<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> 3. Re: Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant<br>
(Joseph Eisenberg)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>>>>>> 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). <br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>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.</div><div><br></div><div>I would suggest</div><div><br></div><div>free_water = <no, anyone, customers> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> </blockquote><div>I am glad we see similar views on the
free_water:container. Any of the permutations below seem fine to me.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> free_water:container =<own,establishment> - this seems fine?<br>
Other options:<br>
free_water:container = "bring_your_own" (maybe a little clearer?)<br>
and<br>
free_water:container = "available"? or maybe "provided"? <br></blockquote><div> </div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Stuart </div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Message: 3<br>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 15:47:16 +0900<br>
From: Joseph Eisenberg <<a href="mailto:joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com" target="_blank">joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
<<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,<br>
restaurant<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CAP_2vPh%2BxD%2B1X5SB6Yyf0Uig87drzDUrQubf8ytE2jd5ZGgOfQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CAP_2vPh+xD+1X5SB6Yyf0Uig87drzDUrQubf8ytE2jd5ZGgOfQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"<br>
<br>
> What do you think of ?<br>
> free_water = <anyone,consumer><br>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment><br>
<br>
The standard "access" values that openstreetmap uses, relevant to this<br>
discussion are:<br>
<br>
"yes" (this means "anyone" / "everyone" / "the general public")<br>
"no" (this means "no for all the categories below")<br>
"customers" (this means "only for customers" that is, for people who<br>
have paid a fee or bought something)<br>
<br>
See <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#List_of_possible_values" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#List_of_possible_values</a><br>
<br>
These values are commonly used for access to parking lots, for<br>
example, so most people who add things to the map will know about<br>
them.<br>
<br>
So the values of "free_water=" should be:<br>
<br>
free_water = yes<br>
and<br>
free_water = customer<br>
<br>
This will make it easier for mappers like us to understand your new<br>
tags and use them correctly.<br>
<br>
free_water:container =<own,establishment> - this seems fine?<br>
Other options:<br>
free_water:container = "bring_your_own" (maybe a little clearer?)<br>
and<br>
free_water:container = "available"? or maybe "provided"?<br>
<br>
Thank you for discussing this here! Many people just make up their new<br>
tags without getting advice from the rest of the community, so you are<br>
doing a good thing. Please forgive us for any overly blunt or direct<br>
criticism - there are many different cultures and communication styles<br>
represented here.<br>
<br>
(If you want, there is a whole, detailed "proposal process" that you<br>
can follow if you want to get these tags official approved. It is not<br>
required, but sometimes it can be helpful if you want more people to<br>
discuss your ideas and the new tags to be displayed more prominently<br>
on the wiki.<br>
See <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process</a> for this option.)<br>
<br>
- Joseph Eisenberg<br>
<br>
On 1/14/20, European Water Project <<a href="mailto:europeanwaterproject@gmail.com" target="_blank">europeanwaterproject@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> 1. Re: Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant (Paul Allen)<br>
>><br>
><br>
>>>>> Paul, thanks for your comment, I see your point<br>
> What do you think of ?<br>
> free_water = <anyone,consumer><br>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment><br>
><br>
> 2. Re: Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant<br>
>> (Joseph Eisenberg)<br>
>><br>
>> >>>> Joseph, makes sense , I removed free_water:table<br>
> What do you think of ?<br>
> free_water = <anyone,consumer><br>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment><br>
><br>
> For the European Water Project, we would include cafes, bars, restaurants<br>
> with<br>
> free_water = anyone<br>
> free_water:container =own<br>
><br>
> and the other three combinations seem to sufficiently cover the other use<br>
> cases<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
><br>
> Stuart<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> Message: 1<br>
>> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:58:09 +0000<br>
>> From: Paul Allen <<a href="mailto:pla16021@gmail.com" target="_blank">pla16021@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,<br>
>> restaurant<br>
>> Message-ID:<br>
>> <<br>
>> <a href="mailto:CAPy1dO%2B9qZYKsZzMoyFoGzrkFD94Sfh3nXVxno4W7kfrpJ9P6w@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CAPy1dO+9qZYKsZzMoyFoGzrkFD94Sfh3nXVxno4W7kfrpJ9P6w@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
>><br>
