[Talk-ko] What is 'English' anyways?

[Andrew Errington]

I have been wanting this discussion for a long time.  For a while it seemed
that the mailing list was too small to be effective, and I am always
worried about discussing things in English for the environment in Korea.
But, if the topic is interesting enough then I think Korean speakers will
translate and discuss it too.

I really like the idea of "ko-Latn" instead of ko_rm, and yes, it ought to
be done on the entire database in one automated update.

In my opinion name=* should be what is written on the sign, which means
Hangul and "English", as we see on many street signs.  Then the Hangul part
moved to name:ko=* and the "English" part moved to... well, it gets
difficult.  Sometimes we see Romanised Hangul, and sometimes an English
translation.

These days, having both names in name=* is not popular, but it means that
the general map is less useful to me, as multilingual mapping is still not
very common.  Maybe we should be encouraging the development of
multilingual mapping so that people can usefully use multilingual data?  I
don't mind putting the data in, but I'd like to see it being used.

How about the following definitions, as a starting point?

name=*
The most prominent name written on the sign. e.g. Hangul for street signs,
or English for some shops or cafes, or in some cases, Chinese (Hanja)
script.

name:ko=*
The name in Hangul (it may be a duplicate of name=*, but that's ok)

name:ko_Latn=*
The Romanized version of name:ko=*

name:en=*
English version of the name of the object (it may be a duplicate of name=*).

name:zh=*
The name in Hanja

name:ja=*
The name in Japanese

Not all tags must be present, just name=*, and it is not necessary to
'guess' the other tags.  I included zh and ja as they are often seen on
signs in Seoul or other cities.  I am not sure if zh is the right language
code for Hanja (maybe zh-KO?).  I am also not sure if some signs are
actually Chinese, and not Hanja, even though they are very similar.  I
think we need to state "here is the tag for Hanja" and "here is the tag for
Chinese" (and here is the tag for simplified Chinese- wow, it's
complicated).

Oh, and I also agree that "Bridge" should stay in the name.  I'm not sure
about "Station", but we could have a list of common words that renderers
could strip from a label to make it shorter.  For example, a renderer could
take the name=Seoul Station for a node tagged railway=station, but could
mark it with an icon and strip " Station" to leave just "Seoul".

Andrew


On 22 October 2015 at 13:33, Max <abonnements at revolwear.com> wrote:

> On 2015년 10월 22일 06:53, Thierry Bézecourt wrote:
> > Le 21/10/2015 17:10, Max a écrit :
> > OSM has probably no appropriate tag, but name:en is not worse than
> > others. You might prefer "int_name", but it is not perfect either
> > ("international" includes non-Latin scripts).
>
> I agree. So we should clearly mark "name:en" as an optional field.
>
>
> > Or maybe we should use name:ko-Latn, which seems to be more standard
> > than name:ko_rm (according to
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Localization).
>
> Oh wow. If we want this transition - and it seems we should - I think
> that needs to be done in the database as bulk to switch all the
> "name:ko_rm" to "name:ko-Latn". Who has the power to decide over this
> and do it?
>
> > Indeed, these names are not exactly romanized names since they use
> > numbers and punctuation (the romanized version of 양화로 is Yanghwaro,
> > but the Latin name is Yanghwa-ro). And sometimes they include purely
> > English words (WorldCup-ro). On the whole, these names are Latin script
> > names.
>
> So would that be
>
> name=월드겊로
> name:ko=월드겊로
> name:ko_Latn=WorldCup-ro
> name:en=World Cup Street
>
> ?
>
> > (What should be avoided is what I have often seen in Seoul: romanized
> > names built up by the mapper (who often makes mistakes because
> > romanization is not an easy task). Transliteration should be done by a
> > software, or not at all:
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Avoid_transliteration )
> >
> >> However, we translate Naegori and gyo to Intersection and Bridge then it
> >> becomes English indeed and rightfully demands the name:en tag. So why
> >> not translating Gil and Ro while we are at it? I think it would be more
> >> consistent and logical.
> >
> > I don't think you should do any translation, unless you can see the
> > translated name in the street. "Map what's on the ground" and "Don't use
> > name tag to describe things". It's useless to repeat in the "name" field
> > what is already said in specific tags (bridge=yes,
> > highway=secondary...). Therefore "name:*" tags should contain official
> > names (Hangeul and Latin scripts, plus sometimes in Chinese and Japanese
> > also) and nothing else.
>
> I disagree. Brooklyn Bridge is the name of the bridge, not only
> "Brooklyn". We can't break the name just because the bridge part of the
> information is already in the bridge=yes tag.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ko mailing list
> Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ko/attachments/20151022/d36deba8/attachment-0001.html>