Proposal talk:Zamenhof-Esperanto objects

Examples needed

Please give some examples of places that could be tagged with this. --Jgpacker (talk) 10:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Some diverse examples: Esperanto Island in Antarctica, Rue de l'Espéranto in Quebec, Universal Esperanto Association, home of the largest Esperanto organization, in Rotterdam, Paraná Esperanto Association, a local conversation club in Brazil. A more comprehensive list can be found here. Pizzaiolo (talk) 14:03, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Quick note: Some of these places (such as Esperanto Island and Rue de l'Espéranto) could use the tag name:etymology:wikidata=Q123. --Jgpacker (talk) 15:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Make it more self-descriptive

One issue I have with the tag zeo=yes/no is that it is too hard to know what it means without consulting the wiki. It would be better if the tag itself was more self-descriptive. --Jgpacker (talk) 15:24, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree, but the problem is that Zamenhof-Esperanto_object=yes/no would probably be too long. Also, the tag esperanto=* is already taken. How could we name this tag if not 'zeo'? Pizzaiolo (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I think using the key esperanto=* is completely okay, because it's wiki page was created in 2012 and yet there are no instances of this key in the OSM database. --Jgpacker (talk) 16:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. I've now reworded the proposal. Pizzaiolo (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

However, the "Tagging" section still refers to "zeo" StellanL (talk) 18:50, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've fixed it. Pizzaiolo (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Saluton! I think is a good idea to add this semantics to the streets and Esperanto POIs, I also think the esperanto=yes/no tag is the most descriptive one. But for a correct semantic categorization of the nodes/ways purposes we will need as Jqpacker mentioned, to add name:etymology:wikidata=Q123 for a generic esperanto object and name:etymology:wikidata=Q11758 for an specific Zamenhof object. --Capiscuas (talk) 16:23, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's a good idea. Pizzaiolo (talk) 14:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)