[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - key:rubbish=

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Mon Feb 9 21:47:43 UTC 2015


On 9/02/2015 1:59 PM, David Bannon wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 09:15 +1100, Warin wrote:
>> A proposal for a new high level tag of .. Rubbish :-)
> Sigh ... .
I find it amusing..
>
>
> Thirdly, dare I say this, will someone argue rubbish= indicates that
> there is rubbish there, on that spot ?  preferable to say
> rubbish_disposal or something similar.

There you have a very good point. And waste_disposal fits well too
Ok .. humm disposal ... could imply no recycling ... what about
waste_collection ?

That may not have been used in OSM before .. so no conflict... nice. 
What do you think? ... change rubbish to waste_collection?

>
> I do believe we need a high level key for rubbish, trash, waste whatever
>
> Hmm, rubbish_receptacle perhaps ? And definitely not
> rubbish_receptacle_desk !!

:-)    That is the spirit.
>
> (sorry)
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features_key%3Drubbish
>>
>> At present there as a number of 'waste' values under the amenity key.
>> Some people say the amenity key is being over used. There are people
>> thinking of adding more waste values to the amenity key. So there is a
>> case for a high level new key for waste facilities. The number of
>> possible values of this is key I estimate at 27. Don't fixate on the
>> values of this key - the ones shown are examples only .. and would need
>> there own separate proposals.
>>
>> Unfortunately the key waste= is already in use, so to avoid conflicts
>> and mistakes a new name should be used - thus 'rubbish'.
>>
>> ========================
>> Is there a better way? So far the choices look to be;
>>
>> A) More values under the key amenity such as amenity=waste_dump_station?
>> B) More values under amenity=waste_disposal in the key waste=?
>> OR
>> C) New top level key rubbish= with new values under that?
>>
>> Any other options?
>> And what one do you prefer? May be a why would be good.
>>
>> Personally .. I don't know. I think a new top level tag would be good in
>> that it does separte it out from hte others and provides a clear path
>> for new rubbish tags. But I also acknowledge the problems/work that this
>> would introduce. On htewhole I'd go with the neew top level tag, I like
>> a good structure, but any other good ideas or arguments can easily sway
>> my present view.
>>
>> ---------------------
>> I'd like to leave the comments open for 3 weeks .. unless there is a
>> vast amount of comments made and changes/additions to the different
>> choices that could be made.
>> So possible closure on 2 march?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20150210/5871b723/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list