Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names
Matthijs, I'm confused by your actions. Yesterday you started the formal process for making an uncontroversial change to the tagging of bookmakers, but since then you have made a series of considerably more controversial edits with no discussion at all. I wish to register my objection to these changes. You are standardising the tagging for particular brands, removing the original judgements made by mappers who looked at them on the ground. I find it particularly de-motivating when these mass changes strip meaning from my tagging, changing a specific tag to a more general one. I'm not against my tagging being changed through discussion, but distinctions should be kept, even if moved to a sub-tag (e.g. shop=bed versus shop=furniture furniture=bed). I have other concerns about these sorts of edits: Are you sure all the shops belonging to a chain sell the same thing and offer the same services? In my experience this isn't always the case. For example, WH Smith at train stations and airports sell a much narrower range than their larger high street stores. Where you are 'correcting' tagging based just on the name tag, how can you be sure its not an administrative office, distribution depot or something else other than a shop? Regards, Will ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names
Hi Will, On 24 October 2014 11:42, Will Phillips wp4...@gmail.com wrote: I'm confused by your actions. Yesterday you started the formal process for making an uncontroversial change to the tagging of bookmakers, but since then you have made a series of considerably more controversial edits with no discussion at all. I wish to register my objection to these changes. As far as I am aware, the bookmaker tagging is more controversial than the changes I did today and yesterday. Bookmaker versus betting is a longstanding controversy, with (until recently) nearly equal tagging and strong proponents for both sides. Moreover the numbers for the bookmaker changes are quite large (hundreds on both sides). On the other hand, the changes I made today and yesterday are shops where mappers have expressed a strong preference for a particular tagging, and only involve small numbers (mostly less than 10 shops), so easy to revert manually. You are standardising the tagging for particular brands, removing the original judgements made by mappers who looked at them on the ground. I find it particularly de-motivating when these mass changes strip meaning from my tagging, changing a specific tag to a more general one. I'm not against my tagging being changed through discussion, but distinctions should be kept, even if moved to a sub-tag (e.g. shop=bed versus shop=furniture furniture=bed). I agree with that. Can you give examples of changes where I stripped meaning from tags? That should not have happened. I noticed the shop=bed situation myself, and already concluded myself that it would be good to carry out this change, but not without advance discussion. I have other concerns about these sorts of edits: Are you sure all the shops belonging to a chain sell the same thing and offer the same services? In my experience this isn't always the case. For example, WH Smith at train stations and airports sell a much narrower range than their larger high street stores. I have surveyed 3016 shops myself (no, I'm not only an armchair mapper), so I think I have a fairly good understanding of what products shops sell. I might always have made a mistake of course, so if you spot any, feel free to point them out. I know WHSmith is a difficult case, so I won't touch it without prior discussion. Where you are 'correcting' tagging based just on the name tag, how can you be sure its not an administrative office, distribution depot or something else other than a shop? I look at location of course. I only changed high street / retail centre locations. In other cases, I added OSM notes. So personally I think I have sufficient checks in place to not overwrite useful data. That said, I don't mind reverting some or all of my changes if you consider them controversial, and discussing them beforehand. If so, please specify which changes you refer to. -- Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme (was: RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names)
On 23/10/2014 13:04, SomeoneElse wrote: On 23/10/2014 12:57, Dave F. wrote: I'm not convinced Notes are cleared up any more than Fixmes They certainly are more visible to me - they're available for a simple overlay on the main map and get announced in IRC channels. They maybe more visible, but that doesn't mean they get updated or offer more relevant data. If Fixmes had a front end overlay they'd, obviously, be just as noticeable. IMO, fixmes are better as they're added by people with knowledge of OSM who are actually editing, attached to entities, offer clearer instructions as to what needs to be fixed. Notes are added by non editors, often inaccurately placed with vague messages like ,can't get down here'. Was there an import from that crappy 'bugs'? Specific Q lots of these notes in my area are 'Incorrect speed limit. Reported speed limit is 40 mph' from 'anonymous'. Where is it 'reported' from. Is it being compared with another database? Cheers Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme
On 24/10/14 14:06, Dave F. wrote: Specific Q lots of these notes in my area are 'Incorrect speed limit. Reported speed limit is 40 mph' from 'anonymous'. Where is it 'reported' from. Is it being compared with another database? There was a short burst of these a couple of months ago. They are very low quality data, more often wrong than right. I suspect the people who injected them reacted to the resulting bad press. More generally, I think notes only work if they can be cleared quickly. There is a tendency for notes to accumulate and clog the user interface if they involve a lot of work (outlines bad here, or lots of shops missing, or if there is no clear test of completion of the work. They also attract a lot of vanity mappings. Whilst some of these can be summarily dismissed, a lot of them are not important enough to research with any priority over normal mapping of the area, so can end up cluttering the map for a long time (alternatively they get resolved to de-clutter the map, but with the result that abusing the notes system gets rewarded). ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme
On 24/10/2014 14:06, Dave F. wrote: On 23/10/2014 13:04, SomeoneElse wrote: They maybe more visible, but that doesn't mean they get updated or offer more relevant data. If Fixmes had a front end overlay they'd, obviously, be just as noticeable. You could argue that they do: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/5BR but I don't see people trying to resolve fixmes the way that they resolve notes. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme
On 24/10/2014 14:06, Dave F. wrote: Specific Q lots of these notes in my area are 'Incorrect speed limit. Reported speed limit is 40 mph' from 'anonymous'. Where is it 'reported' from. Is it being compared with another database? That was mentioned on talk: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-September/070829.html Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme
On 24/10/2014 14:21, SomeoneElse wrote: On 24/10/2014 14:06, Dave F. wrote: On 23/10/2014 13:04, SomeoneElse wrote: They maybe more visible, but that doesn't mean they get updated or offer more relevant data. If Fixmes had a front end overlay they'd, obviously, be just as noticeable. You could argue that they do: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/5BR I'm sorry, are you suggesting an API QL query of the database is 'front-end'? but I don't see people trying to resolve fixmes the way that they resolve notes. Could that be because they're /not/ front-end? Cheers, Andy --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Notes vs Fixme
On 24/10/2014 14:26, SomeoneElse wrote: On 24/10/2014 14:06, Dave F. wrote: Specific Q lots of these notes in my area are 'Incorrect speed limit. Reported speed limit is 40 mph' from 'anonymous'. Where is it 'reported' from. Is it being compared with another database? That was mentioned on talk: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-September/070829.html Ta Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
Dear all, I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24/10/14 14:44, Matthijs Melissen wrote: I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval. Note that by propose what Matthijs means is have already started doing if the number of Correct tagging of XXX shops changesets by him in the last 24 hours are anything to do by: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Math1985/history Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24/10/2014 15:13, Dan S wrote: Co-operative - not clear to me why you choose to drop The from this one, since it's included in the branding? You choose to keep it for The Co-operative Food. +1: see http://www.co-operative.coop/about-us/ -- Steve --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24 October 2014 15:24, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: Note that by propose what Matthijs means is have already started doing if the number of Correct tagging of XXX shops changesets by him in the last 24 hours are anything to do by: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Math1985/history Hi Tom, No, your presumption (which you phrased in a way to make it sound like a statement rather than an presumption, by the way) is not true. I have not started with any of the proposed changes here. The proposed changes in this thread involve changes to name tags of shops, while my changeset involves the shop tag - and that only involving small numbers of shops, in cases where a clear community consensus already exist. If there are any particular of my change sets, or even all of them, you have a problem with, please let me know and I will gladly revert them. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 2014-10-24 15:35, Steve Doerr wrote: On 24/10/2014 15:13, Dan S wrote: Co-operative - not clear to me why you choose to drop The from this one, since it's included in the branding? You choose to keep it for The Co-operative Food. +1: see http://www.co-operative.coop/about-us/ Also note there are a number of co-ops which are not part of The Co-operative Group (eg Scotmid). Some of these might have stores branded as Co-op or The Co-op or Co-operative etc. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24/10/14 14:44, Matthijs Melissen wrote: please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval. Nisa use at least two brands, Nisa Local and Nisa Loco (the logo makes the last o appear to have an accute accent but they don't use it in the text). Whilst I can't work out the branding concept difference between them, they are different brands. I think they tend not to include the Nisa when they are using the Loco brand. Also it is a franchise. Actually a lot of shops are really franchises. Some Nisa stores seem to retain branding that reflects their ownership, and shouldn't be fixed. I see someone has already mentioned the re-branding of Wilkinsons to Wilko. My feeling is that you need to split this up into obvious mistakes and possible branding variations. Sainsburys for Sainsbury's is a mistake. Most variations on Co-op probably need verifying on the ground. What I would more like, though is moving location information into a branch tag, e.g. some people seem to want to have a Macdonalds Snowdon Summit entry rather than just having it as Macdonalds (I assume that doesn't really exist). Also watch out for people going close to the edge on trade mark violations. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24/10/14 17:20, David Woolley wrote: Whilst I can't work out the branding concept difference between them, they are different brands. I think they tend not to include the Nisa when they are using the Loco brand. Nisa Local is for medium sized stores. Loco is for small ones. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:44:17 +0100 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Please let me know if you have any comments. A few thoughts: * The co-operative - Co-operative - As others have said, we should keep the definitive article. * Cotswold Outdoor - Cotswold - My local store and their website refer to the company as Cotswold Outdoor so it would be wrong to change it. * Would it be worthwhile expanding this proposal to also cover the brand tag? -- Regards, Andy Street ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
