Many of the old "pack trail" labeled features near my home-town are now
overgrown and barely usable. I would be skeptical about the utility of this
tag - mappers will need to survey the trail in person before suggesting
that it is currently suitable for horse, mules or other pack animals
.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:41 PM Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:36 PM Mike N wrote:
>
>> On 9/22/2020 9:26 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> > The extra hamlet nodes are import remainders that haven't yet
>> been
&g
utside
databases are corrected, our data will be inaccurate as well, when it comes
to legal issues like boundaries.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 11:39 AM Bradley White
wrote:
> I echo this sentiment exactly as having taken place in California and in
>> my experiences with OSM
My goodness, look at that monstrosity:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1976405#map=8/46.459/-87.627
How can we claim that all of these patches of state-owned land constitute a
single OpenStreetMap feature?
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 10:27 AM Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
The tag military=bunker is used not only for true bunkers, but for "any
kind of military installation built to withstand an attack." - quote from
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Dbunker
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:10 PM Bill Ricker wrote:
>
>
of land, that's just pure cadastre data. We might as well try to
map all the private land parcels and keep that information accurate - but
both tasks are too difficult, and the data is better provided by local
governments directly.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 9:50 PM Bradley White
of private/public land, there are no Forest Service signs at the
limits of private land.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 4:36 PM Kevin Kenny wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:11 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe there might
example with the Manistee National Forest, which used to be
mapped in a much simpler fashion and now has been re-made as many smaller
parcels.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 4:22 PM Clifford Snow
wrote:
> Paul,
> I don't have a definitive answer for you, but rendering usually
Is the track closed to everyone, or is it perhaps access=private, if the
landowner has access?
There is also a more specific tag for military bunkers: military=bunker
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Amilitary%3Dbunker
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 12:16 PM brad wrote
lly
in the relevant map style:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/style/admin.mss#L496
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:55 AM stevea wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2020, at 10:13 AM, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
> > It's not the tagging. Other relation
's gone. I also noticed that the Klamath National Forest
> is gone, as well.
>
> I'm glad to see august and more-technical members of OSM (Paul Norman,
> Joseph Eisenberg...) chiming into this thread.
>
> I am the most recent author of this relation. I made minor chang
Re: "recursion limits of the geometry assembler." - is this merely due to
the large number of inner and outer ways?
Is it related to the nodes that are shared by 2 outer ways?
– Joseph E.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 3:24 PM Paul Norman via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> On
nfo by parcel.
For example in Oregon you can get data at
https://www.oregon.gov/geo/Pages/sdlibrary.aspx
We should not try to map all land ownership data by parcel in OpenStreetMap.
– Joseph Eisenberg
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:23 PM stevea wrote:
> Mike, I hadn't considered that, it di
to use nodes.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 9:36 AM Yury Yatsynovich
wrote:
> I saw addresses in SF mapped both ways -- some are mapped as nodes inside
> the buildings or on contours of buildings (as entrances); others are added
> directly on the ways/relations of
You should check the measurement directly from aerial imagery in iD or
JOSM, or by visiting the location in person and measuring or estimating.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 9:24 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> since the complainer removed the source (google map)
gov/?page_id=405 - I believe this
is a boundary=protected_area
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 12:54 PM brad wrote:
> Good question. At first glance I don't think Leisure=park is wrong. The
> wiki is characteristically narrow since it says that it is green.
> lei
ant to know the legal zoning or property boundaries there are plenty of
data sources for that information, but OpenStreetMap is valueable because
it provides local knowledge of what is really there.
–Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 1:19 PM stevea wrote:
> Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
tag should be used in Seattle (or Portland, where
we have implemented similar short-term policies on "Neighborhood
Greenways") at this time. If the city redesigns these streets and lowers
the speed limit to 5 or 10 mph and legally allows pedestrians to use the
whole street at any times, th
imprecisely, and then later we can get it down to very precise
mapping of thin strips of trees and scrub between fields:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/628402941 - if we want to
Joseph
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:48 PM stevea wrote:
> On May 28, 2020, at 5:12 PM, Joseph Eisenberg
>
rd just because it's allowed to plant a vineyard someday.
