Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-18 8:46 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: Martin - Do you have any suggestion for cleaning up the civic=* subkey I was suggesting for building=civic in this way? I assume we need a big generic key, and then a many subcategories that fall under that key. Building=civic + civic:legislation=city council ? civic:administration=motor_vehicles ? building is about the _building_ typology. civic or public_building are not amongst the building types I'd suggest to use, I'd go for stuff that is more literal / specific like building=community_center building=courthouse building=government_administration building=hospital building=library building=post_office building=school building=church building=concert_hall building=university building=town_hall building=train_station building=art_gallery building=museum for functions like city council, driver and vehicle licensing agency, ministry of defense we should not use the building key (and not even the building object IMHO) but use a dedicated object and have tags for these functions. This would maybe better work with subtags, one tag to say something like: this is a government agency, and another tag to say which type/function of agency it is. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-14 5:03 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own landuse(s). this can be very different from one country to another. E.g. in Italy there are lots of different kind of police forces, some are military, others aren't, so don't take for granted that all kind of police should get the same landuse. Also fire departments will not necessarily have the same landuse, dependent on how we will classify them, e.g. in Germany there are volunteering and professional fire fighters. Not sure what safety is about in this context, can you give a definition or (less preferably) some examples what to include and exclude? (e.g. road maintenance? snow plowing? putting road signs? monitoring stream gauges? analyzing drinking water? homologating vehicles/machinery/(construction/electrical/toys/clothes/...) products/food? Controlling restaurants for hygiene?) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-14 12:09 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: I don't think we need a civic subkey in landuse. When I see the growing list, it will finally generate very small landuse polygons in OSM. This is not the intend of the OSM landuse. there is no indication of this, the wiki remains very generic and doesn't say anything useful. small is completely ambiguous, is an ant small? Compared to a bacterion? We put tax, immigration or legislative into the buildings where these services are. you are presuming that those have to take place in buildings? I agree with you that we should not use landuse instead of actual keys which describe (in the end also in a detailed level) functions like a specific government office. I'd want to use osm to see where I can get a new passport in the future. There are lots of different government agencies and offices? So what, let's start and we'll adapt and refine with the time to come to something useful. Otherwise, it is endless. We could create a subkey for landuse=residential with residential=home or residential=garage or residential=toilets_in_the_garden Actually I would prefer a different direction for residential subtyping, something which describes - the urban structure (might be also done with automatic analysis up to a certain point, given that a lot of data is available (including building types and heights, which makes this hard to realistically come true in the next years). - the density (could maybe be done with population if data was available, also ) there will be more people with even more ideas and classification needs. Therefor the foo=bar, bar=x way of subtyping, which implies there is only one kind of subtyping, should generally be deprecated in favor of more verbose subtyping-keys like foo=bar, bar:property=x More than for residential, I see a missing piece in industrial. In Germany, there are 2 quite different types of what in OSM both is industrial: Gewerbegebiet and Industriegebiet, which in OSM could be translated to industrial subtypes. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Nov 17, 2014, at 9:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-11-14 5:03 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com: A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own landuse(s). this can be very different from one country to another. E.g. in Italy there are lots of different kind of police forces, some are military, others aren't, so don't take for granted that all kind of police should get the same landuse. Well, I was trying to think of something generic that could be flexible to adapt to different conditions, as I’m aware there are many different kind of police forces, and different levels of them - AKA local, county, Regional, national, and Civil and Military - but all of them are geared towards “policing” the citizens - not fighting wars, defending land form invaders, etc. Also fire departments will not necessarily have the same landuse, dependent on how we will classify them, e.g. in Germany there are volunteering and professional fire fighters. not sure how what affects the landuse of the stations. In California there are similar Volunteer stations, or ones manned only during fire season (they are in the countryside). I have heard that some small towns have volunteer-only fire services. But that shouldn’t affect the marking of the landuse as a station, I believe - the’re all just buildings holding fire trucks. There is probably a way to mark manned or unmanned with existing tags - but if there isn’t maybe that is something for a fire=* subtag or something. Not sure what safety is about in this context, can you give a definition or (less preferably) some examples what to include and exclude? (e.g. road maintenance? snow plowing? putting road signs? monitoring stream gauges? analyzing drinking water? homologating vehicles/machinery/(construction/electrical/toys/clothes/...) products/food? Controlling restaurants for hygiene?) Definition for the landuse: I chose Civic_safety thinking that it is for “services that directly protect or safeguard the lives of citizens, while excluding medical - as Hospitals are well established. “Safety seemed to be the right choice, because I’m not implying emergency versus non-emergency as in someone sole my car, so I need to go to the police station to report it.” versus “Someone is stealing my car now, so I need the police here urgently! That is [should be?] a separate tag. Isn’t that covered by Emergency=* ? Police vs military police: Similar with Military forces for military purposes - they are not involved with the protection of citizens - but the protection of the state as a whole. A Military police HQ for a force that is actually policing the citizens citizens (as opposed to the military itself) is still just a police station - it’s military roots would show up in the operator or even the name tag, right? an MP office would be on a military base, not downtown next to the city hall or the rec center. That would be a police station [for the citizens] - The fact that they are military or civilian cops are not really pertinent to their mandate to protect and serve the citizenry directly. I have very little experience in Military policing citizens in a non-emergency manner - but A police station is just a police station, right? If they were truly military - wouldn’t their facility be treated with landuse=military and an amenity=police_station in it instead? Either way, if you feel that such a force is worth being recognized as military or as a policing body, it is easy to describe the building and land through either landuse (=civic_safety or military) and the existing amenity tag. Examples: Police, fire, Lifeguards, Ranger stations(?) snow patrol, Highway patrol, etc *directly* safeguard the lives of citizens. People who maintain equipment or utilities indirectly do so - the road worker fixing a pothole, or a guy trimming trees also is indirectly safeguarding my life (through accident prevention) - but the people responding to a burglar or a fire at my location is directly safeguarding my well being, as is a lifeguard looking for sharks or saving drowning people. People examining pipes are merely safeguarding investments, reducing liability, or checking the quality of a product, service, or utility. A fire brigade stopping a fire at such a facility is a whole different matter. As a [former] computer technician, It is my job to safeguard your computer and It’s data, and indirectly your life making sure your computer doesn’t burn down your house. But I would never consider myself a fireman. I have found stolen equipment, but I would never consider myself the police. My friend is an electrical inspector/engineer. He verifies the safety of the electrical equipment at “high” voltages (~6000v). If he screws up, your factory could
