Re: [Tagging] Proposed definition for cycleways (was Re: bicycle=no)
2010/1/7 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com: On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.com wrote: Tag highway = cycleway for official cycleways and bicycle=yes if it's allowed to have bicycles on footpaths somewhere. End of story. Yes, in Heh, that makes about three people with very simple takes on the matter - and they're all contradictory. The matter is simple to lots of people - with different understandings each time. In bare bones basic, Steve, are you for or against using highway = cycleway for officially marked cycleways only? That's what I would like to understand :) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Proposed definition for cycleways
Just a side note, I think different rules for each country for footways can't be mapped exactly (some countries allow bikes on footways by default, some don't. What happens when country rules changes?). I personally would leave it to parsers/routers. Yes, maybe it's moves OSM just a little bit away to be strightfully useful map, but trying to fit current situation into tags won't help. There should be some basics we can agree on and then move on details. So I agree with colegues from Germany - highway = cycleway for officially marked cycle ways and bicycle=yes for footways with cycle allowance mark. Routers depending on the rules of the country must asume that you can use footway with cycle or not. Cheers, Peter. 2010/1/7 Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@mmmtike.fi: Hi, I would be happy it I could get an instant yes or no answer to two questions: Can I walk along this thing? Can I cycle along this thing? I would love to see just yes or no alternatives, not anything like yes/no/designated/official. I know there may be a need to have a few hundred additional tags for detailed classification but I am prepared to make more questions to get more information after the first course sorting. Fine, I can cycle here. Is it even designated for it? How is the surface like? I tried once to make an universal query for finding cycleable ways/paths but concluded that it is impossible. I managed to get this far: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Consolidation_footway_cycleway_path#selecting_all_cycleways_.28sql.29 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- mortigi tempo Pēteris Krišjānis ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Using relations to group highways
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com writes: 2010/1/7 Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.net: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com writes: Well relations aren't ways, the ways go through/under/ buildings. Do they? Did I miss something? Last I know is that they are rendered on top of buildings even if they are on a lower layer. How is that rendering bug related to using relations to group ways? From a previous post of yours: , | As for the shields this is deviating from the topic at hand but for it | the shield can be derived from the lookup table on the wiki and then | extra preprossesing in osm2pgsql to assign a shield based on admin | polygons + info from the lookup table ` If osm2pgsql can be taught to detect in which admin polygon a way is maybe it can then also notice when a way intersects a building. Or any other area. Matthias ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Love Hotel
On 1/7/10 7:10 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Arlindo Pereira wrote: Hi there, 5 months ago I started scratching a new tag amenity=love_hotel [1]. Since there was no recent activity, I think it's time to call your attention one more time to it and start voting. What do you think of it? The page explains itself (I think), but a love_hotel (motel in Brazil, different from motel elsewhere) is a hotel where people go exclusively to make love. The decorations, TV channels and so on are very different from a regular hotel, hence a new tag (and not specific sub-tags). amenity=motel, rates=hourly? *ducks* clean_sheets_charge=$5 ducks and runs, richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Easy question: _link tags for U turn/cut throughs?
When a divided motorway/trunk/primary/... has a spot for turning or u-turning, should that be marked as primary or primary_link? The wiki isn't clear. Thanks, Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Easy question: _link tags for U turn/cut throughs?
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: When a divided motorway/trunk/primary/... has a spot for turning or u-turning, should that be marked as primary or primary_link? The wiki isn't clear. Well, what is it better described by: 1) link roads (sliproads / ramps) -- primary_link 2) A major highway linking large towns -- primary Given that, I'd say it's either primary_link, or something else. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Easy question: _link tags for U turn/cut throughs?
At 2010-01-07 19:59, Steve Bennett wrote: When a divided motorway/trunk/primary/... has a spot for turning or u-turning, should that be marked as primary or primary_link? The wiki isn't clear. I tag them as highway=x_link where the roads being linked are tagged highway=x (e.g. highway=motorway_link if the roads are highway=motorway). This seems consistent with the description of highway=*_link. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
