<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Apr 20, 2023, 23:18 by ajt1047@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>On 20/04/2023 19:50, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:<br></div><blockquote><div>For start I want to propose to people to review shop tags in their area<br></div><div>with undocumented shop values or ones documented as problematic.<br></div><div><br></div><div>See http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1u2o<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Reviewing "odd" tags before tagfiddling them away seems to me a very sensible approach. However, running that query locally finds, alongside a couple of typos by me, lots that are very much correct, but just not on your list - there are some very odd shops out there.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Note that I mentioned that many of them should be rather documented<br></div><div dir="auto">(or new values covering them invented).<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>To change "shop=veryrarevalue" where it was correct to "shop=lessrarevalue"without preserving the detail somehow loses detail from OSM and is therefore by definition a Bad Thing. Some of the entries on your list I'd definitely want to check onsite ("gun" and "firearms" is one obvious one such, but there are others).<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">I agree in general, this batch is supposed to be listing 1:1 replacements<br></div><div dir="auto">(I have similar list where I gather cases more suitable for shop=something + extra tag,<br></div><div dir="auto">like shop=dog_groomer to shop=pet_groomer + pet=dog)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you see any like this here, please let me know.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>Also, changing rare shop types into "yes" helps absolutely no-one. If a data consumer wants to handle a catch-all for "shop" they can; they don't need them to be set to "yes" first.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">It helps because maintaining lists of many many many rarely used meaningless values<br></div><div dir="auto">in every single QA tool and validator and tool doing this is annoying at best.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">For quite reasonable reasons JOSM developers do not want patches handling barely used<br></div><div dir="auto">tags - if in 2025 someone uses say 50 instances of shop=needs_to_survey they do not<br></div><div dir="auto">want to get a patch.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Also, there is no data loss whatsoever if confusing meaningless value (like shop=retail<br></div><div dir="auto">or shop=??? gets changed into a standard meaningless value)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div> </body>
</html>