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Nov 17, 2014, at 9:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: there will be more people with even more ideas and classification needs. Therefor the foo=bar, bar=x way of subtyping, which implies there is only one kind of subtyping, should generally be deprecated in favor of more verbose subtyping-keys like foo=bar, bar:property=x Martin - Do you have any suggestion for cleaning up the civic=* subkey I was suggesting for building=civic in this way? I assume we need a big generic key, and then a many subcategories that fall under that key. Building=civic + civic:legislation=city council ? civic:administration=motor_vehicles ? That kind of thing? It would allow for a lot more description with much fewer tags. I was thinking of letting the amenity on the building dictate if it is a city_hall or a DMV, but this seems to be a good chance to follow the key:subkey=subkey_value structure. I know it isn’t Building:civic=city_council, Which seems to be what you are advocating (I think), but we have to work within the existing structure for building=X X=* still, right? Javbw___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:03 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own landuse(s). I don't think we need a civic subkey in landuse. When I see the growing list, it will finally generate very small landuse polygons in OSM. This is not the intend of the OSM landuse. We put tax, immigration or legislative into the buildings where these services are. Otherwise, it is endless. We could create a subkey for landuse=residential with residential=home or residential=garage or residential=toilets_in_the_garden Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Nov 14, 2014, at 8:09 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 5:03 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own landuse(s). these are just use cases for when to use the generic landuse=civic. Still trying to figure out what to exclude or to make another landuse tag for. I don't think we need a civic subkey in landuse. it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic. From the page: it might be best to create a civic http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:civicaction=editredlink=1=* subtag that goes with building http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building=civic http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dcivic wondering if is good to give some basic types of civic buildings through a subkey. Javbw___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic. My concern is about splitting a landuse polygon just to refine information that could be stored on buildings themselves for instance. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Nov 14, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic. My concern is about splitting a landuse polygon just to refine information that could be stored on buildings themselves for instance. Do you mean the split between Civic_service and Civic_admin, or seperating out emergency, judicial, and penal? because if the subkey is for the building, a complex would have 1 single landuse_admin, and the building=civic differentiated with civic=* key, including a civic=mixeduse value for when everything is jammed together in a single building (in El Cajon, Califonia for example, the city offices, courthouse, and Jail are all a single building). Javbw Pieren ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Updated and clarified the split of civic into 3 separate keys - civic_admin, civic_service, and civic_safety. Also discussed judicial and penal. civic_safety and penal are interesting, because there is no landuse for police stations, fire stations, jails or prisons. Martin suggested splitting out courthouses as well (landuse=judicial). I look forward to responding to everyone’s feedback here in the mailing list. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivicaction=submit http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/landuse=civicaction=submit Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
A couple more landuse cases were added. I’m going to ask now if it is a good idea to specifically exclude Police/fire/safety and give them their own landuse(s). Safety could cover the lifeguard/ski patrol/ranger buildings that are public or privately operated for the purposes of interacting with the public, like a lifeguard station or ranger station. I know people have been trying to clean up emergency for a long time, so this helpful? Please check out the discussion page’s section on this at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#If_we_need_two_tags.2C_what_should_be_covered_in_each.3F http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse=civic#If_we_need_two_tags.2C_what_should_be_covered_in_each.3F Javbw___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
If we are to split landuse=civic into civic_services and civic_admin, Then I would like some feedback on the categories things fall into. On the discussion page, I listed out some building types that would fall into either one, and I would like opinions on removals or additions to the lists. Please check out the discussion page’s section on this at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#If_we_need_two_tags.2C_what_should_be_covered_in_each.3F http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse=civic#If_we_need_two_tags.2C_what_should_be_covered_in_each.3F The mixed-use case of each is probably their largest use, along with Legislative and capital buildings for civic_admin. Both cities I have lived in In Japan and America have similar mixed-use Civic_services and Civic_admin centres in each city - and most every city I have visited as well. Javbw___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Fri Nov 07 2014 07:30:30 GMT+ (GMT), Colin Smale wrote: I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same. Just the shareholders of the company would different. So I would suggest civic or government or whatever should only be applied where the activities taking place there are actually civic administration - council meetings, committees, births/deaths/marriages, highways,. i.e. the core business of a local authority as defined in law. Sidelines like running transport companies or sports grounds are not landuse=civic to my mind. +1 I totally agree Colin, it would be equally ridiculous to tag schools or parks as civic. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Yes I agree we should not include them, for two main reasons: - landuse should not describe ownership, by any means. Ownership is not publicly verifiable, they remain closed source. Even when land registries (fr/cadastre de/Kataster) now publish property boundaries, the owner remains closed. No other landuse tag describes ownership, and this proposal should not establish a precedent. - transportation is sufficiently covered by existing landuse tags, there is landuse=railway and aeroway=aerodrome for the major infrastructure. Their headquarters can stand on landuse=commercial as there is usually some usage fee involved. Who operates them should be described in the operator= tag. tom p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote on 2014-11-07 10:04: On Fri Nov 07 2014 07:30:30 GMT+ (GMT), Colin Smale wrote: I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same. Just the shareholders of the company would different. So I would suggest civic or government or whatever should only be applied where the activities taking place there are actually civic administration - council meetings, committees, births/deaths/marriages, highways,. i.e. the core business of a local authority as defined in law. Sidelines like running transport companies or sports grounds are not landuse=civic to my mind. +1 I totally agree Colin, it would be equally ridiculous to tag schools or parks as civic. Phil (trigpoint ) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-07 8:30 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same. Just the shareholders of the company would different. +1, that's also what I see here as problematic So I would suggest civic or government or whatever should only be applied where the activities taking place there are actually civic administration - council meetings, committees, births/deaths/marriages, +1, the tag should reflect this, it should not be civic but civic_administration (or similar). civic - as has been noted before - is too generic and not self explaining, at least not for non-native English speakers. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-07 11:02 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: Yes I agree we should not include them, for two main reasons: - landuse should not describe ownership, by any means. Ownership is not publicly verifiable, they remain closed source. for publicly owned land it is often possible to get ownership information. Private ownership is often protected by privacy laws and may not be disclosed (often). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
What about buildings of public transport companies (bus, train, airplane) that are owned and operated by the government. I assume they should be added to the civic part ? I know more and more countries are turning those companies into privately owned, but there are probably countries where this is not the case. regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_ features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
That is an interesting question. I think that falls outside the goal of this tag but I am unsure. In America, Amtrak is nationalized, but I think most of their facilities would fall under transportation related things - railway stations, etc. but their main office, which is not a train station, would be landuse=civic(_admin) I think. The bus station would be transportation related, but their office, where all the paper-pushers reside, (who administers the service) Would probably be similarly tagged. Javbw On Nov 7, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: What about buildings of public transport companies (bus, train, airplane) that are owned and operated by the government. I assume they should be added to the civic part ? I know more and more countries are turning those companies into privately owned, but there are probably countries where this is not the case. regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
My question was indeed for their offices (head-quarters etc.) regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 7:54 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: That is an interesting question. I think that falls outside the goal of this tag but I am unsure. In America, Amtrak is nationalized, but I think most of their facilities would fall under transportation related things - railway stations, etc. but their main office, which is not a train station, would be landuse=civic(_admin) I think. The bus station would be transportation related, but their office, where all the paper-pushers reside, (who administers the service) Would probably be similarly tagged. Javbw On Nov 7, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: What about buildings of public transport companies (bus, train, airplane) that are owned and operated by the government. I assume they should be added to the civic part ? I know more and more countries are turning those companies into privately owned, but there are probably countries where this is not the case. regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_ features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. ___ 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same. Just the shareholders of the company would different. So I would suggest civic or government or whatever should only be applied where the activities taking place there are actually civic administration - council meetings, committees, births/deaths/marriages, highways,. i.e. the core business of a local authority as defined in law. Sidelines like running transport companies or sports grounds are not landuse=civic to my mind. C. On 2014-11-07 08:16, Marc Gemis wrote: My question was indeed for their offices (head-quarters etc.) regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 7:54 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: That is an interesting question. I think that falls outside the goal of this tag but I am unsure. In America, Amtrak is nationalized, but I think most of their facilities would fall under transportation related things - railway stations, etc. but their main office, which is not a train station, would be landuse=civic(_admin) I think. The bus station would be transportation related, but their office, where all the paper-pushers reside, (who administers the service) Would probably be similarly tagged. Javbw On Nov 7, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: What about buildings of public transport companies (bus, train, airplane) that are owned and operated by the government. I assume they should be added to the civic part ? I know more and more countries are turning those companies into privately owned, but there are probably countries where this is not the case. regards m On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values [1] I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] Links: -- [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values [2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-05 1:23 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: To me, Civic is short for Civic Services. Maybe I should make that clear. I updated the RFC page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic IMHO you should make that clear by naming the tag accordingly, i.e. landuse=civic_services In your definition you also include Civic / Governmental / public institutional so this seems to aim not only on services but is intended for everything that is organized/done by the government? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civic : of or relating to a city or town or the people who live there : relating to citizenship or being a citizen yes, I have read this dictionary definition, and I believe it underlines my point: civic is too generic in meaning we already tag residential, industrial, commercial, retail areas City/regional/capital complexes are none of these. of course not (well, maybe they could be commercial as of our definition in the wiki), my point was that the tern landuse=civic (also by the definition you have linked) would include those landuses (overlap). The above are catch-alls, albeit business is divided into three groups. Religious was the other last missing catch-all (to me) landuse=religious is another tag recently introduced which overlaps in its current definition with other landuses that are already established. This seems very straight forward to me. If you want to exclude something from this to have it's own landuse (judicial / penal) I'm all ears, but to deny that there is a need for a landuse for these clearly differentiated Government offices in city centers throughout the entire world seems incorrect. so this is only about offices? What about a city owned and operated power plant or wastewater treatment plant? Or the depot of the public transport? The depot of the public cleaning service? A public waste dump? You are proposing to tag the landuse of a library differently according to its type of ownership? Or is this about the operator? What about PPP (private public partnerships)? I am not generally opposing the introduction of a new landuse value, but it should be chosen carefully to avoid overlap with what we already have. Will a ministry be a civic service? A public school, kindergarten or university? (You mention libraries, so I guess yes?). A public hospital? A public museum? A post office which is run by the government? The tax office? A prison? Business-government-citizen-military-religion-farm-park. There's some mixing between them, but those are the big developed-land landuses ones to me. No first level distinction between industrial, commercial and retail (that's really particular, given the extremely different nature, impact and requirements)? What about transportation (airports, train stations, road infrastructure)? Can you expand on the distinction citizen and government? According to the current state of the proposal both should get the same landuse tag, or am I misreading it? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-05 2:28 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: To me, governmental is more legislative. governments are typically divided into a legislative and an executive branch, plus the judiciary to control them. Civic implies for the citizens. Perhaps it's just a style choice, but it's my preference, and goes well with the existing approved building=civic. building=civic is a very raw tag, that IMHO is a step back to what we have (e.g. building=townhall) and is merely a synonymon for the equally generic and inclusive (hence carrying few information) tag building=public(_building). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to contribute there or here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic#Alternative_values I start thinking that we might need even two tags, one for the civic/municipal cases and one for the govenmental/administration ones. johnw wrote on 2014-11-05 06:35: Thanks tom. ^_^ I was so surprised to see the info in the talk page. When we first talked about landuse=civic a few months ago, I wanted to make an RFC page, but, honestly, the guidelines didn't really show me how to actually _make the page_ , and while I'm really good with a screwdriver or photoshop, wiki markup and conventions are new, so I couldn't. This time I figured it out. I agree that the wiki is not good in documenting it's own use. More or less accidentally I found this page with lots of markup: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wiki_organisation and the proposal process: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-11-03 20:13 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: What about landuse=civil ? Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and in law as relating to private relations between members of a community; noncriminal Thus it includes civil government, civil services, civil affairs, civil law, civil defence. Thus land occupied by tax/pension/immigration offices, ministries, parliaments and their subsidiaries. It would semantically exclude military, religious, judical/prison areas. I'm opposing civil or civic by the definitions you cited above, because it would mean all land excluded that used for military and religious purposes, i.e. it would include residential, commercial (when there is no military or church), retail (if its not a religious institution selling something), industrial (if ...) etc. I don't see this as helpful given the point from where we are starting (we already tag residential, industrial, commercial, retail areas according to the type of usage, regardless of the nature of the operator (military, civilian, ecclesiastical)). This would also imply a toplevel distinction between governments that are civil, those that are military and those that are religious (not necessarily a bad thing but might lead to strange tagging differences between countries). I don't think we should be looking for a one tags catches all solution, and see which tags are needed (maintaining compatibility with our current scheme) and what are the best words to describe them. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Hm hm, somebody could not wait to start the page ;-)
I went through the mail thread so far, and tried to populate the
Talk page with some of the arguments, please add if I missed a point.
Maybe Martin could add some arguments why =public_administration
should be preferred?
tom
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-11-04 11:06:
I'm opposing civil or civic by the definitions you cited above,
[...]
What about using more specific definitions, e.g.
landuse=public_administration?
johnw wrote on 2014-11-04 03:56:
Assembling a draft page. it is my first draft page, so my syntax is kinda
crap.
I will be working on the details of the proposal later today.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
Javbw
On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public}
For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some
ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider.
I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,
so it would be nice it the other contributors to this discussion would
indicate under which title we should start it.
tom
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
To me, Civic is short for Civic Services. Maybe I should make that clear. I updated the RFC page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civic : of or relating to a city or town or the people who live there : relating to citizenship or being a citizen Hence, Services of or relating to a city or town ➛ government provided services to it's residents ➛ Civic Services. This would also imply a toplevel distinction between governments that are civil, those that are military and those that are religious Who cares what the government is. This is services to the citizens. I'm sure Iran and North Korea still have a tax office and a DMV. There are large sections of many City centers dominated by government buildings. Those complexes are distinct, The services they offer are usually monopolistic to the government, and deserve to differentiated. There's no competition to the Tax office, the DMV, or the city council. we already tag residential, industrial, commercial, retail areas City/regional/capital complexes are none of these. I don't think we should be looking for a one tags catches all solution we already tag residential, industrial, commercial, retail areas The above are catch-alls, albeit business is divided into three groups. Religious was the other last missing catch-all (to me) These are generic landuses. If you want to create a ton of amenity tags to describe the actual function of the buildings beyond this class, then that is a great option too. I was suggesting a civic=subtag. This seems very straight forward to me. If you want to exclude something from this to have it's own landuse (judicial / penal) I'm all ears, but to deny that there is a need for a landuse for these clearly differentiated Government offices in city centers throughout the entire world seems incorrect. Business-government-citizen-military-religion-farm-park. There's some mixing between them, but those are the big developed-land landuses ones to me. Civic covers the missing hole pretty well. The last missing hole. javbw On Nov 4, 2014, at 7:06 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-11-03 20:13 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: What about landuse=civil ? Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and in law as relating to private relations between members of a community; noncriminal Thus it includes civil government, civil services, civil affairs, civil law, civil defence. Thus land occupied by tax/pension/immigration offices, ministries, parliaments and their subsidiaries. It would semantically exclude military, religious, judical/prison areas. I'm opposing civil or civic by the definitions you cited above, because it would mean all land excluded that used for military and religious purposes, i.e. it would include residential, commercial (when there is no military or church), retail (if its not a religious institution selling something), industrial (if ...) etc. I don't see this as helpful given the point from where we are starting (we already tag residential, industrial, commercial, retail areas according to the type of usage, regardless of the nature of the operator (military, civilian, ecclesiastical)). This would also imply a toplevel distinction between governments that are civil, those that are military and those that are religious (not necessarily a bad thing but might lead to strange tagging differences between countries). I don't think we should be looking for a one tags catches all solution, and see which tags are needed (maintaining compatibility with our current scheme) and what are the best words to describe them. 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On 5 November 2014 00:23, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: Business-government-citizen-military-religion-farm-park. There's some mixing between them, but those are the big developed-land landuses ones to me. Civic covers the missing hole pretty well. The last missing hole. I agree that a tag that covers this would be nice to have. I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
To me, governmental is more legislative. Civic implies for the citizens. Perhaps it's just a style choice, but it's my preference, and goes well with the existing approved building=civic. I've been throwing out civic for a bit, but if it was approved governmental it's wouldn't matter too to me, as long as we get a new landuse and some subtags out of it. On Nov 5, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: On 5 November 2014 00:23, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: Business-government-citizen-military-religion-farm-park. There's some mixing between them, but those are the big developed-land landuses ones to me. Civic covers the missing hole pretty well. The last missing hole. I agree that a tag that covers this would be nice to have. I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? -- Matthijs ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Thanks tom. ^_^ I was so surprised to see the info in the talk page. When we
first talked about landuse=civic a few months ago, I wanted to make an RFC
page, but, honestly, the guidelines didn't really show me how to actually _make
the page_ , and while I'm really good with a screwdriver or photoshop, wiki
markup and conventions are new, so I couldn't. This time I figured it out.
Now I can follow the guidelines better by presenting RFC pages for future
ideas.
Javbw.
On Nov 5, 2014, at 2:14 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
Hm hm, somebody could not wait to start the page ;-)
I went through the mail thread so far, and tried to populate the
Talk page with some of the arguments, please add if I missed a point.
Maybe Martin could add some arguments why =public_administration
should be preferred?
tom
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-11-04 11:06:
I'm opposing civil or civic by the definitions you cited above,
[...]
What about using more specific definitions, e.g.
landuse=public_administration?
johnw wrote on 2014-11-04 03:56:
Assembling a draft page. it is my first draft page, so my syntax is kinda
crap.
I will be working on the details of the proposal later today.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
Javbw
On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
ok, now we have
landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public}
For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some
ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider.
I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,
so it would be nice it the other contributors to this discussion would
indicate under which title we should start it.
tom
___
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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
So far we have discussed pros and cons of
landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic}
What about landuse=civil ?
Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their
concerns,
as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and
in law as relating to private relations between members of a community;
noncriminal
Thus it includes civil government, civil services, civil affairs, civil law,
civil defence.
Thus land occupied by tax/pension/immigration offices, ministries, parliaments
and their subsidiaries.
It would semantically exclude military, religious, judical/prison areas.
By tag definition we can clarify that we want to exclude emergency services,
hospitals, educational institutions which are not exclusively provided by the
state.
I'm not sure yet if it should include embassies, or not, as they refer to a
foreign
state, in contrast to 'civil' implying 'domestic, interior, home, national'. But
as in amenity={hospital|school}, amenity=embassy can be applied to an area
without hassle.
tom
John Willis wrote on 2014-10-07 23:47:
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 7, 2014, at 10:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw :
For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional
offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people have
to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it is a
really important
government office building that needs to labeled differently than a
standard office building.
I agree that it would be desirable to have more detail on government offices, e.g. being
able to distinguish the tax office from the immigration office etc. I'd see this under
the office tag and not in landuse.
I don't want to add any detail through the landuse - beyond tagging their land.
A single tag that can be used to marking the land for all of these services
seems pretty straightforward.
This is an enormous pile of work to do, as there are many different kind of
these, and the detailed structure is different in every country.
This is why a single landuse that is an umbrella for these services is an easy
solution - it separates out the government services, but leaves the function
tagging to other schemes, like landuse=retail tells you nothing about what is
sold - just that
something is sold there.
I view these buildings as a completely separate class of buildings - so I want
a new major landuse class, just as an industrial plant and a mall are big, but
viewed and tagged with a different land use. A regional capital building is a
similar size, and
similarly in a different class than existing landuse values.
A seperate subtag, where all the different building definitions can be put
(beyond the ones already existing) or just more definitions thrown into amenity
- either way I'm okay with it - but they all need a distinct landuse to sit on.
On the other hand, the idea of having a wastewater plant, a fire station, a
court and a federal ministry categorized the same civic landuse doesn't seem
very appealing to me.
If you want to slice out emergency services (police/fire) and judicial, that's
fine. Give them their own umbrella landuses, and let the existing tagging
scheme describe their function,
The wastewater treatment plant is still industrial - as is the incinerator, but
the city's water board office, usually part of the city's main office, would be
civic. To me, civic is a shortening of civic administration.
We recognize places that provide services to citizens or offices of those
services directly with separate tags - there are tags for community centers,
rec centers, city halls, dmvs, and other places that the public visit regularly
that are part of the
civil government (not military) - but there is no good landuse for them, as
there is for industrial/retail/commercial. There are several classes of
buildings still without seperate tags - ones that get their own label on the
map, a guidepost on the road,
and are visited by the public as frequently as a trip to city hall - but no tag
labels them yet (tax/pension/immigration/etc). I want to show their class
through a landuse, and their function with some other tag.
I believe that civic might be too generic (but maybe I just don't understand
this right, hence the question for what is included and excluded).
Questions always help me clarify my thinking, and understand yours as well.
Thank you for the questions. My idea right now is an umbrella landuse for these
offices/services that don't fit in commercial, and a separate subtag/additional
amenity tags for
function, however people want to do that.
cheers,
Martin
Javbw
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up
for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t.
I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse -
eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of
different tags to properly define the the buildings that would fall into these
4 land uses.
I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches building=civic)
to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of public/civic/institutional/state
services that could be tagged with more specific amenity tags, or a new civic=•
subtag - either through point markers, building labels, or on the area with the
landuse.
Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail. just
like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial.
if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport), that’s
fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad landuse
class.
John
On Nov 4, 2014, at 4:13 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
So far we have discussed pros and cons of
landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic}
What about landuse=civil ?
Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their
concerns,
as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and
in law as relating to private relations between members of a community;
noncriminal
Thus it includes civil government, civil services, civil affairs, civil law,
civil defence.
Thus land occupied by tax/pension/immigration offices, ministries,
parliaments and their subsidiaries.
It would semantically exclude military, religious, judical/prison areas.
By tag definition we can clarify that we want to exclude emergency services,
hospitals, educational institutions which are not exclusively provided by the
state.
I'm not sure yet if it should include embassies, or not, as they refer to a
foreign
state, in contrast to 'civil' implying 'domestic, interior, home, national'.
But
as in amenity={hospital|school}, amenity=embassy can be applied to an area
without hassle.
tom
John Willis wrote on 2014-10-07 23:47:
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 7, 2014, at 10:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw :
For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the
regional offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy
place people have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a
border - but it is a really important
government office building that needs to labeled differently than a
standard office building.
I agree that it would be desirable to have more detail on government
offices, e.g. being able to distinguish the tax office from the immigration
office etc. I'd see this under the office tag and not in landuse.
I don't want to add any detail through the landuse - beyond tagging their
land. A single tag that can be used to marking the land for all of these
services seems pretty straightforward.
This is an enormous pile of work to do, as there are many different kind of
these, and the detailed structure is different in every country.
