Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Craft
Am 07.09.2010 13:31, schrieb Peter Körner: after two weeks without contradictions, I'll open up voting for the Craft proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Craft The Voting has now been open for 1 week and so far we have 25 people approving the proposal. The voting will be open for another week now and I'd encourage everyone that hasn't done this till now, to give his vote and comments. Thank you all, Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
2010/9/13 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: No, that's exactly the same as 'oneway=no' on two-ways roads. When the tag is not present, we assume that the road is two ways. That's it. If it's wrong, then fix it by adding the oneway tag. It is the same for waterways and the direction of the way. If it's wrong, then reverse the direction of the way with your prefered editor. We have similar conventions for the coastline, we don't have/need a tag saying which side is the land and which side is the water and nobody complains. +1, there is also other similar conventions like barrier=retaining_wall. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:49:54 +0200 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: No, that's exactly the same as 'oneway=no' on two-ways roads. When the tag is not present, we assume that the road is two ways. That's it. If it's wrong, then fix it by adding the oneway tag. It is the same for waterways and the direction of the way. If it's wrong, then reverse the direction of the way with your prefered editor. We have similar conventions for the coastline, we don't have/need a tag saying which side is the land and which side is the water and nobody complains. +1, there is also other similar conventions like barrier=retaining_wall. This is detailing tags which have two parts to their meanings. Really this is a form of shorthand which is convenient for those who know the code, and not to those who don't comprehend the 'code'. What sort of a difference does this make to the computed use of the data? We can only make a decision on whether these conventions continue when we understand how it affects the data use. There are good arguments each way for the input of the data. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tall masts supported by guy wires
yes, it should be both (or could be also building=tower instead of yes). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] social facility
Hi. On 14.09.2010 18:59, Sean Horgan wrote: [...] Also, if I wanted to capture specific data about that they offered, I'd like to follow the amenity:recycling tagging scheme (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Drecycling): + homeless_shelter:programs=jobs + homeless_shelter:meals_served=breakfast + homeless_shelter:lodging=yes + homeless_shelter:emergency_medical=yes Is this a good model to follow? I'm not sure. I think, there are two general approaches to simulate a tree-style tagging scheme like this. The first is to use more keys (as you do here with homeless_shelter:*), the second is to use more values and to concatenate multiple values by ; (like you will have at homeless_shelter:meals_served=breakfast;lunch (compare crossing=island;traffic_signals) Both are good for some reasons: using less keys provides easy access for the whole group of values; using less values is more easy to parse and search - there is no string slicing needed. But: I would not mix these together. Perhaps that's only my POV - feel free to argument against. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] social facility
Good feedback Peter and thanks for passing along the Crossing wiki. Some
comments below:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:39, Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.dewrote:
Hi.
On 14.09.2010 18:59, Sean Horgan wrote:
[...]
Also, if I wanted to capture specific data about that they offered, I'd
like to follow the amenity:recycling tagging scheme (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Drecycling):
+ homeless_shelter:programs=jobs
+ homeless_shelter:meals_served=breakfast
+ homeless_shelter:lodging=yes
+ homeless_shelter:emergency_medical=yes
Is this a good model to follow?
I'm not sure.
I think, there are two general approaches to simulate a tree-style tagging
scheme like this.
The first is to use more keys (as you do here with homeless_shelter:*), the
second is to use more values and to concatenate multiple values by ; (like
you will have at
homeless_shelter:meals_served=breakfast;lunch
(compare crossing=island;traffic_signals)
Ok, I'm following you. Similar to amenity:recycling, many of the examples
in Crossing follow a yes/no model:
traffic_signals:soundhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:sound
=yes/nohttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_signals:sound%3Dyes/noaction=editredlink=1
traffic_signals:vibrationhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:vibration
=yes/nohttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_signals:vibration%3Dyes/noaction=editredlink=1
traffic_signals:arrowhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:arrow
=yes/nohttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_signals:arrow%3Dyes/noaction=editredlink=1
traffic_signals:minimaphttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_signals:minimap
=yes/nohttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_signals:minimap%3Dyes/noaction=editredlink=1
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:traffic_signals:minimap%3Dyes/noaction=editredlink=1However,
for a finite and relative small ( 10) set of values, I prefer a multivalued
value string like homeless_shelter:meals=breakfast;lunch over something
like this:
homeless_shelter:breakfast=yes
homeless_shelter:lunch=yes
homeless_shelter:dinner=no
For amenity:recycling, there is no limit to what could be recycled so I
think it makes more sense to follow the yes/no model as a single value could
get extremely large. The same appears to go for traffic_signals (I never
thought you could break those down so discretely!).
Both are good for some reasons:
using less keys provides easy access for the whole group of values;
using less values is more easy to parse and search - there is no string
slicing needed.
But:
I would not mix these together.
I prefer consistency as well but I think I would only apply that for a
particular tag. To continue the meals example, homeless_shelter:meals could
be defined as a multivalued list from a set of known values (e.g.
{no;breakfast;lunch;dinner;takeout}) while a list of programs/services
offered by the shelter would follow the yes/no model:
+ homeless_shelter:lodging=yes
+ homeless_shelter:meals=no
+ homeless_shelter:job_placement=yes
+ homeless_shelter:veterans_services=yes
+ homeless_shelter:emergency_medical=yes
Feedback is greatly appreciated!
--
Sean
Perhaps that's only my POV - feel free to argument against.
regards
Peter
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] tagging government garages
landuse=garage seems pretty tightly focused right now. what i'd like to tag that doesn't really fit are garages operated by various government entities, e.g. garages operated by school districts for their bus services garages operated by towns, counties, and state DOT organizations to support highway maintenance. these are the obvious ones, although there are also garages devoted to commercial vehicle fleets. anyone have any thoughts on this? richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging government garages
On 15 September 2010 08:23, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: garages operated by school districts for their bus services Locally these more commonly referred to as a depot... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging government garages
On Sep 14, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 9/14/10 6:27 PM, John Smith wrote: On 15 September 2010 08:23, Richard Weltyrwe...@averillpark.net wrote: garages operated by school districts for their bus services Locally these more commonly referred to as a depot... nothing documented for that on the map features wiki page either. what specifically is usage in the UK for these sorts of government facilities? probably should stick with the British English model. Depot sounds like a good option. Katie richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging government garages
On 15 September 2010 08:39, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote: I would tag them as amenity=parking + access=private + operator=New York State Department of Transortation (or whatever applicable) + name=___ (fill blank) They aren't just used to park buses etc, they're also fueling and maintenance locations... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging government garages
On 9/14/10 6:41 PM, John Smith wrote: On 15 September 2010 08:39, Katie Filbertfilbe...@gmail.com wrote: I would tag them as amenity=parking + access=private + operator=New York State Department of Transortation (or whatever applicable) + name=___ (fill blank) They aren't just used to park buses etc, they're also fueling and maintenance locations... and for town/county/state facilities, they also are used to store salt (for winter), gravel, guardrail, and other materials needed for road repair maintenance. so depot really sounds ok. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging government garages
On 15 September 2010 08:48, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: so depot really sounds ok. So... highway=depot depot=bus|communication|road_works| ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tall masts supported by guy wires
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:26 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: One test to apply when considering stuff like this: what would happen if a renderer supported man_made=tower but none of the sub-tags. Would it be the end of the world if a radio mast and an air traffic control tower were rendered the same? (Answer: no, it would be perfectly fine) Shouldn't an air traffic control tower be building=yes rather than man_made=tower? Apologies for the poorly chosen example. Hopefully my point was clear enough though? Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
