On 5/25/2012 2:16 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Am 25.05.2012 um 01:44 schrieb Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com:
I'd register my disapproval, but it would simply be ignored, so I'll just
ignore the new guidelines and continue tagging as I have been.
I'm curious: what exactly do you
On 5/22/2012 10:07 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
E.g. if the cycleway is not
suitable for your bike (e.g. you have a huge trailer, or it is
damaged, or it is obstructed by stuff, or...) you will still be
legally entitled to use the road. Also if the cycleway does not go
where you want to go
On 5/19/2012 11:43 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
All three examples would not be roundabouts in Germany or Italy, where
the use of the roundabout tag is linked to the presence of the
corresponding road sign for a roundabout, at least this seems to be
common practice on OSM.
In New Jersey the
On 5/19/2012 1:01 PM, Anthony wrote:
I'd be interested in
seeing a sign which says circle used on a roundabout, though.
If you mean simply a circle where all entering traffic yields, here's
one:
On 5/19/2012 1:34 PM, Anthony wrote:
I'm not sure that qualifies as approaching vehicles being deflected
around a central island (the MUTCD definition). The deflection is
being done by the islands in the four corners.
Buh? So you wouldn't call
On 5/18/2012 9:15 AM, Anthony wrote:
2012/5/18 Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com:
If anyone doubts that existing tagging does not match the wiki, see the
following examples, all tagged as junction=roundabout by editors other than
me:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5677217
On 5/17/2012 3:04 PM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Hi!
I updated now the english article:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout
Translations will follow in the next days.
Traffic circles are usually tagged as roundabouts, contrary to your
statement.
On 5/17/2012 3:40 PM, Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote:
Can someone please stop NE2? I'm sick and tired of this person.
I'm on it. Oh wait, that's me. Hi there.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
Whoever the hell Gnonthgol is on the wiki has blocked me to get his
way in an edit war.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 5/17/2012 5:39 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Whoever the hell Gnonthgol is on the wiki has blocked me to get his way in
an edit war.
Why do you keep starting the wars?
Have you stopped beating your wife?
On 5/17/2012 5:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Whoever the hell Gnonthgol is on the wiki has blocked me to get his
way in an edit war.
By the way, his block summary is complete bullshit. He says The
discussion on tagging@ mentions traffic circles and right of way several
times and allways
On 5/17/2012 5:48 PM, Gnonthgol wrote:
Whoever the hell Gnonthgol is on the wiki has blocked me to get his
way in an edit war.
I am sorry I offended you but I was not out to win an edit war. You were
blocked because you edited against the consensus on the list, and when I
reverted your edits
If anyone doubts that existing tagging does not match the wiki, see the
following examples, all tagged as junction=roundabout by editors other
than me:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/5677217
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/9080282
I'd like to propose a page that basically says that just because a tag
is named X, that does not mean that something should be tagged as such
only if it meets the real-world definition of X. The following examples
can be included:
*Many cities are tagged with place=town
*Bikes and pedestrians
On 5/16/2012 8:51 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Unless you want to invent a new tag
for the New Jersey circles that give right-of-way to some approaches.
I wouldn't mind. There's something fundamentally different between a
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?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 5/16/2012 1:52 PM, Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote:
Am 16.05.2012 um 19:44 schrieb Nathan Edgars IInerou...@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
On 5/16/2012 1:06 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
I guess that depends on what you're trying to do... If you are trying
to tag the largest possible vessel that can navigate a waterway (under
normal conditions at least) you could probably come up with a
reasonable set of tags. Inland waterways are
On 5/16/2012 6:48 PM, Dale Puch wrote:
I found this at http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil/data/dictionary/ddnwn.htm
Data is here http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil//db/waternet/data/ but
not in shp format so someone would need to do some format translation.
There are lots of other sets of data and
On 5/16/2012 7:41 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On 5/16/2012 8:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
Also, I'd prefer for my satnav to save the word roundabout for
actual roundabouts. If it starts talking to me about roundabouts when
I'm just merging onto a road which is part of an interchange which is
kind of circular in shape, I'm just going to get
On 5/16/2012 8:34 PM, Anthony wrote:
Anyway, while looking for an example of a roundabout, I came across
this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/83428962/history
Why did you remove the roundabout tag?
