marc.gemis at gmail.com
Wed Jan 18 19:48:17 UTC 2017
I thought we went through this discussion on sell or vending a couple
of months ago, where the fear was that we would start "importing" the
sales catalogue of shops and that it would be very hard to maintain.
A vending machine typically sells 1 type of product, so there it is
more or less doable.
Still there will be people who would like to different between the
types of bread or brands of candy or sodas in vending machines and
start mapping that as well. Is this what we want ? Or is the current
level of detail sufficient ?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:35 PM, joost schouppe
<joost.schouppe at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-01-18 15:33 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout <daveswarthout at gmail.com>:
>> This tag started out being for a very specific type of shop that sells
>> only one item, motor fuel, in small volume containers. There is a need to
>> keep shops of this type separate from large full-service facilities that
>> sell motor fuel in quantities large enough to refill cars or trucks. lt has
>> now been expanded to include other types of fuel like kerosene and even
>> charcoal. Fine. That's logical and sensible.
>> But if you want to rework the tagging structure to handle such borderline
>> cases as fuel shops that also sell bread, then I feel that would be
>> defeating the original purpose of this tag. Where will these additions and
>> modifications stop? A logical but not particularly useful extension of that
>> reasoning might involve redefining the entire structure of the shop tag
>> hierarchy by using shop=yes, bread=yes, Crest_brand_toothpaste=yes,
>> fuel:diesel=yes, knitting_supplies=yes, etc. etc.
> Well, I for one like to take a middle ground between what works now and what
> we will probably need in the future.
> Vending machines are mapped entirely according to this model, using
> vending:*=* . By the logic we used for shop=*, it should have been
> amenity=bread_vending_machine or amenity=vending_machine + bread=yes. The
> vending:* tagging style makes it easier to process all sorts of data, and
> easily allows further extension.
> I wouldn't say we should change shop tagging styles to that. I was merely
> taking the stated position that fuel shops should follow that structure to
> its logical conclusion. And I'm starting to think we might actually have to
> consider it to avoid ever further cluttering of the shop types.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging