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

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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. >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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:

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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.

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

> 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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

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,

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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),

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

> > > 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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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 ? > >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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 ?

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

> 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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

> > 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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

> 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

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 /

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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:

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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 > > > >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

> 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,

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

(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 >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

cting 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:

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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>> >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

: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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

>> >> 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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

voiding 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" >

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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.

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

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

[Tagging] shop=fashion

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