[Tagging] Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, restaurant

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Tue Jan 14 11:06:15 UTC 2020


Am 13.01.2020 um 21:23 schrieb European Water Project:
>
>
> Thanks Hauke
>
> The namespace scheme could work. It is very elegant and clean. The
> meaning of customer in container is a bit confusing... as it can be a
> paying or non paying customer. 
>
> I could see : 
> free_water = <anyone,must_consume>
> free_water:container =<own,establishment>
> free_water:table=<yes/no>  
>
> How long does it typically take for the tag allocation decision
> process to be completed?  Do you have an example wiki proposal page ? 

To be clear "formal" approval is completely optional, documenting what
you are using is best practice, discussing what could work and trying to
find a consensus is wise.

Currently I see the usual problem that the discussion is trying to solve
the general problem. Is anybody actually interested in if free water is
dispensed in other than bring your own container/bottle scenarios?

Simon

>
> Best regards,
>
> Stuart 
>
>  
>
>
>     Message: 2
>     Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 19:57:02 +0100
>     From: Hauke Stieler <mail at hauke-stieler.de
>     <mailto:mail at hauke-stieler.de>>
>     To: tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,
>             restaurant
>     Message-ID: <b247e31a-8523-a49b-0a9e-cd9a7f731cca at hauke-stieler.de
>     <mailto:b247e31a-8523-a49b-0a9e-cd9a7f731cca at hauke-stieler.de>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>     Hi Stuart,
>
>     > The proposal below does not seem optimal, but if that is what is
>     decided
>     > we will write wiki instructions in this manner.
>     No decisions have been made so far. Currently all these mails just
>     contain ideas and discussions.
>
>     I'm personally a fan of the namespace scheme, the one with the ":"
>     separating parts of a tag. You'll find this e.g. on addresses:
>
>             addr:street=*
>             addr:city=*
>             addr:housenumber=*
>             ...
>
>     Or also for parking situations:
>
>             parking:lane=*
>             parking:lane:left=*
>             parking:condition=*
>             ...
>
>     This semantic separation of a key creates a nice structure and
>     organizes
>     this huge collection of possible tags into groups.
>
>     > I still prefer free_water_refill=yes/no  free_water_table=yes/no
>     Because the beginning of these two tags are the same, for me
>     personally
>     it's a reason to change them into "free_water:..." tags.
>
>     Using this scheme, I can also imagine the following tags (just ideas,
>     the keys and values are probably not optimal):
>
>     free_water=<yes/no/customers>
>     free_water:container=<customer/supplier/both>
>     free_water:table=<yes/no>
>     (maybe more...)
>
>     However, in the end, there must probably be a tag proposal (a wiki
>     page
>     describing how the final tags should look like, what they exactly
>     mean,
>     when to use them, what use-cases do they have, etc.). Everybody
>     can vote
>     for or against the proposal, therefore it's in the end on the
>     community
>     to decide what tags become "official".
>
>     Hauke
>
>     -------------- next part --------------
>     A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>     Name: signature.asc
>     Type: application/pgp-signature
>     Size: 833 bytes
>     Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
>     URL:
>     <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/7ff6a580/attachment-0001.sig>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Message: 3
>     Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:01:56 +0100
>     From: European Water Project <europeanwaterproject at gmail.com
>     <mailto:europeanwaterproject at gmail.com>>
>     To: tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, (Martin
>             Koppenhoefer)
>     Message-ID:
>            
>     <CAK=tSVf_Da=AT=gEK8N0UsxA_VbaUrryqQwVv9F6EMejdU1UYw at mail.gmail.com
>     <mailto:gEK8N0UsxA_VbaUrryqQwVv9F6EMejdU1UYw at mail.gmail.com>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>     >
>     >    2. Re:  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars, (Martin Koppenhoefer)
>     >
>     >>>>> Martin, Italy is amazing. Apparently there are more than 100,000
>     fountains in Italy. On the 24th of April, we are planning a
>     fountain hunt
>     in Rome with the My-D.org. We should be 20 people including locals
>     (just in
>     case you live there).
>     re: amenity=drinking_water
>     France is complicated and the lobbies have made almost all
>     perfectly good
>     water fountains labelled "non potable". Just across the borders in
>     Switzerland and Italy all the fountains are good to drink......
>
>     Price can be an incentive, but unless the waste producer pays all true
>     indirect externalities the cost will always be minimal for PET.
>
>
>     > 3. Re:  Tagging Free Water for cafés,  bars, (Philip Barnes)
>     >
>
>     >>>>>>>Philip, Yes, like the US and France. We believe that it
>     should be
>     that way everywhere. No one should have to create single-use waste
>     to keep
>     themselves hydrated.
>
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Message: 2
>     > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 17:50:20 +0100
>     > From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
>     <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>>
>     > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>     >         <tagging at openstreetmap.org
>     <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>>
>     > Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés, bars,
>     > Message-ID:
>     >         <
>     >
>     CABPTjTCLw2ikPrN1vAGBtc4x9zGuoToL0xCoxz5MpNC6G0-rOg at mail.gmail.com
>     <mailto:CABPTjTCLw2ikPrN1vAGBtc4x9zGuoToL0xCoxz5MpNC6G0-rOg at mail.gmail.com>>
>     > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>     >
>     > Am Mo., 13. Jan. 2020 um 17:29 Uhr schrieb European Water Project <
>     > europeanwaterproject at gmail.com
>     <mailto:europeanwaterproject at gmail.com>>:
>     >
>     > > While I understand your point of view, many are trying hard to
>     change
>     > > legislation and might see it as more than a marketing gimmick
>     but rather
>     > a
>     > > right to be able to drink without generating single-use waste.
>     Belgium,
>     > > Luxembourg,  Switzerland and Italy are not obliged to serve
>     tap water
>     > with
>     > > a meal like in France where we live.
>     > >
>     >
>     >
>     > from a practical point of view, living in Italy, I have not yet
>     encountered
>     > a place that would have refused (free) tap water. Great thing
>     about Italy
>     > is that you can get free water in many places right on the
>     street, from
>     > drinking fountains 24/7. amenity=drinking_water is rank 5 on Italy's
>     > taginfo stats, almost double the amount of petrol stations :)
>     > https://taginfo.geofabrik.de/europe/italy/keys/amenity#values
>     >
>     > In France, drinking_water is amenity rank 23, so rightfully your
>     government
>     > has found other ways to provide you with water ;-)
>     > https://taginfo.geofabrik.de/europe/france/keys/amenity#values
>     >
>     > Not to get me wrong, I do agree there is benefit from political
>     action, and
>     > there are issues related to water. What also matters is the
>     actual price
>     > you have to pay for (bottled) water. It will always be
>     completely unrelated
>     > to drinking water prices, but while in Italy a bottle of water
>     is typically
>     > 1 EUR (away from airports), or 2 EUR (in the restaurant, there are
>     > exceptions), in Germany they will typically charge you 2,50 and
>     more for
>     > just a glass of water. In Switzerland, they sell water for 5 SFR
>     a bottle
>     > on the motorway, and 4 EUR and more is not unseen on German
>     motorways as
>     > well.
>     >

