"not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

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

"not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Joseph Eisenberg
There's a new-ish page about the prefix "not:"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:

It's been used with "not:name" to show that a street isn't named
something else (e.g. for streets that had the wrong name on official
OS maps in Britain): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:name

Also it's been used with "not:addr:postcode" -
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=not%3Aaddr%3Apostcode

Recently there was a suggestion to use "not:brand" and
"not:brand:wikidata" to show that a feature is not part of a chain.
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6577

For example, this can be used to tag the "Burger King" fast food
restaurant in Illinois that's older than the international brand with
the same name. This would help database users distinguish between
places like this and the usual, popular brand, when doing searches or
validating data.

Does anyone see a problem with this?

What about "not:name"? There's also a discussion about using that tag
to check for mistakes, like when new mappers keep changing the name of
a feature due to a misspelled or hard-to-read sign:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6411

-Joseph

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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Francesco Ansanelli
Hello Joseph,

I have to say that I'm not a fan of the tag, IMHO negation is something that will make harder to do searches...
If the burger king is not the food chain keep the brand empty and write a note or do a Wikipedia page about it, probably an historical activity deserve it.

About the no name, this already exists:


Can you please point out why adopt the new syntax instead?

Cheers,
Francesco

Il sab 14 set 2019, 06:43 Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
There's a new-ish page about the prefix "not:"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:

It's been used with "not:name" to show that a street isn't named
something else (e.g. for streets that had the wrong name on official
OS maps in Britain): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:name

Also it's been used with "not:addr:postcode" -
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=not%3Aaddr%3Apostcode

Recently there was a suggestion to use "not:brand" and
"not:brand:wikidata" to show that a feature is not part of a chain.
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6577

For example, this can be used to tag the "Burger King" fast food
restaurant in Illinois that's older than the international brand with
the same name. This would help database users distinguish between
places like this and the usual, popular brand, when doing searches or
validating data.

Does anyone see a problem with this?

What about "not:name"? There's also a discussion about using that tag
to check for mistakes, like when new mappers keep changing the name of
a feature due to a misspelled or hard-to-read sign:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6411

-Joseph

_______________________________________________
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: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Joseph Eisenberg
"noname=yes" is used when a feature like a road doesn't have a name.

The tag :not:name=XXX" is used when mappers might think that the name
is actually "XXX" but it's not. Usually the "name=" field is already
set with the correct name: 96% of objects with "not:name" have a
"name=*" - see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/not%3Aname#combinations

The tag "not:brand" or "not:brand:wikidata:" tags would be similar,
they would be added so that mappers and database users do not
accidentally think that the amenity=restaurant with name="Phở Hòa" is
the same as other restaurants with brand=Phở Hòa

I suppose the alternative is using a "note" or "description", but this
tag would be more specific and easier for software to handle, like
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index - which helps link
names with brands.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 9/14/19, Francesco Ansanelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Joseph,
>
> I have to say that I'm not a fan of the tag, IMHO negation is something
> that will make harder to do searches...
> If the burger king is not the food chain keep the brand empty and write a
> note or do a Wikipedia page about it, probably an historical activity
> deserve it.
>
> About the no name, this already exists:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noname
>
> Can you please point out why adopt the new syntax instead?
>
> Cheers,
> Francesco
>
> Il sab 14 set 2019, 06:43 Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> ha
> scritto:
>
>> There's a new-ish page about the prefix "not:"
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:
>>
>> It's been used with "not:name" to show that a street isn't named
>> something else (e.g. for streets that had the wrong name on official
>> OS maps in Britain): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:name
>>
>> Also it's been used with "not:addr:postcode" -
>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=not%3Aaddr%3Apostcode
>>
>> Recently there was a suggestion to use "not:brand" and
>> "not:brand:wikidata" to show that a feature is not part of a chain.
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6577
>>
>> For example, this can be used to tag the "Burger King" fast food
>> restaurant in Illinois that's older than the international brand with
>> the same name. This would help database users distinguish between
>> places like this and the usual, popular brand, when doing searches or
>> validating data.
>>
>> Does anyone see a problem with this?
>>
>> What about "not:name"? There's also a discussion about using that tag
>> to check for mistakes, like when new mappers keep changing the name of
>> a feature due to a misspelled or hard-to-read sign:
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6411
>>
>> -Joseph
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Jez Nicholson
+1 for the not: namespace. It stops people inventing new negation tags with slightly different wording. Searches could take it into account even.

On Sat, 14 Sep 2019, 07:25 Joseph Eisenberg, <[hidden email]> wrote:
"noname=yes" is used when a feature like a road doesn't have a name.

The tag :not:name=XXX" is used when mappers might think that the name
is actually "XXX" but it's not. Usually the "name=" field is already
set with the correct name: 96% of objects with "not:name" have a
"name=*" - see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/not%3Aname#combinations

The tag "not:brand" or "not:brand:wikidata:" tags would be similar,
they would be added so that mappers and database users do not
accidentally think that the amenity=restaurant with name="Phở Hòa" is
the same as other restaurants with brand=Phở Hòa

I suppose the alternative is using a "note" or "description", but this
tag would be more specific and easier for software to handle, like
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index - which helps link
names with brands.

