[Tagging] shop=fashion

Thilo Haug thaug at gmx.de
Sun Aug 27 13:54:47 UTC 2017


Hi Simon,

I also can't see a difference
between boutique and fashion.
Both might be a shop
with other items than clothes
according to these definitions :

"A small shop selling fashionable clothes or accessories"
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/boutique
"a small store that sells stylish clothing, jewelry, or other usually
luxury goods".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boutique

"A popular or the latest style of clothing, hair, decoration, or behaviour."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fashion
"Fashion is a popular style or practice, especially in clothing,
footwear, accessories, makeup, body, or furniture."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion

Possibly a
shop=fashion
with
fashion:type=accessories;clothes

I think this system may be described properly
without causing confusion.
Please let me know which "lot of reasons" you mean.

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 27.08.2017 um 15:04 schrieb Simon Poole:
>
> There is a big difference between a limited number of binary options
> and  essentially moving all values in to key space (and I can give a
> lot of reasons why it is a really really bad idea in a free form, user
> extendible tagging system).
>
> But it seems to be rather off-topic in this thread in any case: I
> simply wanted to know if there is a clear characterisation of
> shop=fashion that can serve as disambiguation between it and
> shop=boutique and shop=clothes (with appropriate additional tags).
>
> We have one voice saying that it should be considered a cheap variant
> of boutique limited to clothes, and the others suggesting that it is
> an upmarket shop=clothes and that shop=boutique should have a broader
> not only clothes definition.
>
> One takeaway is that adding the "clothes" tag both to fashion and
> boutique would be a good idea.
>
> Simon
>
> Am 26.08.2017 um 13:53 schrieb Thilo Haug:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm in favor of a namespace solution,
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace
>> e.g.
>>
>> ski:clothes=yes
>> surfing:clothes=yes
>> motorcycle:clothes=yes
>> any_other_sport:clothes=yes
>>
>> and so on.
>>
>> This way you may also tag other shops (not just shop=clothes)
>> in a way which exactly describes their offers,
>> in this example possibly a shop=sports.
>>
>> The same works also for other services they offer,
>> like
>> ski:repair=yes
>> ski:rental=yes
>> ski:parts=yes
>>
>> This way there's no need to create a new shop type
>> or decide whether it's MORE one type of shop (bicycle vs. motorcycle
>> vs. car or similar)
>> in case they offer very various things.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Thilo
>>
>>
>> Am 26.08.2017 um 13:13 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Thilo Haug
>> Bismarckstr.37
>> 72764 Reutlingen
>>
>> Mobil: +49 177 3185856
>> Festnetz : +49 7121 3826414
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856
Festnetz : +49 7121 3826414

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170827/4a1f5188/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list