[Tagging] telecommunication shafts?
Hi, has anybody started mapping telecom shafts? I would like to start doing that in my city so please help me with correct tags. Here are a few images to clarify: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-video-5499295-opening-of- telecommunication-shaft.php http://picasaweb.google.hr/lh/photo/CzosKmODQApo7S9AhB0Fcw http://picasaweb.google.hr/lh/photo/a1TsDPZu6aiKnfEbxR_4pw http://www.blic.rs/Vesti/Beograd/205218/Milionska-steta-za-sitnu-zaradu -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telecommunication shafts?
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, has anybody started mapping telecom shafts? I would like to start doing that in my city so please help me with correct tags. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:manhole ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] telecommunication shafts?
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 06:10:39 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:manhole Thank you. -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com linux, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless, ronjenje, pametne kuće registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic, MSN: valent.turko...@hotmail.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Interpreting One feature, one OSM-object
Hi Richard. Never heard of that, so let me ask to clearify... On 23.09.2010 00:59, Richard Welty wrote: On 9/22/10 6:47 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: What happens if tags conflict then? For example just say the boundary actually had a name, e.g. X Y Border, but the river also has a different name. one of the operative theories here is that in cases of shared ways, we should be using the higher level relations that contain the ways to provide the distinction. Following situation: There are two shops inside the same building and the building is a node only, yet. Let's assume the position of the shops cannot be distinguished - examples can be found in discussions about e.g. post offices together with stationery shops etc. If I interpret your statement correct, you propose to tag that as follows: 1) the node contains address data (and of course the coordinates) 2) a relation contains the node and the data for the stationery shop 3) a second relation contains the same node and the data for the post office. If I am right with this interpretation, I come to new questions: 1) What kind of relation should (2) and (3) be? 2) Is that stuff supported by common renderers (interpretation of relations to show simple POIs? 3) How can we achieve to support that model in editors, as IMHO editing relations is much harder than editing simple geometry objects (nodes/ways), but this model would lead to more need for relations. Nevertheless I think, it could be a very useful scheme to generally support grouping tags together while differentiating several groups on one geometry object. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Interpreting One feature, one OSM-object
On 9/23/10 7:27 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote: Hi Richard. Never heard of that, so let me ask to clearify... On 23.09.2010 00:59, Richard Welty wrote: On 9/22/10 6:47 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: What happens if tags conflict then? For example just say the boundary actually had a name, e.g. X Y Border, but the river also has a different name. one of the operative theories here is that in cases of shared ways, we should be using the higher level relations that contain the ways to provide the distinction. Following situation: There are two shops inside the same building and the building is a node only, yet. Let's assume the position of the shops cannot be distinguished - examples can be found in discussions about e.g. post offices together with stationery shops etc. If I interpret your statement correct, you propose to tag that as follows: i'm not proposing anything about that particular situation, the original discussion was about shared ways (e.g., admin boundary and river bank, or admin boundary and highway.) furthermore, i would consider representing a building with unknown outline with a node to be a bit iffy. so no, i'm not proposing anything about how to set up relations for this Nevertheless I think, it could be a very useful scheme to generally support grouping tags together while differentiating several groups on one geometry object. using relations in this manner has potential, but the variations are far from completely worked out or agreed upon. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Interpreting One feature, one OSM-object
Check out the murray river polygon/relation stuff near Albury I did if you want an example On 9/23/10, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 9:06 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Since it would be almost impossible for a single way along a river to be a closed area, you'd need to use a relation to group all the boundaries together, you add the boundary name to the relation. Actually I could be putting all the waterway tags into a relation too (although it is only proposed at the moment http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway). That would aleviate my concerns and would be needed to be done anyway for some rivers which fork but are both the same river. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my mobile device ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Interpreting One feature, one OSM-object
Yep, this is how I understood that guideline to be. So if you have a polygon where there was just a node before representing the same thing, you're free to delete the node in favor of the polygon assuming no data (i.e., tag info) is lost. Here's what the wiki says [1] One feature, one OSM-object Don't place nodes in (equally labelled) areas just to see some icon appear on the map. The renderers will display icons on areas as well and there's no need to have every parking-lot, soccer-ground etc. twice in the database. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM-object I don't think this means that you're not supposed to reuse the same OSM object to represent different things. On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote: I think one feature, one object is usually used in the other direction: you don't tag the boundary name=x and also put it in a boundary relation with name=x. You don't put a fast_food node in the middle of a building that only holds the fast food place; you put the fast_food tags on the building (or, even better, the parcel of land owned by the company, which includes the parking lot). Having a boundary relation and a node at the city center violates this guideline, but is a valid exception because the node carries other information about where the city center is. As for the specific question, I would say that if the boundary is defined by the natural feature, it's probably OK to use one way. For example, http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/78384443 is legally defined as ...to the water's edge of Little Lake Conway; thence run southeasterly along said waters edge to a point of intersection... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Interpreting One feature, one OSM-object
On 23/09/2010 12:46, Richard Welty wrote: furthermore, i would consider representing a building with unknown outline with a node to be a bit iffy. I realize this is going a bit OT, but since you brought it up - why do you think that? Ta Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Railway routes in different directions.
Hi I've a railway routes that's drawn as a single line with a relation added; except where the tracks become wider apart to go each side of a platform where they are two lines. Does routing software need the relation to differentiate between the directions? Up/Down, Forward/Backward? And how would you decide which direction is which? Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Railway routes in different directions.
The proper way to do it is to have separate relations in each direction, probably named for the origin and destination (ie not calling it the up Bristol and the down Bristol, but calling it the Bristol-London and London-Bristol service). Alternatively, put all the ways in one relation and put roles in for ways which are traversed in one direction only (forward if it's the direction of the way, backward if it's the opposite to the direction of the way). Richard On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Hi I've a railway routes that's drawn as a single line with a relation added; except where the tracks become wider apart to go each side of a platform where they are two lines. Does routing software need the relation to differentiate between the directions? Up/Down, Forward/Backward? And how would you decide which direction is which? Cheers Dave F. ___ 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] Railway routes in different directions.
Hi. At first, I would say, there is no railway routing algorithm similar to one for cars or pedestrians. There even is no allowed direction of one of the routes usually. So I would do it the following way: - the track should be tagged as one single line, divided into two different lines along the platforms - no oneway at the track as it's no legal restriction; it's a usage decision of the railway operator, I think. - If you add the routes as relation, add the parts that apply - different for each direction at least along the platforms. the relation is AFAIK interpreted in order of it's elements or vice versa. Per role you can define forward only or backward only for parts of the route. Compare http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Members for details. regards Peter On 23.09.2010 20:53, Dave F. wrote: Hi I've a railway routes that's drawn as a single line with a relation added; except where the tracks become wider apart to go each side of a platform where they are two lines. Does routing software need the relation to differentiate between the directions? Up/Down, Forward/Backward? And how would you decide which direction is which? Cheers Dave F. ___ 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] Railway routes in different directions.
If it's a continuous double-track line, it should ideally be mapped as parallel tracks. This may not be possible due to low resolution aerials. It's important to note that many railroads use a signaling system that allows a train in either direction to occupy any track, depending on traffic conditions. Thus a fast train can pass a slower train on the wrong track. This even happens at stations, where a train may normally use one track but sometimes uses a different one; you can't necessarily use one ride to say which side of the platform the train stops at. But if it's not signaled this way, and each track is one-way except during construction or emergencies, I would tag the tracks as oneway despite there being no legal prohibition. Motorways sometimes have angled crossovers in the median for emergency evacuation using both carriageways in the same direction, and during construction one carriageway may be temporarily closed with two-way traffic on the other. Highway law says you have to follow traffic control devices, not the direction you know the way is, and railway rules are similar: you do whatever the dispatcher or signals tell you. All this means that you really can't have a railway route relation that follows only one path. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Tag craft is part of map-features
Hi The new tag craft has been approved by 35 voters and so I moved on and pushed it to map-features: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Craft http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:craft http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dcarpenter Thank you for your votes. Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] SchemaTroll 2.01 - Update with USGS - NHD map features and more
Hi all, Happy to report more progress on the map features charts :) http://www.mediafire.com/file/1yk31opux7yob1a/Schematroll_2_01_23_sept_2010.zip -i have included the mapnik schema chart (list of features that mapnik supports) -the TIGER Map features -re-organized with categories and descriptions -the USGS NHD map features -the canvec features organized a bit more -included the pdf catelogues for each feature set so you can source back to it So now that i've collected most of the data, i can bring it all into 1 large chart, which shows all of the features and the category naming that each country/dataset uses to describe the features. Once that's done, i can then transfter and perge the rows where there are feature matches, and slightly different descriptions. I can then add in the png file links copied from the nrcan and usgs paper maps and from the osm map feature page, to the master spreadsheet Because there are so many variants in tagging, i think the best route to take is to just a single document that just has 4 columns for 'DictionaryKey' 'DictionaryValue' then 'SchemaTrollKey' and 'SchemaTrollValue', that way, whenever you need to figure out a map feature, you can look it up in the chart, and and then adjust the reference to something better where needed. So the source datasets map features along with the garmin features acts as the 'basemap legend', where when it gets combined it becomes a very good international set of map features, which have been designed by National Cartography agencies around the world. Is it the best? No, but it's pretty close :) And the definitions from each map feature can easily be understood, so there is really no question on what exactly is being represented. So for the planet.osm tag-popularity contest, it's actually better to use these map features as again another source of Data, like another dataset. Since it does change often, its really only the top frequently used features that can be used to give it a well-rounded view. The rest of those less common map features, are listed in the 'DictionaryKeyValue' list. Anyway, that's it for now, i'll check back in a couple weeks with progress :) Again, if anyone wants to help with tag-matching and detailing, just ask :) and im happy to post the latest version to a googledocs spreadsheet. Cheers, Sam Twitter: @Acrosscanada Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans Skype: samvekemans IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room) @Acrosscanadatrails ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tag craft is part of map-features
Thanks for your proposal Peter :) Do you like to create a JOSM preset, so that the dev team might integrate the new feature in the next stable release? Matthias ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
