Re: [talk-ph] landuse = farm

2017-05-02 Thread David Groom 

Thanks for showing me those previous discussions

-- Original Message --
From: "Eugene Alvin Villar" 
To: "David Groom" 
Cc: "OpenStreetMap Philippines" 
Sent: 02/05/2017 04:31:46
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] landuse = farm

Of the 3 options, I also favor option 3. For the record, I've been 
saying that landuse=farmland (or landuse=farm before) should be tagged 
on the entire farm area and not on individual fields (or rice paddies 
if crop=rice). See this post of mine from 2009:


https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2009-November/001545.html

There's also a relevant discussion in 2014 regarding the mapping of 
individual farm fields/paddies (thread archive is split into two 
months):


https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2014-August/005229.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2014-October/005318.html

For the specific case of rice paddies, there are actually two ways you 
can go about mapping things (once you've marked up the whole area as a 
single landuse=farmland):


1. Mark the borders between paddies as ways as these are raised lines 
of land that serve as walls to hold the water and secondarily serve as 
footpaths (but shouldn't be tagged as highway=*) to access individual 
paddies. There was the suggestion to use man_made=bund or 
man_made=embankment or something similar but no decision was made.


2. Mark the paddies as individual polygons.

~Eugene

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:28 AM, David Groom  
wrote:


During early April I looked at  nodes/ways/relations tagged as 
landuse=farm as reclassified many of them as appropriate.


Howver , in some places I noted that individual fields had been tagged 
using landuse = farm, for example:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/11.225924767247454/124.54216374231005 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/16.933969/121.13637 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/14.883274660783613/120.25851326487962 




At present I have done nothing with these ways

The standard use in OSM for landuse=farmland is for it to be used on 
larger areas, rather than individual fields


There appears to be no approved tag in OSM for fields, (though taginfo 
 shows field=yes 
used on 388 occasions worldwide)


There seem to be a number of possibilities regarding these ways:

1) retag them as landuse=farmland
2) delete them and draw a single way round the larger outline of all 
the adjacent fields and tag this as landuse=farmland
3) retag  them as field=yes, and also draw a single way round the 
larger outline of all the adjacent fields and tag this as 
landuse=farmland.


Of these I think I favour approach 3 as it keeps the field data in OSM 
(someone might have a use for this)


What are your thoughts?

Regards

David





-- Original Message --
From: "David Groom" 
To: "OpenStreetMap Philippines" 
Sent: 31/03/2017 12:23:53
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] landuse = farm

I don't think it will take too long for one person to do this, but I 
may be mistaken.


It will also be an opportunity to look at some of the areas tagged as 
"landuse = farm", and merge them into adjacent areas where 
appropriate.


David


-- Original Message --
From: "Eugene Alvin Villar" 
To: "David Groom" 
Cc: "OpenStreetMap Philippines" 
Sent: 30/03/2017 00:56:18
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] landuse = farm

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:06 PM, David Groom 
 wrote:


Shall I start looking at the  relations and ways and change where 
appropriate from "landuse = farm" to "landuse = farmland"?


What do you think?


Go for it! Would it also make sense to turn this into a Maproulette 
task?


~Eugene


___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph 



___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Bridges mapped as link roads or ramps

2017-05-02 Thread David Groom 

I have no idea why i wrote what I did in that last post on this topic !

What I meant to write was:

I think it would be appropriate to re-tag these with the appropriate 
highway type , ensuring that "bridge=yes" and "layer=1" are also on the 
way


David

-- Original Message --
From: "David Groom" 
To: "talk-ph" 
Sent: 27/04/2017 16:46:15
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bridges mapped as link roads or ramps

I think it would be OK to re-tag these as the appropriate highway type 
with "_link".


David

-- Original Message --
From: "Jherome Miguel" 
To: "talk-ph" 
Sent: 21/04/2017 13:11:48
Subject: [talk-ph] Bridges mapped as link roads or ramps

There are a lot of bridges in Samar that are still mapped as link 
roads or ramps and this brought misleading directions when I got 
directions between Manila and Tacloban, and it is also the problem 
when routing on Cagayan Valley Road in Bulacan and Nueva Ecija, for 
example, when getting directions from Manila to Tuguegarao or any 
point in Nueva Ecija, Aurora, Nueva Vizcaya, Quirino, Isabela, or 
Cagayan. Having bridges mapped as link roads makes routers say that 
you take the ramp, or other instructions. I do not know who made such 
mapping, but it is in the past years and no one have floated that 
mapping by any user[s], that should have been fixed earlier before it 
can affect directions.


--TagaSanPedroAko___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph