[Tagging] Keys to which new values can be added without a proposal: craft=, shop=, building=, office=, sport=?
pla16021 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 17 13:18:33 UTC 2019
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 13:28, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> you have mentioned the owner’s wishes already yesterday, but I wasn’t
> aware we had a requirement that the owners must tolerate having their
> property mapped.
We don't (that I know of).
> So far I thought the only strict requirement was that the thing is
> verifiably there.
Indeed. If it's publicly verifiable, I map it. If I learn about a
business from information
which is not publicly verifiable then I ask the owner for permission.
Because if the
owner refuses that permission then another mapper may be unable to verify
Also out of courtesy.
> Unlike real people, businesses don’t have privacy and should not be able
> to dictate what we can map and what not.
But they do control if they make that information public. My
be running some sort of business from home, but if she is then she's
keeping it secret
from me. I can't map what I don't know about.
One Facebook-advertised beautician stated that she operated in a cabin on a
I could identify the farm, but I couldn't figure out which outbuilding was
hers so I couldn't
map it with any precision. So I asked her for clarification and she said
she didn't want to
be mapped. I could visit her to get beautified (with all the effect of
tying a ribbon on
dog poop) and then I'd know and could map her whether she wanted it or not
still might not do so if I thought she was operating on the black economy
and there was a
risk of it getting her prosecuted).
I went past a farm, once. As well as the name of the farm, there was a
"XYZ Holiday Cottages." I could spot the farmhouse (more of a mansion)
imagery, but I could see many outbuildings that I was unable to identify
the purpose of.
Their web site had a pseudo-map identifying each holiday cottage - just
outbuilding had been converted to a holiday cottage. Pseudo-map because it
an artistic rendition of a perspective shot taken from a drone. So I
about mapping their cottages, asked about what the copyright on the map
and told them if copyright prevented it we could still play "spot the ball"
to identify them.
They responded that not only did they want the holiday cottages unmapped
wanted the name of the farm removed. I refused to remove the farm name
"ABC Farm" in the hamlet ABC which has that farm and a couple of houses).
fellow mapper ever stays at one of those cottages, they'll all get mapped.
But I can't
do it from the info I am allowed to use.
For one business I learned the street name and house name: "The Old
Trouble is, there is no building with that name on that street. There is a
that closed a couple of months ago, but the name on the gatepost is still
"Ashleigh Surgery" and there are no obvious signs it's in use. There are
other buildings on that street that were previously used by that same
in years past: one is now the Citizen's Advice Bureau and has been for many
years. I've never been able to pin down which of two houses was previously
the other incarnation of the surgery, but both of them display names which
not "The Old Surgery." I'm guessing the business is in the recently-closed
but I'm not certain. I contacted the owner who said he doesn't want to be
won't map my guess and probably wouldn't map the place even if I found
out which of the three possibilities it is, unless that information were
If a business does not make its location public then mapping it isn't
generally useful, but I'm happy to do so as a courtesy if the owner
the location isn't public and the owner doesn't wish it mapped than I won't
so because of copyright and/or verifiability, but also to be courteous and
it's not going to benefit many people anyway. YMMV, but that is
(currently) how I
choose to do it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging