[Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Gambling (reminder)

[Martin Vonwald]

Hi!

I fully understand the technical and other difficulties. And I also don't
have any problem with using the gambling key _in this case_ (I simply don't
tag any of those). I just want to make anyone aware that it is _not_ a
solution to move from one key to another, because once we started we can't
stop this (and we already started...). We will always have some collisions.
So either (i) use for everything a separate key, or (ii) allow and support
multiple values for keys. I don't think that item (i) will work on the long
run. Lets face it: at some point we need to allow multiple values and the
longer we need to accept it the more problematic it will be for everyone
then.

We should start accepting and supporting multiple values. Preferable:
today. Today it's a just a big problem, tomorrow maybe one that we can't
solve at all.

Just my opinion.

Best regards,
Martin




2014/1/9 Peter Wendorff <wendorff at uni-paderborn.de>

> Hi Martin,
> in general you're right, but in this case it's a bad choice.
>
> we as a community, as the mappers, can accept multiple values - but even
> we as the mappers don't have the tools to deal with multiple values,
> that is: AFAIK editors create multiple-value-tags, but don't use them,
> e.g. for their internal rendering of the map.
>
> For other software it's worse: As far as I know you have to actively
> deal with multiple-value-tags in Mapnik for any tag used in the
> stylesheet, and on top of that it's slower than single-values.
>
> For rendering apart from the technical issues (which are of course
> solvable) you have to choose what to show on a value-level instead of on
> a key-level:
> Currently a shop=* is "more important" to the stylesheet than an address
> (addr:*), so a shop icon is shown instead; but any shops that have a
> dedicated item are on the same importance level.
> With multiple values you have to decide, which is more important:
> amenity=pub or amenity=gambling? shop=car or shop=car_repair,
> amenity=fuel or amenity=car_wash?
>
> I agree that fly's argument shouldn't be taken too seriously (the part
> "...especially as it might collide with another value of amenity), but
> as the gambling key is proposed, too it's better to use that one only
> instead of spreading values across amenity, shop, leisure, gambling and
> probably even more.
>
> regards
> Peter
>
> Am 09.01.2014 15:07, schrieb Martin Vonwald:
> > Hi!
> >
> > 2014/1/9 fly <lowflight66 at googlemail.com>
> >
> >> .... and only use gambling, especially as
> >> it might collide with another value of amenity.
> >>
> >
> > In my opinion we all really should start accepting that a key might have
> > more than one possible value. I don't see any problem in
> > amenity=pub;gambling .
> >
> > -----
> > Ok, you don't like the semi-colon, so lets move gambling to a different
> key
> > - now we have amenity=pub + gambling=yes -> problem solved. Fine. Oh,
> wait
> > - there's a pub that's also a nightclub! amenity=pub;nightclub? No way,
> so
> > lets move nightclub to a different key - problem solved! Again. One
> moment:
> > this pub sells ice_cream! No problem, just move ice_cream to a different
> > key....
> > -----
> >
> > See what I mean?
> >
> > The sooner we start to accept multiple values the less problems we will
> > have in the future. <--- my opinion!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140109/69ebd92f/attachment-0001.html>