RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

David Dean
Hi everyone,

I'm interested in proposing and/or documenting existing tagging approaches of the wiki to ensure that all highway=service ways can have a service=? associated tag. Having done, so I'm planning on resurrecting https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete/issues/808 to help people get all service roads appropriately tagged in their area.

At the moment, service=? can be (according to the wiki at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service):

* service=parking_aisle
* service=driveway
* service=alley
* service=emergency_access
* service=drive-through

But service roads are also used for the 'main ways on a parking lot', and there is also an indication of access to multiple businesses (like in an industrial estate etc), and it looks like the documented way is to not to provide a service=? tag in this case.

This seems problematic to me from a map maintenance purpose, as how do we know if a highway=service just hasn't had a service=? tag applied yet, or if it is one of the exceptions that does not get a service=? tag (and which one is it?)

I would like to try to understand the highway=service usages that don't have a current documented service=? tag and either propose an appropriate tag or find examples of existing tagging to document.

At this stage I think appropriate tagging for some of the missing service=? tagging indicated in the documentation would be:

service=parking -> main way in a parking lot, for connecting service=parking_isles (used almost 2K times already: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service#values)

service=driveway -> also used for access to multiple businesses (like in an industrial estate, etc)

service=driveway/drive-through -> Service way for access to a fuel station

Are there any other main understood uses of no service=? tag that would need an appropriate service=? tag to fill this gap?

Once I've got some good starting feedback from this forum, I plan on revising https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/service%3Dparking to include any new appropriate service=? (not just service=parking) tagging and start the formal RFC process.

Thanks for your feedback, everyone.

- David

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Jmapb
On 8/1/2020 8:40 PM, David Dean wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm interested in proposing and/or documenting existing tagging
> approaches of the wiki to ensure that all highway=service ways can
> have a service=? associated tag.

Hi David -- My feeling is that often highway=service, without a
service=* tag, is a useful and valid tagging practice.

The basic rule I follow is that any road that is not part of the general
public road network but is more established than a track should be
highway=service. (There are exceptions of course -- privately operated
residential, unclassified, tertiary etc -- but that's the basic rule.)
If that road isn't obviously a driveway, alley, drive-through, or
parking aisle then I'm usually fine to omit the service=* tag.

Here of some of the situations where I use highway=service without
service=*:
  - Roads through cemeteries
  - Roads through campgrounds
  - Roads through schools
  - Roads through universities
  - Roads through hotels
  - Roads through museums
  - Roads through prisons
  - Roads through military areas
  - Roads through airports
  - Roads through retirement homes
  - Roads through resorts
  - Roads through reservoirs (sometimes over dams)
  - Roads through ski areas
  - Roads that serve privately-owned inholdings surrounded by public land
  - Maintenance roads in parks
  - Private semi-residential roads that serve multiple driveways
  - Non-public roads though industrial areas

This is just off the top of my head. There are probably dozens more in
use across the globe.

My feeling is that these uses do not require and would not much benefit
from a specified service= tag. I don't see the need for service=prison,
service=ski_area, service=campground, etc.

Jason


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by David Dean
service=parking seems like a good idea
to me


2 Aug 2020, 02:40 by [hidden email]:
Hi everyone,

I'm interested in proposing and/or documenting existing tagging approaches of the wiki to ensure that all highway=service ways can have a service=? associated tag. Having done, so I'm planning on resurrecting https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete/issues/808 to help people get all service roads appropriately tagged in their area.

At the moment, service=? can be (according to the wiki at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service):

* service=parking_aisle
* service=driveway
* service=alley
* service=emergency_access
* service=drive-through

But service roads are also used for the 'main ways on a parking lot', and there is also an indication of access to multiple businesses (like in an industrial estate etc), and it looks like the documented way is to not to provide a service=? tag in this case.

This seems problematic to me from a map maintenance purpose, as how do we know if a highway=service just hasn't had a service=? tag applied yet, or if it is one of the exceptions that does not get a service=? tag (and which one is it?)

I would like to try to understand the highway=service usages that don't have a current documented service=? tag and either propose an appropriate tag or find examples of existing tagging to document.

At this stage I think appropriate tagging for some of the missing service=? tagging indicated in the documentation would be:

service=parking -> main way in a parking lot, for connecting service=parking_isles (used almost 2K times already: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service#values)

service=driveway -> also used for access to multiple businesses (like in an industrial estate, etc)

service=driveway/drive-through -> Service way for access to a fuel station

Are there any other main understood uses of no service=? tag that would need an appropriate service=? tag to fill this gap?

