[Tagging] I started a draft on a new "main" key culture
tom at acrewoods.net
Mon Nov 8 11:25:06 GMT 2010
On 8 November 2010 10:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>wrote:
> > I agree that places whose primary purpose is to sell prints, paintings by
> > local artists and framing services should be marked as shop=art.
> Thin ice IMHO. You are saying that original art by "local artists" is
> on the same level then "framing services" and "prints" ? I don't agree
> (or only on an individual basis which makes it hard to give a good
> undisputed and unambiguous definition.
We are on thin ice in every distinction in the culture category, frankly. As
I wrote earlier, thousands of years of debate and linguistic ambiguity can't
be condensed into a completely clear tagging schema.
Let me try to restate the distinction. The use of the word "primary" is all
important, because of course on can buy art works at all three, and all
three in some sense exhibit art works.
shop=art: a shop whose owners' primary purpose is to sell individual art
works (and often prints, postcards, framing services)
culture=art_gallery: a place where the primary purpose is the temporary
exhibition of art works for artistic appreciation
culture=museum, museum=art (or similar): a place where the primary purpose
is to hold permanent exhibitions of art works for artistic appreciation and
I'm willing to concede on culture=museum only because it helps us arrive at
On a more general note, relying too heavily on the name of a place would be
very bad practice. In the UK at least there are very few places that fit
your definiton of an "art museum" with museum in the name. There are also
some shops I know of with "gallery" in the name, but that shouldn't be
considered art galleries.
On an even more general note, this thread demonstrates why a handful of
people on a mailing list is such a bad why to come up with a good tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging