Re: [Talk-us] Ferries

Martijn van Exel marti...@telenav.com writes: It turns out that this happens because some of the access roads to these ferries are tagged as highway=service, sometimes service=driveway. For various reasons we don't want to route folks through service roads, so this poses a challenge. Here's

Re: [Talk-us] Ferries

Martijn van Exel marti...@telenav.com writes: It's the other way around, really. We're adjusting our routing logic to adapt to OSM. Referring to the wiki, a service road is 'Generally for access to a building, motorway service station, beach, campsite, industrial estate, business park, etc.'

Re: [Talk-us] Admin borders in the US: CDPs

Paul Norman penor...@mac.com writes: From: Richard Welty [mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net] Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Admin borders in the US: CDPs the latter, i think. there are parts of the US where the CDP boundaries do contribute to the map. I think there's two different cases that need to

Re: [Talk-us] Should this be a dual carriageway?

(I'm writing from the perspective of having driven Route 6 from the sagamore bridge to north eastham every summer for many years, and to Provincetown a few years ago.) If we're talking about where Route 6 goes from 2 lanes each direction with a real median down to one lane in each direction with

Re: [Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)

Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org writes: On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Minh Nguyen m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us wrote: If you're lucky, you can find an Ohio city limit's legal definition in county commissioners' minutes when an annexation is proposed. The most authoritative data

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Importing Tesla Superchargers

Charles Samuels o...@charles.derkarl.org writes: On Sunday, April 12, 2015 01:12:12 AM Andy Allan wrote: Right now, if a tag doesn't match with supercharge.info, I overwrite OSM's. Could you explain this a bit further? For example, if supercharge.info has capacity 6, and I correct this

Re: [Talk-us] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap

I don't have time to wade into the controversy, but +1 to Russ's comments. Old railroad grades really are features. The USGS shows them on topos, and they're often really obvious. More seriously, a wave of deletionism is really bad for the project in terms of morale. Doing more than a

Re: [Talk-us] National Forest nature_reserve?

Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org Sorry I don’t follow this topic more closely but I would think with the mixed-used of national forests, it is best to use boundary=protected_area After reading the wiki page

Re: [Talk-us] National Forest nature_reserve?

Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org writes: Sorry I don’t follow this topic more closely but I would think with the mixed-used of national forests, it is best to use boundary=protected_area[1] but I know it has been discussed a bunch, so someone might have an even better answer. I

Re: [Talk-us] National Forest nature_reserve?

stevea stevea...@softworkers.com writes: I tag landuse=forest on National Forests. If there are any included wilderness areas, I tag them leisure=nature_reserve. Sometimes these boundaries can be quite complex via multipolygons, but I try to keep it as simple as this, and I seldom get

Re: [Talk-us] Am I mapping this wrong, or should the router be fixed for this?

James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com writes: I've been normally mapping slip lanes as '_link' highways at intersections since the beginning. However, as most fellow US mappers know, they almost never have 'speed limits' posted for them, and that seems to help cause problems in some routing

Re: [Talk-us] Highway tagging sort-of-dispute

Bradley White writes: > In urban areas, I would consider secondary to usually mean 4 lanes, 35 > mph(ish), maybe divided maybe not, with not much in the way of access > control. Primaries are faster, more controlled and usually wider - more > important roads in the

Re: [Talk-us] San Diego Address Import Update

Tod Fitch writes: You raise a lot of really excellent and difficult points and I am not commenting on most of them. > Finally, Los Angeles. The incorporated area for LA is huge and it > surrounds other incorporated cities. But there are areas in LA like > Woodland Hills,

Re: [Talk-us] San Diego Address Import Update

Tod Fitch writes: > What is a “city” in US specific OSM terms? > > I prefer a postal city definition as that is the most useful for > routing purposes which I feel is the primary use of address data in > OSM. Or are we dealing with some other concept of addr:city? I see

Re: [Talk-us] San Diego county addresses

Tod Fitch writes: > I am not local to that area so am not best to work on correcting > this. And, in fact, I am not sure I know the best way to fix them. The > house numbers and streets seem reasonable (at least the addresses > adjacent to the business I added seem

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Bryan Housel writes: > Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important, > except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better > place for this. Except that osm is part of the Free Sofware / Open Data world, and it isn't reasonable to

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

To me, one of the biggest things is about having all mappers act reasonably toward each other. We have some people that I'd describe as "lone wolf mappers". If they just add things, that's fine. But if they are retagging motorways as trunk, or deleting railroads, or otherwise being hostile,

Re: [Talk-us] Increasing the number of US Mappers

Mike Dupont <jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> writes: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> wrote: >> in each state, have a state mailinglist, > I think that is a good idea, or a metro area > (ht

Re: [Talk-us] Downgrading 'motorways' around toll plazas?

James Mast writes: > Does anybody think it is a good idea to downgrade 'motorways' around > toll plazas to 'trunk' highways? I just noticed a user did this in > mass in NY and MA along I-90/I-87. [1] [2] He's even done this in PA a > few times. [3] No, this is not

Re: [Talk-us] Map Roulette Idea - GNIS "parks"

Mike Thompson writes: everything not quoted sounds good. > Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a OSM tag to describe “a broad, > flat, mostly open area in a mountainous region", yet I feel that these > names are important pieces of information that should be preserved

Re: [Talk-us] Android Phone App that Uses Garmin Format -- Was Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2015-09-30

Greg Morgan writes: > I think my Garmin GPS finally died. Has anyone had experience with or > can recommend an Android app that uses the Garmin file format? I seem > to be in areas where the data roaming does not shine. It would be > nice to toss one of these US

Re: [Talk-us] Should driveways be on OSM?

Minh Nguyen writes: > On 2015-10-03 07:45, Mike Thompson wrote: >> >> By removing access=private you would be removing a valuable piece of >> information. Maybe the community can come up with a better tag, but we >> should not just delete the "private" tag. > > How

Re: [Talk-us] Should driveways be on OSM?

Tom Bloom writes: > -If the driveway is long and wrong, or short and inside an urban area, > delete it. If it's wrong and TIGER, yes delete it. If someone did it by hand, message them. Deleting driveways in urban areas is wrong, unless you are sure (meaning you have

Re: [Talk-us] Another road classification disagreement (this time with HFCS in Kansas)

"Richie Kennedy" writes: > To me, "unpaved" includes gravel surfaced roads (which is the > predominant surface type of non-state highways in rural Kansas). I'm > not inclined to mark every gravel road in Kansas as 'track' Unpaved does not at all imply track. If

Re: [Talk-us] Best iOS app for GPS wander, GPX to laptop into OSM?

Marc Gemis writes: > Keypadmapper can send the recorded data via email. Keep in mind that keypadmapper is spyware :-) In all seriousness, it uploads locations and cell ids to a public database whenever it's running. If you're out explicitly doing mapping, that might be

Re: [Talk-us] York County South Carolina

"Kiley, Jim" writes: > We would like to make our GIS Streets available to Open Street > Map. Upon inspection, the streets already look great so I know someone > is performing the updates. How can we help to keep the York County > streets as accurate as possible

Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

Eric Ladner <eric.lad...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 5:58 AM Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> wrote: > >> >> Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > OK, 'residential' if it looks like 'subdivision', 'unclassifie

Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

Kevin Kenny writes: > OK, 'residential' if it looks like 'subdivision', 'unclassified' > otherwise (as long as it's drivable in, say, my daughter's car rather > than my 4-wheeler). Got it. I also see a distinction between residential/unclassified as denoting a

Re: [Talk-us] Timezones in USA?

Frederik Ramm writes: > I have deleted a couple of such time zone polygons account of not being > verifiable on the ground. > > I don't know how time zones are defined "at the source" but it is very > unlikely that someone puts up signs. I guess there'll be some kind of >

Re: [Talk-us] How are US county boundaries legally defined?

Jake writes: > US mappers - do any of you know what government body is the keeper of truth > for Missouri county boundaries? I don't, but I would call the state GIS or highway departments and ask. It is likely that the country boundaries are defined in state statute and

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed import cleanup: NYSDEClands

Kevin Kenny writes: > landuse=conservation is formally deprecated. This is the real bug. There should be a set of landuse= tags that are jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive and this one is obviously missing. It describes exactly what you are trying to

Re: [Talk-us] NYC DEC Lands reimport

Kevin Kenny writes: > I used leisure=nature_reserve and boundary=protected_area > protect_class=1b for these six areas. The appearance therefore > changes. If you want it to change back, convince me that there's a > consensus that landuse=forest would not be tagging

Re: [Talk-us] evacuation_center=yes

Blake Girardot writes: > What tags are we using in the US for disaster evacuation centers for > like hurricanes and things? > > http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/evacuation_center#map > > Shows none in the US but I know we have a lot. > > I am looking for the right tag to use but

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Boston, MA, USA addr:housenumber Import

Roman Yepishev writes: > The wiki now contains updated files that set the postcode and add > a fixme tag to a building in case it already had the number that does > not match the official information from SAM. How many fixme tags would there be? How many of these fixme

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Boston, MA, USA addr:housenumber Import

Clifford Snow writes: > 4) Is it really necessary to upload that many notes during the import? if a > building is missing, can you add a node with the address information > instead of leaving a note? I am opposed to adding notes from bulk data. There are already a

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Slack

Charlotte Wolter writes: > Really nice discussion of the issues around using for-profit tools > in an open-source organization. The for-profit point isn't really the core issue. IMHO the big issues are the use of non-Free software on servers the use of

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Boston, MA, USA addr:housenumber Import

I should point out that I'm not opposed to this import or address imports in general; generally, I am supportive. But, I think the doing an import right is vastly harder than someone who hasn't been through one thinks, and that it's good to iterate on approach and data quality, and not rush or

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Boston, MA, USA addr:housenumber Import

Jason Remillard writes: > The licensing link says the following, it is kind of weird. indeed. > "The City of Boston recognizes the value and benefit gained by sharing > GIS data. Although the City has made reasonable efforts to provide > accurate data, the City

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

Mike Thompson writes: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > >> They tagged them as "social_path", according to their blog entry [1] >> > Totally unacceptable. OpenStreetMap maps what is observable on the ground > (generally). If

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

There seems to be some wiki-agitation going on about a "proposed tag" of social path. Perhaps everyone who is opposed might want to look and register opposition, unless they are more opposed to wikifiddling than to this tag :-) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Social_path

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

Alan McConchie writes: > Thanks everyone for your strong but sincere criticism so far. In the > thread here on talk-us, I explained _what_ we were trying to do, but I > didn't explain very much about our rationale: _why_ we think this is > an important idea. The wiki

Re: [Talk-us] Caliparks re-tagging paths?

Kevin Kenny writes: > This isn't a matter of "get off my lawn." It's a matter of "there's no > promise that there's a path there at all." I think you're making a separate argument, that when there's some maybe-path that's indistinct, and not clearly followable, then

Re: [Talk-us] Optimal / preferred checkin sizes

"Steve Friedl" writes: > I don't think that 3 square miles of road straightening ought to go in a > single [enormous] batch, but I'm not sure that 100 entries of the form > 'Straightened Main Street in MyTown" / "Straightened Elm Street in MyTown" / > "Straightened Euclid

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Kansas City addresses from maps.kcmo.org

Clifford Snow writes: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:02 PM, teslas_moustache < > teslas_mousta...@riseup.net> wrote: > >> I'm not sure if property lines and ownership are useful. And I don't >> think that building outlines are included, so I may need to continue >> with

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Status and progress: NYS DEC Lands reimport

Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > On this particular issue I believe you should use different tagging. > Currently there is almost no use of access=permit > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/access=permit > Typically if you require a permission for access it is "private"

Re: [Talk-us] Common names of highways do not match road signs.

Paul Johnson writes: > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Kevin Morgan > wrote: > >> It is confusing to use open street maps in my area(Central Ohio) for >> driving directions since the "common names" of high ways do not match >> road signs. The

Re: [Talk-us] Blue Ridge Parkway

To me the biggest point is that having a tag "boundary=national_park" in OSM that is somehow tied to exactly which flavor of park administered by exactly which government *in the US* seems broken. The general OSM model is to have tags that have some meaning that can reasonably be applied

Re: [Talk-us] Choptank River

Simon Poole writes: > Am 16.01.2017 um 15:08 schrieb Christoph Hormann: > >> On Sunday 15 January 2017, Simon Poole wrote: >>> Given that Washington is supposedly the global centre of mapping >>> goodness, I hope we might be able to find somebody there that perhaps >>> is

Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain

Frederik Ramm writes: > Hi, > > On 09/07/2016 02:48 AM, Mike N wrote: >> But if one less >> thing is wrong or outdated, that makes the data more useful to all clients. > > Except those humans who could have used that outdated thing as a marker > to tell them that the map