>     > Cheers
>     > Martin
>     > -------------- next part --------------
>     > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>     > URL: <
>     >
>     http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/41ea2a3c/attachment-0001.htm
>     > >
>     >
>     > ------------------------------
>     >
>     > Message: 3
>     > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 18:12:56 +0000
>     > From: Philip Barnes <phil at trigpoint.me.uk
>     <mailto:phil at trigpoint.me.uk>>
>     > To: tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     > Subject: Re: [Tagging]  Tagging Free Water for cafés,  bars,
>     > Message-ID:
>     >       
>      <ba9dbef6a392aaafac3f9c7fc86dcc6785ee2064.camel at trigpoint.me.uk
>     <mailto:ba9dbef6a392aaafac3f9c7fc86dcc6785ee2064.camel at trigpoint.me.uk>>
>     > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>     >
>     > In GB it is the law that licensed premises provide free drinking
>     water.
>     >
>     > So that , means all pubs, most restaurants and some cafes.
>     >
>     > Phil (trigpoint)
>     >
>     > -------------- next part --------------
>     > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>     > URL: <
>     >
>     http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/08db579c/attachment-0001.htm
>     > >
>     >
>     > ------------------------------
>     >
>     > ****************************************
>     >
>     -------------- next part --------------
>     An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>     URL:
>     <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200113/f4e4ddb5/attachment-0001.htm>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Message: 4
>     Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 21:02:10 +0100
>     From: Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com
>     <mailto:selfishseahorse at gmail.com>>
>     To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>             <tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>>
>     Subject: Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking
>     Message-ID:
>            
>     <CAJJ-S94-nzLN9GmFq=w_WGVqprKyRqbOBbgap8gyLS2yXQ1esw at mail.gmail.com
>     <mailto:w_WGVqprKyRqbOBbgap8gyLS2yXQ1esw at mail.gmail.com>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>     Hi John
>
>     On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 22:37, John Willis via Tagging
>     <tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>     >
>     > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/36.31737/139.61884
>     >
>     > Here is a good example of the kind of situations I have in my area:
>     >
>     > - a service area with two different lots, car and HGV
>     (bus/lorry) adjacent to each other, with a satellite bathroom for
>     the busses.
>     > - service area is segregated by motorway direction, and labeled
>     as such. This makes duplicates of everything.  They are usually
>     not adjacent, but are in this case.
>     > - dedicated separated handicap parking
>     > - separate “permissive” lots for people outside the toll system
>     to park and enter on foot.
>     > - loading zones for deliveries (untagged).
>
>     https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/758265853
>
>     amenity=parking
>     access=customers
>     bus=designated
>     hgv=designated
>     motorcar=no
>     parking=surface
>     ref=🚛🚌
>     surface=asphalt
>
>     As amenity=parking currently is defined as a car park, data users
>     would assume that this is a car park for customers (they likely don't
>     evaluate motorcar=no).
>
>     Even if amenity=parking weren't exclusive for cars, but for any
>     vehicles, your tagging doesn't mean what you likely had in mind (i.e.
>     a customer parking for buses and HGVs), but a designated parking
>     facility for buses and HGVs (not only for customers) that other
>     vehicles except cars (e.g. tourist buses or motorcycles) can use if
>     they are customers.
>
>     In order that data understand your example and before we've found a
>     solution for parkings for multiple vehicle classes, i would recommend
>     to tag it as follows:
>
>     amenity=parking
>     access=no
>     bus=customers
>     hgv=customers
>
>     Regards
>
>     Markus
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     Subject: Digest Footer
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     End of Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 78
>     ****************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200114/7e6531de/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200114/7e6531de/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the Tagging mailing list