This is why a single landuse that is an umbrella for these services is an
easy solution - it separates out the government services, but leaves the
function tagging to other schemes, like landuse=retail tells you nothing
about what is sold - just that
something is sold there.
I view these buildings as a completely separate class of buildings - so I
want a new major landuse class, just as an industrial plant and a mall are
big, but viewed and tagged with a different land use. A regional capital
building is a similar size, and
similarly in a different class than existing landuse values.
A seperate subtag, where all the different building definitions can be put
(beyond the ones already existing) or just more definitions thrown into
amenity - either way I'm okay with it - but they all need a distinct landuse
to sit on.
On the other hand, the idea of having a wastewater plant, a fire station, a
court and a federal ministry categorized the same civic landuse doesn't
seem very appealing to me.
If you want to slice out emergency services (police/fire) and judicial,
that's fine. Give them their own umbrella landuses, and let the existing
tagging scheme describe their function,
The wastewater treatment plant is still industrial - as is the incinerator,
but the city's water board office, usually part of the city's main office,
would be civic. To me, civic is a shortening of civic administration.
We recognize places that provide services to citizens or offices of those
services directly with separate tags - there are tags for community centers,
rec centers, city halls, dmvs, and other places that the public visit
regularly that are part of the
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t. I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse - eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of different tags to properly define the the buildings that would fall into these 4 land uses. I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches building=civic) to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of public/civic/institutional/state services that could be tagged with more specific amenity tags, or a new civic=• subtag - either through point markers, building labels, or on the area with the landuse. Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail. just like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial. if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport), that’s fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad landuse class. I just noticed that my local government uses public for these types of landuse. That seems like a appropriate land use for most of the usages described. Civic refers to the duties of people associated with their governments. Public refers to being open as in the lands and buildings. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
and the line between public and private is not one OSM singles out very much (is is a public school vs a private school?), but things are separated by function. and the functions are of a civic government (pnsion offices, taxes, judicial, etc). I would use the word public or “government” but civil (opoopsite of military or company use) is a good fit, and civic is basically “for civil”, so it works well enough - and matches a pre-existing approved building subtag. Javbw On Nov 4, 2014, at 8:30 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com wrote: Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t. I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse - eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of different tags to properly define the the buildings that would fall into these 4 land uses. I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches building=civic) to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of public/civic/institutional/state services that could be tagged with more specific amenity tags, or a new civic=• subtag - either through point markers, building labels, or on the area with the landuse. Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail. just like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial. if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport), that’s fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad landuse class. I just noticed that my local government uses public for these types of landuse. That seems like a appropriate land use for most of the usages described. Civic refers to the duties of people associated with their governments. Public refers to being open as in the lands and buildings. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us/ OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public}
For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some
ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider.
I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,
so it would be nice it the other contributors to this discussion would
indicate under which title we should start it.
tom
johnw wrote on 2014-11-04 00:40:
and the line between public and private is not one OSM singles out very much
(is is a public school vs a private school?), but things are separated by
function. and the functions are of a civic government (pnsion offices, taxes,
judicial, etc). I would use
the word public or “government” but civil (opoopsite of military or company
use) is a good fit, and civic is basically “for civil”, so it works well enough - and
matches a pre-existing approved building subtag.
Javbw
Clifford Snow wrote on 2014-11-04 00:30:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com
wrote:
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is
up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t.
I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse
- eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of
different tags to properly define the the buildings that would fall into these
4 land uses.
I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches
building=civic) to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of
public/civic/institutional/state services that could be tagged with more
specific amenity tags, or a new civic=• subtag - either
through point markers, building labels, or on the area with the landuse.
Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail.
just like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial.
if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport), that’s
fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad landuse
class.
I just noticed that my local government uses public for these types of landuse. That
seems like a appropriate land use for most of the usages described. Civic refers to the duties of
people associated with their governments. Public refers to being open
as in the lands and buildings.
Clifford
--
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Assembling a draft page. it is my first draft page, so my syntax is kinda
crap. I will be working on the details of the proposal later today.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic
Javbw
On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:
ok, now we have
landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public}
For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some
ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider.
I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,
so it would be nice it the other contributors to this discussion would
indicate under which title we should start it.
tom
johnw wrote on 2014-11-04 00:40:
and the line between public and private is not one OSM singles out very
much (is is a public school vs a private school?), but things are separated
by function. and the functions are of a civic government (pnsion offices,
taxes, judicial, etc). I would use
the word public or “government” but civil (opoopsite of military or
company use) is a good fit, and civic is basically “for civil”, so it works
well enough - and matches a pre-existing approved building subtag.
Javbw
Clifford Snow wrote on 2014-11-04 00:30:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com
wrote:
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn
is up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t.
I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all
landuse - eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and
hundreds of different tags to properly define the the buildings that would
fall into these 4 land uses.
I believe there is a good case for landuse=civic (name matches
building=civic) to cover the basic landuse of a myriad of
public/civic/institutional/state services that could be tagged with more
specific amenity tags, or a new civic=• subtag - either
through point markers, building labels, or on the area with the landuse.
Let the landuse denote class, and the other tags take care of the detail.
just like with residential / commercial / retail / industrial.
if you want to slice out a service (eg, school, hospital, airport),
that’s fine - but I think there is enough leftover to warrant another broad
landuse class.
I just noticed that my local government uses public for these types of
landuse. That seems like a appropriate land use for most of the usages
described. Civic refers to the duties of people associated with their
governments. Public refers to being open
as in the lands and buildings.