Dear Matthijs, As Will has objected to these edits, I do too. I agree with him that it is far too premature to even consider doing this. AFAIK the Nottingham area is the only place in the UK, and one of the very few places in the world, where there has been a systematic approach to mapping shops (by Paul Williams, Kev Swindells, Will Phillips and myself). The tags chosen have been chosen with care and represent a very valuable data set for evaluating how one might develop the tagging scheme for shops in the future. Altering these tags to some view of what they should be creates the following problems: - It destroys the utility of the OSM-Nottingham http://osm-nottingham.org.uk/ site which is a show case for OSM in our local area. This already has a categorisation of retail tags which we know works really well (created by Will Phillips, but pretty much in accord with my own ideas of classification set out in my slides at SotM-Baltics. (OSM Nottingham demonstrates incidentally that consuming such data, as I have said before, is not a major point of development complexity. - It destroys a highly useful data set for evaluating how things might be tagged by mappers in the field. It also shows a massive amount of disrespect for other OpenStreetMap contributors in a multitude of areas their mapping styles, their hard work, and their local knowledge. I would ask you to revert edits made in the UK over the past few days, and for you to abstain from further mechanical edits in the area. Should you not do this I may feel a need to refer your actions to the Data Working Group. Regards, Jerry Clough On 24 October 2014 14:44, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names . Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
Dear Matthjis, Apparently you have chosen to change names of shops which have been surveyed in the field. Please do not assume that your armchair knowledge is somehow more valuable than someone who lives in the area and actually goes out and looks what it says on the front of the shops. I could have done many of these changes, but strangely decided not too. I even did some work on stores in the co-operative movement, where someone else had already erroneously changed names. Your actions however well-intentioned are far too hasty, and do not appear to respect the clear guidelines set out in the Mechanical edit policy. Regards, Jerry Clough On 24 October 2014 15:44, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: On 24 October 2014 15:24, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: Note that by propose what Matthijs means is have already started doing if the number of Correct tagging of XXX shops changesets by him in the last 24 hours are anything to do by: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Math1985/history Hi Tom, No, your presumption (which you phrased in a way to make it sound like a statement rather than an presumption, by the way) is not true. I have not started with any of the proposed changes here. The proposed changes in this thread involve changes to name tags of shops, while my changeset involves the shop tag - and that only involving small numbers of shops, in cases where a clear community consensus already exist. If there are any particular of my change sets, or even all of them, you have a problem with, please let me know and I will gladly revert them. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names
Thank you for the constructive reply. I don't doubt you are acting in good faith and with more care than my initial message might have implied. However, I do think it is very important that these sort of systematic changes are fully discussed first. There have been a number of cases where such changes have been done badly in the past, so I do tend to view them with concern, especially when they are done unexpectedly. The specific change you made that led to my original message was shop=tyre being replaced with shop=car_repair. I'm not familiar with any of the locations changed, but shop=tyre seems to me to be a more specific tag than shop=car_repair, so I don't think it should have been replaced without consultation (and preferably checking on the ground). I'm not very keen on the shop=tyre tag, but it does at least indicate a garage that specialises (sometimes only) in selling and fitting tyres, which is something worth tagging in my view. There are about 10 such places tagged in Nottingham currently (Tyre Link, Tyre Point, Tyre Zone, etc...). I do certainly support the idea of discussing and agreeing recommended tagging for high street chains, but I think mappers on the ground should make the final judgement, because as I wrote in my earlier message, different branches of the same chain can sometimes vary depending on things like size and location. Cheers, Will On 24/10/2014 12:38, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Hi Will, On 24 October 2014 11:42, Will Phillips wp4...@gmail.com wrote: I'm confused by your actions. Yesterday you started the formal process for making an uncontroversial change to the tagging of bookmakers, but since then you have made a series of considerably more controversial edits with no discussion at all. I wish to register my objection to these changes. As far as I am aware, the bookmaker tagging is more controversial than the changes I did today and yesterday. Bookmaker versus betting is a longstanding controversy, with (until recently) nearly equal tagging and strong proponents for both sides. Moreover the numbers for the bookmaker changes are quite large (hundreds on both sides). On the other hand, the changes I made today and yesterday are shops where mappers have expressed a strong preference for a particular tagging, and only involve small numbers (mostly less than 10 shops), so easy to revert manually. You are standardising the tagging for particular brands, removing the original judgements made by mappers who looked at them on the ground. I find it particularly de-motivating when these mass changes strip meaning from my tagging, changing a specific tag to a more general one. I'm not against my tagging being changed through discussion, but distinctions should be kept, even if moved to a sub-tag (e.g. shop=bed versus shop=furniture furniture=bed). I agree with that. Can you give examples of changes where I stripped meaning from tags? That should not have happened. I noticed the shop=bed situation myself, and already concluded myself that it would be good to carry out this change, but not without advance discussion. I have