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 9/14/19, Francesco Ansanelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello Joseph,
>
> I have to say that I'm not a fan of the tag, IMHO negation is something
> that will make harder to do searches...
> If the burger king is not the food chain keep the brand empty and write a
> note or do a Wikipedia page about it, probably an historical activity
> deserve it.
>
> About the no name, this already exists:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noname
>
> Can you please point out why adopt the new syntax instead?
>
> Cheers,
> Francesco
>
> Il sab 14 set 2019, 06:43 Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> ha
> scritto:
>
>> There's a new-ish page about the prefix "not:"
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:
>>
>> It's been used with "not:name" to show that a street isn't named
>> something else (e.g. for streets that had the wrong name on official
>> OS maps in Britain): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:not:name
>>
>> Also it's been used with "not:addr:postcode" -
>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=not%3Aaddr%3Apostcode
>>
>> Recently there was a suggestion to use "not:brand" and
>> "not:brand:wikidata" to show that a feature is not part of a chain.
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6577
>>
>> For example, this can be used to tag the "Burger King" fast food
>> restaurant in Illinois that's older than the international brand with
>> the same name. This would help database users distinguish between
>> places like this and the usual, popular brand, when doing searches or
>> validating data.
>>
>> Does anyone see a problem with this?
>>
>> What about "not:name"? There's also a discussion about using that tag
>> to check for mistakes, like when new mappers keep changing the name of
>> a feature due to a misspelled or hard-to-read sign:
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6411
>>
>> -Joseph
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>

_______________________________________________
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: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Paul Allen
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 at 08:17, Jez Nicholson <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for the not: namespace.

+1

It may be applicable to other tags on objects which are prone to misidentification and
which are not better handled by lifestyle prefixes.  Where an object is no longer used as
an X (or used for anything else now) then disused is appropriate.  Where it never was
used as an X, but there is a risk of it being identified as such, then not is appropriate.

Some will complain that we should only tag verifiable things, but the not: prefix is
important to ensure accuracy by reducing mistakes.

--
Paul


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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

dieterdreist
I am leaning to supporting the tag, because it offers a standard way to give specific hints for some special cases. The risk is that the tag could in theory be added with infinite value lists to any object, but we should not expect it to happen ;-)

Cheers,
Martin


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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Joseph Eisenberg
I think "not:brand" and "not:brand:wikidata" should only be used when
the name of the feature or the brand of the feature is identical (or
nearly identical) to a well-known brand.

- Joseph

On 9/14/19, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I am leaning to supporting the tag, because it offers a standard way to
> give specific hints for some special cases. The risk is that the tag could
> in theory be added with infinite value lists to any object, but we should
> not expect it to happen ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>

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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Tim Magee
I would absolutely agree with this use case. Especially for cases such as the
regularly mentioned Burger King. If somebody from out of town is either
traveling through or armchair mapping they could be confused. If they are
using the ID editor, it suggests that you "upgrade the tags" which could lead
to a "Burger King" that is not part of the international Burger King tag
having the same brand:wikidata tag.

I also think that the not: namespace could be useful in other cases such as
not:name, so I support it.

-Tim

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 9:57:32 AM EDT Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> I think "not:brand" and "not:brand:wikidata" should only be used when
> the name of the feature or the brand of the feature is identical (or
> nearly identical) to a well-known brand.
>
> - Joseph
>
> On 9/14/19, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I am leaning to supporting the tag, because it offers a standard way to
> > give specific hints for some special cases. The risk is that the tag could
> > in theory be added with infinite value lists to any object, but we should
> > not expect it to happen ;-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Tagging mailing list
On 9/14/2019 10:53 AM, Tim Magee wrote:
> I would absolutely agree with this use case. Especially for cases such as the
> regularly mentioned Burger King. If somebody from out of town is either
> traveling through or armchair mapping they could be confused. If they are
> using the ID editor, it suggests that you "upgrade the tags" which could lead
> to a "Burger King" that is not part of the international Burger King tag
> having the same brand:wikidata tag.

Personally I have a problem with the asymmetry of work that this
requires from mappers who need to protect their work from iD versus
mappers who blindly "upgrade" using iD.

The first mapper has to 1) be familiar with all possible brands (Burger
King is a brand most mappers know, but take a look at all the brands in
this list:
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/master/brands/amenity/fast_food.json
...and that's just the fast food!) 2) recognize when a feature might
have a brand conflict 3) look up the brand in question and 4) correctly
tag the "not:" prefix for brand in question. The second mapper simply
has to hit the "upgrade" button when prompted.

I certainly have no problem with the idea that iD and other editors
would respect the "not:brand" tag when applying brand info to a feature.
But I'm not buying the idea that these "not:" tags are the solution to
the increasing problem of brand tags being incorrectly applied by iD
(sometimes along with incorrect corrections to name, cuisine, etc.)

