[Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

Sergio Manzi smz at smz.it
Thu Nov 29 14:33:53 UTC 2018


Don't you see it *possible* that sms payment can be made through different clearinghouses/operators? Really?

Cheers!


On 2018-11-29 14:13, Michael Brandtner wrote:
> If I pay per SMS, then I don't pay per app. It doesn't make sense to have both in the same key. I do like bkil's suggestions but do think that the tags should be as specific as possible, even if that means to have multiple keys with the same value.
>
> So for example:
> payment:sms=yes
> payment:AppName1=yes
> payment:AppName2y=yes
> ref:sms=12345
> contact:sms=0127
> ref:AppName1=12345
> ref:AppName2=12345
>
> This leads me to another interesting question: Should these be added to amenity=parking or to vending=parking_tickets? 
> In my opinion it makes more sense to add them to the parking lot itself because I don't need the ticket machine if I use pay by phone. But the wiki only suggests payment=* keys for vending=parking_tickets, not for amenity=parking.
>
>
> Sergio Manzi <smz at smz.it> schrieb am 21:15 Mittwoch, 28.November 2018:
>
>
> Sorry, but it should be:
>
>     payment:sms=yes
>     payment:sms:WhateverPayApp=yes
>     payment:sms:WhateverPayApp:contact=<phone number to send>
>     payment:sms:WhateverPayApp:ref:payment=<code to send>
>
> because, sooner or later, multiple payment options/clearingouse/apps could be supported and each should have its info.
> The "ref:" could be go, IMHO...
> Cheers,
> Sergio Manzi
>
> On 2018-11-28 21:07, bkil wrote:
>> payment:sms=yes
>> payment:WhateverPayApp=yes
>> contact:sms=<phone number to send>
>> ref:payment=<code to send>
>>
>> As an alternative, ref:sms=* would also work for me, though I think
>> it's redundant if the code is the same for all payment options.
>> ref:payment:sms=* sounds a bit excessive, but would be the most
>> correct tagging. However, OSM strives for consistency and
>> mapper-friendliness more than "correct" tagging in most cases, so I.
>>
>> I would definitely mark the exact payment variety, like
>>
>> * payment:sms=*,
>> * payment:app=* or even better payment:WhateverPayApp=*,
>> * payment:mastercard_contactless=*.
>>
>> I don't recommend using payment:pay_by_phone=* or
>> payment:contactless=* due to the sheer number of incompatible
>> different payment solutions (see wiki). It sounds worse to me than
>> payment:debit_cards=* that many disapprove of, while I do use
>> payment:debit_cards=* myself. I actually wanted to bring this up in a
>> new topic recently:
>>
>>>> payment:contactless=*
>> Contactless payment on Wikipedia and Contactless smart card on Wikipedia
>> Used to indicate that a venue has 'contactless' (RFID/NFC-based) bank
>> card readers. You may consider adding the precise variety of
>> contactless smart card accepted: payment:expresspay=*,
>> payment:mastercard_contactless=* (formerly payment:paypass=*),
>> payment:visa_contactless=* (alternatively payment:paywave=*),
>> payment:quickpass=*, payment:quicpay=* (overseas J/Speedy, commonly
>> payment:QUICPay=*), payment:rupay_contactless=*, payment:zip=*,
>> payment:mifare=*
>> (wikipedia:en:MIFARE#Places_that_use_MIFARE_products),
>> payment:felica=*(wikipedia:en:FeliCa#Card_usage), payment:wechat=*
>> (wikipedia:en:WeChat#WeChat_Pay_payment_services), payment:alipay=*
>> (wikipedia:en:Alipay#Comparison_with_other_payment_systems),
>> payment:venmo=*. Not to be confused with contactless electronic
>> variants of payment:meal_vouchers=* and payment:electronic_purses=*
>> that are used in-house at many places. <<
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 9:29 AM Philip Barnes <phil at trigpoint.me.uk> <mailto:phil at trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 21 November 2018 12:45:30 GMT, Michael Brandtner <brandtner_michael at yahoo.de> <mailto:brandtner_michael at yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>> Philip Barnes <phil at trigpoint.me.uk> <mailto:phil at trigpoint.me.uk> schrieb am 23:29 Dienstag,
>>>> 20.November 2018:
>>>>
>>>>> I am not 100% sure that mobile payment is the correct term, that to
>>>> me implies using your phone for contactless payment.
>>>> But wouldn't that be payment:contactless?
>>>>
>>>>> The English term used in these cases is Pay by Phone.
>>>> So your suggestion is payment:pay_by_phone and ref:pay_by_phone?
>>> That is correct, pay by phone is the normal English usage.
>>>
>>> Phil (trigpoint)
>>> --
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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/20181129/c798d71c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3675 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181129/c798d71c/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the Tagging mailing list