[Tagging] shop=fashion

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Sat Aug 26 11:38:52 UTC 2017

There is already disambiguation within the shop=clothes object with over
10'000 uses of the clothes tag. and I'm not quite sure were your
stipulation shop=fashion is cheaper than shop=boutique comes from.


On 26.08.2017 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> sent from a phone
> On 26. Aug 2017, at 11:15, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch
> <mailto:simon at poole.ch>> wrote:
>> the question turned up if shop=fashion (with 5000 something uses)
>> should not be deprecated (==not offered for new use) due to overlap with
>> shop=boutique (~11'000 uses) and shop=clothes, clothes=fashion (not
>> particularly popular with roughly 200 uses). It just doesn't seem to
>> have a good definition, which is already pointed out on the wiki page
>> (but without a conclusion).
> I'd see shop=fashion similar with shop=boutique, while shop=clothes is
> not particularly helpful if you're looking to buy clothes (too
> generic). I'd roughly see it like this: boutique expensive, fashion
> cheap(er), department store both, supermarket cheap ;-)
> What would I search for if I wanted to buy a suit or a shirt
> (department shops apart which will sell you anything)? Maybe a
> "boutique for men"? To buy gloves I'd try with a  shop=bags? Or
> shop=leather? Or shop=sports? Or an outdoor shop? There are many
> places to buy clothes, cheap, casual, formal, according to the
> material, for work, gender, age, style, one brand/designer or
> multiple, or no (known) designer, discounter, different types of
> clothing (underwear, shirts, etc.
> I'm rather against reduction of top level shop types, there's IMHO a
> clear distinction between fashion shops and boutiques, with maybe some
> edge cases, but still useful overall. Nonetheless I agree that
> shop=clothes does require subtags to be more useful, but the current
> situation in the clothes key is not working:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/clothes#values
> There are many orthogonal, specific properties tagged, e.g. target
> group (women, men, children, babies), for specific occasions/uses
> (sports/wedding/workwear), materials (denim/fur), type
> (underwear/lingerie). Fashion would be yet another new category in
> this cauldron (with 111 uses it isn't really significant).
> cheers,
> Martin 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170826/ddfe76da/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list