Proposal talk:Key:logistics

What to map with it?

Maybe I'm to stupid, but I can't find the information what objects should be tagged with it. All the images that are supposed to make things more clear are showing moving objects, who by definition have no place in a geo database. I assume you intend to attach this as a secondary key to an object like a building or a landuse; if so please make that clear. --Lyx (talk) 15:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It's to specify "A subdivion of a office=logistics, company=transport, company=logistics or similar", as there may be different sort of transport (or logistics). The transport "type" is not the same as the transported cargo. Means it should determine which transport service the company or office offers.

I think I see what you want to say: You want it to additionally categorize logistics/transport organizations by their "mode of transport". If this is indeed what you intend to say, you should change the wording, because "subdivision" does not mean what you apparently think it does: it's always used for a part of a bigger "something" where that "something" is not an abstract concept but an individual "thing", like e.g. the "Forsyth Subdivision of the BNSF mainline". --Lyx (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be a "general page" about the wording regarding "subdivisions" (and their syntax). Which expression would you prefer ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The "syntax principle" is the same as in

LOADING TAG LIST...

(and many similar others)

Feel free to extend the values or description, took the values from existing ones, examples :

LOADING TAG LIST...

The differentiation between boat and ship is currently missing. For spaceflight vs. aerospace it should be clear as of the international height of 100km (definition for the beginning of "space") Some  List_of_private_spaceflight_companies transporting cargo=passengers (for tourism / recreational purposes) might have another definition. rtfm Rtfm (talk) 16:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

My issue is, how is this any different from the myriad other tags for the same exact things? Especially considering they are either approved or used and implemented in software so many times over that it's completely worthless to try and create an alternative. What does this have that those other tags don't that make it worth there being an alternative? Also, "organization of a complex operation is a mush brained definition that could apply to literally anything. Same goes for ""the practical organization that is needed to make a complicated plan successful when a lot of people and equipment are involved." So there should be a more specific definition of how to how this tag then those if it's going to be a thing.

Personally, I also found "the detailed coordination of a complex operation involving many people, facilities, or supplies" and "the organization of moving, housing, and supplying troops and equipment." But neither of those are any better. I guess something along the lines of "the commercial activity of transporting goods to customers", but again, there's already many perfectly fine tags for that. Including ones that don't have such ambiguous, meaningless definitions. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

The meaning of logistics

Just some examples as there were questions what this tag is good for

• The term  /Logistics_(disambiguation) means "the detailed organization of a complex operation" or "the practical organization that is needed to make a complicated plan successful when a lot of people and equipment are involved" Oxford Learner's Dictionaries
•  Humanitarian_Logistics, also see Humanitarian_OSM_Tags, "real world" examples medical supply via drones https://youtu.be/73rUjrow5pI, Red cross / crescent https://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/logistics/
• Types of logistics  Logistics#Logistics_activities_and_fields (there's more to it than delivery=*, Amazon and cargo=* /  Cargo)

Both of your first examples could apply to pretty much any business or organization. So it doesn't say exactly what the tag should or shouldn't be used on and "Everything" isn't a usable definition. For instance, in no way are me or anyone else with half a brain going to recommended this tag be used on every grocery or convenience store out there on the planet just because they have "complex operations" (whatever that means). Literally no one out there considers them "logistics companies" even if they fit your definitions of one either. So your going to have to be way more specific as to when exactly this should be used or not. Also, don't delete other people's comments. It's an massively bad faithed, ridiculous thing to do. Especially coming from someone that goes off constantly about other people being destructive trolls. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:07, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

We can revert each other back and forth all day about this. Wouldn't it just be easy for you to provide a none vague or complete ambiguous definition for a logistics company though (that wouldn't include places like FedEx stores)? Otherwise, why not just be an adult about it and admit there isn't one? --Adamant1 (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2021 (UTC)