Describe shop=yes as "Unspecific shop"

[matkoniecz]

Right now there is no good hint that shop=yes is a poor tagging and something specific would be better.

Maybe have weaker form of complaint like one appearing for ways not tagged alone and not being part of relations?

(BTW, the same could be useful for `office=yes)

[bhousel]

Wait no, it's not an "unspecific shop"..
It's just a shop type that doesn't have a preset yet.

Please don't do this - people will see "unspecific shop" and use it for things like "variety store" or "general store".

[matkoniecz]

I am not experienced with iD code, but is the new presets going to match say shop=magic_items? I expect it to match just shop=yes when there are no tags putting it into other preset.

It's just a shop type that doesn't have a preset yet.

Vast majority of shop=yes that I have seen have iD preset, just mapper have not used them (though it is biased by fact that I keep reporting missing values for inclusion if spotted)

[bhousel]

I am not experienced with iD code, but is the new presets going to match say shop=magic_items? I expect it to match just shop=yes when there are no tags putting it into other preset.

This type of preset is a fallback preset that matches shop=* when there is no better match.
It will show a "Type" field so user can supply any tag they like (or choose from the taginfo-seeded list).

[tyrasd]

In 1527ba5 I went with the title Shop (Unspecified Type), which is the same wording the wiki uses: A shop of unspecified type […]

It's also not searchable, so only existing features are matched with the preset.

Sorry for not making this clear in a comment after closing this issue from the commit.

Please don't do this - people will see "unspecific shop" and use it for things like "variety store" or "general store".

Do you still think this will be an issue?

[bhousel]

In 1527ba5 I went with the title Shop (Unspecified Type), which is the same wording the wiki uses: A shop of unspecified type […]

Oh I see now.. I thought you were changing the wording on the fallback "Shop" preset. I didn't realize you were making a new unsearchable preset that matches a literal shop=yes tag.

Do you still think this will be an issue?

I guess it's not as bad, since people wouldn't be choosing this as a preset.

[1ec5]

Apparently it used to be common to add shop=yes alongside amenity=fuel to indicate that there’s a convenience store attached to the gas station. I don’t think we should encourage that practice anymore, but if a feature like that is selected, would iD continue to show the Gas Station preset, or would it now show the “Shop (Unspecified Type)” preset?

[tas50]

That's still pretty common around the US, but those should really get split out to proper convenience store tags so they'd show up in a search for convenience stores.

[1ec5]

Agreed, though it would be mildly confusing if they started getting identified as unclassified shops¹ instead of gas stations.

Footnotes

1. If only we didn’t have highway=unclassified, it wouldn’t be so confusing to call this preset “Unclassified Shop”, which reads nicer without the parentheses. ↩

[bhousel]

if a feature like that is selected, would iD continue to show the Gas Station preset, or would it now show the “Shop (Unspecified Type)” preset?

Could add a matchScore like 0.9 so that this preset scores lower than a "real" preset like Gas Station.
https://github.com/ideditor/schema-builder#matchscore

[matkoniecz]

Or make all unsearchable presets to rank below searchable ones of the same matchScore? (if not done already)

[tyrasd]

shop=yes alongside amenity=fuel […] would iD continue to show the Gas Station preset, or would it now show the “Shop (Unspecified Type)” preset?

good point. 305e689 assures that iD will always choose a "regular" preset over the *=yes ones.

Or make all unsearchable presets to rank below searchable ones of the same matchScore? (if not done already)

As far as I can see, this is currently not the case. But it sounds like a good suggestion in general.