion).
>>>
>>>
>>> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes
>>> is not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too
>>> generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion
>>> cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-)
>>>
>>> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt
>>> (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a
>>> "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or
>>> shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many
>>> places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the
>>> material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or
>>> multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of
>>> clothing (underwear, shirts, etc.
>>> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a
>>> clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe
>>> some edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that
>>> shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current
>>> situation in the clothes key is not working:
>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
>>> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target
>>> group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses
>>> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type
>>> (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in
>>> this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> Martin 
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Thilo Haug
>> Bismarckstr.37
>> 72764 Reutlingen
>>
>> Mobil: +49 177 3185856
>> 

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

There is a big difference between a limited number of binary options
and  essentially moving all values in to key space (and I can give a lot
of reasons why it is a really really bad idea in a free form, user
extendible tagging system).

But it seems to be rather off-topic in this thread in any case: I simply
wanted to know if there is a clear characterisation of shop=fashion that
can serve as disambiguation between it and shop=boutique and
shop=clothes (with appropriate additional tags).

We have one voice saying that it should be considered a cheap variant of
boutique limited to clothes, and the others suggesting that it is an
upmarket shop=clothes and that shop=boutique should have a broader not
only clothes definition.

One takeaway is that adding the "clothes" tag both to fashion and
boutique would be a good idea.

Simon

Am 26.08.2017 um 13:53 schrieb Thilo Haug:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm in favor of a namespace solution,
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace
> e.g.
>
> ski:clothes=yes
> surfing:clothes=yes
> motorcycle:clothes=yes
> any_other_sport:clothes=yes
>
> and so on.
>
> This way you may also tag other shops (not just shop=clothes)
> in a way which exactly describes their offers,
> in this example possibly a shop=sports.
>
> The same works also for other services they offer,
> like
> ski:repair=yes
> ski:rental=yes
> ski:parts=yes
>
> This way there's no need to create a new shop type
> or decide whether it's MORE one type of shop (bicycle vs. motorcycle
> vs. car or similar)
> in case they offer very various things.
>
> Cheers,
> Thilo
>
>
> Am 26.08.2017 um 13:13 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole > > wrote:
>>
>>> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
>>> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
>>> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
>>> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
>>> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
>>> (but without a conclusion).
>>
>>
>> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes
>> is not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too
>> generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion
>> cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-)
>>
>> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt
>> (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a
>> "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or
>> shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many
>> places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the
>> material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or
>> multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of
>> clothing (underwear, shirts, etc.
>> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a
>> clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe
>> some edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that
>> shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current
>> situation in the clothes key is not working:
>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
>> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target
>> group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses
>> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type
>> (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in
>> this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).
>>
>> cheers,
>> Martin 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> -- 
>
> Thilo Haug
> Bismarckstr.37
> 72764 Reutlingen
>
> Mobil: +49 177 3185856
> Festnetz : +49 7121 3826414
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Thilo Haug]

Hi all,

I'm in favor of a namespace solution,
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace
e.g.

ski:clothes=yes
surfing:clothes=yes
motorcycle:clothes=yes
any_other_sport:clothes=yes

and so on.

This way you may also tag other shops (not just shop=clothes)
in a way which exactly describes their offers,
in this example possibly a shop=sports.

The same works also for other services they offer,
like
ski:repair=yes
ski:rental=yes
ski:parts=yes

This way there's no need to create a new shop type
or decide whether it's MORE one type of shop (bicycle vs. motorcycle vs.
car or similar)
in case they offer very various things.

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 26.08.2017 um 13:13 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole  > wrote:
>
>> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
>> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
>> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
>> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
>> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
>> (but without a conclusion).
>
>
> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is
> not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too
> generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion
> cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-)
>
> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt
> (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a
> "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or
> shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many
> places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the
> material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or
> multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of
> clothing (underwear, shirts, etc.
> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a
> clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some
> edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that
> shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current
> situation in the clothes key is not working:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target
> group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses
> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type
> (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in
> this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).
>
> cheers,
> Martin 
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856
Festnetz : +49 7121 3826414

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 26.08.2017 o 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer pisze:
I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a 
clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some 
edge cases, but still useful overall.


Could you shortly define them to see what's the general difference 
between those 3 tags? I think this is all "edge cases" with no core.


There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target 
group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses 
(sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type 
(underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in 
this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).


That could be very useful - also for shoes:*=* (I've been thinking about 
shoes for men/women for a long time):


clothes:for=*
clothes:use=*
clothes:material=*
clothes:type=*
clothes:style=* (casual, elegant, skate...)

aything more?

But what about "fashion"? It would be not as easy to define as 
"second_hand".


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Colin Smale]

Boutique is not a synonym for (expensive) fashion shop! A boutique
implies small scale, and can sell things other than clothes such as
jewellery and other accessories. The tagging should preferably be
objective (what things actually are) and not subjective (what you or I
might call a certain shop). A large proportion of the protracted
discussions about tagging are about people saying "well I would call it
an X" or "round here we call them Y" - this could go on for ever (and it
frequently does). Concepts like "department store" and "convenience
store" could be made more objective by considering what makes them so,
such as "large floor area" and "sells a very wide variety of things" or
"open long hours". This is what should be in OSM, in a quantified form,
either directly tagged or implied. Floor area can be calculated from the
building size + floors + retail usage, assortment of goods could be a
list of classes or departments, and opening_hours is a well-known
tagging concept.

//colin 

On 2017-08-26 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> sent from a phone 
> 
> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole  wrote:
> 
>> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses) 
>> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
>> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
>> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
>> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
>> (but without a conclusion).
> 
> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is not 
> particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too generic). I'd 
> roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion cheap(er), department 
> store both, supermarket cheap ;-) 
> 
> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt (department 
> shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a "boutique for men"? To buy 
> gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an 
> outdoor shop? There are many places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, 
> according to the material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer 
> or multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of clothing 
> (underwear, shirts, etc. 
> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a clear 
> distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some edge cases, 
> but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that shop=clothes does require 
> subtags to be more useful, but the current situation in the clothes key is 
> not working: 
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values 
> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target group 
> (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses 
> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type (underwear/lingerie). 
> Fashion would be yet another new category in this cauldron (with 111 uses it 
> isn't really significant). 
> 
> 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] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

There is already disambiguation within the shop=clothes object with over
10'000 uses of the clothes tag. and I'm not quite sure were your
stipulation shop=fashion is cheaper than shop=boutique comes from.

Simon


On 26.08.2017 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole  > wrote:
>
>> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
>> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
>> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
>> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
>> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
>> (but without a conclusion).
>
>
> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is
> not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too
> generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion
> cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-)
>
> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt
> (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a
> "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or
> shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many
> places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the
> material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or
> multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of
> clothing (underwear, shirts, etc.
> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a
> clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some
> edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that
> shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current
> situation in the clothes key is not working:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target
> group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses
> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type
> (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in
> this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).
>
> 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] shop=fashion

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole  wrote:
> 
> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses) 
> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
> (but without a conclusion).


I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is not 
particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too generic). I'd 
roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion cheap(er), department 
store both, supermarket cheap ;-)

What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt (department shops 
apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a "boutique for men"? To buy gloves 
I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? 
There are many places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the 
material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or multiple, or no 
(known) designer, discounter, different types of clothing (underwear, shirts, 
etc.
I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a clear 
distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some edge cases, 
but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that shop=clothes does require 
subtags to be more useful, but the current situation in the clothes key is not 
working:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target group 
(women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses 
(sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type (underwear/lingerie). 
Fashion would be yet another new category in this cauldron (with 111 uses it 
isn't really significant).

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 26.08.2017 o 11:15, Simon Poole pisze:

Working on this issue

https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset/issues/27

the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
(but without a conclusion).


I was trying to make an icon for osm-carto2 years ago:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1706
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1719

It was rejected as we were not sure what boutique or fashion is - both 
are probably just shop=clothes with some unrecognized properties.


--
"Probably it's an eternal problem - too many chiefs, too few Indians" [O. 
Muzalyev]


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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

[Simon Poole]

Working on this issue

https://github.com/simonpoole/beautified-JOSM-preset/issues/27

the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses) 
should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
(but without a conclusion).

Any opinions?

Simon


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