Hi!
Am 09.04.2013 um 17:22 schrieb François Lacombe
francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu:
In my mind, define a role in a relation is mandatory but you say it's
definitely not right.
Roles can make sense. For example ways in a route relation may have the role
forward or backward, if this
Hi!
Am 08.04.2013 um 04:44 schrieb John Baker rovas...@hotmail.com:
As you are talking about rendering of the roads. I am actually looking at
this for the new cartoCSS mapnik style for osm.org.
Have you had a look at the style Lane and road attributes for JOSM? I know
it's not a cartoCSS
Hi!
Am 08.04.2013 um 00:03 schrieb François Lacombe
francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu:
Hi again :)
2013/4/7 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com
Hi!
Actually how could that happen?
I don't have example, I was only guessing.
Assuming 2 different power plants with output
Hi!
Am 29.03.2013 um 00:15 schrieb Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
I tend to go with access=no, hov=*, and possibly motorcycle=yes or
psv=designated, since I've yet to find an HOV road that allows you to walk,
ski, ride an animal or a bicycle, etc. on it; it literally only allows the
Hi,
Are there any arguments against using amenity=shelter +
shelter_type=field_shelter for field shelters (see [1]) for horses?
From the wiki:
The amenity=shelter tag marks all sorts of small shelters to protect against
bad weather conditions.
Sounds good to me.
Regards,
Martin
[1]
Am 01.02.2013 um 15:01 schrieb Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
I think that's harder than you think. What if you have the next example:
http://i.imgur.com/ETBsfSQ.png
How does the renderer preprocesor know if the middle line is inside the
bridge area? It has to make some difficult
Am 01.02.2013 um 15:33 schrieb Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de:
That's why I promoted to keep bridge=yes nevertheless (see previous posts)
We definitively should keep bridge=yes!
Regards,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Am 01.02.2013 um 00:01 schrieb Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de:
On 31.01.2013 12:06, Martin Vonwald wrote:
I'm looking for some alternatives to map tunnels and bridges that
contain several ways. I'm not really happy with the proposed relation
-1
The current method is used and well
Am 25.01.2013 um 20:23 schrieb Ole Nielsen on-...@xs4all.nl:
It is a little bit sad that the proposal
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_generation_refinement
died due to lack of votes. It would have resolved these problems. Maybe
somebody could review and
...@gmail.com:
2013/1/23 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com:
I just want to add my understanding of the building tags:
building=xxx (with no other tags like building:use): it looks like a
xxx and is used as xxx
building:use=xxx: it is used as xxx, but might not look like one
building:type=xxx: it looks
Hi!
Am 03.12.2012 um 20:27 schrieb Ole Nielsen on-...@xs4all.nl:
I intentionally chose not to deprecate maxspeed:wet as I had the feeling that
doing so might upset some people and I didn't want such minor issues to
affect the voting process. Of course I will recommend to use the conditional
Hi,
Am 31.10.2012 um 23:49 schrieb Johan C osm...@gmail.com:
Ok, so what you guys are saying is that
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Restrictions is wrong on the
description of motor_vehicles. Fine to me, but I would appreciate an
improvement of that page then. How can
, then psv and hgv are still allowed to drive on that highway.
Am I misreading the map features?
2012/10/31 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com
2012/10/31 OSM o...@bavarianmallet.de:
I am sorry to disagree, but if hgv and psv use a kind of motor_vehicle, they
are still not allowed
Am 29.10.2012 um 14:27 schrieb Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de:
It is currently not valid - vehicle types can only appear in the key,
whereas groups of users (forestry, customers, delivery, ...) can only
appear in the value. For the groups of users, it actually gives
exclusive access rights
Am 16.10.2012 um 21:30 schrieb Eric SIBERT courr...@eric.sibert.fr:
Sorry for late answer. There is so much traffic related to lanes on this
mailing list.
I suggest the following rewording which should reflect the initial intention:
Other lanes such as Wikipedia spitsstrooken in the
Am 15.10.2012 um 17:55 schrieb Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com:
But as I'm sure you've noticed there's some divided opinion about this.
That's why I asked! Actually I don't think that we see any consensus about this
soon. But then I can document at least that there are two variants
Am 13.10.2012 um 14:48 schrieb Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
I don't like the lanes tag where there are no lines on the street, it
misses the point.
It completely misses the point! The lanes tag should only be used for lanes
that are somehow marked - usually with lines.
A narrow bridge is
Hi,
A quick question how you would tag this:
* one building (looks from the outside mostly like a residential building)
* the building is used for three different things: an office, a riding ground
(just assume it's a pitch) and a stable.