Because it's not a complete circle...
___
On 5/16/2012 10:42 PM, Dale Puch wrote:
You might check with the OpenSeaMap guys
Surely at one of them is paying attention to tagging@?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 5/15/2012 10:30 AM, Anthony wrote:
Okay, so, for OSM terminology, a roundabout means 1) traffic goes in
one direction; 2) entering traffic must yield; and 3) entering traffic
need not stop (no stop signs).
Nope. Junction=roundabout applies to all (one-way) traffic circles, no
matter what
Is anyone familiar with the regulations governing the U.S. inland
waterways (such as the Mississippi River and the Intracoastal Waterway)?
From my brief look, it seems to be less these barge configurations are
allowed and more you can go anywhere but don't crash. Is this
correct, or are there
On 5/16/2012 1:06 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
In either case, any idea what the suitable tags might look
like (other than the generic boat=yes ship=yes)?
I guess that depends on what you're trying to do... If you are trying
to tag the largest possible vessel that can navigate a waterway (under
On 5/14/2012 11:02 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
The longer I think about it, the more I'm asking myself: do we really
need a tag for this? If someone doesn't want to map it as loop, why
not simply end the road without any additional tag? What information
are we missing then, that we are not missing
On 5/13/2012 5:25 PM, Pieren wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Since oneway=yes is the default for motorways (per the wiki, and apparently
some routers), these should be tagged as oneway=no (as these two in fact
are).
NE2 is in favour of
On 5/11/2012 4:23 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Hi,
Two-lane expressways. I came across one of these when running an
analysis on OSM data in Vermont, USA. I didn't even know they existed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-lane_expressway#United_States
The one I looked at is tagged as motorway:
On 5/10/2012 11:05 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
mini_roundabout is by definition a traversible object, but one with a
hard median isn't.
A mini-roundabout may be by definition traversable, but that doesn't
mean highway=mini_roundabout is, any more than a highway=trunk is a
trunk road or a
On 5/10/2012 11:21 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Nathan,
formally you are correct, but it has been OSM practice to base its tags
on UK definitions.
Nope. In the UK, not all highway=trunks are trunk roads. Some have been
detrunked but remain in the primary route network.
On 5/10/2012 11:30 AM, Josh Doe wrote:
I've made some significant edits to this article to improve the
overall quality, as well as hopefully provide text which satisfies
both concerned parties.
Nope - you said that it's erroneous to use the tag as many mappers have,
for a miniature roundabout
On 5/10/2012 11:52 AM, fly wrote:
Why should we have two tags for roundabouts which differe only in size.
We do not do this with other objects/tags.
waterway=ditch/canal and stream/river?
(By the way, we don't currently have two node tags for roundabouts.
Hence the current situation.)
On 5/10/2012 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/10 Josh Doej...@joshdoe.com:
I propose we start accepting junction=roundabout to be used on nodes.
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Why?
On 5/10/2012 12:35 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/10 Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com:
On 5/10/2012 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Why?
Because it gives you more information (e.g. the radius
I've started tagging local mini_roundabouts with mountable=yes/no. Most
have trees and are obviously not. But I'm not exactly sure where the
line is. Should one with a low curb, more like a gutter, be considered a
true mini-roundabout or not? For example, this one in Kissimmee:
On 5/10/2012 5:31 PM, Andrew Chadwick (lists) wrote:
19 tc (turning circle at the end of a road, with or without a
solid centre)
Careful - there was a recent dispute over whether a turning circle with
an island is really a turning_circle, very reminiscent of this
mini_roundabout
I just went through the mini_roundabouts in east central Florida. I
found one definitely mountable (in an industrial park), 202 definitely
not mountable (including some culs-de-sac), 3 that I'm not sure about,
and 4 mistagged turning_circles. Obviously this says a lot about
roundabout
On 5/10/2012 6:47 PM, Andrew Chadwick (lists) wrote:
Might solve the
problem of people not making the distinction between flat mini
roundabouts and the bigger sort, or not making the distinction in the
definitively correct place.
You're conflating size of intersection with height of center.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/place%3Dquarter#Voting_result
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 4/27/2012 3:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
While this is ongoing, Pieren continues to remove area=yes from
railway=platform, which has been on the page since it was created in
2008:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:railway%3Dplatformaction=history
And Pieren continues
It's the standard to draw a waterway in the direction of flow. I've
questioned this several times, but it's an ingrained default.
My question is more specific: what happens to a drainage canal that
reverses direction? I offer the Everglades and surrounding agricultural
land as an example.
On 4/28/2012 5:32 AM, Sander Deryckere wrote:
Can you give a picture of multi-lane cycleways (or coordinates, so we
can see it in aerial pics or via streetview)?
Not quite what you're looking for, but here's another weird edge case
with a pedestrian lane rather than a sidewalk:
On 4/28/2012 7:59 AM, Anthony wrote:
Scanning the wiki it looks like usually-not-area would be less of a
moving target. Otherwise almost every time someone adds a new amenity
you have to add a new always-area tag. The usually-not-area would be
junction=roundabout, barrier=*,
While this is ongoing, Pieren continues to remove area=yes from
railway=platform, which has been on the page since it was created in
2008:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:railway%3Dplatformaction=history
___
Tagging mailing list
On 4/25/2012 3:39 AM, Pieren wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not highway only. For example, it can be used on railway=platform:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/94063273
or man_made=pier:
On 4/25/2012 4:53 AM, Pieren wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Because a railway platform is usually drawn as a single line (as is a pier).
Omitting area=yes gives a hole in the middle.
Sounds tagging for the renderer...
Where did I mention
On 4/24/2012 2:13 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
Pieren - thanks for pointing out that area=yes is highway only. How could the
documentation for it be clearer [1]?
It's not highway only. For example, it can be used on railway=platform:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/94063273
or
Is there a tag in use for weigh stations, places where trucks are
weighed to ensure that they are not too heavy?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 4/20/2012 4:19 AM, Georg Feddern wrote:
Am 20.04.2012 09:02, schrieb Nathan Edgars II:
Is there a tag in use for weigh stations, places where trucks are
weighed to ensure that they are not too heavy?
There is only a tag at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservices says that it
(usually) has fuel and food, but it links to Wikipedia:rest area. Should
the Wikipedia link be removed (and added to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Drest_area)? Should the
word 'usually' be removed?
On 4/18/2012 9:34 AM, Masi Master wrote:
For me, it looks like a bicycle-lane. On first look with no sign, so i
would tag it cycleway=lane + bicycle=yes (- no designated or official,
because a OSM-cycleway is for me a way, that is made for cycling (with
no implied access), access can be added
I'm wondering what the best way would be to tag a good-quality shoulder
that acts essentially as an undesignated bike lane, in that you can use
it but it is not required. Current Florida DOT policy is to use these on
rural roads, with marked bike lanes only when there is a lane to the
right.
Hmmm. Apparently Thunderbird's 'reply to list' fails when there are
multiple lists. Sending again:
On 4/17/2012 11:47 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
I quite like cycleway=shoulder. It describes exactly what's going
on: the cycling infrastructure at this point isn't a marked lane
(cycleway=lane), nor
On 4/15/2012 3:55 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in
who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend,
delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits
access
On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for
residents only?
name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate.
That's only a solution if the gates actually have
On 4/15/2012 10:39 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
At 2012-04-15 13:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for
residents only?
name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik
I think we're talking about two different things here.
(a) An editor (program) automatically applying tags to an object. This
is bad, because we don't know whether the mapper has specifically
verified this, or whether it's just being assumed and may be false.
(b) Tags on an area that specify
On 4/12/2012 2:33 AM, Philip Barnes wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 19:50 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/11/2012 7:17 PM, Philip Barnes wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 13:28 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/11/2012 4:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
If sidewalks were tagged without
On 4/11/2012 4:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
If sidewalks were tagged without the highway tag, routing would
continue to work like it does for everybody
Except when a motorway has a sidewalk.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 4/11/2012 7:17 PM, Philip Barnes wrote:
On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 13:28 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/11/2012 4:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
If sidewalks were tagged without the highway tag, routing would
continue to work like it does for everybody
Except when a motorway has
On 4/10/2012 12:38 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
The suggested tagging is IMHO tagging for the renderer. For tagging
sidewalks it would be sufficent to tag them with footway=sidewalk
without the highway-tag. In analogy to this tagging we would
optionally be mapping an ordinary street as dual
On 4/10/2012 2:26 PM, Pieren wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/10/2012 12:38 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
The suggested tagging is IMHO tagging for the renderer. For tagging
sidewalks it would be sufficent to tag them with
On 4/10/2012 6:38 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
Not explicitly. And while it is true that the examples don't include
sidewalks, they do include cycleways, where we have basically the same
debate whether or not they should be separate ways.
Are you talking about bike lanes or sidepaths? The latter is
On 3/26/2012 7:18 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Hi!
This is a follow-up proposal for the :lanes proposal. I suggest the
introduction of a new key to tag all kinds of reversible lanes:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/reversible_lane
A center turn lane is not a reversible lane
On 3/26/2012 7:47 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
I took the notation from the wikipedia page linked in the proposal.
I don't know why Wikipedia groups them, but it at least doesn't say that
a center turn lane is a reversible lane.
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2b.htm#section2B24
On 3/26/2012 9:26 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
It seems to me, that two-way lane is more widely known for this. So I
changed the key to two_way_lane. I also changed the value reversible
to tidal_flow (british english)
The proposal is now located here:
On 3/26/2012 9:44 AM, Andrew Hartley wrote:
hello,
while reading the reversible proposal i stumbled across the centre turn
lanes proposal. this proposal was written on a key page instead of a
proposal page. is this a mistake or is there any reason for this?
On 3/26/2012 10:53 AM, Andrew Hartley wrote:
I created it there because the purpose was foremost to explain
existing tagging. Hence it's not proposed, since multiple mappers
already use it.
are you sure about this? according to taginfo
On 3/20/2012 6:52 PM, Felix Delattre wrote:
In Central America describing addresses work differently than in
northern countries. As there are often times no street names and people
are used to describe the addresses with reference points. Only in some
residential areas they use letter and
On 3/21/2012 9:06 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
The harder question is if you want to try and define actual addresses,
like actually putting a unique address description on each dwelling
(From the church, 400m south, From the church, 380m south with the
blue door). But maybe leave that harder
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/1584729508
This is a residential apartment building. Is it appropriate for one of
the residents to add a digital marketing business he owns?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 3/14/2012 5:39 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, OSM usero...@fizik.spb.ru wrote:
You can look at these signs here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Traffic_sign#dangerous_turn_and_dangerous_turns
.
These signs mean:
*) there will be dangerous
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle#Central_island
The question is whether a normal-sized turning circle can be tagged as
such if there's a small landscaped island in the middle. Here's a local
example:
On 3/13/2012 7:45 AM, Jonathan Bennett wrote:
On 13/03/2012 11:29, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle#Central_island
The question is whether a normal-sized turning circle can be tagged as
such if there's a small landscaped island
On 3/13/2012 11:14 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Martin Vonwald wrote:
The central island - if there is
one at all - of a mini-roundabout, must be traversable, while this
is not true for the roundabout.
This is not what the wiki says and not how I've been tagging
mini_roundabouts or have seen
It's obvious to me that the banner is not part of the network. US 1
Alternate is part of the U.S. Highway system (US:US), not some mythical
U.S. Highway Alternate system.
It also makes the most sense to put it in the ref tag. Otherwise there's
inconsistency between an alternate signed as US 1
You can also use traffic_sign=blaze (as with signs mounted on buildings
and the old practice of painting signs on telephone poles).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
If anyone cares and wishes to discuss it:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:center_turn_lane
Otherwise I'll just skip voting and get on with mapping.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes_and_complex_intersections_visual_approach
User Cmuelle8 insists on adding it to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lane_tagging_comparison#A_visual_approach
as a valid alternate.
___
Tagging mailing list
http://i43.tinypic.com/2moxxjl.jpg
There's a black tarp spread over the ground (tree roots have exposed a
piece here) with dirt, mulch, and other natural materials spread on top.
Does this have a name?
___
Tagging mailing list
On 2/26/2012 12:59 PM, Mike Valiant wrote:
I think the tarp is a horticultural membrane designed to stop weeds
growing up through the path. The mulch looks like debris that has
fallen from the trees rather than anything applied deliberately.
It's difficult to see from the photo, but it looks
On 2/25/2012 8:24 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
You probably already know this, but: in OSM railway=abandoned is what we
in the US would call old railroad grade. railway=disused seems to
cover both what we would call out of service (a term within railroad
regulation, referring to tracks/ROW still
On 2/20/2012 1:05 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Hi.
If it's an artwork, I would tag it as an artwork.
If it's a landmark (yes, that IS possible - if I think e.g. about some
areas in Sweden), I would probably tag as something like that
For that matter, how would I tag a mailbox in general? Not
Simple solution: use ele:top=* for the elevation of the top.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 2/20/2012 8:23 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote:
While we are discussing this, we should
also agree on how to tag bicycle lanes that are unmarked. We have a
surprising number of these in my area of the world. They have no signs
(I know, they are no longer required to) and no markings within the
Would it be reasonable to map custom personal mailboxes that are
essentially public art (e.g. in the shape of a manatee)? Or is this
going a bit too far?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
One possibility is railway=station state=abandoned (where that's
correct, of course).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
The county has a bunch of water supply facilities that I presume are
used to store water as an intermediate step in the water supply chain
(and not for wastewater). How should I tag them?
Here's a list so you can see what kind of things they have:
On 2/17/2012 2:01 AM, Andre Engels wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
The county has a bunch of water supply facilities that I presume are used
to store water as an intermediate step in the water supply chain (and not
for wastewater). How should I
On 2/11/2012 1:48 AM, Shu Higashi wrote:
Hi list,
There are many game arcades (or amusement arcades or video arcades) in Japan,
but tags have not been defined yet.
It's a facility usually in a building for amusement, not for gambling.
How about in other countries?
I propose a tag definition as
On 2/8/2012 2:25 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
The lane-case is a little different though, because if you have
multiple values there (plus a definition from where to start) you
won't need lane numbering. For buildings you will have unambigous
numbers for the floors anyway, and they are the
On 2/8/2012 3:14 PM, Bryce2 Nesbitt wrote:
Colons in keys are likely to make many casual mappers uneasy about
editing said tag, let alone two of them in one key.
Casual mappers seem an unlikely target for this particular type of
highly technical mapping.
Adding the number of
On 2/8/2012 3:47 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
For building floors, are there any cultures which number their floors
downwards?
The Troglodytes.
There is of course the common leaving off of the 13th floor.
___
Tagging mailing list
I ask because someone added a name:vi tag for Orange County, Florida:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/389011
As far as I know, there is no large Vietnamese population here and no
other reason why someone would want to know the literal translation of
Orange County into Vietnamese.
On 1/30/2012 1:07 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/1/30 Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com:
I ask because someone added a name:vi tag for Orange County, Florida:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/389011
As far as I know, there is no large Vietnamese population here and no other
Martin, what is this? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10542244
This is Orange County, Florida, not Orange County, California.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
There's a problem with the key type. It's necessary for a multipolygon
relation, but also has other uses such as the type of airport
(public/private). So how is one to indicate that an airport represented
by a multipolygon is public?
___
Tagging
On 1/30/2012 3:29 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
There's a problem with the key type. It's necessary for a multipolygon
relation, but also has other uses such as the type of airport
(public/private). So how is one to indicate that an airport represented
by a multipolygon is public?
Addendum
On 1/30/2012 7:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Btw: what is the meaning of Public/private airport? Is this the operator? The
proprietor?
I'd choose a tag that makes it unambiguously clear which property it refers to.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Daerodrome
To identify the
1 - 100 of 554 matches
Mail list logo
