2010/10/26 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
On 25/10/2010 12:04, Peter Wendorff wrote:
I'm not sure wether that's a better approach you describe here.
Of course it's a building - but also it's a museum.
So building=museum works.
well, almost everything works if there is consistency and
On 23/10/2010 22:10, David Murn wrote:
A hairdresser and museum, are currently amenity.
I agree with you that museum should be amenity, although for some silly
reason it's listed under the anachronistic tag of tourism.
As I said on the tagging forum:
Tourism is a tag that shouldn't be used
2010/10/25 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
Tourism is a tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
Primary tags should be used to describe what it is, not whom it *might* be
used by.
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
On 25 October 2010 11:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/10/25 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
Tourism is a tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
Primary tags should be used to describe what it is, not whom it *might* be
used by.
what about tourism=information
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
building=tourist_information
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
2010/10/25 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
building=tourist_information
no, please not. the building key is (and should IMHO be) used for
On 25/10/2010 10:38, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/10/25 Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com:
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
building=tourist_information
no, please not.
On 25/10/2010 10:23, Markus Lindholm wrote:
On 25 October 2010 11:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/10/25 Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com:
Tourism is a tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
Primary tags should be used to describe what it is, not whom it *might* be
Am 25.10.2010 12:22, schrieb Dave F.:
On 25/10/2010 10:23, Markus Lindholm wrote:
On 25 October 2010 11:17, M∡rtin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/10/25 Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com:
Tourism is a tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
Primary tags should be used to
2010/10/25 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
On 25/10/2010 10:38, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/10/25 Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com:
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Markus Lindholm
markus.lindh...@gmail.com wrote:
What constitutes a primary tag?
A tag which is meant to be exclusive of other primary tags. To avoid
infinite recursion, amenity is a primary tag.
How should one know which tags are considered primary when
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote:
Let's take the following entities:
A museum showing old buildings arranged to villages from the far past (there
are a lot of in Germany, but also in other countries). As that's not a
building (it includes
Dave F. wrote:
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
building=tourist_information
And if it's not a building?
--
View this message in context:
-
It'd be a whole lot easier for parsers if we just used
thing=fire_extinguisher/picnic_table/well/cable_distribution_cabinet/memorial/fountain/street_lamp.
Or
amenity=fire_extinguisher/picnic_table/well/cable_distribution_cabinet/memorial/fountain
/street_lamp.
In other words, the class tag.
On 25/10/2010 16:27, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
On 25/10/2010 10:17, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
what about tourism=information with it's several subtags? Seems to fit
perfectly IMHO as a primary tag.
building=tourist_information
And if it's not a building?
Please read all of
On 25/10/2010 14:00, Anthony wrote:
Why tag all museums with tourism=yes when you can just put a single
line in the search engine which says that museums (or perhaps museums
without access=no) are places for tourism.
Good point, well made.
___
talk
On 25/10/2010 12:04, Peter Wendorff wrote:
I'm not sure wether that's a better approach you describe here.
Of course it's a building - but also it's a museum.
So building=museum works.
There are lot's of museums without being a building.
Please see the point at the end which you +1.
Yes
2010/10/22 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au:
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 19:06 +0200, Claudius wrote:
Am 22.10.2010 18:28, David Murn:
One way I heard it described, is an amenity is something youre likely to
want to navigate to. While that description is a bit vague, it seems to
fit most
On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 13:09 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/10/22 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au:
If you were visiting someone in an out-of-state prison, it certainly
would be somewhere one might want to navigate to, the same way you might
want to navigate to an ATM, fuel station
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 07:55 +0200, Peter Körner wrote:
Am 21.10.2010 23:29, schrieb Sean Horgan:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single line definition.
Do you have
Am 22.10.2010 18:28, David Murn:
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 07:55 +0200, Peter Körner wrote:
Am 21.10.2010 23:29, schrieb Sean Horgan:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 19:06 +0200, Claudius wrote:
Am 22.10.2010 18:28, David Murn:
One way I heard it described, is an amenity is something youre likely to
want to navigate to. While that description is a bit vague, it seems to
fit most current applications of the key.
Like
On 10/22/2010 03:16 PM, David Murn wrote:
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 19:06 +0200, Claudius wrote:
You could propose
that footpaths should no longer use the highway= tag, as they’re not
highways, using a similar argument.
Sure they are.
From Wikipedia:
A highway is a public road, especially a major
Hello everyone!
From searching through the tagging mailing list archives, the Amenity key
has its share of supporters and detractors and the topic seems to frequently
rear its head. I can see both sides and like many of the tagging issues, it
comes down to semantics. I think a lot of the
Am 21.10.2010 23:29, schrieb Sean Horgan:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single line definition.
Do you have a suggestion?
Peter
25 matches
Mail list logo
