[Tagging] Please don't think name_1 tags are errors.
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Jan 15 15:02:12 UTC 2016
2016-01-15 15:26 GMT+01:00 moltonel 3x Combo <moltonel at gmail.com>:
> But I wonder if some people know about the iD editor behavior below,
> and assume that a name_1 tag must have been created that way ? If so,
> consider this email as a reminder that the _N suffix is used on
> purpose by many people. As always, contact the mapper if unsure.
also shop_1 tags are created that way. I wonder why you would want to add
these tags on purpose. E.g. for shops the values indicate a type of shop. A
bookstore that also sells music cds? Still a bookstore IMHO. A music store
that also sells some books? Still a music store. Now, a store that sells
both, music cds and books, and maybe dvds and posters, maybe still a
bookstore, maybe a new category like a media store, not sure, would have to
decide on the particular case. In a majority of cases you still can decide
on one of the types and that it is. A green grocer that also sells
toothpaste, detergents, toys and cheese? That likely not a green grocer any
more, that's either a convenience store or a supermarket.
What I want to say: a shop that is 2 shops in one might well be neither of
these shop types, but a new typology.
In other cases, there is a well defined shop/restaurant/bar/kiosk/... which
also offers some odd service or product you might find in some but not all
of this kind of business, and which you consider so interesting that you
want to map the presence of it. Examples might be tobacco/cigarettes,
icecream, particular soft drinks (club_mate comes to mind ), public
transport tickets, fresh milk, etc.
My solution for this is sells:foo=yes(/no/etc.)
Obviously we wouldn't want people to tag the whole assortment of a
supermarket like this, but due to the amount of work the risk is low.
People will likely just tag the things they are particularly interested in,
and that are not automatically thought of being available generally. So far
the list is small ;-) 
Now, there are also edge cases, i.e. types that are so rare that you
probably won't find more than a handful on the whole globe, my favorite one
is this: http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/7089481?album_id=4242149
that's an optician who also runs a polish deli shop in the same shop (and
it's the same person, one door, same opening hours, not sure if it's one
business actually (on a legal level), but let's suppose for this discussion
that it is). My suggestion is to map them as two overlapping shops rather
than shop=foo shop_1=bar. For the avoidance of doubt you can add the same
VAT identification number (ref:vatin).
For names, the solution should be to use well defined name key variations,
there's a whole lot of them , and introducing just another infinite
amount of indexed ones seems completely unnecessary.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging