Proposal:Estate Agent
| Estate Agent | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Approved (active) |
| Proposed by: | Harry Wood |
| Tagging: | shop=estate_agent |
| Applies to: | node;area |
| Definition: | A shop selling or renting property |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2009-05-12 |
| RFC start: | 2010-02-11 |
| Vote start: | 2010-02-19 |
| Vote end: | 2010-03-05 |
shop=estate_agent (with an underscore '_') is Harry Wood's suggestion
Applies to
A shop selling and/or renting property
Details
Very common type of high street shop. Often with fancy modern decor and a window display showing photos and descriptions of houses.
Often part of a chain. Often combined with solicitors/legal services related to property transactions e.g. conveyancing, surveying, planning applications, but a shop=estate_agent should be primarily selling or renting property.
Can be called a "letting agent" (for renting). In the U.S. people talk about "real estate".
Related tags
shop=estate_agent could be used in relation with following usual tags :
- operator=* when the shop belongs to a local, national or international company/network.
- opening_hours=*
already used
- Due to changes in Query-to-map this Template does not work anymore. You can use Template:Osm-query2. Please replace or delete this use of Osm-query template. [ dead link ]
As of January 31st 2010 and February 22, 2013, OSMDoc lists following usage :
- 195 ~ 1964 x shop=estate_agent
- ??? ~ 2352 x office=estate_agent
- 25 ~ 73 x shop=real_estate
- 13 ~ 14 x shop=estate agent
- 11 ~ 28 x shop=estate_agents
- 2 ~ 6 x shop=realestate
- 2 ~ 3 x shop=real estate
- 2 ~ 13 x shop=real_estate_agency
- 1 ~ 3 x shop=estate
- 1 ~ 25 x shop=estate_agency
- 1 ~ 2 x shop=Estate Agent
- 1 ~ 1 x shop=estate_services
- 1 ~ 0 x shop=formerly_real_estate
- 1 ~ 4 x shop=real estate agency
- 1 ~ 0 x shop=real estate agent
- 1 ~ 2 x shop=real_estate_broker
estate_agent is proposed as it is shorter but unambiguous as well and the most used.
Shop/Office
Some people claim an estate agency is no shop and should be tagged as office=*. This point can be discussed, but as this tag dos not yet exist, and that many shop=* also could be discussed if they are shop or not, I believe the question should be asked once office=* has been approved.
Please let know on discussion page what is/ isn't a shop for you. Thank you. -- Djam 19:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Vote
Vote has begun on 2010-02-19 and shall end on 2010-03-05.
I approve this proposal. Djam 11:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC). I would approve an office=* tag, but I fear the limit between amenity, shop and office becomes very thin. Would a post office be an office or an amenity ? what about little shops that are alltogether a post office, kiosk, bar, restaurant and so on ?- As Liz said on the ML, we urgently need an office key (like for architects). An estate agent office is not a shop. So I like this proposal if it's office=estate_agent --Pieren 11:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Kslotte 12:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- +1 for office=estate_agent --Delta foxtrot2 14:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Gwilbor 18:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I oppose this proposal. This is no shop. I approve use of office=estate_agent. Rramthun 18:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)- I approve this proposal. Regardless of the tagging name used we still want to map the same thing. Wiktionary: 1. An establishment that sells goods or services to the public. That could be changed if it is false and thus improve wiktionary in the process! logictheo 07:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --amai 12:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. This is no shop. I approve use of office=estate_agent. -- Dieterdreist 00:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. +1; we should start this discussion right now !!! --Skyper 14:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. I'm fine with tagging this as shop until an office tag (and rules to what is what) exists. Just as a lot of things were mapped as amenities until the shop key was proposed. Chaos99 13:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. This has usually a showy windows display and is located on a commercial street, I'm fine with tagging it as shop.--Kaitu 17:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. Even if we invented a new 'office' key, english speakers would still tend to tag it 'shop'. We talk about an "estate agents shop" not an "estate agents office" anyway. -- Harry Wood 19:50, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Post-vote
So, 8 people liked the proposal, and 5 people didn't liked it. Thus it could be approved, but I think it wuold better to find a better consensus. For example, I preferred the shop key, but I would like even the office=estate_agent tag. Other opinions? --Gwilbor 09:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm preparing a proposal for a new category. It's in the spirit of the office <-> shop controversy, but settles on 'service' or 'services' as key name. It should help to declutter the amenity key and even the shop key. I'm still working on simple and intuitive rules to tell both apart. The proposal is not in the wiki yet, due to a lack of time on my side. It's also to consider that 'service' exists as a sub-key to the highway=service tag. It will come down to where you buy/get a physical object (shop) or where you buy/get a service. Thats intuitive enough to overcome the hurdles of 'language habits', which differ a lot. Chaos99 10:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
office has now been documented, with over 2,500 uses in the database already. --LobeliaT 01:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well thanks for letting us know, but I must say I find it irritating that you would create a page office=estate_agent, making it look like finalised tag documentation without linking to this pre-existing proposal at all. I've fixed it, and linked to the the relevant discussion. Please can you make sure you have done the same for office type pages you created, most of which have older tag docs pages or proposals relating to them -- Harry Wood 09:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
So... it's solved now, right? Can this be removed yet? -- Supaiku 17:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)