– Joseph Eisenberg
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:51 PM stevea wrote:
> Mateusz Konieczny writes:
> > (quoting stevea)
> "treed farmland" or "heavily wooded residential" prove slightly
> problematic to
s) about these
> honorary/memorial names that aren't actually used but were created by some
> obscure congressional bill long ago.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Joseph Eisenberg
> Sent: May 26, 2020 2:54 PM
> To: Jack Armstrong
> Cc: Talk us
ted_States
But these can probably be tagged as "official_name=Ronald Reagan Highway":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan_Highway
– Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:15 PM Jack Armstrong
wrote:
>
> More than once in the past, users have attempted to “
I also think that it makes sense to have counties as admin_level=6 in
Connecticut and Rhode Island, if local people still know their counties and
the governments still recognize them for geographic, statistical and some
other legal purposes.
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:42 PM
is passable by 2-track vehicles such as farm tractors,
logging trucks, or 4wd cars.
-- Joseph Eisenberg
(You might try the Tagging mailing list for questions about how to tag
something: tagg...@openstreetmap.org)
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:43 AM Kevin Broderick
wrote:
> Ideally, I'd say that m
That's great, if you are committed to going back and changing all the
opening_hours again in a month or two.
But it could be a bad idea in the long term if there is no follow-up
to return the hours to the regular ones afterward.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On 3/14/20, Eric Christensen via Talk-us wrote
Is it proper to use amenity=college? That tag was originally developed
for insitutes of "Further Education" in the UK, which are a bit
different than North American junior/community colleges. Is anyone
using amenity=university instead?
- Joseph Eisenberg
_
regularly scheduled places for the train to stop.
-Joseph Eisenberg
On 1/8/20, Clay Smalley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Over the last few months, I've been doing some systematic improvements to
> the passenger railway network across North America. Much of this has been
> filling out p
n usage, but official documents will use
the other way with "of" in the middle.
Joseph Eisenberg
On 12/28/19, Tod Fitch wrote:
> Based on this discussion and my own checking to see what search engines are
> doing with the data, I think it would be okay to move the alt_name tag value
&
search
applications only.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On 12/28/19, stevea wrote:
> Right: I've wondered if short_name would be appropriate in this case. Our
> wiki says short_name would work, Joseph says "not," though I suppose it is
> ultimately up to the search machinery and what i
ary as the first result:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Josephine - and there is no
short alt_name or short_name.
So I think there is no reason to have this information duplicated if
we are just worried about search.
-Joseph Eisenberg
On 12/27/19, stevea wrote:
> I truly love the l
> new freeway was just renamed for a congress person
In this case “official_name=“ with the whole congresspersons name would be
good, keeping the commonly-used name in “name=“.
-Joseph
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
I agree that the current OpenStreetMap data is wrong.
For example, I grew up in the Klamath National Forest, and that area should
include the Marble Mountain wilderness, it’s shouldn’t be a hole in the
National Forest.
-Joseph
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 10:40 AM Tod Fitch wrote:
> If I am
Thank you for the correction. So highway=trunk in German is similar to
expressway=yes in the USA?
Joseph
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 6:49 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 21. Dec 2019, at 01:10, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
> >
> > Unfor
e to
work.
It's also helpful that mappers in Germany and Japan can help map my
area here in Indonesia, adding rivers, lakes and roads based on aerial
imagery. They would have trouble if they needed to learn the hundreds
of local languages in each part of Indonesia to tag things properly.
-Joseph Eisenbe
motorroad=yes and expressway=yes,
rather than tagging all expressways and motorroads as highway=trunk no
matter their classification or significance in the road network. And
adding maxspeed=, surface=, lanes= and access= will allow routing
applications and specialized renderers to treat these roa
lanes=, surface,
maxspeed=, expressway=yes, and motorroad=yes
The latter two tags could be useful for rendering if they were applied
consistently.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:29 AM Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 6:26 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>
Trunks are rarely expressways in remote parts of the world. In Britain,
where this tag started, many highway=trunk roads are not expressways or
motorroads.
Joseph
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:22 AM Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 6:18 PM Joseph Eisenberg <
>
I would use highway=trunk the whole way for consistency. In Canada the
connecting highway is also highway=trunk. This makes sense because AK 2 is
linking Fairbanks, the largest city in this part of Alaska, with All the
cities in Canada and the lower 48 States.
-Joseph
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at
ZIP Codes (US Postal Service codes) are not administrative boundaries.
They are widely used for addressing, for routing and for deliveries by
private companies in addition to the USPS, but they are not used for
any official administrative purposes, at least not in the States where
I have lived.
To be prescriptive, the best way is to make a proposal, discuss it,
and vote on it.
While this is usually done on the international Tagging mailing list,
I've seen that the Japanese community has done formal proposals to
discuss how a tag should be used in Japan specifically.