Re: [Talk-us] MassGIS Road Import - Lanes

Bill Ricker writes: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Spencer Gardner > wrote: >> Is anyone on here familiar with the process that was used to upload MassGIS >> road data for the state of Massachusetts? I'm noticing a lot of incorrect >> lane

Re: [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

Harald Kliems <kli...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:17 PM Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: > >> >> That's not what the OSM tag means; it's more european. In OSM, "cafe" >> means (usually) that there is real food, but (always)

Re: [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

Andrew Wiseman writes: > The wiki uses a European context, so here's my attempt at classifying what > is what in the US. Let me know what you think. I mostly agree; comments on details. > To me, a "pub" in the US would be bars that have food, but the food isn't > the main

Re: [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

Jeffrey Ollie writes: > Third, the laws/regulations around liquor licenses are complex for various > historical and political reasons and vary state by state and probably even > city by city. What classifies as a bar in one state might be a restaurant > in another. Agreed that

Re: [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

Andrew Wiseman writes: > On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > >> I think that you're all overthinking it, and trying to fit a European >> square into a US circle. First of all, the US doesn't have pubs, unless the >> owner is specifically

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

Felix Delattre writes: > There are different concepts of routes in OpenStreetMap and GTFS. > Sometimes they are not existent or ambiguous. I am a native speaker of en_US. > 1. A general public transport service (e.g. No. 38): > In OSM: "route_master" in GTFS: "route"

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

Stephen Sprunk writes: > I should point out that "bus lines", "cruise lines", "air lines", > etc. are plural when talking about one company (e.g. American > Airlines) because they operate a collection of individual lines > between specific locations, such as New York-Los

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

"Roger Slevin" writes: > I have watched this debate over the years - and I keep coming back to > what I think is a key question for the OSM community ... if there is > an existing robust standard for public transport information, then is > it really worth trying to add to

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

Felix Delattre writes: > I also like them. Thanks, Jo! > But isn't "line" an European wording? Would an English native speaker > intuitively understand the concepts of "line" and "itinerary"? I always For me (en_US), I find it awkward. > thought a "line" is more

Re: [Talk-transit] Naming concepts

signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Re: [Talk-us] Boston speed limit too Re: Michigan speed limit changes coming soon

Also, we do have the implicit 30 mph tagged on many roads. While there are usually not signs, it is entirely verifable. One only has to read the law and measure the distance between houses (or observe that the area is built up with businesses). These two tasks are entirely within the ability

Re: [Talk-us] Boston speed limit too Re: Michigan speed limit changes coming soon

Bill Ricker writes: > ​the question then is, can we tell (without driving in circles) is if an > existing ​30 mph tag in Boston was implicit or explicit ... to find which > might need fixing No, you probably can't. Perhaps massdot will update and you can compare. But, I

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

writes: > Free and Open. Dakota County encourages the use of its published data > and supports it being added to OSM. They are aware of the project and > do not object. That's great to hear. Can you ask them to update their website to make permission to copy and

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

writes: > On that page, it states Dakota County encourages public use of this > GIS data. “The County Board of Commissioners adopted a policy of free > and open GIS data, in collaboration with the other six metropolitan > counties in the Twin Cities. More information

[Talk-us] Boston Globe Marathon map has OSM basemap!

And it's even attributed. (I did write to someone at the Globe long ago about a prior unattributed map.) Beware that the page is really infested with ads/trackers. Install uMatrix before visiting :-)

Re: [Talk-us] possible upgrade for residential roads in Detroit

"Ionut Radu - (p)" writes: > I was looking over residential roads in central area of Detroit and I > was wondering if some of them should be upgraded to a superior > function class (e.g. tertiary or secondary). > Lots of them are Avenues and Boulevards with at least two

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> writes: > In many new england states you list Town as 7 and City as 8. As a > local, this makes no sense to me. I misspoke about "you", sorry. Let me try again: At https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level it says

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

Kevin Kenny writes: > So to me, what makes sense for New York: > > admin level 2 - United States of America > admin level 4 - New York State > admin level 5 - New York City, special case > admin level 6 - County, Borough (within New York City) > admin level 7 -

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

Kevin Kenny writes: > The default municipality elsewhere is a town. This is what you get > when you don't incorporate. Towns do not cross county lines. They are > similar to townships in other states. Every resident in New York State > resides in a town, a city, or

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

OSM Volunteer stevea writes: > To read this, then perhaps participate in first discussion, then > possibly "solve" these issues, take the second line (Massachusetts) as > an example. Massachusetts did the MassGIS import, which included > "City" boundaries and set

Re: [Talk-us] Differences with USA admin_level tagging

In many new england states you list Town as 7 and City as 8. As a local, this makes no sense to me. We have to keep separate what OSM means by words and what various places mean; often they are different. It's when they are close but not quite that it's extra hard! signature.asc

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

Richie Kennedy writes: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> Alternatively, a single >> carriageway that is limited access, ie, no intersections, no driveways, only >> ramps (eg, Chickasaw Turnpike in Oklahoma). Essentially,

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

Paul Johnson writes: > Would you consider oncoming traffic as conflicting? That's the crux on the > super-two debate. I would consider at least two lanes each way, > free-flowing, controlled access, and at least two carriageways as the > minimum threshold for motorways.

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

Kevin Kenny writes: > Perhaps we could reach consensus more easily if we were > to first try to agree that the goal is to tag both physical character > and regional importance, and recognize that the two serve > different needs, and are (in the US) often grossly

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

Martijn van Exel writes: > In the mean time, I decided to test some of the ideas posted here on a real > case: The part of Michigan SR 10 northwest of the I-696 interchange: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/252973#map=13/42.5132/-83.3168 > > Since 1) this road does not

Re: [Talk-us] "System Continuity" in the Functional Classification network

Frederik Ramm writes: > Hi, > > On 07.09.2017 16:51, Max Erickson wrote: >> Broadly speaking, yes, such continuity should apply. Maybe not using >> exactly the same rule as the US DOT. > > I know this is talk-us and I won't attempt to say anything USA specific > but such

Re: [Talk-us] guidelines regarding roads access

"Ionut Radu - (p)" writes: > For us it's a little bit confusing if we should map those areas with > service, residential roads or even living streets and if there are > some gates at the entrance if we should tag them with restrictive > access. So, if you know some rules

Re: [Talk-us] guidelines regarding roads access

Adam Franco writes: > One additional note is that at least in my area, the TIGER import > incorrectly added access=private to many driveways and privately maintained > residential roads. Upon surveying these I've found that they are signed > "Private" or "PVT" on the

Re: [Talk-us] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import in Price George...)

Martijn van Exel writes: > Hi Simon, > >> > * everyone is on it >> That's a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy after you've essentially >> force migrated everybody there and then cut the ties with any other >> competing media (in OSM) so that you can have your nice walled garden. > > I would

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

> For the US, however, you'd want to do something other than just > "downgrading to track".  There are a couple of options I suspect: In the US, treating an unpaved road as "track" does not seem right. Besides the surface issue, there is a very strong notion of legal status between a "road"

Re: [Talk-us] Potential vandalism in Northern California (Pokémon Go?)

I think the National Park term causes a lot of problems. As I see it, there are two kinds of places: 1) a natural area with some accomodation for human use, which is mostly natural except for a few bits. 2) a semi-natural area which has grass and trees (instead of concrete), but is

Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.

From: Albert Pundt Subject: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc. To: "talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap" Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 22:06:50 -0400 (10 hours, 17 minutes, 15 seconds ago) Attachment: [3. text/html]... I notice the user SSR_317

Re: [Talk-us] NYC Name Vandalism

I tend to agree that automated systems are going to be not that useful. I tend to notice some things in my area, but it's hard to keep track. This makes me wonder about a tool that - lets people sign up to watch edits, in some area, or in general, sort of like maproulette. Use some

Re: [Talk-us] admin_level=8 boundaries in Parker County, TX

Frederik Ramm writes: > I've recently traced a little bit of stuff in Annetta, TX. The area I > looked at had a lot of potential for someone interested in mapping from > aerial imagery (houses, tracks, driveways, parking missing; some > driveways tagged as highway=residential etc.) and I did

Re: [Talk-us] 'address' tags in Massachusetts

There is a talk-us-massachusetts@ and I think review of your proposed mechanical edit should include that list. I suspect people would be amenable, but it would be good to publish the code, and the proposed files to upload, so that they can be reviewed. (I'm not clear on the rules for mechanical

