From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


The following is a proposal to put this service variety into tags:

  • sale=yes/brand/used/no/... - sells whole motorcycles
  • rental=yes/brand/no/... - motorcycle rental
  • repair=yes/brand/oldtimer/no/... - repairs / maintains motorcycles
  • safety_inspection=yes/no - inspection of safety/emission regulation conformance
  • parts=yes/brand/oldtimer/no/... - sells motorcycle parts
  • clothes=yes/brand/no/... - sells motorcycle clothes / equipment
  • scooters=yes/no/only - to distinguish scooter shops, very useful in Asia
  • services=... - other services this shop offers

RocketMan (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC) ‎

These SHOULD be proposed on the tagging group!!! Not proposed on a wiki page.
All shop sell things. Being able to add detail to ALL of them in a logical, organised way that uses the same system for ALL of them would be best.
'sale' is usually taken to mean a special event with lower prices, not a regular thing. 'sells' would be better?
See tagging group thread with subject "JOSM preset with strange tag values" for more. Warin61 (talk) 04:03, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Regarding service:*=* , there's already an accepted proposal for the services of shop=bicycle : But this doesn't work for everything mentioned above, as some aren't services.
An (non-service) example which is relevant due to the number of affected entities :
To distinguish between a motorcycle dealer which also sells clothes=* and a shop which (only) sells motorcycle clothes. As of the current documentation, it would be tagged as shop=motorcycle and clothes=motorcycle. IMHO it wouldn't be elegant to say the pure clothes shops should remove the shop=motorcycle tag (as it is a shop, and usually also sells accessories, so not just a shop=clothes). It would be possible to distinguish it with a sales=* tag or motorcycle:sales=clothes/accessories/motorbikes/scooter... (If there are no motorcycles/scooters, it's just a motorcycle clothes shop).
repair=* currently got 2 514 entries according to taginfo. On the other hand, according to the "bicycle" system, it should be service:motorcycle:repair=* (most of the existing "repair" entries are for other kind of shops). The necessity of "service:bicycle/motorcycle" isn't quite clear, except if a shop sells both and just got service for one of them. But motorcycle:repair=yes or alternatively shop=motorcycle combined with repair=yes seems more elegant to me (what is the "service:" part good for ?) rtfm Rtfm (talk) 15:51, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
the 'services' tag has no clear meaning. I believe it is a 'catch all' meant for anything that does not fit any of the mentioned categories. Anything that does not match the given tags should get a new tag that matches what it is. As such I would not use the tag 'services'.Warin61 (talk) 21:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
So what do you think about motorcycle/skiing/bicycle:(type of service)=* ? It would be similar to contact=* or addr:*=*. rtfm Rtfm (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Sells not Sale

Please use 'sells' not 'sale'! In common English the word 'sale' is taken to mean a special event where goods are sold at a reduced price. The word 'sells' would make much more sense in the context of an shop. Warin61 (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm fine with that rtfm Rtfm (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately someone who didn't well read
the Vandalism#Vandalism_response definition
reverted all the already adjusted tags rtfm Rtfm (talk) 18:59, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Sales promotion 2015 0001.JPG
Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Repair vs Service

An explanation for motorcycles.

Repair is to fix something that is broken. Example, fixing a punctured tyre.

Service is to maintain something that is working - to ensure its long life. Example, a change of engine oil.

Servicing something would require less tools and knowledge than repairing the same thing. Warin61 (talk) 21:42, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Think this might be difficult to distinguish in case of any garage. So repair would include service. In case of a station, they possibly just got service. But the term "service" is already taken by service=*, so motorcycle:service=oil_change would possibly be irritating ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

"Tag usage" and "tips" sections

I got rid the Tag Usage and Tips sections because they are extremely vague, make no sense, and aren't relevant to the article anyway. But I got reverted by RTFM. So I'm starting a discussion about it here. In general, if there is going to be a section about Tag Usage, it should relate to 1. how to use the tag (which the section doesn't do) 2. Be relevant to the actual tag (which it isn't because its mostly about the motorcycle:whatever tagging "scheme"). Instead it just lists how to find the tag on different apps. Which I don't think is relevant to the article and even counter to the point in the wiki.

The same goes for the "tips" section. Which isn't explained and seems to just show how to find different motorcycle brands in Taginfo. I have the same criticism of it as I do the "tag usage" section, its complete none sense as to what it has to do with anything and if the information is actually relevant to anything, which I highly doubt, it should be on its own article page not on this one. Anymore then the same type of thing would be relevant to have on the restaurant article for cuisine tag etc.

