Hi, Recently more and more fuel stations are getting a 'brand' instead of 'operator' or 'name'. Some examples: <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1801313286> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1803239322> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1924797484> Could we change the style rule for amenity=fuel to include the brand (if name is missing) ? Suggestion: amenity=fuel { name '${brand}: ${name}' | '${operator}: ${name}' | '${name}' | '${brand}' | '${operator}' } [0x2f01 resolution 24] or: amenity=fuel & brand=* { add operator = '${brand}' } amenity=fuel (as now) Chris
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 06:39:46PM +0100, Chris66 wrote:
Hi, Recently more and more fuel stations are getting a 'brand' instead of 'operator' or 'name'.
That makes sense especially for those fuel brands that are being dispensed by various 'no-name' companies (enterpreneurs that are operating just one fuel station). But, what if both operator (the name of the one-man company) and brand have been assigned? Should ${brand} be given the priority over ${operator}? Marko
On 1/5/13 2:08 PM, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 06:39:46PM +0100, Chris66 wrote:
Hi, Recently more and more fuel stations are getting a 'brand' instead of 'operator' or 'name'. That makes sense especially for those fuel brands that are being dispensed by various 'no-name' companies (enterpreneurs that are operating just one fuel station).
But, what if both operator (the name of the one-man company) and brand have been assigned? Should ${brand} be given the priority over ${operator}?
i would say yes, go with brand. travelers are more likely to be searching for a preferred brand than a particular operator. richard
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 02:11:04PM -0500, Richard Welty wrote:
i would say yes, go with brand. travelers are more likely to be searching for a preferred brand than a particular operator.
Come to think of it, the same applies to ${operator} and ${brand} in general, for both public and commercial services. Shops can be a bit like fuel stations. In some chains, all shops are operated by the same huge company, but certain chains make use of franchising agreements and might only operate a handful of shops themselves. For bus routes and amenity=recycling, the municipality or municipalities would assign a brand, and the operator would be whatever company made the cheapest bid for the time frame. I guess that the brand should trump in all these cases. It is what is most visible in the real world. Marko
The attached patch introduces a new include file 'inc/name' for naming all kinds of objects. Tourism=information are no longer named after ${description}. I could be convinced to put it back. The map of Finland became slightly smaller with this patch. One of my nearby fuel stations was already using ${brand} in addition to the no-name ${operator} that I had added years ago. The patched naming logic seemed to work there. I will wait for feedback for a couple of days, before committing this. Marko
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 11:48:38PM +0200, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
The attached patch introduces a new include file 'inc/name' for naming all kinds of objects. Tourism=information are no longer named after ${description}. I could be convinced to put it back. The map of Finland became slightly smaller with this patch. One of my nearby fuel stations was already using ${brand} in addition to the no-name ${operator} that I had added years ago. The patched naming logic seemed to work there.
I will wait for feedback for a couple of days, before committing this.
It does not look like this branding of fuel would ignite any flame war, so I will commit the patch tonight. Note that the patch would display both brand and operator when they are present. Knowing the operator could be useful for some services (such as amenity=recycling or bus stops or bus routes). Maybe less so for supermarket or restaurant or fuel station chains. But, the patch would use a consistent naming for all POIs. Marko
participants (4)
-
Chris66 -
Marko Mäkelä -
Richard Welty -
WanMil