Clifford
--
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
On Oct 5, 2014, at 6:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Il giorno 04/ott/2014, alle ore 06:58, johnw jo...@mac.com ha scritto: Usually the government services are monopolistic - courts, police, elected officials (there's only 1 mayor) tax offices, DMV, etc, whereas NGO s and non-profits are a business model to support some activity. thehospital could be run by a church, an NGO, or by the city, but it's still a hospital. A clinic. a pet hospital. maybe we need an amenity=homeless shelter? for the latter there is a social facility scheme with subtags. Never had to tag one, so I'll have to read up on that tag. interesting. ^^ What landuse value do you suggest for NGOs? I don't know currently - the service they offer should be the basis of the tag - but for the admin offices, I don't know. It sounds like it should be a social facility office or something, or just plain offices, as only their business model might set them apart from a standard business. maybe it gets jammed in with civic. I don'tknow enough about NGO's to know here they should go, but I think there are a few paces they can comfortably fit. We've had this same discussion some months ago. I think courts and government shouldn't necessarily be in the same landuse, while for police I agree. I don't exactly get the meaning of civic, can you expand on this, what it includes and excludes? Well, we're all talking about the same pizza, just where to slice it, I think. to me, we all seem to tag big services that are offered by the government or private companies based on the function - schools, hospitals, universities, bus routes, train lines, etc - the services are paramount. But there are civil services that are offered and administrated by the government that usually don't have an equal - or are just special offices : tax offices, pension offices, public libraries, national post services, city admin (mayor, city councils), immigration offices, DMV, courts, Jails, police, fire dept, etc, and viewed as non-commercial and government services to most people. Like schools and hospitals, if you want to cut out judicial (Courts, government attorney's offices) or detention (juvenile correction, work camps, jails, prisons, etc), or any of the others - that's fine, another slice taken from the civic pie. I just want a tag that lets me label the landuse for the rest, since they are often disparate services (pension, Fire, DMV) connected by the common thread of city services, often sharing the same land / offices, and thought of and treated differently than a standard commercial area. For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it is a really important government office building that needs to labeled differently than a standard office building. In the US, it is a Federal building that is regional, or a immigration office that is more local. Just as landuse=retail pulls together disparate services (car sales, discount stores, food markets), or landuse=commercial (cleaning services to computer consultants), landuse=civic ties these these services together as well. I want a common landuse, and a separate civic= subtag that work with the landuse to label these disparate leftover services as well (goes with building=civic) such as civic=pension/tax/etc, but if there is another solution for the subtag, I'm okay with that too. Javbw 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it is a really important government office building that needs to labeled differently than a standard office building. I agree that it would be desirable to have more detail on government offices, e.g. being able to distinguish the tax office from the immigration office etc. I'd see this under the office tag and not in landuse. This is an enormous pile of work to do, as there are many different kind of these, and the detailed structure is different in every country. On the other hand, the idea of having a wastewater plant, a fire station, a court and a federal ministry categorized the same civic landuse doesn't seem very appealing to me. I believe that civic might be too generic (but maybe I just don't understand this right, hence the question for what is included and excluded). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
I hope we can come to some sort of agreement on this topic as there are many large parcels of land here in Thailand that serve various government functions. It seems every time I notice a big, well appointed structure over here my Thai partner tells me that's a government building. Irrigation and dam projects, immigration offices, local and provincial government administration offices are so common I'm looking for a suitably generic way to tag them without being compelled to learn the subtle details of each of them. I vote yes on the landuse=* tag. As for the value, either one of these would be fine: civic or public. If we get into NGOs and the differences between this or that government department, judicial vs prisons, this conversation is not going to bear fruit. While I agree with what Martin said about it being desirable to have enough detail to distinguish between the tax office and the immigration office, I believe there are other ways to do that already. What I want to see here is some simple, straightforward way to tag an area that is being used for a government related function, any government (federal, municipal), any function (tax office, motor vehicle department), whatever. On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it is a really important government office building that needs to labeled differently than a standard office building. I agree that it would be desirable to have more detail on government offices, e.g. being able to distinguish the tax office from the immigration office etc. I'd see this under the office tag and not in landuse. This is an enormous pile of work to do, as there are many different kind of these, and the detailed structure is different in every country. On the other hand, the idea of having a wastewater plant, a fire station, a court and a federal ministry categorized the same civic landuse doesn't seem very appealing to me. I believe that civic might be too generic (but maybe I just don't understand this right, hence the question for what is included and excluded). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Sent from my iPad On Oct 7, 2014, at 10:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-07 14:57 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: For example, I'm a foreign resident in Japan. I have to visit the regional offices to renew my visa every year or so. It's always a busy place people have to find. It's not at the city hall, the airport or a border - but it is a really important government office building that needs to labeled differently than a standard office building. I agree that it would be desirable to have more detail on government offices, e.g. being able to distinguish the tax office from the immigration office etc. I'd see this under the office tag and not in landuse. I don't want to add any detail through the landuse - beyond tagging their land. A single tag that can be used to marking the land for all of these services seems pretty straightforward. This is an enormous pile of work to do, as there are many different kind of these, and the detailed structure is different in every country. This is why a single landuse that is an umbrella for these services is an easy solution - it separates out the government services, but leaves the function tagging to other schemes, like landuse=retail tells you nothing about what is sold - just that something is sold there. I view these buildings as a completely separate class of buildings - so I want a new major landuse class, just as an industrial plant and a mall are big, but viewed and tagged with a different land use. A regional capital building is a similar size, and similarly in a different class than existing landuse values. A seperate subtag, where all the different building definitions can be put (beyond the ones already existing) or just more definitions thrown into amenity - either way I'm okay with it - but they all need a distinct landuse to sit on. On the other hand, the idea of having a wastewater plant, a fire station, a court and a federal ministry categorized the same civic landuse doesn't seem very appealing to me. If you want to slice out emergency services (police/fire) and judicial, that's fine. Give them their own umbrella landuses, and let the existing tagging scheme describe their function, The wastewater treatment plant is still industrial - as is the incinerator, but the city's water board office, usually part of the city's main office, would be civic. To me, civic is a shortening of civic administration. We recognize places that provide services to citizens or offices of those services directly with separate tags - there are tags for community centers, rec centers, city halls, dmvs, and other places that the public visit regularly that are part of the civil government (not military) - but there is no good landuse for them, as there is for industrial/retail/commercial. There are several classes of buildings still without seperate tags - ones that get their own label on the map, a guidepost on the road, and are visited by the public as frequently as a trip to city hall - but no tag labels them yet (tax/pension/immigration/etc). I want to show their class through a landuse, and their function with some other tag. I believe that civic might be too generic (but maybe I just don't understand this right, hence the question for what is included and excluded). Questions always help me clarify my thinking, and understand yours as well. Thank you for the questions. My idea right now is an umbrella landuse for these offices/services that don't fit in commercial, and a separate subtag/additional amenity tags for function, however people want to do that. cheers, Martin Javbw ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Would schools and hospitals fit into this new landuse tag? Dana 3. 