A lot of other pages have the same exact "tag usage" and "tips" sections, but there by the same person. If agreement can be reached here that they should be removed, id also like to remove them in the other places.

I also take offense to RTFM's removal of Mateusz Monieczny's comments about the low usage of the tags and their lack of wider acceptance, along with his revert of my adding the clothes=motorcycle tag as an alternative to his motorcycle:clothes tag. His attempts to suppress mentions of the problems with the motorcycle:whatever scheme or the mention of other alternatives to it is extremely wrong. So those things need to be restored, along with the bad sections being deleted, but I don't feel like edit warring to do it. @Mateusz Konieczny: --Adamant1 (talk) 09:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I am not a motorcyclist, but I would agree that the secrions that you had removed are off topic. I suggest you ask the DWG for their opinion and advice on how to proceed. A similar case was published by Rftm himself on the tagging mailing list last year. I am curious what they will answer. --Hufkratzer (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
I would not bother DWG with that, unless there would be anyone actually sharing RTFM opinion to include highly unusual materials (see linked rockets case) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Tag usage section (link to old version, fortunately not present in the current one) is pointless and unwanted duplicate of Doing this for tags manually on Wiki is bloating articles and beyond our maintenance capability. I also see no value at all at including overpass turbo guide everywhere. Link or two to a complicated query that is clearly useful would be OK, but adding Overpass Turbo tutorial on every page is absurd. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Regarding the "pointless and unwanted duplicate of", I would really like to link (directly) to OsmAnd instead of the screenshot, but it's technically not possible, and the "projects" section itself won't give an impression at first glance. The "tag usage" and "Tips" section are in fact thought for "not so nerdy" OSM users which aren't keen to first read all the Overpass description before using it. If there was a "short description" within the Overpass article, this would certainly be the more elegant method. With kurviger there's a similar problem as the POIs aren't switched on by default (and so the OSM data not visible), therefore the screenshot. rtfm Rtfm (talk) 01:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
So because kurviger UI is substandard we should mention it across the wiki? It is not a good place to document kurviger issues and have kurviger tutorials Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Mateusz Konieczny here. It's not our problem if some random piece of software has a bad UI. Quit a lot of them do and it would be pretty useless to list them all on every tag page. Your also making a false assumption that people who are looking at these article use Kurviger in the first place. It's highly questionable if they are and not, your essentially advertising for its usage by having an unneeded tutorial about it here. Which I don't think tagging pages should be used for. Same goes for linking and OsmAnd. At least in the case Overpass Turbo its widely used by the community and isn't commercial software. I think references to specific software in this way should be left out of tag pages though. Otherwise it seems like an endorsement of them by the OSM foundation and the wider community when there isn't one. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
So, I guess I'll just delete the sections then. Since there's good reason not to have them and Rtfm hasn't came back in the meantime with a counter argument. Thanks for the input Mateusz Konieczny. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Protected this article

@Rtfm: @Adamant1: I protected this article for now because reverting each other does not help. I would appreciate if you could find a solution. I suggest you stop editing this article completely and focus on other topics within OpenStreetMap or your other hobbies. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 15:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Use of this tag for a shop that only sells clothing and accessories?

The page Tag:brand=Louis_Motorrad suggests using shop=motorcycle for a shop which only sells clothing and accessories, and does not sell or repair motorcycles. This seems incorrect to me. Is it common to tag in that way, rather than using shop=clothes or something else more specific? --Jeisenbe (talk) 12:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

