[Tagging] Wiki on amenity=waste_disposal Rewrite?

[Warin]

On 5/02/2015 9:02 AM, David Bannon wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-05 at 08:23 +1100, Warin wrote:
>
>> The 'amenity=waste_disposal does not look to have been through an
>> aproval process ... nor does any tag. The 'approval process' is
>> voluntary ..
> Not sure I agree there !  There is an approval process, if a key/tag
> gets the votes OR its agreed thats its widely used, then its "officially
> approved".
>
> Complying with the standard so established is voluntary. I guess thats
> what you meant.
Yes.. sort of. But not that important.
> But thats probably not important, lets concentrate on camp_site.

Err No. This is about 'amenity=waste_disposal ... it came out of the 
discussion on campsite.. but amenity=waste_disposal is not limited to 
campsites. Need may 'hats' around here.
> Are
> you suggesting we should throw out whats there now and define some
> better terms ?  As you point out, existing ones may not be 'official'
> and are not really a very good syntax.

I'd not throw out the ones in use. Well most of them .. the possible 
confusion between waste=dog and waste=dog_excrement is evident and it 
probably comes about by the present non existent documentation.
>
> I'd personally like to make it a bit tidier but like Dave S, I'll go
> with  the flow, as long as there is a flow !

Yep. I too would like to make it tidier .. but 'we' are being lead by 
those not documenting what they are tagging, and possibly those not 
talking about 'their' additions.
>
> For example, dump_point or dump_station is vastly preferable IMHO to a
> [amenity=waste_disposal; waste=chemical_toilet] combination.

Only one person voted on dump_point .. one. If you want to pursue that 
then go ahead .. but I think people want things gathered together under 
a primary tag then sub tags for the details. Unfortunately in this case 
I too think it is wrong - for the following reason - the rendering of 
the feature should depend on the sub tag .. as that tells us what is there.
>
> I  think pitch v. campsite v. campground is lost, there are 56K uses of
> campsite. If I had time, I see how many are in the UK ! Interestingly,
> the tags we are discussing are not mentioned in camp_site
> combinations.....
> Incidentally, they use "pitch" as in "pitch a tent", I didn't get that.
>
> Personally, I'd only put a new tag on the wiki in a proposal page. If we
> agree, here, on things that work, I'd go that way.
>
>
  I think that is best. And may obtain future tag names being more 
appropriate .. past examples ? campsite-campground? trash-rubbish?

-------------------------------
Additional thing .. distinguishing between amenity=waste_disposal and 
amenity=waste_basket?
Might be best done on volume of the receptacle ? Say 0.5 m^3 (half a 
cubic meter) as the change over point between the two? But make it a 
'general guide' .. not a hard rule!

Thus a waste_basket is less then 0.5 m^3, and a waste_disposal is 0.5 
m^3 or more .. but includes all liquid waste disposal?

---------------------
One thing I have deleted from waste_disposal was a comment that liquid 
waste should have a different tag .. but that was inconsistent with the 
linked waste= tag...
So do you wast to generate a liquid waste tag ? If so what name should 
it have ?

I'm not fixed in either way ,... but would like to have it done sooner 
rather than later when other tags will be in use!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150205/9df5691d/attachment.html>