Talk:Key:agrarian
How is this different from shop=trade + trade=agricultural_supplies
Did you know about this tag before creating this wiki? Although, I like the values you've come up with for agrarian=*, but we could specify the same under agricultural_supplies=*. Is there a possibility for merging? Bkil (talk) 10:06, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
- "Did you know about this tag before creating this wiki?" I did not know other tags of this type before creating this site.
- "Although, I like the values you've come up with for agrarian=*, but we could specify the same under agricultural_supplies=*. Is there a possibility
- for merging?"
- Well, if all these types of stores are under one tag. If farm stores will have their own icon to distinguish them from other non-agricultural stores,
- then yes. Generally, I would expect the main tag to have a name suggesting a relationship with agriculture. for example: prefix "Agro". I agree that
- the word "agrarian" sounds strange. The value 'trade' seems too general (e.g. almost all stores with building materials, fuel, large food stores can
- they be shop=trade? ). It seems to me that the shop trade differ from other stores in that it issues a VAT invoice for companies (Companies need VAT
- invoices. Ordinary residents, employees do not need a VAT invoice. Goods with VAT for ordinary residents, employees are more expensive). The farm store
- is not a construction store or food. Rather, a specialized shop dedicated to agriculture. Stores that have a word "trade" in name in my opinion they
- can store good (should have their owns warehouses). Eg. Grain trade (Agriculture Trade) (purchase of grain at harvest time, storage and sale of
- processing companies when the price is high. Farm shops sometimes dealing with cereals sometimes not. It depends on the area. Cz ja (talk) 13:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Well, as mentioned at Talk:Tag:shop=agrarian, a shop=country_store usually stocks various goods, including clothes as well, so it's not the same category as an agricultural supply store. Just imagine that I can buy a few kg of crushed corn in any supermarket, but I'd definitely not put this into the same category either.
Also, you seem to be referring to such trade associations that only sell "big" from their large warehouses, however, the description of shop=trade indicates that it "normally also retails to normal consumers". It follows the principle that OSM maps for the many, not for the few (or at least by default). So we usually prefer to map those shop=trade instances that are most important to the daily lives of our primary users. Although, if this was the only difference, I'd simple add an extra tag to shop=trade, like volume_resale=yes/no/only (better name welcome). In Hungary, they can easily print a VAT invoice from virtually any mediocre shop and upwards (and I think they are obliged by law to produce a hand written one on request), although if this is a problem in some part of the world, we could invent a tag to indicate just this if you feel that "volume resale" does not have sufficient overlap (payment:invoice=*?).
If you keep a dozen chickens at home in a very small backyard, purchasing 100kg of grain at a time is a normal amount, and the shop will need some amount of storage room for these sacks of each kind of grain. If they have less than that, we are rather talking about some kind of pet store, as keeping a cat and a dog requires much less feed than that, however we have different tags for that: shop=pet, shop=pet_products, shop=pet_food...
I've also noticed that they have also suggested an alternative wording instead of "agrarian" on the other talk page, that was incidentally "agricultural_supplies". As an alternative to deprecating shop=agrarian, would you recommend introducing a separate key for each of the trade forms, ie., shop=building_supplies, shop=plumbing, shop=timber, shop=tiles, shop=windows, etc? This sounds excessive, and I still feel that I would have trouble categorizing between the two in an objective manner. I think it would be best to introduce this question to the tagging list for further advice regarding deprecation. Bkil (talk) 19:40, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- "Well, as mentioned at Talk:Tag:shop=agrarian, a shop=country_store usually stocks various goods, including clothes" Maybe it is about protective clothing (work trousers, work shirts, work shoes, work gloves) used in agriculture and/or related branches of farm production?
- "you recommend introducing a separate key for each of the trade forms" It was just about agricultural_supplies. I think an agricultural supply store, if it's possible, should have its own independent tag. Although I understand that one overarching tag for high-volume stores is a great convenience in tagging.
- "Also, you seem to be referring to such trade associations that only sell "big" from their large warehouses, however, the description of shop=trade indicates that it "normally also retails to normal consumers". It follows the principle that OSM maps for the many, not for the few (or at least by default). So we usually prefer to map those shop=trade instances that are most important to the daily lives of our primary users. Although, if this was the only difference, I'd simple add an extra tag to shop=trade, like volume_resale=yes/no/only (better name welcome). In Hungary, they can easily print a VAT invoice from virtually any mediocre shop and upwards (and I think they are obliged by law to produce a hand written one on request), although if this is a problem in some part of the world, we could invent a tag to indicate just this if you feel that "volume resale" does not have sufficient overlap (payment:invoice=*?)."
- In my opinion, it a good argument for deprecating shop=agrarian. The fewer similar tags the better.
- "I think it would be best to introduce this question to the tagging list for further advice regarding deprecation." A good idea. Let others express their idea of tagging this type of stores.Cz ja (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Some parts feels a bit too environmentalist oriented
Even though I’m quite concerned about environment, I don’t think parts which criticize agriculture such as
- harmful for flora and fauna, even for human health
and alike are appropriate to debate on OpenStreetMap. I suggest removing those and keep content explaining how the tag should be used. --Lejun (talk) 08:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)