Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

> Am 23/lug/2014 um 21:43 schrieb Christian Quest : > > Have you looked at taginfo ? > > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=aerodrome#overview > > aerodrome=international is already in use, it is even the first in quantity > (157) +1, I think the wiki page should become a proposal a

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

> Am 24/lug/2014 um 00:55 schrieb Fernando Trebien : > > aerodrome=international would mean "a public airport/aerodrome that > primarily enables regular citizens to hire flights directly to other > countries", and to achieve this it would need some supporting > infrastructure (immigration, custo

[Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

Is there a reason to keep sport=horse_racing? Equestrian seems to defined as This broad description includes the use of horses for practical working purposes, transportation, recreational activities, artistic or cultural exercises, and competitive sport (!!!). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eq

Re: [Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

On 24/07/2014 10:35, Andreas Goss wrote: Is there a reason to keep sport=horse_racing? "horse racing" is a very different animal (pun intended) to e.g 3 day eventing, country point-to-points, gymkhanas, etc. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

"horse racing" is a very different animal (pun intended) to e.g 3 day eventing, country point-to-points, gymkhanas, etc. But do you plan to tag those with sport=horse_3_day_eventing, sport=horse_country_point-to-points and sport=hose_gymkhana? Because I have the impression they are all still

Re: [Tagging] Change in rendering in Mapnik of Nature Reserves.

On 24 July 2014 00:10, Dave F. wrote: > Thanks for pointing that out to me. As I said, I personally had no problem > with 'NR' but I'd be OK with it's removal is there was some king of infill. > ATM there is none & it looks virtually invisible. I'm not sure if this is in the right place, but I've

Re: [Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

Maybe [sport=equestrian; equestrian=racing] would be better? 2014-07-24 11:52 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss : > "horse racing" is a very different animal (pun intended) to e.g 3 day >> eventing, country point-to-points, gymkhanas, etc. >> > > But do you plan to tag those with sport=horse_3_day_eventing

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

2014-07-24 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > My Main question is on my understanding of the landuse+building tagging > scheme. > I don't think there is a 1:1 relationship. "building" describes the type of the building, while landuse the _use_ of the land. Just yesterday evening I saw a mosque in the grou

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

2014-07-24 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > My Main question is on my understanding of the landuse+building tagging > scheme. > I don't think there is a 1:1 relationship. "building" describes the type of the building, while landuse the _use_ of the land. Just yesterday evening I saw a mosque in the grou

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

It is kind of a proposal, but it isn't in the sense that I don't want to be responsible for it. I know little beyond the basics of aerodrome, and currently do not have the interest of researching this much further. If anyone thinks this should be a proposal, and know enough about aerodromes to do s

[Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names? Background: In some countries (Japan, Korea, Ivory Coast…) people orient themselves in the local area using the names of road junctions (like crossroads or roundabouts) or traffic signals rather then the names of streets. While street names

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

I'm not familiar with them, maybe they'd just be instances of aerodrome=private if the user needs to own a plane or be the pilot, or if permission to fly is given not by a flight authority but by a third party such as the aerodrome owner. Or maybe these would be new values for aerodrome=*. On 24 Ju

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

2014-07-24 14:11 GMT+02:00 John Packer : > If anyone thinks this should be a proposal, and know enough about > aerodromes to do so, feel free to make one. thing is that right now it looks as if this was state of the art, i.e. an established scheme, what it surely isn't, also compared to actuall

Re: [Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

2014-07-24 15:24 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer : > Current situation: > We have the tags highway=traffic_signals (for traffic signals on road > junctions or at straight roads – typical for Japan) and junction=yes (for > road junctions with or without traffic signals – typical for Ivory Coast) > in use at

Re: [Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

Have you looked at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Ajunction "*junction*=yes can be useful for a simple junction node that has a name =* ta

Re: [Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

Yes, I know that junction=yes works fine for simple crossroads. My question is: How should we map complex junctions like http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2351057522#map=19/5.34399/-4.00300 Using just an unconnected node like in this example (even after removing the wrong place=hamlet tag) maybe is

Re: [Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

If place=hamlet is wrong, I believe place=locality is often used as a generic tag for nodes indicating named locations. Not really a solution but a simple option. Dan 2014-07-24 17:01 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer : > Yes, I know that junction=yes works fine for simple crossroads. My question > is: How

Re: [Tagging] How to tag road junction names and traffic signal names?

junction=yes will probably be rendered by openstreetmap-carto soon. However: – Can we accept a simple (not connected) node with junction=yes and name=* in spite of the problems in turn-to-turn navigation? – Is using a relation for this to complicate? But it would be a clean solution to have the

Re: [Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

Am 24.07.2014 12:26, schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: > Maybe [sport=equestrian; equestrian=racing] would be better? > > > 2014-07-24 11:52 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss >: > > "horse racing" is a very different animal (pun intended) to e.g > 3 day > event

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

Martin, Sorry, I should have talked a little about the history behind this before. Initially aeroway=aerodrome used the key type=* to further classify it's type. Nowadays, the key type=* is infamous because it is the de facto way of especifying relation's types, and therefore shouldn't be used for

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

2014-07-24 19:04 GMT+02:00 John Packer : > Martin, > Sorry, I should have talked a little about the history behind this before. > > Initially aeroway=aerodrome used the key type=* to further classify it's > type. > This looks like 90% of the values describe if it's a military or a non-military ae

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

The problem with type=* is that you have no clue on what it relates... When an object combines for example amenity=* and building=*, type is related to which one ? Most OSM tags are hierarchical: aeroway = aerodrome aerodrome = * When investigating taginfo, also check WHERE unusual values are

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

2014-07-24 19:04 GMT+02:00 John Packer : > I am working on the key's aerodrome in the hope it can substitute the key > type=* on classifying an aerodrome, because it conflicts with relations > like multipolygon (as shown above). > > I will also include this information in the wiki page Key:aerodro

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

Martin - thanks for the thoughtful reply. I read it carefully, and I think you kind of misunderstood me again, please bare with me. On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:07 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2014-07-24 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > My Main question is on my understanding of the landuse+building t