Hello again,so far the voting on the door proposal for indoor mapping got 7
votes (positive and negative).See
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/entrance/door I would
appreciate if more people can vote and comment their ideas on the dicussion
page. So far many people
Hi Andreas.
I didn't vote (yet), because I'm a little bit ambiguous about it.
On the one hand I like detail mapping and even indoor mapping ideas, but
- and here is the (or at least one) comment you requested:
Indoor mapping leads to mapping in more than one level in buildings most
often.
Hi,
Generally I am in favour of 3D and very detailed mapping even of
buildings' inside, but putting number of nodes inside a building
outline just does not seem very sensible. It seems like stretching the
current mapping model far beyond it should ever be.
For how to do it, I believe that there
Hello,I would like to hand in a request for voting on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/entrance/door. It is about
how to tag a door which is especially useful for indoor tagging. Andreas
___
2011/12/24 Andreas Balzer em...@andreas-balzer.de:
Hello,
I would like to hand in a request for voting on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/entrance/door. It is
about how to tag a door which is especially useful for indoor tagging.
please note, that there are some features
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:28 AM, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote:
As the creator of the proposal I do not like your proposed key/value
entrance=public_transport.
The tag should show the importance of an
2011/10/14 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
If can't even tag *entrances* to a subway with this tag I see little
use for it. Could either of you perhaps expand a bit about what you
mean.
You can tag the entrance of a train or subway station as
entrance=yes/main BUT only together with a
Hi,
On 10/14/2011 01:00 PM, André Riedel wrote:
If can't even tag *entrances* to a subway with this tag I see little
use for it. Could either of you perhaps expand a bit about what you
mean.
You can tag the entrance of a train or subway station as
entrance=yes/main BUT only together with a
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely. I think it would be good, wherever possible, to stick to
the idea of the value of a tag subclassing the key, so that
building=*
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Are you recommending to tag subway stations as buildings in order to be able
to tag their entrances?
That seems logical to me. Is there some problem with doing this, that
I haven't seen? I know that it would be
Hi,
On 10/14/2011 01:18 PM, John Sturdy wrote:
Are you recommending to tag subway stations as buildings in order to be able
to tag their entrances?
That seems logical to me. Is there some problem with doing this, that
I haven't seen?
Sorry, I forgot that a subway station does not always
On 10/14/2011 7:35 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Tagging an above-ground subway station as a building is common practice.
For underground buildings, things are more difficult; we don't have an
established way of recording the fact that they are below the surface.
layer=-1 doesn't cut it as it is only
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 10/14/2011 01:18 PM, John Sturdy wrote:
Are you recommending to tag subway stations as buildings in order to be
able
to tag their entrances?
That seems logical to me. Is there some problem with doing this,
André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/10/14 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
If can't even tag *entrances* to a subway with this tag I see little
use for it. Could either of you perhaps expand a bit about what you
mean.
You can tag the entrance of a train or subway station
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:18 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
In the case of a subway station, this will mean that the station's area will
need to underlay other mapped objects, and the mapper will need to map the
access tunnels as well as the station proper.
Burrr!
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:00 PM, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/10/14 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
If can't even tag *entrances* to a subway with this tag I see little
use for it. Could either of you perhaps expand a bit about what you
mean.
You can tag the entrance of
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
What about covered=yes?
or underground=yes which could be a simple filter for all of us who
don't want to be disturbed by underground features during edition.
Pieren
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
What about covered=yes?
or underground=yes which could be a simple filter for all of us who
don't want to be disturbed by underground features
2011/10/14 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
What about covered=yes?
or underground=yes which could be a simple filter for all of us who
don't
On 10/14/2011 9:43 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
The established way is covered, at
least it has a definition in the wiki and dates back to 2009 + it is
used more often (covered, usage: C. denote an area such as an
underground parking lot, a covered reservoir/cistern or even such
things as an
2011/10/14 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On 10/14/2011 9:43 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Covered doesn't mean something is underground, just that it has a roof on
top. For example a road passing through a building at ground level would be
covered=yes.
covered doesn't necessarily
Hi.
I fear, it's wrong that most data consumers would get informed simply
because of a vote in the usual community channels.
I think, there are a lot of data consumers, who don't follow the
changing tagging system after once implementing it.
That may be wrong, but I think, we should avoid mass
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:28 AM, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote:
As the creator of the proposal I do not like your proposed key/value
entrance=public_transport.
The tag should show the importance of an entrance and not what you
will find behind the door.
Definitely. I think it
Hi. The proposal for marking building entrances with entrance=* tags
was discussed a year and a half ago, but didn't really go anywhere:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/entrance
Notice that there is a conversion mentioned in it, from deprecated
building=entrance.
Hi,
On 10/12/2011 11:12 PM, Ilya Zverev wrote:
An hour ago there was a big changset (#9541529) from one of belarusian
mappers changing 21640 building=entrance to entrance=yes in several
countries, including Russia. This is not the first attempt, and I'm
undoing it now.
Please let them know
Pieren wrote:
It was not widely discussed but the proposal seems to be accepted as
an improvement. But deprecating a tag is never easy in OSM. It needs a
large consensus, a wide audience and time ...
The proposal is actually well designed in that regard. It doesn't
redefine any existing tags
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
Hi. The proposal for marking building entrances with entrance=* tags was
discussed a year and a half ago, but didn't really go anywhere:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/entrance
An hour ago there was
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
Hi. The proposal for marking building entrances with entrance=* tags was
discussed a year and a half ago, but didn't really go anywhere:
On 10/12/2011 6:52 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
Please let me know when did my private renderer for those
building=entrances cease being something that renders (besides the times
when my VM is down of course :-))? ...Honestly, I think you just _assumed_
that nobody is using the data for anything
I think you meant might be advised rather than need
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
If entrance=* is being used at all, you need to change your rendering to
support it, whether or not existing building=entrances are being changed.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Ilpo Järvinen
ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Erik Johansson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote:
aren't we better of without building=entrance? I really
hope that DWG can be kept out of this.
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 10/12/2011 6:52 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
Please let me know when did my private renderer for those
building=entrances cease being something that renders (besides the
times
when my VM is down of course :-))? ...Honestly, I think you just
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 1:14 AM, Ilpo Järvinen
ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi wrote:
But that's still besides my point which
is that deprication should be handled properly instead of giving those
hints for DWG to not interfere on mass removal even before anything
is official.
FYI, I'm not against
So, how about proposals to replace tags globally? For example, after
this proposal is accepted, we could start voting on mass-retagging
entrances, so 1) it's official; 2) most data consumers get to know about
the change and adjust their software accordingly? With this we could
make a precedent
2011/10/13 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
Further I would like to propose railway=subway_entrance =
entrance=public_transport, since it's probably interesting to have on
bus/boat/rail terminals as well, now this is a bit more tricky since
it already renders.
As the creator of the proposal
35 matches
Mail list logo