10. 2014. 20:33 osoba Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org napisala je: Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see it in use, though there is a small number of landuse=civil already. (Plus other stuff of course...) Civic makes sense as well, however would that not limit the type of offices to municipal only, and exclude country government? My built-in Oxford defines: civic: of or relating to a city or town, esp. its administration; municipal of or relating to the duties or activities of people in relation to their town, city, or local area municipal: of or relating to a city or town or its governing body Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 20:02: what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc. landuse=organi[z|s]ational ? [oxford allows the 'z'-spelling for BrE, but 's' as well] could subsume greenpeaces, red crosses, civil defence, doctors without borders, political parties, and maybe even the disputed religious organisations, what else? ___ 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] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Il giorno 04/ott/2014, alle ore 06:58, johnw jo...@mac.com ha scritto: Usually the government services are monopolistic - courts, police, elected officials (there's only 1 mayor) tax offices, DMV, etc, whereas NGO s and non-profits are a business model to support some activity. thehospital could be run by a church, an NGO, or by the city, but it's still a hospital. A clinic. a pet hospital. maybe we need an amenity=homeless shelter? for the latter there is a social facility scheme with subtags. What landuse value do you suggest for NGOs? We've had this same discussion some months ago. I think courts and government shouldn't necessarily be in the same landuse, while for police I agree. I don't exactly get the meaning of civic, can you expand on this, what it includes and excludes? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: 2014-10-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer: I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative use, maybe in the context of further civic use. We do have office=administrative and office=government but no appropriate tag for the land they stand on. Often such buildings are surrounded by some land and often fenced off. not sure if office could also apply to the whole area (site) on which the office building stands (similar to how this is done with other amenities). I'd prefer to keep the office= tag to the building, or different offices in a building. Just to be sure: when writing about administration you are referring only to the public administration? Yes absolutely. Any commercial administration can keep the commercial landuse. Yes. I agree that the current practise of using commercial for all kinds of offices seems a bit strange, at least from a German point of view. I am not sure if the term commercial landuse is understood differently in English speaking countries. E.g. they do call their centres commercial district and central business district while in other cultures there might be a less business related term in use to articulate high density with mixed usage, but not focused on business (because there are also other features located typically, like theatres, museums and other culture related facilities). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_district I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 Tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
2014-10-03 18:14 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: 2014-10-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer: I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative use, maybe in the context of further civic use. We do have office=administrative and office=government but no appropriate tag for the land they stand on. Often such buildings are surrounded by some land and often fenced off. not sure if office could also apply to the whole area (site) on which the office building stands (similar to how this is done with other amenities). I'd prefer to keep the office= tag to the building, or different offices in a building. Just to be sure: when writing about administration you are referring only to the public administration? Yes absolutely. Any commercial administration can keep the commercial landuse. Yes. I agree that the current practise of using commercial for all kinds of offices seems a bit strange, at least from a German point of view. I am not sure if the term commercial landuse is understood differently in English speaking countries. E.g. they do call their centres commercial district and central business district while in other cultures there might be a less business related term in use to articulate high density with mixed usage, but not focused on business (because there are also other features located typically, like theatres, museums and other culture related facilities). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_district I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see it in use, though there is a small number of landuse=civil already. (Plus other stuff of course...) Dan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Il giorno 03/ott/2014, alle ore 19:14, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org ha scritto: Yes absolutely. Any commercial administration can keep the commercial landuse. what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see it in use, though there is a small number of landuse=civil already. (Plus other stuff of course...) Civic makes sense as well, however would that not limit the type of offices to municipal only, and exclude country government? My built-in Oxford defines: civic: of or relating to a city or town, esp. its administration; municipal of or relating to the duties or activities of people in relation to their town, city, or local area municipal: of or relating to a city or town or its governing body Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 20:02: what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc. landuse=organi[z|s]ational ? [oxford allows the 'z'-spelling for BrE, but 's' as well] could subsume greenpeaces, red crosses, civil defence, doctors without borders, political parties, and maybe even the disputed religious organisations, what else? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial
a few months ago I laid out the case for landuse=civic It's literal definition is a little restrictive, but basically all government admin and services. from a brance office of the city hall to the UN building. local to supranational. There was so much back and forth over it - do we need a voting page now? Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 20:02: what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc. landuse=organi[z|s]ational ? [oxford allows the 'z'-spelling for BrE, but 's' as well] Usually the government services are monopolistic - courts, police, elected officials (there's only 1 mayor) tax offices, DMV, etc, whereas NGO s and non-profits are a business model to support some activity. thehospital could be run by a church, an NGO, or by the city, but it's still a hospital. A clinic. a pet hospital. maybe we need an amenity=homeless shelter? I dunno. On Oct 4, 2014, at 3:31 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see it in use, though there is a small number of landuse=civil already. (Plus other stuff of course...) Civic makes sense as well, however would that not limit the type of offices to municipal only, and exclude country government? My built-in Oxford defines: civic: of or relating to a city or town, esp. its administration; municipal of or relating to the duties or activities of people in relation to their town, city, or local area municipal: of or relating to a city or town or its governing body Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 20:02: what about not-for-profit companies? NGOs etc. landuse=organi[z|s]ational ? [oxford allows the 'z'-spelling for BrE, but 's' as well] could subsume greenpeaces, red crosses, civil defence, doctors without borders, political parties, and maybe even the disputed religious organisations, what else? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
