[OSM-talk] Prolification of the amenity tag

[bvh]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 11:32:42AM +0000, Paul Youlten wrote:
> Open, free Yellow Pages does exist: www.yellowikis.org (I am a co-founder)

Great, Didn't know it existed.

> I don't see why a node tagged: "amenity/butcher" shouldn't be a valuable
> part of OSM's data set - Yellow Pages (or Yellowikis) has all the other
> information about the business: business name, address, telephone number,
> opening hours as well as a geo-code.

But you also have the <geo> </geo> tag. So there is duplicated
information, right?

> It all comes down to how you display of the information - I don't think
> anyone would want OSM map covered with hundreds of tiny logos. So butchers
> and bubble gum machines should be there - but only rendered if requested by
> the user.

I am totally not concerned with display of information. Pulling
different databases together to tailor the view for one application
is a nobrainer. Well, as long as they don't contain duplicated
(and thus potentially conflicting) information.

I am concerned with the entry of information and its searchability.

Those are more practical inside something like yellowiki than
openstreetmap.
 
> I'd also suggest that allowing a wide range of amenities to be added
> broadens the appeal of OSMing an area.

How so?

cu bart

> On 11/29/06, bvh <bvh-osm at irule.be> wrote:
> >
> >On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 09:53:29AM -0000, Andy Robinson wrote:
> >> While I agree on gpx uploads of flightpaths being withheld from OSM I do
> >> that only because it confuses. However with respect to other geo data
> >that
> >> represents physical features (and the wifi access point hardware is a
> >> physical feature) then why do we care what type of geo data the database
> >> holds. I'm concerned that we are not thinking outside the box if we set
> >> restrictions based on traditional mapping. If my kids want to produce a
> >map
> >> of all the bubble gum machines in the area why would I not want to let
> >them
> >> (tooth decay permitting!), they would be producing an innovative map and
> >one
> >> which has value to a certain group of society. It was the potential for
> >this
> >> innovation in mapping that drew me to OSM in the first place.
> >
> >My main concern against allowing an unlimited amount of geo information is
> >* more features means more outdated information (especially
> >with quickly changing stuff like wifi zones, shops, etc), harming
> >the credibility of other information also in the database
> >(Note missing information is better than wrong information)
> >* more features means a bigger hurdle in participation for everyone
> >involved
> >* more features make it more difficult to edit the map. Theoretically
> >the editing tools should take care of that. But currently they are not
> >yet good enough, so the concern is real
> >* by accepting this data we may cut short the birth of a better
> >adapted "openyellowpages" scheme. For example it is
> >impractical to search for "butchers in Gent" using the data
> >model of a map. It would be trivial in a listings data model.
> >* bad priorities. While this is a voluntuur project and we can't
> >decide for others how they should spend their time, we can try
> >to steer them. Eg. I think it is more usefull for people to add
> >a new street than to add the location of their local butcher.
> >* more distinct features make it more difficult to refactor the
> >database if we ever need to (I believe this to be very likely)
> >
> >> The counter argument is that the location of bubble gum machines should
> >be
> >> held in someone else's database. Fine if it exists and is free and open.
> >But
> >> in reality few sites are collecting data right now in the way OSM does
> >and I
> >> think we should encourage others to go forward with this rather than
> >block
> >> them from the head start they can gain by using existing OSM data. Look
> >at
> >
> >I would totally encourage a new openyellowpages project to take as
> >much advantage of the _data_ provided by openstreetmap. It would only
> >make sense to do so and I mentioned that in my original mail also.
> >
> >> Freethepostcode, ok its not within the OSM database as such but its
> >founded
> >
> >EXACTLY my point. Freethepostcode is a success _because_ it has its
> >own adapted database that meshes nicely with Openstreetmap. The same
> >should happen for a listing of butchers, wifihotspots or whatever.
> >
> >> Thus personally I believe that there should be few restrictions on the
> >type
> >> of geo data but that the way information is tagged and associated needs
> >some
> >> additional work. Bubble gum machines are arguably not an amenity
> >although I
> >> think wifi access points certainly are in our modern world. Improvements
> >in
> >> the extensibility of the Map Features tagging schema is something I'm
> >> working on and hopefully will make some of these issues less
> >contentious.
> >
> >Could you elaborate a bit more on this?
> >
> >cu bart
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >talk mailing list
> >talk at openstreetmap.org
> >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Yellow Pages for the 21st Century