Ilya, Here's a Walmart that's been built in the last few years I recently added to OSM:
http://audit.osmz.ru/browse/walmart/5935 What's currently in OSM represents my own mapping style, but I think it's worth discussing the differences before you change them across the whole country. If I read this correctly, you are planning on changing the top-level tag from shop=department_store to shop=supermarket. I have been using shop=supermarket only for Walmarts branded as "Walmart Neighborhood Market" and using shop=department_store for all other Walmarts. For me the main distinction is that most Walmarts have departments for things like clothing and electronics that don't exist in the "Walmart Neighborhood Market" stores. You are proposing changing the opening_hours tag from "00:00-01:00,05:00-24:00" to "Mo-Su 05:00-01:00". When I'm adding opening hours, I avoid timespans that cross midnight as there is some difference of opinion as to what those timespans actually represent. I think most people would say that these two opening hours are equivalent, but if you were to have something like "Mo-Sa 05:00-01:00; Su 10:00-22:00" this illustrates the problem with different interpretations of times that span midnight: http://openingh.openstreetmap.de/evaluation_tool/?EXP=Mo-Sa% 2005%3A00-01%3A00%3B%20Su%2010%3A00-22%3A00 http://projets.pavie.info/yohours/?oh=Mo-Sa%2005:00-01:00;% 20Su%2010:00-22:00 I also omit "Mo-Su" when writing opening_hours as, in my opinion, this doesn't add value to the data and from a human-readable perspective it looks very similar to "Mo-Sa" which of course means something different. Another problem with "Mo-Su" is that it is equivalent to "Su-Sa" or any of the other 7 possible variations. One of the problems with the opening_hours tag in general is that there are many ways of representing the same set of opening hours and I'm not aware of any efforts to establish a canonical representation for opening_hours. Can you avoid updating opening_hours if the new value is equivalent to the old value? For the website tag, I prefer to use simple URLs: http://www.walmart.com/ https://www.walmart.com/store/5935/tigard-or/whats-new The advantage to using the basic URL is that it will still continue to work in the future even if Walmart decides to reformat their webiste. The disadvantage is that it does not go to a page specific to this particular store. Reading through the imports list, I see there is already some discussion about whether to use the "whats-new" or "details" URL for each store. What happens in a year when the "whats-new" URL no longer works? I would omit the addr:full tag at least on objects where addr:street and addr:housenumber already exist. I would also omit the operator=Walmart tag. I only use operator if the value of the operator is different from the value of name. The object already has ref=5935. The ref:walmart=5935 tag is superfluous and I would omit it. It's fairly well established practice to use the plain ref tag for mapping store identifiers. We don't need a separate ref:* tag for every store. Overall, I think you need to put in more effort to determine whether the data that you are using to overwrite existing OSM data is in fact better. Since you want to get this done "before the New Year", maybe it would be better to just leave existing OSM tags alone for now and then manually check them against your dataset later. I don't have any specific examples handy, but I've seen cases where the data on the company website is wrong for things like postal code, house numbers, or streets. Sometimes it seems that companies change their addresses to get their geocoding service of choice to put the placemarker in the right spot, so I would be especially wary of changing existing OSM data. Peter On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Ilya Zverev <i...@zverev.info> wrote: > Hi, > > As some of you know, Brandify company wants to import all the Walmart > locations in the US into OpenStreetMap. They have full permission to do > that. See the message from their VP Product, Damian, for more detailed > explanation: > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2017-Decem > ber/005279.html > > After a brief discussion on the imports@ list, they made a few proposed > changes, and I re-uploaded the result to my imports validation website. > Could you please look through a couple dozen points, to ensure they will be > added to correct locations with correct tags? The more the better — I plan > to to a few hundred myself: > > http://audit.osmz.ru/project/walmart > > I really hope we can finish this before the New Year. > > Thanks, > Ilya > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
