Proposed features/Second Hand Shops

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Second Hand Shops
Status: Approved (active)
Proposed by: kempelen
Tagging: second_hand=only or both
Applies to: Same as shop=*
Definition: Extends shop information to indicate whether second hand products are sold (too).
Rendered as: Same as shops selling new items
Drafted on: 2011-11-06
RFC start: 2011-11-06
Vote start: 2012-04-24
Vote end: 2012-05-08

Proposal

We need a way to indicate whether a shop sells second hand products. The shop's most important property is what it sells (see shop=*) , and whether it is second hand is secondary detail, so this should be added as an additional tag.

Rationale

Second hand shop tagging is currently different on various Wiki pages.

shop=second_hand A shop buying and selling used clothes and other things. (quote from shop=*)

This mixes all kind of products together, not a good tagging, as it would remove important clothes or computer (etc) shops from being clothes or computer shops (unless specially handled). The page also recognizes this, by recommending to use more specific values. But by using those more specific tags, the second hand status is lost.

books=* recommends using a double tag shop=second_hand + second_hand=books.

This combination is not seen on any other shop wiki pages. This has the same problems as mentioned above.

Second hand as additional attribute

Tagging (thread) and OSM Hungary mailing list members agreed, that this information is secondary, and should be tagged next to tagging the shops with their actual products in the first place.

This method supports searching for a product the same way (eg. shop=computer) without requiring any changes in tagging or search.

Tagging

  • second_hand=only - When only second hand products are sold
  • second_hand=yes - When both new and used products are sold
  • Post vote update: second_hand=both - Originally proposed value, but changed to yes based on feedback

Actual wording has been discussed on the Tagging mailing list (thread). Summary: Value yes would be ambiguous, may mean both of these values. Other words like "also", "additionally" were also recommended, but "both" seems to be agreed by more people, and also a native English speaker that I asked, and it is short. It was also agreed, that difference between only and both selling shops is important and needs a different value.

Value no won't be used. When the shop is not tagged with a second_hand=* value, it is selling new products only.

Post vote update: Based on feedback, the value no may be used to mark this explicitly. Lack of 'second_hand' tag may mean any of:

  • no
  • not surveyed

Applies to

All entities that shop=* applies to.

Rendering

Shops should be rendered with their own icon.

If a special render wishes to indicate second hand status of various shops, it could use a little "patch" overlay (a square with threads going in the 4 directions) over the original shop icon (in small icon sizes this does not fit).

Features/Pages affected

  • shop=* - at value second_hand link to this new key and briefly explain the difference between these tagging modes:
    • shop=* (not second_hand) + second_hand=*
    • or shop=second_hand
  • shop=books - remove the two-tag recommendation and link to this new key
  • Add a link to the See also section of all shops.

shop=second_hand

The old shop=second_hand tag can be used for shops that sell many different products. Those shops cannot be tagged with other shop=* values. If you have better ideas for the name of this tag, please add here.

Comments

To the talk page please.

Voting

Important: Please indicate whether you want the "second_hand=yes" value too, and whether it should mean "both" or "only". A "finalized" second_hand=* page already suggests "yes = both".

To vote use {{vote|yes}} or {{vote|no}} and sign with -- ~~~~

  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Dieterdreist 10:57, 24 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- sletuffe 11:11, 24 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Al3xius 12:20, 24 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- PanierAvide 17:13, 24 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I think "also" (or partly) instead of "both" is more clear. -- MasiMaster 17:17, 24 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I would strongly recommend using the values yes, no and only. "no": no second hand items. "yes": second hand items are sold, but not exclusively. "only": only second hand items are sold. I would also recommend a subkey like second_hand:items=xxx, which may contain a list of items, e.g. second_hand:items=clothes;books . --Imagic 11:40, 25 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- higa4 13:07, 29 April 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal.--Javiersanp 18:05, 29 April 2012 (BST)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Existing shop=second_hand is good enough!--R-michael 16:17, 2 May 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I support using yes/no/only values. --BáthoryPéter 21:32, 6 May 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I support original but preferring yes/no/only values. --grin 13:00, 7 May 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Yes/No is enough for me. Yes/No/Only would be OK. --Theonlytruth 14:09, 24 May 2012 (BST)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I support using "both"/"only" but wish a difference between "additionaly" and "mainly". "yes" might be interpreted as "unknown which type". --rayquaza 16:54, 24 May 2012 (BST)