other concerns about these sorts of edits: Are you sure all the shops belonging to a chain sell the same thing and offer the same services? In my experience this isn't always the case. For example, WH Smith at train stations and airports sell a much narrower range than their larger high street stores. I have surveyed 3016 shops myself (no, I'm not only an armchair mapper), so I think I have a fairly good understanding of what products shops sell. I might always have made a mistake of course, so if you spot any, feel free to point them out. I know WHSmith is a difficult case, so I won't touch it without prior discussion. Where you are 'correcting' tagging based just on the name tag, how can you be sure its not an administrative office, distribution depot or something else other than a shop? I look at location of course. I only changed high street / retail centre locations. In other cases, I added OSM notes. So personally I think I have sufficient checks in place to not overwrite useful data. That said, I don't mind reverting some or all of my changes if you consider them controversial, and discussing them beforehand. If so, please specify which changes you refer to. -- Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
I'd also say the same about the Wilkinson-Wilko rebranding. Most store chains roll out re-brands over a number of months because they are expensive and creating and fitting new signage externally internally involves a range of skills which may take time to assemble. At present I suspect we are a bit slow at spotting and dealing with these things. The ideal would be to encourage local mappers to check. We all know that checking a minor change in an area often results in a flurry of other edits because it's a while since someone was in that area. It's another problem of editing them en masse: by doing so you remove one of the incentives to get mappers to revisit places in their local area. As we acquire more mappers better messages about what needs checking is far more likely to result in a good map than doing mass updates. If we want to keep a data set with what we believe to be absolutely current branding this can be done as a post-processing step (a typical data warehouse cleansing process). The logic is essentially the same and has the advantage of that it does nothing to antagonise mappers who contributed the data in the first place. Furthermore post-processed data sets can be changed so that global changes are easier to apply through use of more normalised schemas. Jerry On 24 October 2014 18:18, Will Phillips wp4...@gmail.com wrote: I think the name tag should show what is written on the shop sign. Some of your suggested changes do this. For example, as far as I know Waterstones never has an apostrophe. However, some of the proposed changes look like doing the opposite: e.g. the signs do say MS Simply Food not Marks Spencer Simply Food (if my memory is correct). The changes to Co-op names look problematic, because they vary around the country (unless they've been standardised very recently). Locally the one in my home town (Stapleford, Nottingham) is 'The Co-operative Food', another a few miles down the road in Castle Donington for a long time just said 'Co-op', until it changed to 'The Co-operative Food' in the last year or two ago. Unless you have strong evidence they have all been standardised recently, I don't think they should be changed. Cheers, Will On 24/10/2014 14:44, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Dear all, I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/ Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mechanical shop edits (Was: RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names)
On 24 October 2014 17:46, SK53 sk53@gmail.com wrote: AFAIK the Nottingham area is the only place in the UK, and one of the very few places in the world, where there has been a systematic approach to mapping shops (by Paul Williams, Kev Swindells, Will Phillips and myself). The tags chosen have been chosen with care and represent a very valuable data set for evaluating how one might develop the tagging scheme for shops in the future. That's interesting, and a project I certainly appreciate. Is there any documentation on this tagging scheme? Of course the risk is that other local communities might come up with an equally well-thought out, but incompatible tagging scheme, which does not help global data consumers. I just checked, and I touched 5 objects in the Nottingham area: shop=funeral_director to shop=funeral_directors shop=video to shop=music for HMV shop=hearing_aid to shop=hearing_aids shop=chocolatier to shop=confectionery (Thorntons) shop=car_repair;car_parts to shop=car_repair Could you indicate how these changes relate to the Nottingham tagging scheme? Were all old tags seen as correct by your scheme? I would ask you to revert edits made in the UK over the past few days, and for you to abstain from further mechanical edits in the area. I don't agree with all of your arguments, and I believe (globally) standardizing tagging schemes is the way to go. However, I agree we should not make mechanical changes that are controversial, so I have reverted my edits of today and yesterday. Kind regards, Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names
On 24 October 2014 14:44, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names. Thank you for all comments so far. Based on the comments, I made the following changes: - I removed most changes to the co-operative stores, as their inconsistent signs means that they require a local visit. - Majestic (Wine (Warehouse)) is a difficult case because they're very inconsistent in the way they use their brand. I decided to go with Majestic Wine Warehouse, which is the current most popular name. - I dropped the Nisa change. - Marks Spencer Simply Food is now changed to MS Simply Food, instead of the other way around. People mentioned the Wilkinsons to Wilko change, but please note that I never proposed to automatically change this. As not all shops have been changed, we cannot handle this in an automated way. The brand tag, as well as moving location information into a different tag, would be worth looking at to, but I consider it out of scope of the current changes. Please let me know if there are more changes that need to be made to the proposed list. -- Matthijs ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
