Proposal talk:Collection times

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


General & Name

I like it, especially the consistency achieved by keeping the value syntax similar to the one used with opening_hours=*. --Lutz.horn 14:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer "pickup_time", but otherwise like the proposal. Alexrudd 17:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Probably there are several possible names for it. At the end that one should be used which is a) known and correct in English of course and b) most intuitively understandable for international taggers which do not speak English natively. This might also be different but at least for Germany "emptying" is clear immediately rather than "picking up". Don´t know the other languages ;)
--Krza 17:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
On the whole I like the suggestion, however I have to agree with Alexrudd, "pickup_time" I would perceive to be more appropriate in English. It's a pity there is not an "internationalisation" effort for the actual tags them selves :)
--Wibbit 10:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
I'd suggest changing it to "pickup_time" as well.
--Grille Chompa 16:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to add another option, but the phrase used in the UK is "collection", see for example this image. So I'd like to propose "collection_time". But in the end I don't mind what name we're using, as long as everybody is using the same one. Mtcv 16:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
It is the same (Collection) in the US (at least in the NC), see picture...--TamCaP 04:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I assume that the v='Do' in the recycling container example is a typo, and that day of week should be expressed in english (abbreviated)? --Erik Lundin 19:18, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

You are right. I will correct this. --Krza 19:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Can we express the examples in a simpler form than XML please? No ordinary mapper should ever be typing in XML, so it's pointless for the example to be expressed in XML. Also, the XML syntax and the API schema being used are outside the scope of this discussion and defined elsewhere. Finally, XML is very verbose, and it makes the example more difficult to read despite bits being in bold. May I suggest extracting just the bits in bold from the examples and displaying them as key=value lines in the indented <pre>, or in a 2-column table? It'll make the example much clearer visually, which is what you want if the proposal uses a fairly complex syntax as this one does :) --achadwick 10:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to improve the examples. That's wiki style ;) But I would suggest that you add the mentioned extract below the existing examples rather than replace them. Reason: The proposal shouldn't change too much because it's frozen during the voting. But the next job will be to establish the map feature entry itself. There we can do it differently of course. For the proposal I choosed the most explicit style - which is OSM XML. --Krza 20:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Post Office & Post Box

Could it also apply to amenity=post_office? Very often it is different than the opening hours, and the post box itself is located within (often self-service, 24/7) part of the building. Or should we just put amenity=post_box next to it? --TamCaP 02:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Initially I had exactly this scenario taken as an example on the page. But I took it away again before posting because I think that each function should have an own node. It´s the same with stamp machines, parcel boxes and so on. Even if you have one big machine for all you should - my opinion - make 3 nodes closely next to each other but not on each other so that you can identitfy them as single nodes even in Potlatch. The renderer has the task to identify it as one common ... assembly or something. We just have a similar discussion in German regarding parcel boxes. --Krza 03:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

time or times

By the way: Is it "time" or "times"? At least in German we would use the plural form but I know that in certain cases this differs in other languages. --Krza 14:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

According to the US picture which was added yesterday it could also be "times". In case there´s no disagreement I would say that we take times then. Sounds more logical to me because it´s more than one point in time stated in this tag.

Name Voting

Let´s do some little statistics ... please put your name at the according position )resp. positions in case two names seem to be equally appropriate):