[Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

Tue Oct 20 06:30:39 UTC 2020

They mean the same thing, we tag different aspects of a bridge with
different tags.

All bridges are man_made and all bridges are bridges.

Therefore if the tag for man_made=bridge was changed to bridge=yes, and
bridge=yes was used for both ways and areas then this would simplify the
tagging of bridges.

One would then use bridge=construction instead of construction=bridge to
match the standards used in buildings (building=construction).

If you take the buildings for example:
buildings=yes (area) is equivalent to man_made=building (not used) as all
buildings are man_made, yet we don't tag it as man_made rather just
building=yes for areas.

*If building=yes applies to areas, why doesn't bridge=yes apply to areas?*

The same stands for all other man_made tags.

Most common man_made tags:
man_made=pier could become pier=yes
man_made=storage_tank could become storage_tank=yes or
storage_tank=(content)

*Perhaps I'll drop the gender argument and go with man_made is actually not
required and perhaps we should tackle these one-by-one therefore reducing
the immediate changes required.*

Regards,

Rob.

On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 17:01, Jo <winfixit at gmail.com> wrote:

> They do NOT mean the same thing. How they differ has already been
> mentioned 2 or 3 times in this thread.
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 06:59 Robert Delmenico <robert at rtbk.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Essentially though, they mean the same thing:
>> man_made=bridge is for areas
>> bridge=yes is for ways
>>
>> Both refer to to say there is a bridge and each assumes each others
>> meaning - I wouldn't think we would use natural=bridge.
>>
>> Perhaps there could be a proposal to change man_made=bridge to bridge=yes
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 3:41 pm Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging, <
>> tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 20 paź 2020, 00:52 od robert at rtbk.com.au:
>>>
>>> Perhaps the use of man_made could be dropped all together as it is
>>> somewhat superfluous.
>>>
>>> Ie. man_made=bridge is the same as bridge=yes
>>>
>>> Are you aware that we have bridge=yes
>>> and man_made=bridge used with a
>>> different meaning?
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps all of the existing man_made=[value] tags should be changed to
>>> [value]=yes
>>>
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 9:46 am Robert Delmenico, <robert at rtbk.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please read this article:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/pep/index-fra.html?lang=fra&page=usage_7_gender_neutral_writing_questions_usage
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 'Not really, and "man_made" does not mean that it was made by males.'
>>>
>>> Yes it does. Why would society also use women-made?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 'It seems to me that a lot of males like to speak for women on these
>>> issues.
>>> Why? Can't they speak for themselves?'
>>>
>>> Hence why I said who am I to decide!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 'Marriam-webster:
>>> ==
>>> Definition of man-made
>>> : manufactured, created, or constructed by human beings'
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/03/not-everything-is-man-made-13-amazing-inventions-you-can-thank-women-for/
>>>
>>> Should we use the term man-made if it is made entirely by women?
>>>
>>> Also, check out the translations in the Collins dictionary - what do you
>>> notice?
>>> https://www.collinsdictionary.com/amp/english/man-made
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 'As I mentioned in another email, we do use terms such as midwife.'
>>>
>>> Midwife actually translates as 'with woman'. The wife part relates to
>>> the person giving birth.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2020, 8:44 am Niels Elgaard Larsen, <elgaard at agol.dk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Robert Delmenico:
>>> >
>>> > I originally put the call out really to gauge if there was much
>>> interest in changing
>>> > the term man_made because of its use of 'man', and was interested in
>>> hearing the
>>> > thoughts from other mappers as really this proposal isn't just mine.
>>> If there was no
>>> > interest I would just abandon it and move on - that's how the system
>>> works yeah?
>>> >
>>> > Here's my thoughts based on the feedback received so far
>>> >
>>> > Regardless of the origin of the term, the current use of 'man' is to
>>> identify adult
>>> > males.
>>>
>>> Not really, and "man_made" does not mean that it was made by males.
>>>
>>> > I don't think the use of 'man_made' offends women, but who am I to
>>> decide that as I
>>> > am a adult male.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that a lot of males like to speak for women on these
>>> issues.
>>> Why? Can't they speak for themselves?
>>>
>>> > I feel that by using any masculine or feminine terms where a suitable
>>> alternative
>>> > exists instills the stereotypes based on these terms.
>>>
>>> Marriam-webster:
>>> ==
>>> Definition of man-made
>>> : manufactured, created, or constructed by human beings
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>> > We don't refer to firefigters as firemen anymore, not do we refer to
>>> airline
>>> > attendants as airline hostesses. The world is changing and OSM should
>>> adapt to these
>>> > changes if there is enough interest from the OSM community.
>>>
>>> As I mentioned in another email, we do use terms such as midwife.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Niels Elgaard Larsen
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201020/c725556a/attachment-0001.htm>