Once I've got some good starting feedback from this forum, I plan on revising https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/service%3Dparking to include any new appropriate service=? (not just service=parking) tagging and start the formal RFC process.

Thanks for your feedback, everyone.

- David

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 2. Aug 2020, at 10:19, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> service=parking seems like a good idea
> to me


too generic for me, also not suitable where the road is not just for the parking.

 Proposal: service=access_collector

Cheers Martin


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Graeme Fitzpatrick



On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 18:55, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:

 Proposal: service=access_collector

Sorry, means nothing, at least to me?

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 2. Aug 2020, at 11:28, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Sorry, means nothing, at least to me?


it’s meant to be a coined word for an access road that leads to more access roads, that collects different or multiple kind of access roads, in short a more important access road


Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ael
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

ael
In reply to this post by Jmapb
On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 01:04:15AM -0400, Jmapb wrote:
> On 8/1/2020 8:40 PM, David Dean wrote:
> > I'm interested in proposing and/or documenting existing tagging
> > approaches of the wiki to ensure that all highway=service ways can
> > have a service=? associated tag.
>
> Hi David -- My feeling is that often highway=service, without a
> service=* tag, is a useful and valid tagging practice.
 +1

 ael


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

westnordost
In reply to this post by Jmapb
>  - Roads through cemeteries
>  - Roads through campgrounds
>  - Roads through schools
>  - Roads through universities
>  - Roads through hotels
>  - Roads through museums
>  - Roads through prisons
>  - Roads through military areas
>  - Roads through airports
>  - Roads through retirement homes
>  - Roads through resorts
>  - Roads through reservoirs (sometimes over dams)
>  - Roads through ski areas
>  - Roads that serve privately-owned inholdings surrounded by public land
>  - Maintenance roads in parks
>  - Private semi-residential roads that serve multiple driveways
>  - Non-public roads though industrial areas

Good list!

So what all these have in common is that they are not public roads not
intended for through-traffic. They are all on private/public properties.
So maybe they could be summarized under service=property, with a
description like "roads on (private) large properties, such as on
hospital grounds, cemeteries, camping grounds, industrial or commercial
areas"

Another kind of service road that comes to my mind would be just a piece
of paved way that is broad enough for a car somewhere in the nowhere
(countryside, forest) that does not obviously belong to any property but
also does not lead to any house or parking area. It is not tagged as a
highway=path because it is broad enough for cars and it is not tagged as
highway=track because oftentimes such tracks that are well paved and not
obviously for agricultural/forestry usage are simply tagged that way.
So in other words, it is "just" a service road but a subtype is unknown,
much like a subtype is often unknown for highway=footway ("It is just a
way!").

Tobias


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Graeme Fitzpatrick



On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 05:49, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]> wrote:

So what all these have in common is that they are not public roads not
intended for through-traffic. They are all on private/public properties.
So maybe they could be summarized under service=property, with a
description like "roads on (private) large properties, such as on
hospital grounds, cemeteries, camping grounds, industrial or commercial
areas"

That's a nice idea!

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

On 3. Aug 2020, at 00:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:


So what all these have in common is that they are not public roads not
intended for through-traffic. They are all on private/public properties.
So maybe they could be summarized under service=property, with a
description like "roads on (private) large properties, such as on
hospital grounds, cemeteries, camping grounds, industrial or commercial
areas"

That's a nice idea!


not all “service without additional subclass” are on properties, while most of those that already have additional subclasses like service=driveway/parking_aisle/drive_through etc. usually are. IMHO “property” would be misleading as qualifier for more important service roads

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

David Dean
Thanks for the great feedback, everyone.

Firstly, I don't want anyone to feel that just tagging highway=service is wrong, and you have to have a service tag. Any information available on the map is more useful than no information. I just want the ability to differentiate between 'we don't know what sort of service road this is' and 'we know it is a main parking road and/or access within a private residential/commercial/industrial/etc property/campus'.

On the main parking road, I think we are largely in agreement that service=parking would be a good addition to OSM documentation (and is already in use throughout the world, as such).

For the second type of highway=service with no service tagging, what about using service=access? 
It has been used about 1K times already ( https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/service=access#overviewhttps://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WGY), and looks like it has been used in that general 'access to facilities on a larger property/campus' sense.