* the building is not separated - it's just one building
Am 11.09.2012 um 16:10 schrieb Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de:
http://roads.osm4people.org/?zoom=7lat=49.60305lon=10.72137layers=B0TFF
Thanks! This covers surface, but smoothness isn't supported as far as I can see.
___
Tagging
Hi,
First I have to excuse myself for this 100% off-topic mail. I nonetheless sent
it to this mailing list because here might(!) be the right target group.
I need a few volunteers for a short survey. They need to be native speakers,
preferable from GB, and not(!) involved in the legal or
Just a quick thought: wouldn't it be more readable if this tag would be a
subkey of beach, i.e. beach:blue_flag=yes? So you see at once that this is a
property of the beach.
Regards,
Martin
Am 06.07.2012 um 17:10 schrieb Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc:
There are plenty of beaches (and
Am 06.07.2012 um 20:48 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
If you would like to subtype it, I'd use an award-namespace, similar
to how it was mentioned in the other thread: award:blue_flag=yes on
the entity it applies to (be it a beach or something else)
This looks to me more
Am 05.07.2012 um 12:08 schrieb Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net:
This really is the wrong way round. We must always consider the mapper
*first*. If a scheme is too complex there will be no data added for consumers
to use.
I fully agree with you, but simply wrote it badly. We need a scheme that
Am 05.07.2012 um 13:49 schrieb aighes o...@aighes.de:
Am 05.07.2012 12:08, schrieb Chris Hill:
This really is the wrong way round. We must always consider the mapper
*first*. If a scheme is too complex there will be no data added for
consumers to use.
This shouldn't be a problem, because
Am 05.07.2012 um 14:30 schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
reading this discussion again demonstrates how useless our voting process
is.
Sad, but true.
It is obvious that this issue has not been thoroughly discussed, that there
is no consensus about which problem exactly it
Am 02.07.2012 um 22:09 schrieb sabas88 saba...@gmail.com:
I'd opt for landcover system.
+1 for landcover. IMO the tag natural should not be used for areas (yes, I
know, currently it is used often for areas).
___
Tagging mailing list
+1 to the summary and especially to:
Am 15.06.2012 um 16:41 schrieb Eckhart Wörner ewoer...@kde.org:
I would also like to ask people not to blindly start new proposals, because
otherwise we'll inevitably end up with hundreds of proposals and no
conclusion at all.
I would even prefer to have
Am 01.06.2012 um 15:01 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
On 01/06/2012 14:19, Jason Cunningham wrote:
On 1 June 2012 08:09, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
But we have to make sure, that this values are only applied if real
indications (e.g. signposts) are present
Can someone please stop NE2? I'm sick and tired of this person. Beside
contraproductive statements and continuous vandalism (yes, I call it this way)
and can't see anything useful coming from his direction.
If this isn't stop here and now I don't see any point in investing a single
second in
.
In many cases they ar more like a widening of the road so its possible
to make a three-point-turn.
I dont think anyone i sweden will change how we map this in Sweden
because of this definition. But how do you guys feel about this?
Best Regards Thod
2012/5/17 Martin Vonwald imagic
to turn around.
2012/5/17 Martin Vonwald (Imagic) imagic@gmail.com:
But this is exactly the definition of turning_place: a widening of the road
without any island.
Am 17.05.2012 um 22:23 schrieb Tobias Johansson t...@mensa.se:
There is one thing. In Sweden we have something called
Am 16.05.2012 um 19:44 schrieb Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
Does anyone have an actual use case where it's so important to know whether
entering traffic yields that the user expects a completely different tag when
one or more approaches has right-of-way?
Penalties for routing?
Am 26.04.2012 um 20:03 schrieb Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com:
Major problem: You've haven't adequately dealt with the lanes=1.5 issue.
You've suggested something that can't solve the issue, but simply looks like
an attempt to cleanse it from the lanes tag and forget about it.
Am 20.04.2012 um 16:58 schrieb Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com:
On 20 April 2012 14:35, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
Which prompts another question, do we have a tag for a 'passing place'?
There is a photo of one on this page
Am 21.04.2012 um 13:34 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi:
...What I don't really care if it is called lanes=1.5 or
lanes=1/2+some_other_agreed_tag_which_is_not_an_estimated_width=x, but
simply saying that use lanes=1/2 alone instead I oppose.
I would recommend lanes=2 and
Am 08.02.2012 um 18:48 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
On 08/02/2012 17:52, Martin Vonwald wrote:
I suggest putting the lanes qualifier in front,
allowing arbitrary tag hierarchies to follow at a fixed location.
This was suggested, but dropped for better readability: see Default
Am 08.02.2012 um 20:38 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
you could have a relation to say that there is a linear possibility to
switch between the lanes (proposed area relation). This would make
some things much easier (we could use standard tags on the ways and it
would be
37 matches
Mail list logo