Re: [Talk-us] Population during mandatory evacuations

Minh Nguyen writes: > (Crossposted to the talk-us and tagging lists.) > > Due to the ongoing Camp Fire in Northern California [1], the place POI > for the town of Paradise got tagged with population=0 before the > change was reverted. Following some discussion about this changeset in > OSMUS

Re: [Talk-us] Population during mandatory evacuations

Richard Fairhurst writes: > Minh Nguyen wrote: >> Following some discussion about this changeset in OSMUS >> Slack [2], I started a discussion on the wiki about preferring >> more stable population figures over supposition about >> temporary circumstances. [3] > > It's roughly analogous to a

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Luis Villa writes: >> My guess is the only split that the majority in the state would instantly >> recognize would be “Northern California” and “Southern California”. However >> exactly where that split occurs is likely to be contested. :) >> >> Were I to hazard a guess, I would start on the

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk versus motorway

Bryan Housel writes: > Can’t a motorway begin or end at an at-grade intersection though? Certainly, and I think the question is how long does a stretch of road that meets motorway specs have to be to be tagged motorway. The basic issue is that "not having at-grade intersections" is not a local

Re: [Talk-us] Monterey - Santa Cruz County line in Monterey Bay

Martijn van Exel writes: > You are correct. The official Monterey County GIS file from [1] has > the boundary at the shoreline, whereas OSM has it going out into the > ocean, see https://imgur.com/a/aCMROQZ > (OSM in orange, Official GIS in dark gray). > > I don’t

Re: [Talk-us] Temporary closures and OSMAnd offline map downloads

Jmapb writes: > On 5/30/2019 4:22 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: >> Hello all, >> I'm an old OSM user and have recently moved to the US. >> What is the correct procedure to submit temporary (at least a few >> weeks long) road closures on OSM? >> Also, how long to changes typically take to make it

Re: [Talk-us] Mapping rail trails

Richard Fairhurst writes: > Hi all, > > You might remember that back in March I wondered whether we could get > access to the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy's data, which they've given > to Google: > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2019-March/019266.html > > Helpful people on

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

The real problem is that we have two linguistic traditions: one is plain langauge, and one is tagging tokens. People keep blurring them, and of course this is going to continue. We end up with having to explain "Just becuase it says 'Foo Park' doesn't mean it's a park." If we had #define

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

OSM Volunteer stevea writes: > It may be emerging that tagging boundary=protected_area (where > correct) where leisure=park now exists and we delete it, begins to > supersede leisure=park on many North American now-called-parks. I > think that's OK, maybe even overdue. To be clear, there are

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

OSM Volunteer stevea writes: > How much consensus IS there for tagging national_park on "large, > (important?) state parks" which roughly (or not) meet the > national_park definition in our wiki? My view is that we should deprecate the national_park tag entirely, and end up with tags that

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

One of the things that has come up is "mixed-use parks", where an area is not clearly one thing or the other. I see two kinds of cases (with of course a blurry line between the cases). One case is an area where there are two kinds of uses close together, in a way that's hard to draw a sensible

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

Jmapb writes: > On 4/26/2019 9:49 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> No, I think leisure=playground aligns a bit more closely with "kids >> play here," though some people like snap-tight definitions, others >> consider things as much more elastic. It's difficult to please >> everybody;

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

Kevin Kenny writes: > The smaller state parks - the thousand-acre type that you contemplate > - are often not what IUCN considers to be protected areas, and so I've > taken to using protected_area tagging, but with protection classes > such as 21 (which woud be accompanied with >

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

brad writes: >>> Why not simply call anything which is a 'large public area for >>> recreation', a park, and specify it additionally with additional tags? >> Because we have existing norms, and it is not generally a good idea to >> ask that tagging of thousands of objects be thrown out and

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

Joseph Eisenberg writes: > On 4/29/19, Greg Troxel wrote: > >> With leisure=nature_reserve, leisure=park, golf courses, cemetaries, >> schools, etc., we represent them on the map by some kind of shading or >> fill. But, boundary=protected_area is represented b

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

Andy Townsend writes: > With regard to British English usage, I think you're > correct*. Something described here as a "park" would pretty much match > the current description at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark (without the > urban requirement, but you've already talked

<    1   2   3   4   5   >