- David

On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 08:31, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:


sent from a phone

On 3. Aug 2020, at 00:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:


So what all these have in common is that they are not public roads not
intended for through-traffic. They are all on private/public properties.
So maybe they could be summarized under service=property, with a
description like "roads on (private) large properties, such as on
hospital grounds, cemeteries, camping grounds, industrial or commercial
areas"

That's a nice idea!


not all “service without additional subclass” are on properties, while most of those that already have additional subclasses like service=driveway/parking_aisle/drive_through etc. usually are. IMHO “property” would be misleading as qualifier for more important service roads
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 3. Aug 2020, at 06:09, David Dean <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On the main parking road, I think we are largely in agreement that service=parking would be a good addition to OSM documentation (and is already in use throughout the world, as such).



if we need a specific service subtag for the access to parkings (which is already implicit through the fact that the road leads to a parking, and which leads to uncertainty which tag to choose if the road leads to parking and another use, like delivery for supermarkets), I would prefer are more verbose tag, as it is foreseeable that “parking“ will be confused with “parking_aisle”.

Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Tom Pfeifer
I agree that it would be helpful to distinguish more subtypes of highway=service.
However I find the proposed 'service=parking' misleading, as it suggests the way itself is
used for parking, not that it provides access to such facility.

I started a similar discussion four years ago, here is the thread start:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-March/028982.html

Possibilities discussed were:

service=parking_access
service=main
service=access
service=major

tom

On 03.08.2020 10:39, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 3. Aug 2020, at 06:09, David Dean <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On the main parking road, I think we are largely in agreement that service=parking would be a good addition to OSM documentation (and is already in use throughout the world, as such).
>
>
>
> if we need a specific service subtag for the access to parkings (which is already implicit through the fact that the road leads to a parking, and which leads to uncertainty which tag to choose if the road leads to parking and another use, like delivery for supermarkets), I would prefer are more verbose tag, as it is foreseeable that “parking“ will be confused with “parking_aisle”.
>
> Cheers Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

dieterdreist
Am Mo., 3. Aug. 2020 um 11:06 Uhr schrieb Tom Pfeifer <[hidden email]>:
Possibilities discussed were:

service=parking_access
service=main
service=access
service=major


apart "access", all of these seem better than "parking". My preference would go to the more neutral "main" or "major"

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Paul Allen
In reply to this post by David Dean
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 05:09, David Dean <[hidden email]> wrote:

For the second type of highway=service with no service tagging, what about using service=access? 

How about because not all service roads that don't currently fit into
service=* would be viewed by some as access roads?  The service
roads in a university campus or a caravan park come to mind.  I have
to stretch my mental model of "access road" to breaking point to
call those access roads.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

westnordost
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
service=parking_access also sounds most clear to me.

On the other hand, service=parking is already used almost 2000 times so
documenting that as "main access road in a parking" would just be
documenting the status quo, no proposal necessary, which is certainly
easier.

IF after research one can actually conclude that service=parking is
really used for that purpose and not for all kinds of roads in parking
that should actually be parking_aisles. So before reaching a conclusion,
I'd strongly suggest to first analyse a bit what really is the status
quo with service=parking.

Cheers
Tobias

On 03/08/2020 11:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> Am Mo., 3. Aug. 2020 um 11:06 Uhr schrieb Tom Pfeifer
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>
>     Possibilities discussed were:
>
>     service=parking_access
>     service=main
>     service=access
>     service=major
>
>
>
> apart "access", all of these seem better than "parking". My preference
> would go to the more neutral "main" or "major"
>
> Cheers
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

westnordost
In reply to this post by David Dean
> For the second type of highway=service with no service tagging, what
> about using service=access? 

The issue with this is that basically this is the definition of
highway=service already without any extra tags: It provides access to
something. Be it the rear/side of buildings (alley), the garage of a
house (driveway), the fuel dispensers on a filling station
(drive-through) or to the individual parking spaces on a parking
(parking_aisle).

Maybe service=property_access would be a little more clear. Of course,
strictly speaking, pretty much all the above are also "properties". Is
there a word in English that would describe more accurately those kind
of hmm, bigger properties, like industrial and commercial parks,
hospital grounds etc etc (as mentioned in an earlier post)?

Cheers
Tobias


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Paul Allen
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 14:02, Tobias Zwick <[hidden email]> wrote:

Maybe service=property_access would be a little more clear.

Or not.  Because it overlaps with service=driveway.  Especially as property
is often used to describe dwellings.
 
Of course, strictly speaking, pretty much all the above are also "properties". Is
there a word in English that would describe more accurately those kind
of hmm, bigger properties, like industrial and commercial parks,
hospital grounds etc etc (as mentioned in an earlier post)?

For universities and some hospitals, campus.  Doesn't really work for mid-range
though.