We could consider
y in several places I've
checked; eg. California vs East Coast vs North Dakota.
On 8/29/19, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:05 PM Joseph Eisenberg
>
> wrote:
>
>> I don't have any local knowledge about old route 66 in OK, but I'd
>> like to address the
I don't have any local knowledge about old route 66 in OK, but I'd
like to address the use of highway=trunk in general.
I'm in favor of using a secondary tags like motorroad=yes and
expressway=yes, along with other details like lanes=, surface=,
maxspeed=, etc, to specify expressways, rather than
Thank you, that suggests that the apparent increase in usage since
2012 is due to splitting existing ways. I'll mention this on the wiki
page, since it's not something you can see in the Taginfo numbers.
On 8/6/19, Paul Norman via Talk-us wrote:
> On 2019-08-04 7:56 a.m., Joseph Eisenberg wr
ze trucks)
>
>Regards,
>
>Mike Nice
>
> On 8/5/2019 6:33 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> Ok, thanks! I've created a wiki page at Key:hgv:national_network
>>
>> It's still not clear to me what the tag
>> hgv:national_network=terminal_access means -
I've found this undocumented tag, used 130,000 times, almost
exclusively in the USA.
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/hgv%3Anational_network#overview
Values: yes 86.56% terminal_access 13.37%
I thought it might be imported from Tiger, but the usage has increased
gradually since 2012:
I would recommend starting to use boundary=protected_area for State
parks, and other parks that are large natural areas that are designed
for a balance of tourism and protection of the natural environment but
are not actually National Parks.
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 by denoting the
> border, and this does not serve map users well.
> I think it makes no sense to call a dirt path, open to more than 1 user
> group, anything other than a path
It is very common to tag dirt footpaths as highway=footway in most
parts of the world, if the path is designed for and used by people on
foot.
For example, here in Indonesia there are
Natural=peak must be a local high point, so it has to be at least a
few meters higher than the surrounding land. A natural=peak does not
have to be the highest point of a mountain, but it has to have some
topographical prominence. Not all spot elevations on USGS are of
peaks, some are just a
This was discussed at the main Tagging mailing list a couple of months ago:
Start of thread:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-December/041597.html
Continuation in January:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-January/041720.html
The wiki page for Motel was
The sidewalk style is somewhat controversial. For routing applications, it
is simpler if the sidewalk is added as a tag on the highway. This also
makes it easier to render clean-looking maps. However, some people prefer
to have the sidewalks separately mapped, so that they can be seen at high
zoom
Do the latest NGS topographical maps show the city limits properly? Those
are public domain
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 10:16 AM OSM Volunteer stevea <
stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2019, at 4:00 AM, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > A mapper has recently changed this to "cut the corner off"
This data is no less verifiable than national forest boundaries and federal
wilderness boundaries; these generally need to be checked against official
sources, just as BLM boundaries will.
Municipal boundaries are perhaps even harder to verify than boundaries of
BLM land and National Forests in
I've noticed that federal Wilderness areas in Northern California and
Southern Oregon are mapped as if they are not part of the surrounding
national forest(s).
Is this correct mapping? On older USGS maps the Wilderness areas were
always shown as being enclosed by the surrounding National Forest
From the Help page, user kurtrad writes:
> "A friend of mine says the Monterey/Santa Cruz county line in openstreets 3
> miles out to sea that travels from the mouth of the pajaro river to the north
> south california boundary line is wrong. In openstreetsmap the line travels
> west, south,
In California some roads have signs that say “End Freeway”, about 1/2 mile
before the first intersection, eg I-8 in San Diego.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 1:04 PM Evin Fairchild wrote:
> Nobody is saying that we should tag as motorways a road with a surface
> intersection. I don't understand what it
Yes.
New York City has several counties within its borders.
I believe Houston and several other cities in Texas cross county borders.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:08 PM Adam Franco wrote:
> Last summer there was a big thread Differences with USA admin_level
> tagging
>
Counties in California are very different in size and population. A few in
the mountains have under 20,000 people and a rather small area. But Los
Angeles county has 10 million people and covers a huge area.
If 2 files become too big in a few years, it would be most useful to break
up the states
Northern and Southern California would work; make the split along the
county boundaries just north of Bakersfield, which conveniently follow one
line of latitude.
It would also be possible to split the State into Northern, Central and
Southern regions, but this would be harder to define.
Joseph
59 matches
Mail list logo
