Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant

European Water Project
  3. Re:  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant
      (Joseph Eisenberg)


>>>>> Joseph, on the contrary. The bluntness demonstrates the clarity of the system.   We want a tagging system that is acceptable to the community and widely adapted (with enforcement). 


free_water = I think allowing yes is ambiguous and can lead to confusion, but if that is what is most acceptable fine.  Someone could use yes to describe customers.

I would suggest

free_water = <no, anyone, customers>  
  
I am glad we see similar views on the   free_water:container. Any of the permutations below seem fine to me.
free_water:container =<own,establishment> - this seems fine?
Other options:
free_water:container = "bring_your_own" (maybe a little clearer?)
and
free_water:container = "available"? or maybe "provided"?  
 

Best regards,

Stuart 

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 15:47:16 +0900
From: Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
        <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,
        restaurant
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> What do you think of ?
> free_water = <anyone,consumer>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment>

The standard "access" values that openstreetmap uses, relevant to this
discussion are:

"yes" (this means "anyone" / "everyone" / "the general public")
"no" (this means "no for all the categories below")
"customers" (this means "only for customers" that is, for people who
have paid a fee or bought something)

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#List_of_possible_values

These values are commonly used for access to parking lots, for
example, so most people who add things to the map will know about
them.

So the values of "free_water=" should be:

free_water = yes
and
free_water = customer

This will make it easier for mappers like us to understand your new
tags and use them correctly.

free_water:container =<own,establishment> - this seems fine?
Other options:
free_water:container = "bring_your_own" (maybe a little clearer?)
and
free_water:container = "available"? or maybe "provided"?

Thank you for discussing this here! Many people just make up their new
tags without getting advice from the rest of the community, so you are
doing a good thing. Please forgive us for any overly blunt or direct
criticism - there are many different cultures and communication styles
represented here.

(If you want, there is a whole, detailed "proposal process" that you
can follow if you want to get these tags official approved. It is not
required, but sometimes it can be helpful if you want more people to
discuss your ideas and the new tags to be displayed more prominently
on the wiki.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process for this option.)

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 1/14/20, European Water Project <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> 1. Re:  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant (Paul Allen)
>>
>
>>>>> Paul, thanks for your comment, I see your point
> What do you think of ?
> free_water = <anyone,consumer>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment>
>
>    2. Re:  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant
>>       (Joseph Eisenberg)
>>
>> >>>> Joseph, makes sense , I removed free_water:table
> What do you think of ?
> free_water = <anyone,consumer>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment>
>
> For the European Water Project, we would include cafes, bars, restaurants
> with
> free_water = anyone
> free_water:container =own
>
> and the other three combinations seem to sufficiently cover the other use
> cases
>
> Best regards,
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:58:09 +0000
>> From: Paul Allen <[hidden email]>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>>         <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,
>>         restaurant
>> Message-ID:
>>         <
>> [hidden email]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 20:52, Hauke Stieler <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > What does "must_consume" mean?
>> >
>>
>> free_water=must_consume means exactly what it says.  Anybody who
>> enters will be given free water and they MUST consume it.  Or else.  So
>> we need a tag to specify the punishment if they refuse to consume the
>> free water (such as being ejected, fined, or killed).
>>
>> Not, in my opinion, a good value for the key.
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/89a75c48/attachment-0001.htm
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:49:47 +0900
>> From: Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>>         <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,
>>         restaurant
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAP_2vPjBzwK0uUtCrabDp4G=
>> [hidden email]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> free_water_table= or free_water:table= will be confusing for places
>> that sell take-out food and don't have tables, for examples small
>> fast-food restaurants, convenience shops, etc.
>>
>> The word "customers" should be included, since what you are trying to
>> specify is that "you can only get free water if you buy something
>> else", and "customers" is the standard term in Openstreetmap for this
>> idea.
>>
>> - Joseph Eisenberg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:47:32 +0100
From: Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
        <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] How to tag oneway restriction applying to
        pedestrians?
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Am Di., 14. Jan. 2020 um 01:30 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
[hidden email]>:

> > following this logics, "oneway:foot" means the oneway restriction
> applied to pedestrians, and the result would be no restriction, because
> "oneway" already has no implication for pedestrian
>
> That "logic" is not logical. Why would another mapper or a database
> user assume that? If I saw this tag as a mapper, it would be logical
> to assume that the oneway restriction did indeed apply to foot travel.
>


yes, it asks to apply the oneway restriction to foot travel, and the oneway
restriction is: "only drive in this direction". You do not drive your feet,
do you agree?




> It is the same as a database user designing a routing application or
> renderer - you are not going to assume that a tag is meaningless
> (unless it looks like it came from a bad import).
>


you will have choose the tags you will evaluate and you will likely drop
all the rest as meaningless (for your usecase) or insignificant.



>
> (This sort of pedantic arguement is like claiming that "I don't got no
> money" means "I have money" because it is a "double negative", but in
> fact double negatives are extremely common in spoken languages as a
> means of emphasis, and are perfectly "standard" in many (like Spanish,
> Indonesian, and many dialects of English).)
>


this is a completely different issue, because as you state, the double
negative is well defined in English as a means of emphasis. It would be
different in German, where it would indeed mean I do have money. Tags,
similar to language, depend on conventions, and for OSM tags my opinion is
that we should not have the double negative to mean negative, because it
seems quite confusing. In logics, "not no" means yes (or unknown etc., it
means anything but no). Lets see tags more like a programming language and
less like natural language.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200114/27828fc8/attachment.htm>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

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


------------------------------

End of Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 82
****************************************

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

Re: Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 14. Jan 2020, at 10:13, European Water Project <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> free_water = I think allowing yes is ambiguous and can lead to confusion, but if that is what is most acceptable fine.  Someone could use yes to describe customers.
>
> I would suggest
>
> free_water = <no, anyone, customers>  


I agree anyone is better than yes as it’s more explicit.


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