The simple truth is that automatically adding these brand tags is a
mechanical bot edit, and the fact that the bot in question is triggered
by a user clicking an ambiguous "upgrade" button doesn't change that.
These edits should be subject to peer review here on the tagging list,
and the iD branding bot should behave according to the automated edits
code of conduct. Yes, this is slower, but it's the right way. Putting
the onus on the original correct mapper to prevent iD's incorrect tags
seems backward.

Jason



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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Joseph Eisenberg
I think the idea of the iD developers was to add "not:brand=XXX" when
a mapper selects "this is not that brand" in the editor.

This would then make it clear that the feature had already been
checked and noted to be different than the expected brand based on the
name.

But wisely, they decided not to do that right away, since the tag had
not been documented and discussed.

- Joseph

On 9/19/19, Jmapb via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 9/14/2019 10:53 AM, Tim Magee wrote:
>> I would absolutely agree with this use case. Especially for cases such as
>> the
>> regularly mentioned Burger King. If somebody from out of town is either
>> traveling through or armchair mapping they could be confused. If they are
>> using the ID editor, it suggests that you "upgrade the tags" which could
>> lead
>> to a "Burger King" that is not part of the international Burger King tag
>> having the same brand:wikidata tag.
>
> Personally I have a problem with the asymmetry of work that this
> requires from mappers who need to protect their work from iD versus
> mappers who blindly "upgrade" using iD.
>
> The first mapper has to 1) be familiar with all possible brands (Burger
> King is a brand most mappers know, but take a look at all the brands in
> this list:
> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/master/brands/amenity/fast_food.json
> ...and that's just the fast food!) 2) recognize when a feature might
> have a brand conflict 3) look up the brand in question and 4) correctly
> tag the "not:" prefix for brand in question. The second mapper simply
> has to hit the "upgrade" button when prompted.
>
> I certainly have no problem with the idea that iD and other editors
> would respect the "not:brand" tag when applying brand info to a feature.
> But I'm not buying the idea that these "not:" tags are the solution to
> the increasing problem of brand tags being incorrectly applied by iD
> (sometimes along with incorrect corrections to name, cuisine, etc.)
>
> The simple truth is that automatically adding these brand tags is a
> mechanical bot edit, and the fact that the bot in question is triggered
> by a user clicking an ambiguous "upgrade" button doesn't change that.
> These edits should be subject to peer review here on the tagging list,
> and the iD branding bot should behave according to the automated edits
> code of conduct. Yes, this is slower, but it's the right way. Putting
> the onus on the original correct mapper to prevent iD's incorrect tags
> seems backward.
>
> Jason
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list



19 Sep 2019, 16:52 by [hidden email]:
Personally I have a problem with the asymmetry of work that this
requires from mappers who need to protect their work from iD versus
mappers who blindly "upgrade" using iD.
"Despite that iD is asking user to add brand:wikidata and brand:wikipedia
and describes this action as "XYZ looks like a brand with nonstandard tags"
and offers user to "Upgrade the tags"."

For now nobody made a PR and is with "considering" label.
The simple truth is that automatically adding these brand tags is a
mechanical bot edit, and the fact that the bot in question is triggered
by a user clicking an ambiguous "upgrade" button doesn't change that.
I am tempted to interpret this way, but so far I made no attempt to escalate
it to DWG (and I am not planning it, I have found recently two undiscussed
imports that should be reverted due to unclear copyright status that are
anyway not handled due to lack of time).
These edits should be subject to peer review here on the tagging list,
and the iD branding bot should behave according to the automated edits
code of conduct. Yes, this is slower, but it's the right way. Putting
the onus on the original correct mapper to prevent iD's incorrect tags
seems backward.
I would rather say that iD validator should have sane interface not
black box "upgrade tags".

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

Re: "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

Mark Wagner
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 10:52:01 -0400
Jmapb via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 9/14/2019 10:53 AM, Tim Magee wrote:
> > I would absolutely agree with this use case. Especially for cases
> > such as the regularly mentioned Burger King. If somebody from out
> > of town is either traveling through or armchair mapping they could
> > be confused. If they are using the ID editor, it suggests that you
> > "upgrade the tags" which could lead to a "Burger King" that is not
> > part of the international Burger King tag having the same
> > brand:wikidata tag.  
>
> Personally I have a problem with the asymmetry of work that this
> requires from mappers who need to protect their work from iD versus
> mappers who blindly "upgrade" using iD.

It's not just iD that's the problem.  There's an industrial-supply
store I've been monitoring called "Safway", and even before the
invention of the name-suggestion index, well-meaning armchair mappers
would turn it into a grocery store called "Safeway".  A "not:brand" tag
would reduce the workload by letting iD cue mappers that no, this isn't
the well-known grocery store.

(There's also a "Maxwell House", but thankfully, most people realize
that the coffee brand doesn't operate restaurants.)

--
Mark

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