It seems like the Israel name tag guidelines were written with cities / streets in mind, stating that the name language is “the language most common in the area”.
This slightly deviates from the global guideline, which prioritizes “The most prominent name on a sign posted on the feature itself”.
In practice, the result is almost always the same. But there are exceptions in certain areas, for example this commercial area, where the “language most common in the area” is amorphous and not a usable guideline, so I used the prominent name on the sign instead - so, streets have Arabic name tags, while shops are a mix of Arabic, Hebrew, English.
For the sake of completeness and alignment between Wiki and actual practice, I’ve been thinking this should be incorporated in the IL guidelines without changing them completely. Feedback / opinions are welcome.
In case the name in a particular language is distinctly prominent on a sign of a shop or amenity, use that language regardless of the language most common in the area.
B:
In areas where the language most used is amorphous, or in the case where a particular language is distinctly prominent on a sign of a shop or amenity, use that language regardless of the language most common in the area.
C:
In areas where the language most used is amorphous, use the language most prominent on the sign of a shop, amenity, or object, if present.
Come to think of it, I’m willing to be bold with the aforementioned edge cases, but I think I’m mostly undecided on the case of an English sign in a mostly Hebrew area (say, McDonalds / Zara), and my amendment can imply one direction or the other depending on wording, and I prefer to hear the community on that aspect. (amendment C avoids prescribing anything for that case).
The name=* tag should be used as the primary name, given in a single language selected like this:
If there is signage with only one language, or one language more prominent than others (e.g. a shop’s sign or a street name sign), use that language. This is the normal rule for name=*.
Otherwise, use the language most commonly spoken in the area (usually Hebrew or Arabic).
If two or more languages are equally common in the area, use your judgement or use the same language as nearby objects.
Additionally, the name should be stated using name:*=* tags:
A name:lang=* tag in the same language as the name=* tag, and with the same value.
name:*=* tags stating the name in other languages:
Use name:he=* for Hebrew
Use name:en=* for English (prefer the exact spelling as it is on the street sign)
For example, the city of Tel Aviv-Yafo has its main name as name=תל־אביב–יפו and name:he=תל־אביב–יפו in Hebrew, as well as name:en=Tel-Aviv, name:ar=تل أبيب – يافا and several other languages.
Add the full name written on the sign without including “רחוב”, “rehov”, “street”, etc.
Do not use abbreviations, leave that for rendering.
Many streets in Arab or Druze villages do not have an official name. If there’s a de-facto name, use it. Otherwise leave it blank. Do not make up a name yourself. Note that bus-stop names do not necessarily reflect the street name in such areas.
The logic is actually “backwards” from what you had - the signage should come first, and only if that’s not enough, we should defer to the local language. At least, that’s how I understand it - do you agree?
This is actually just your version A, somehow I didn’t realize. It seems the most logical to me.
Anyway, I made some further refinements to the section, check out the page history for details.
First, your update actually changes the implied recommendation for the case of a shop with an English signage in a Hebrew area (similar to version A or B above). This is usually a chain such as McDonalds, Zara, Adidas, KSP, etc. Since it’s a big change in recommendation, and not an edge case, I wanted to wait for feedback first.
Second, (and this is speculation): I can imagine, in theory, some areas where the local population prefers the name to be in Arabic, even if the official signage is Hebrew, maybe those preceding us in the Wiki didn’t want to open a geopolitical can of worms and this was part of the consideration for prioritizing the common language? It seems the sentence was introduced back in 2010. I don’t know if this is a scenario that even exists. I’m just trying to squint and to abide to Chesterton’s fence.
I’m not know this area perfectly, but from looking at the map it feels like Arabic is the main language in this specific place. Why do you think it is unclear?
It’s an Arabic-speaking area where Hebrew-speakers often visit the place. Many shops there have a prominent Hebrew name on the signage. It wouldn’t make sense to put Arabic in name, as it would often be a barely known translation, or even a transliterated or invented one. Even for non tourist oriented shops, sometimes the locally known POI is simply the Hebrew one, and the Arabic name is secondary or nonexistent on the sign or in the local language. And sometimes it’s the other way around. It’s pretty mixed and there are nuances.
I’d firstly orient for locals, visitors are kind of tourists - we can’t fit every visitor
Just a mind experiment, which language will be more useful for the local kid who just learned to read?
Many of the locals are practically bi-lingual, I think nobody knows, say עולם הספורט by its Arabic name. If you translate it and ask a local for direction they may not even recognize what you’re asking for.
In fact, I would say the current translation is invented and a transliteration is better.
Deviation from the priorities listed here is sometimes justified, for example if the local population prefers a different language from the signed one. In those cases, the reason for the selected language should be documented in note:name=* to inform other mappers.
What do you think? (Of course, feel free to tweak phrasing or change it however you see fit, it’s a wiki after all)
McDonalds, maybe, although IMHO it’d be more natural to see it in English on maps than Hebrew. But for the others - especially KSP - it definitely sounds fine to me that it should be in the signed language.
You’re right, it’s a change in recommendation, but I figured through “be bold” it’s fine to change it now and perhaps change it back later if there isn’t agreement here. It’s not like having slightly-wrong recommendations for a couple of days will change the map overnight.
I see, “forced” translations are always ugly, in case where Arabic name is not really useful, then for sure I’d keep Hebrew, but in case there is a normal Arabic name (e.g. something like Ahmed Bakery), I see no reason to put Hebrew in the main name tag.
Personally, I think this deviation practically devolves the situation into something very similar to version C, but with many more words. In that respect I prefer this revision which simply said: The name=* tag should be used as the primary name, given in the language most common in the area. The name=* tag contains the name only in that common language. In areas where the language most used is amorphous, use the language most prominent on the sign of a shop, amenity, or object, if present.
It sounds to me like @SafwatHalaby has first-hand knowledge about this area, and has a better grasp of what’s most useful for locals and general map users.
Thinking about it further, I think your current version is good. It leaves no vagueness, even if it’s longer than C. I retract what I said earlier and need to sleep on it.
Oh good, I was struggling to explain why I disagree with your previous comment. Basically in my version the “deviation” rule is an edge-case get out of jail free card. It’s not the same.
I’m not even sure the “deviation” rule needs to be stated, it’s sort of implied that there’s an exception to every rule, but sometimes it is better to say so explicitly.
Hebrew: תל־אביב–יפו - effectively “Tel Aviv-Yafo” with a fancy maqaf
Arabic: تل أبيب – يافا - should there be a space before and after the dash?
English (and many other languages): Tel-Aviv - no mention of Yafo!
Is this intentional? This relation is used as an example in that section of the wiki, and this discrepancy makes it a bad example IMO. Maybe we can use Haifa instead? It’s well-known enough and has a consistent name.
While we’re at it, Jerusalem is definitely wrong: name=ירושלים | القدس. I know it’s a political issue, but we can’t have two languages in the name tag… Can we? (IMO this question is of big enough concern to raise in a global forum, not just Israel)