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 20:52, Hauke Stieler <<a href="mailto:mail@hauke-stieler.de" target="_blank">mail@hauke-stieler.de</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> ><br>
>> > What does "must_consume" mean?<br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>> free_water=must_consume means exactly what it says. Anybody who<br>
>> enters will be given free water and they MUST consume it. Or else. So<br>
>> we need a tag to specify the punishment if they refuse to consume the<br>
>> free water (such as being ejected, fined, or killed).<br>
>><br>
>> Not, in my opinion, a good value for the key.<br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Paul<br>
>> -------------- next part --------------<br>
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
>> URL: <<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/89a75c48/attachment-0001.htm" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/89a75c48/attachment-0001.htm</a><br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>> ------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> Message: 2<br>
>> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 06:49:47 +0900<br>
>> From: Joseph Eisenberg <<a href="mailto:joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com" target="_blank">joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,<br>
>> restaurant<br>
>> Message-ID:<br>
>> <CAP_2vPjBzwK0uUtCrabDp4G=<br>
>> <a href="mailto:co7YXDvDO%2Bq6kusvTc-QySxDmw@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">co7YXDvDO+q6kusvTc-QySxDmw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"<br>
>><br>
>> free_water_table= or free_water:table= will be confusing for places<br>
>> that sell take-out food and don't have tables, for examples small<br>
>> fast-food restaurants, convenience shops, etc.<br>
>><br>
>> The word "customers" should be included, since what you are trying to<br>
>> specify is that "you can only get free water if you buy something<br>
>> else", and "customers" is the standard term in Openstreetmap for this<br>
>> idea.<br>
>><br>
>> - Joseph Eisenberg<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:47:32 +0100<br>
From: Martin Koppenhoefer <<a href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com" target="_blank">dieterdreist@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
<<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] How to tag oneway restriction applying to<br>
pedestrians?<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:CABPTjTCTcC0qVwEtbL19bMwpzEfymQH9QZvT%2BwjCKJaKB1HnXA@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CABPTjTCTcC0qVwEtbL19bMwpzEfymQH9QZvT+wjCKJaKB1HnXA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Am Di., 14. Jan. 2020 um 01:30 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <<br>
<a href="mailto:joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com" target="_blank">joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
<br>
> > following this logics, "oneway:foot" means the oneway restriction<br>
> applied to pedestrians, and the result would be no restriction, because<br>
> "oneway" already has no implication for pedestrian<br>
><br>
> That "logic" is not logical. Why would another mapper or a database<br>
> user assume that? If I saw this tag as a mapper, it would be logical<br>
> to assume that the oneway restriction did indeed apply to foot travel.<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
yes, it asks to apply the oneway restriction to foot travel, and the oneway<br>
restriction is: "only drive in this direction". You do not drive your feet,<br>
do you agree?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> It is the same as a database user designing a routing application or<br>
> renderer - you are not going to assume that a tag is meaningless<br>
> (unless it looks like it came from a bad import).<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
you will have choose the tags you will evaluate and you will likely drop<br>
all the rest as meaningless (for your usecase) or insignificant.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
> (This sort of pedantic arguement is like claiming that "I don't got no<br>
> money" means "I have money" because it is a "double negative", but in<br>
> fact double negatives are extremely common in spoken languages as a<br>
> means of emphasis, and are perfectly "standard" in many (like Spanish,<br>
> Indonesian, and many dialects of English).)<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
this is a completely different issue, because as you state, the double<br>
negative is well defined in English as a means of emphasis. It would be<br>
different in German, where it would indeed mean I do have money. Tags,<br>
similar to language, depend on conventions, and for OSM tags my opinion is<br>
that we should not have the double negative to mean negative, because it<br>
seems quite confusing. In logics, "not no" means yes (or unknown etc., it<br>
means anything but no). Lets see tags more like a programming language and<br>
less like natural language.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Martin<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200114/27828fc8/attachment.htm" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200114/27828fc8/attachment.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 82<br>
****************************************<br>
</blockquote></div></div>