How about service=internal or something similar?  A road, or network of roads,
internal to an area such as a university, hospital, caravan park, military base,
manufacturing facility, business park, industrial estate, etc.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Matthew Woehlke
In reply to this post by David Dean
On 01/08/2020 20.40, David Dean wrote:

> I'm interested in proposing and/or documenting existing tagging approaches
> of the wiki to ensure that all highway=service ways can have a service=?
> associated tag. Having done, so I'm planning on resurrecting
> https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete/issues/808 to help people get
> all service roads appropriately tagged in their area.
>
> At the moment, service=? can be (according to the wiki at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service):
>
> * service=parking_aisle
> * service=driveway
> * service=alley
> * service=emergency_access
> * service=drive-through
>
> But service roads are also used for the 'main ways on a parking lot', and
> there is also an indication of access to multiple businesses (like in an
> industrial estate etc), and it looks like the documented way is to not to
> provide a service=? tag in this case.
>
> This seems problematic to me from a map maintenance purpose, as how do we
> know if a highway=service just hasn't had a service=? tag applied yet, or
> if it is one of the exceptions that does not get a service=? tag (and which
> one is it?)

As someone who has recently tagged a number of ways thusly, I have to
strongly agree that there needs to (continue to) be a way to mark such
roads. It's also often unclear if an otherwise undesignated road with
provides access to, or navigation of, a larger area (consider a mall
perimeter road as an example), should be a "driveway".

*If* we need a tag (on which note, I'll point at Jason's list), what
about something as simple as "service=access"? (IOW, Martin's line of
thinking, except lose the confusing "collector".)

That said, service=main might be a good choice.

> I would like to try to understand the highway=service usages that don't
> have a current documented service=? tag and either propose an appropriate
> tag or find examples of existing tagging to document.

You might start by taking a look at all such routes in Quantico, VA (as
any such were probably tagged by me).

Parking lot access roads are a common example; I don't really feel that
these are "driveways", but I also prefer to reserve "parking_aisle" for
ways that actually *have* parking spaces along them.

Of course, Jason's list is quite good; this is more along the lines of
if you want to go look at some *extant* examples where the lack of
service= is known to be intentional.

> At this stage I think appropriate tagging for some of the missing service=?
> tagging indicated in the documentation would be:
>
> service=parking -> main way in a parking lot, for connecting

As noted by others, I would strongly prefer parking_access.

> service=parking_isles (used almost 2K times already:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/service#values)

What is a parking *isle*? I wonder how many of these are typos for
"aisle"...

> service=driveway -> also used for access to multiple businesses (like in an
> industrial estate, etc)

*Maybe*, but this seems like an excessive stretch of what most people
would consider a "driveway".

OTOH, my suggested service=access could be seen to overlap with
driveway. Maybe it would be better to provide that while also narrowing
the definition of "driveway"?

> service=driveway/drive-through -> Service way for access to a fuel station

IMHO, a drive-through is a very specific type of way which involves a
service window. *Maybe* you could argue for that in case of a
full-service fuel station, but I wouldn't use it otherwise. (Note:
"drive through" implies that the vehicle will engage in stopping but no
standing or parking.)

--
Matthew

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

Graeme Fitzpatrick



On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 01:10, Matthew Woehlke <[hidden email]> wrote:

It's also often unclear if an otherwise undesignated road with
provides access to, or navigation of, a larger area (consider a mall
perimeter road as an example), should be a "driveway".

*If* we need a tag (on which note, I'll point at Jason's list), what
about something as simple as "service=access"?

I've always called those =driveway, but yes, =access would work

Parking lot access roads are a common example; I don't really feel that
these are "driveways", but I also prefer to reserve "parking_aisle" for
ways that actually *have* parking spaces along them.

I agree, but then you get ones like these (as always, Google just used for imagery, not mapping!)

Main through road across the front of the shopping centre, with parking_aisles opening off it, put with a dozen or so specialised parking spaces (disabled, ambulance, reserved, electric vehicle charging) on it - does that change it from "access" to another parking aisle?


Rear "access" road, intended for trucks to reach the loading docks, store rubbish & industrial bins etc, but also with marked parking spaces

What is a parking *isle*? I wonder how many of these are typos for
"aisle"...

I'd also go for typo

> service=driveway/drive-through -> Service way for access to a fuel station

IMHO, a drive-through is a very specific type of way which involves a
service window. *Maybe* you could argue for that in case of a
full-service fuel station, but I wouldn't use it otherwise. (Note:
"drive through" implies that the vehicle will engage in stopping but no
standing or parking.)

No, driveway/-through is good for a fuel station, as well as anywhere else that you don't get out of your car to be served eg take-away, car wash, bottle shop (liquor store)

Thanks

Graeme


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12