Hi All,
In making my recent transport map[1] I've found there's a (relatively)
large number of nodes in the UK tagged railway=station, when they
aren't stations (and often aren't any railways there, either). I'm
proposing that we don't tag former, disused or fictional stations in a
way that
On 19 April 2011 09:21, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
I realise that there are additional tags to try to indicate that they
don't exist (such as disused=yes) but I don't think this is a
particularly useful approach
I completely agree. As a fellow data user, I think the rule of
I agree
Cheers
Bob
--- On Tue, 19/4/11, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
Subject: [Talk-GB] Things that aren't stations tagged railway=station
To: Talk-GB talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Date: Tuesday, 19 April, 2011, 8:21
Hi All,
In making my recent
Andy Allan gravitystorm@... writes:
In making my recent transport map[1] I've found there's a (relatively)
large number of nodes in the UK tagged railway=station, when they
aren't stations
I realise that there are additional tags to try to indicate that they
don't exist (such as disused=yes)
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
I've even seen
status=desire to indicate that a path doesn't exist, but it would be nice
if it did...
Ed, you might be mis-understanding the meaning of that tag. Desire
paths do very much exist on the ground and don't fall
80n 80n80n@... writes:
I've even seen status=desire
Here's a description, and a nice photo, of a desire path:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desire_path
Ah, you're right. I'm glad I didn't try to retag it.
--
Ed Avis e...@waniassset.com
___
Any unambiguous tagging scheme you can think of would be fine.
(railway=abandoned_station would also be possible)
This variant has the added benefit that it would make it into most current
rendering databases for free. Data users that do want to show this, don't
have to do anything special to
Lennard wrote:
Any unambiguous tagging scheme you can think of would be fine.
(railway=abandoned_station would also be possible)
This variant has the added benefit that it would make it into most current
rendering databases for free. Data users that do want to show this, don't
have to do
Hi,
On 04/19/11 11:10, Lennard wrote:
Granted, as a maintainer of a few maps, I'm biased. I just detest those
negating tags. This is a $shazbaz. Oh, no, it isn't!
It's often natural language that makes people do that. For example,
people say: This is a railway line under construction, or
On 19 April 2011 10:30, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Lennard wrote:
Any unambiguous tagging scheme you can think of would be fine.
(railway=abandoned_station would also be possible)
This variant has the added benefit that it would make it into most current
rendering databases
10 matches
Mail list logo
