User talk:RoGer6

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tagging von Zugfunkmasten

Hallo RoGer6,

kannst du mir bitte die Hintergründe deiner Edits im OpenRailwayMap-Taggingschema erklären (deutsch, englisch)?

Bitte versteh mich nicht böse. Wir sind offen gegenüber Fehlerkorrekturen, aber Mastentagging ist nicht mein Spezialgebiet. Solange du keine Issue im Bugtracker erstellst, bleibt das alte Tag weiterhin in der JOSM-Objektvorlage, die die meisten Eisenbahnmapper verwenden. --Nakaner (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


Hallo RoGer6, du hast heute ([1]) beschrieben, dass Hortbetreuung von Schulkindern als amenity=childcare gemappt werden soll. Dies geht an der Realität vorbei, du kannst das auch nicht auf der Wikiseite anordnen.

amenity=childcare hat zwei gescheiterte Proposals hinter sich: im ersten war es vorgeschlagen für Einrichtungen in denen Kinder "spend time otherwise after school or kindergarten", abgelehnt wegen unklarer Definition; im zweiten sollte amenity=kindergarten komplett durch amenity=childcare ersetzt werden, das hat auch keine Anhänger gefunden. Nach beiden Proposals bleibt ein Nutzungsverhältnis 159954 : 5018. Unklar ist auch was du meinst, es sei das "neuere Proposal 2.0 eingekippt" - eingekippt wie/was? Kollabiert?

Tatsache ist, dass die Altersgrenzen in den Betreuungseinrichtungen verschwimmen, hier in Berlin haben wir sehr viele Kindertagesstätten, die vollumfänglich sowohl Vorschul- als auch Grundschulkinder betreuen. Das ist ja auch ein Grund, warum sich der Name meist von Kindergarten hin zu KiTa bewegt.

amenity=kindergarten hat sich in OSM zur anerkannten Hauptkategorie für die organisierte Gruppenbetreuung jüngerer Kinder entwickelt, und die genaue Altersabgrenzung kannst du gern per min_age und max_age angeben. Auch die Frage ob "der Hort schulisch oder privat gestützt ist" hat mit der Hauptkategorie nichts zu tun, das wird im operator=* tag erfasst. "childcare=yes" zur Definition einer Hortbetreuung ist denkbar ungeeignet, es sagt ja verbal lediglich aus, dass in der Kinderbetreuungseinrichtung auch Kinder betreut wird, und eben nicht, ob es sich um Grundschüler handelt. --Polarbear w (talk) 21:59, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


Hello. I have extended the lunch draft and I am interested in your opinion and welcome your additions based on your experience. Cheers, Bkil (talk) 14:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

which draft are you talking about? --Polarbear w (talk) 08:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I forgot the link: Bkil (talk) 09:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

lunch:saladbar, lunch:snackbar, lunch:soup_tureen

I welcome your extensions at lunch=* suggesting lunch:saladbar, lunch:snackbar and lunch:soup_tureen. Am I understanding correctly that these are effective for lunch=buffet?

Are there venues which offer a snackbar for lunch offers as well? I do recall going to a place some years ago which did offer free pickles with your meal.

It is good that we have a documented tagging scheme as soon as possible, and we can rename things later on as needed. I am not experienced with subkey hierarchies, but as I see only 1 level of subkeying is common. Hence my proposals in the form lunch:menu:course:dessert may seem excessive, and I'm not sure that they could be eventually accepted in this form. However, do I understand right that your additions might also be referred to as something like lunch:buffet:course:salad, lunch:buffet:course:dessert and lunch:buffet:course:soup?

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by snackbar? Is it a kind of snack rich in sugar and water or salty, dry one? I've only been to a few buffet places, but I find that some offer fruit and dessert (small slices of various simple sweet cakes, pies, brownies, etc.) in addition to ready made main courses, various pickled vegetables, pizza, soups and raw meat or fish that they fry_on_demand.

I had to look up tureen to confirm that we are talking about the same thing, and I have indeed visited a venue which served soup from tureens. However, at other places, soups are contained in temperature controlled huge metallic soup bowls (small barrels). I'm not sure what the most common word to describe these would be, but they serve the exact same purpose.

lunch=yes, lunch=menu, lunch=buffet, lunch=menu;buffet, lunch=menu;buffet;tourist_menu, etc.

What do you think about such a scheme? So we would not limit ourselves to only lunch=yes/no/<times>. If it is known, the exact type of lunch offering could also be specified.


What does 'abo' stand for? How is it different compared to `lunch:menu:subscription=yes/no/only`? Bkil (talk) 21:14, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:Cellar entrance.p.20 v2.4.png ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified February 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.


Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


Hello! And sorry for bothering you, but description of file you uploaded need to be improved.

You have uploaded file which is licensed as requiring attribution. But right now attribution is not specified properly.

Please, ask for help if something is confusing or unclear in this message.

Please, fix that problem with this uploads - note that images with unclear licensing situation may be deleted.

Attribution may be missing completely or just be specified in nonstandard way, in either case it needs to be improved. Note that using CC-BY files without specifying attribution is a copyright violation, which is often unethical and unwanted. So clearly specifying required attribution is needed if license which makes attribution mandatory was used.

If it is applying to your own work which not based on work by others - then you can select own user name or some other preferred attribution or even change license to for example {{CC0-self}}

For your own work: ensure that it is clearly stated at file page that you created image/took the photo/etc

For works by others - please ensure that there is link to the original source which confirms license and that you used proper attribution, or that source is clearly stated in some other way.

Especially for old OSM-baded maps, made from data before license change on 12 September 2012 you should use "map data © OpenStreetMap contributors" as at least part of attribution

For old OSM Carto maps, which predate license change on 12 September 2012 you can use a special template {{OSM Carto screenshot||old_license}}