<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/03/2015 10:22 AM, Andreas Goss
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:mdg17b$gf3$1@ger.gmane.org" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Do you 'navigate' to 'drinking water' or
simply look for the closest one?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Depends if I said I will meet someone at drinking water spot xyz
or I'm just looking for some water.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">most would navigate to an address .. then
look on the map for parking,
<br>
then look on the map for the closest reception desk
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
So that's the <u>quality</u> of data you are fine with in OSM?
Why do we even tag house numbers then? Finding the right street
and then looking at the numbers is even easier than this, don't
even have to get out of the car.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Small point ... The data may be correct and of high quality .. but
missing what you want .. thus lacking detail, resolution or quantity
... not quality. Lacking quality would be, say, if the node were
displaced .. say 2 kms. Or if the name was wrong.<br>
<br>
Most of 'my' local area has no OSM house numbers .. nor are
residential buildings mapped, there are a few missing street names
too. The level of data resolution and quantity is up to the
contributors, their time and inclination. Before I map house numbers
.. I think the missing street names should be done? You may think
that address numbers are more important than reception desks ..I
don't, simply for the reason you have given above " looking at the
numbers is even easier than" finding a reception desk in a facility
.. particularly when a multi building facility. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:mdg17b$gf3$1@ger.gmane.org" type="cite">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"> A name of the reception desk would help
... but some of them are for all the firms in that
<br>
location.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Then why isn't this addressed at all in the proposal? </blockquote>
<br>
There are many possibilities. Covering them all? I'd rather leave
the variations up to the mapper .. they are inventive and are on the
ground so know the situation better than I could possibly imagine
it. The ones I know of are simple .. at least I see it that way.
What you have I don't know and won't try to predict what the best
possible solution is for something I can only guess at... Sorry but
my crystal ball is broken. If there were a set preference that
covers all (or at least most) cases then state it .. I've got no
firm idea of what solution that is. <br>
<br>
-----------------------------<br>
This is ONE case that I know very well.<br>
<br>
A group of buildings - all on one site.<br>
<br>
One major firm owns the site... but leases parts off to other firms
.. <br>
<br>
One reception desks for all.<br>
<br>
One address for all (yes all the buildings have one address).<br>
<br>
The reception desk is poorly marked .. has been for many decades.
Not uncommon to find visitors wandering around lost. <br>
<br>
============== thus the reception desks exist in an area with one
address, so one address. I'd not name it .. the firms change over
time , but the reception desk remains. Possibly name the operator as
the site owner. But I'd leave the name off. <br>
<br>
-------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:mdg17b$gf3$1@ger.gmane.org" type="cite">Relations
which could handle this are not mentioned once.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
First time that has been mentioned. I've not though of it. I'd see
that as another proposal ... <br>
First get a tag for 'reception desk' .. whatever it is called and
where ever it is placed on the OSM data base.<br>
<br>
Then see if a relationship is needed .. and if that relationship may
be used on other features too. Like 'my' proposed relationship for
area- steps? <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:mdg17b$gf3$1@ger.gmane.org" type="cite">
<br>
And again how would you name it if it was just one of multiple
recpetions desks for one facility. Facility name => operator=*
name=Gate 1? So if the reception has no name then name= stays
empty? Do I use the plant name as operator? Or the company name?
<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote cite="mid:mdg17b$gf3$1@ger.gmane.org" type="cite">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Is it possible to put that in operator
or official_name, or is the
<br>
name assumed because the point is inside the landuse?
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
The basic answer would be .. how do the people there name the desks?
Use that - the locals will understand it, visitors may be given that
name too. See the wiki -
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name</a> "The common default
name."<br>
<br>
Multiple reception desks for one facility? Do they have separate
functions? Or the same functions in different locations? I'd use a
name appropriate to the circumstance! I don't know the circumstance
.. so don't know the answer. There are too many possibilities that
exist for your given question. <br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------<br>
Request For Comments ... <br>
I see this as part of improving the proposal .. not as showing a
complete, fully functional for all possible things, fault free tag.
If only complete fault free and all encompassing tags are to be
proposed then there will be NO tags. <br>
By all means comment on things that could be better ... and
hopefully suggest possible solutions. <br>
<br>
Don't think a proposal should have addressed all possible things..
if they could see the world and all its problems, and then solve
them in the bast possible way .. well OSM would not need proposals
.. they would simply go straight to tags! And there would be no need
of the tagging group. <br>
<br>
Criticism that a proposal is incomplete, should have address some
issue .. before being proposed .. will simply discourage people from
using the tagging group at all and going straight to make a tag
without consultation .. leading to a worse situation. People here
need to encourage proposals .. no matter how poor they might think
them to be, to do otherwise is to discourage the use of this group.
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>