shop=clothes would fit if it was mainly clothes. But if you have a look at the common motorcycle shop chains, they almost all sell nearly all other stuff except motorcycles. But the "main topic" remains motorcycle, not clothes. Generally you've got the same situation with a couple of other shops or amenities. How about a guest_house also offering apartments ? Would you prefer to create two different nodes with the same contact data a.s.o. over a namespace solution ? How about a shop=car which also sells motorcycles and atv besides ?rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
RTFM, since you mass-edited the tag you know the answer to a shop=car that also sells motorcycles is sales=motorcycle. Your other whataboutisms have similar established solutions, that your both fully aware of and aren't using a namespace. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
The way its always been done is to tag motorcycle shops that also sell clothes with clothes=yes/motorcycle. Whereas clothing stores that exclusively sell motorcycle clothes would be tagged as clothes=motorcycle. That was up ended when RTFM did a mass edit that changed all the clothes=yes tags used on motorcycle shops to motorcycle:clothes=yes. Clothes=yes/motorcycle is the community accepted and more widely tagged way of doing it though. In no instance should a clothing store that just sells motorcycle clothes be tagged as shop=motorcycle IMO. Kind of off topic but not really, RTFM seems to be lukewarm on shop tags in general. The tag is often left out of his articles and he would probably be fine if they were all replaced by a whatever namespace tagging scheme." I think this a case of that. "Proper" tagging doesnt really matter when its a tag scheme your against using. I know he is against the clothes tag feom his mass edits and conversations. The clothes tag is the proper way to do this though. Maybe also with a clothes:brand tag or something. Although, just using the brand tag would also be fine or even clothes=motorcycle;Louis_Motorrad or hell why not even clothes=Louis_Motorrad? Adamant1 (talk) 19:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
In my vicinity a Louis shop went motorcycle. It is 99% clothes and accessories, a small amount of tools and an even lesser amount of parts. There is foul language in the CS comment - --Hungerburg (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
I reported RTFM to the DWG for that edit and the other ones he made against other discussions about it, but unfortunately the person I reported him to decided to turn the whole thing into a personal screed instead of dealing with it. You could always re-tag it in the meantime back to how we agreed, but RTFM would probably just re-tag it again and throw out more insults. So, I guess it will have to be tagged that way against the consensus until RTFM and his bad attitude is actually dealt with by someone less cynical then the person I reported it to. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Tag motorcycle:sales=no is true and cannot be considered anything but that on a shop=motorcycle that does not sell motorcycles; maybe I try that.--Hungerburg (talk) 18:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

page locked again

Due to a continuing edit war I had to lock the page again, this time for the duration of one year. I want to give a final warning to the two main protagonists @Rtfm: and @Adamant1: that they will be blocked for one year if I see them continue edit wars any more. I don't care if one of you is more right than the other or who started this mess, it has got to end now. This is a community project and not your personal playground. If you disagree on something, then please describe your position on the talk page, and if you want to have your position on the tag page then do it in a way that the other position is not removed but users see both positions and can decide for themself, preferably helped by what they can read on the talk page. So, any more edit wars will lead to blocks. --Lyx (talk) 21:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Lyx: Please see RTFM's recent block on the main site which is relevant to this. Https:// Along with the other blocks he's received over the exact same thing. In the meantime, I'm not treating the platform like it's a playground by editing the article to reflect the clear community consensus that there is no single best way to tag things. Nor is me editing the article in a neutral way to reflect it "removing his position." He's acting like it's HIS playground by continuing to do things he's been blocked and reverted for many times over. As well his repeated edits to articles that remove alternatives or call them "old" ways of tagging when they are currently being used. None of Which I've done. I've always gone out of my way to make sure his preferred tags are just as findable as the alternative and no where have I claimed they are outdated.
So I really don't appreciate you acting like this is a both sides thing. Let alone do I appreciating you making false claims about my edits and threating me with a block for things I'm not doing. Aside from being massively disingenuous, it's just not going to resolve the problem. And I'd like it to be as much as everyone else. The rental, repair, etc aren't an "outdated method." They are currently being used It has nothing to do with it being "my position" that they aren't outdated and the article should really reflect that. Regardless of RTFM's opinion or if he's a childish, edit warring coward about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Resolved: Page unlocked, RTFM is banned for now, page improved by maro Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

New version

Since I was not involved in your conflict, I would like to propose a new version of the page. The new version presents the used tags in a neutral way.
new version

  • I removed the extensive table with unnecessary columns and instead gave a table showing which tags are USED and how often. Since there is no consensus on which ones to use, it is also not clear which are "old" and which are "new".
  • I removed the deprecated template {{Common tags to use in combination}} and replaced it with text.
  • Minor formatting corrections (punctuation marks etc.).

This version doesn't say which tags are better or worse and gives users the opportunity to decide.

By the way, you (Adamant1, rtfm) should make a formal proposal for these tags, not play with reverting one page about one tag, because there are similar tags for other shops and services as well.

Lyx, could you take a look at this and, if you accept it, unblock or replace with the new version? maro21 12:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Seems superior to existing version Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
I have now unlocked the page. Your new version looks like a good starting point for a discussion, feel free to replace the current version with it. --Lyx (talk) 09:17, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
@Maro21: Do you want to make a replacement edit? I think it would be a good improvement Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)