On Fri, 2015-02-06 at 19:31 +1100, Warin wrote: .... reasoned arg against (eg) amenity=waste_dog_excrement....
Yes, Warin, you are probably right, while a more sensible syntax, it will be resisted as too big a change. An alternative might be to declare that (eg) waste=waste_dog_excrement is on a par with amenity=, so waste= can be used without amenity=waste_disposal. In other words, bumping waste= up to a higher lever key. While a big change in principle, its technically trivial, existing tags in the database will still be valid, no changes needed, just in future, taggers can leave out the redundant amenity=waste_disposal The problem there is treating waste= as a high level tag. Considering just how big an issue waste disposal is to humanity, I cannot help but think its justified. But won't be surprised if there are dissenters.... David > On 5/02/2015 12:04 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: > > You mean a one step? Like highway= x ? > > > > To do that I'd think a new supper key waste= at the top > > level! And maybe that is what it needs! If there are enough > > different kinds then why not? > > waste=rubbish_bin > > waste=skip_bin > > waste=dump_point > > waste=chemical_toilet > > waste=dog_excrement > > waste=sharps > > waste=cigarettes > > waste=excrement > > > > What does it take to justify a top level tag? > > > > I think he means that if we use a top level amenity tag like > > amenity=waste_disposal we are forced to make another whole set of > > sub keys to describe the waste being disposed of. At least that's > > where my criticism comes from. If however we can agree on a tag of > > amenity=dump_point and define it as "a facility where one can dump > > or discharge the waste tanks of an RV or recreational boat" it can > > be understood and rendered by evaluating only that single tag. > > > > Whether the waste being dumped is from a "chemical toilet" or from a > > plastic bag on a "porta-potty" or "cassette" then becomes > > irrelevant. The facility will handle it. > > > > > > This new top level tag might make the approval process easier too. > > Standing alone as it would, it nicely separates garbage and trash, > > or recyclables, from sewage and doesn't require any other > > potentially lengthy approvals for new subkeys. > > > The present sub tag already exists and is in use .. for oil, > cigarettes, grey_water, drugs, dog_excrement, etc .. so they still > have to be evaluated for a true render of the facility. If what is > required is a one tag entry for each waste type then amenity= will be > over loaded eg > > amenity=waste_dog_excrement > amenity=waste_cigarettes > amenity=waste_sharps > > Note the inclusion of waste in the name .. so people don't think that > they are places that sell the stuff! :) > > about 8 + around 28! if you include waste recycling... > and I think it then needs to be a top level tag .. like shop=, > tourism=. sport= etc. as there are too many of them .. and that would > be opposed as it is a lot of work to change the present data and a lot > of work to change the renders... at least another category of > amenity ... presently > * 2.1 Sustenance > * 2.2 Education > * 2.3 Transportation > * 2.4 Financial > * 2.5 Healthcare > * 2.6 Entertainment, Arts & Culture > * 2.7 Others > > Add '2.8 Waste'? I don't know.. just pointing out the possible > future problems? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
