<div dir="auto"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">在 2020年5月10日週日 07:08，François Lacombe <<a href="mailto:fl.infosreseaux@gmail.com">fl.infosreseaux@gmail.com</a>> 寫道：<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 19:20, Phake Nick <<a href="mailto:c933103@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">c933103@gmail.com</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><br></div><div dir="auto">What you said doesn't make sense.</div><div dir="auto">The existence of a space within the word doesn't inherently make them separateable.</div><div dir="auto"></div><div dir="auto">Like for the tag amenity=charging_station, do you think the space mean ot make sense to change the tagging scheme into amenity=station + station=charging ?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It depends on what your definition of station is.<br></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As you said, it depends, you can't just break down everything this way just because they're compounded word.</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Your interpretation on public transit service is incorrect.</div><div dir="auto">When you board a plane from London to Paris, you didn't fly to Paris because they told us they would fly to Paris. You're going to Paris because you have expressed interest in going to Paris. Same with rideshareing or other rented mobility services.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You're lucky enough to take on planes you define your own destination first.</div><div>"Going to Paris" doesn't mean the same for a taxicab and for a plane.</div><div>Even in ridesharing, destination is given by passengers and driver doesn't know it before meeting them (face to face or with an app, same actually).</div><div>You don't define the destination reached by plane, by train or by bus. This is the difference I make.<br></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">You can book a flight ticket through travel agents, ticketing websites, carrier hotline, or airport counter. You don't need luck to get a flight to Paris.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><br><div dir="auto"><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"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div><div><br></div><div>We agree on that particular point.</div><div>Neverthess that doesn't make a second value of amentiy legit.</div><div>OSM would only have one key grouping all possible values if it was relevant.<br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I am not aware of such requirement on value ever existing in OSM.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This was actual irony.</div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I hope you realize the irony here is that you pulled some rule out of thin air that didn't exists in OSM.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 20:45, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div><br></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>Neverthess that doesn't make a second value of amentiy legit.<br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div>Why?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Both have taxi service in common but the vehicle is different (and implies really different experiences indeed)</div><div>amenity=* represents the taxi service and I find relevant to describe the different vehicle in another key.<br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As have already been explained they are different types of services</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div></div><blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(147,163,184);padding-left:10px;margin-left:5px"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>OSM would only have one key grouping all possible values if it was relevant.<br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div>Why?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If you accept to merge similarities and differences in values you don't need different keys.</div><div>Who need operator key for instance?</div><div>amenity=taxi_with_cars_operated_by_Acompany</div><div>amenity=taxi_with_motorbikes_operated_by_anotherCompany</div><div>Hey it's way different things, Acompany is really bad compared to anotherCompany.</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">That's a ridiculous comparison, that's like saying we shouldn't have different tag for office building versus residential building because people night expand it to make tags like microsoft_office_building.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div><br></div><div>Finally, Paul, I find your point about taxonomy thinking interesting and will try to develop it a bit in future.</div><div>Get me well, I don't intend to ban anyone from anything.</div><div>Query tools are really important to consume data and my point wasn't to downgrade tagging readability in general (nor to encourage K9842=V2179).</div><div>To me tourists and query tools users can only be the same persons at different time. I've never used overpass to locate myself in any train station, that's all.<br></div><div><br></div><div>In proposal, arguing amenity=taxi/amenity=motorbike_taxi will better prevent errors than amenity=taxi + vehicle=* doesn't convince me : mappers are always able to confuse two services, whatever the tagging they use can be.</div><div><br></div><div>That was my 2 cts, good night</div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So you're saying people would be confused by a motorcycle taxi and think they're a 4-wheeled taxi, or they might look at a 4-wheeled taxi and think it is a motorcycle taxi?</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
</blockquote></div></div></div>