<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font face="Verdana">Suggestion: postal_services next to
post_office.<br>
You could use post_office then only in the long term just to
name those buildings that are historically just post_offices.
Smoothly you transition and promote use of postal_services.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">In the same context, and in regard to your
proposal Georg to use multiple values in a primary key, again
here locally of course, don't know if it happens elsewhere, we
have post offices still owned and operated by the national
postal services, but they have developed a licensing system to
allow people to use these for other purposes. So me can be
hardly called post_office anymore, although they still carry
that signage. They still have a small counter where you get
postal services but the rest of the post_office is turned into a
food court or a market or even a shopping mall.</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">How should a mapper indicate what it is by
using multiple value in one key, how should he decide what is
it's primary use or significance to the community? <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Greetings,</font></p>
<p><font face="Verdana">Bert Araali</font><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 28/02/2021 13:59, Georg wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1N95eJ-1luCTx2mU3-0168Aa@mail.gmx.net">
<br>
<br>
Am 2021-02-28 um 03:30 schrieb Minh Nguyen:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Please help to find a better wording,
see also below.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
From a U.S. perspective, the term "post office" in everyday
speech is
<br>
associated with official USPS post offices and, to some extent,
<br>
USPS-branded approved postal providers. Perhaps it would've been
<br>
intuitive to reserve amenity=post_office for only these branch
<br>
locations. But U.S. mappers have been using the tag more broadly
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
As far as I understand you, the term "post office" in everyday
language
<br>
does match different objects (only a subset) than the OSM tag. To
me,
<br>
that makes the impression a refined OSM tagging makes sense from
US
<br>
perspective, i.e. one that distinguishes between the USPS and
others
<br>
just like everday language does. Is that conclusion appropriate?
Does
<br>
the proposal seem suitable?
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">But if we're creating a new secondary tag,
then
<br>
maybe a more generic term would be helpful.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
You're welcome to suggest :)
<br>
<br>
Greetings, Georg
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>