Open plepe opened 5 years ago
plepe
commented
5 years ago So, these are the main questions now:
Shall there be an 'offices' category, as I created it?
I will include these offices values in the mentioned categories, but did I do any mistakes in the assignment?
What with the tags where I don't have a fitting category - shall I create categories for these and if yes, which, and under which parent category ...
Cybereric
commented
5 years ago Hello,
Wow I wont' comment yet all the sixty tags !
I think that first it would be better to begin with the tags from the wiki page >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office rather than Tag Info.
First we must classify the tags by theme on the model of the "shops" page. This should be clearer. And later also improve the wiki by structuring tags thematically like "shops"
How to tidy up? Perhaps take the example of the category "tourism" divided into different sections But I think there is also an interest in having a category "office" just as we have for "shops" and "craft".
The problem of the categories is that we do not see what is inside (what elements they contain) we must find explicit names. As with "Electric power" ;-)
So here is my thematic classification according to the wiki page in English.
At the end you'll find some additional tags. Some are really "new" but I will use them soon. Some did not exist yet and were really missing I think.
Éric
Do you know this web service ? It's very useful to translate words and use the right terminology >>> https://iate.europa.eu
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So it's just thematic no category priority.
office=financial
office=accountant
office=insurance
office=tax office=tax_advisor
office=lawyer office=notary
office=adoption_agency office=charity
office=newspaper office=telecommunication
office=advertising_agency
office=architect office=estate_agent office=property_management
office=educational_institution office=employment_agency
office=company
office=energy_supplier office=water_utility
office=travel_agent office=guide
office=logistics office=moving_company
office=private_investigator
office=surveyor
office=therapist
office=engineer office=it office=research
office=government office=political_party
office=forestry office=geodesist
office=association office=ngo office=quango office=foundation
office=parish office=religion
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And a new category (+ new tags) that was missing I think
office=management_consulting office=investment_advisor office=financial_advisor office=credit_broker office=mortgage_broker
office=public_relations
office=human_resources
office=communication_agency
office=audiovisual_production
office=film_production
office=real_estate_promoter and synonyms => (office=promoter / office=developer) office=real_estate_broker
Cybereric
commented
5 years ago I hope this classification will help you to put the elements in the proper category in OpenStreetBrowser.
I hope there is no misunderstanding the above categories are just there to rank the tags. This is not the menu tree of OpenStreetBrowser ;-)
plepe
commented
5 years ago Thanks for your advice, I will come up with something :-)
plepe
commented
5 years ago The newest category update includes some of the suggestions - it's not finished yet, though: https://blog.openstreetbrowser.org/node/63
Until yesterday OpenStreetBrowser completely ignored the "office" key. Now I created an "Offices" category (under "Services"), but I'm not sure about it's usefulness. It would be great to get some input from the community on this.
Many of the tags should actually be included in other categories and I'm not sure what to do with the rest. Maybe you (or others) have some thoughts on this?
Of course we can include the tags in the others and have an additional "office" category anyway.
This are the top 60 values (according to https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/office#values) of the 'office' key:
I also have thoughts about "office=yes" - currently it shows "yes" as description for map features of this type. I would like to write "unknown" (resp. its translation) instead. What do you think about that?