Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread Willi
On 19. November 2010 13:40 Andrew Errington [a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk]
wrote:

 I wish to tag an island with its name.  Except that the name refers to a
 group of islands, and each of these islands have their own name.

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.24164lon=131.86871zoom=16layers=M

 The name is Dokdo (-do is Korean for 'island'), but this is the name of
 the group of islands (two main ones and some smaller named rocks around
 them).  There is no single island called Dokdo.  The two main islands in
 the group are Seodo (Seo is 'West') and Dongdo (Dong is 'East').

 So I suppose there are two questions:

 1) What is the correct way to tag a group of islands with their well-known
 name when the names of the individual islands are not well-known or
 commonly used and are different to the name of the group?

 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so,
 why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly?

1) Imho it's mapped correctly using a multipolygon relation.

2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't
and imho shouldn't try to control this.

Two examples:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963669
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963209 

Happy mapping
Willi


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread Erik Johansson
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Willi wil...@gmx.de wrote:
 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so,
 why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly?

 2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't
 and imho shouldn't try to control this.

 Two examples:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963669
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963209


Since it's obviously not rendered in any renderer., the question is
how to make this renderable, not how to write the relation in a nice
way..

This problem exist all over and a fix is badly needed, e.g.
1. buildings/entrances
2. islands
3. metro stations/entrances
4. water areas



-- 
/emj

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a (main) entrance to a large feature?

2010-11-19 Thread Erik Johansson
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
 I don't know if it's legal to park here and walk around the gate into
 the park, but assume for the sake of argument that it is. How do we
 tell the router to instead use the main entrance to the south?

  In this case, the way in the photo can be properly tagged as a
 service/driveway and /or track to help direct routers to another entrance. I
 recently found this exact situation where hordes of lost park-goers coming
 from the north were directed to the back gate which is permanently locked. I
 was able to tag the back entrance as service/driveway because the gate is
 never open and the only normal access is for the ranger - even though I
 think the road is still named as Lake Road in the official county records
 (which I cannot access).

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=41.85594mlon=-89.9528zoom=15layers=M


Hum...

Should private access roads really render as ordinary roads in zoom 14
and less? Bug in mapnik?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread Georg Feddern

Erik Johansson schrieb:

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Willi wil...@gmx.de wrote:
  

2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so,
why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly?
  


  

2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't
and imho shouldn't try to control this.




Since it's obviously not rendered in any renderer., the question is
how to make this renderable, not how to write the relation in a nice
way..

This problem exist all over and a fix is badly needed, e.g.
1. buildings/entrances
2. islands
3. metro stations/entrances
4. water areas
  


Well at least 1 and 3 (site relation with apropriate roles) as well as 2 
(multipolygon archipelago) _are_ yet renderable - it just has to be done 
- by the renderer. As said above.

So the answer could only be: ticket / patch for mapnik, osmarender, 

Georg


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


[Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Richard Welty

what are people doing for this? the truck oriented access tags in the
wiki are oriented towards UK legal categories whereas i'm basically
looking at a simple sign that says no trucks. the wiki would have
me use

goods=no
hgv=no

whereas

truck=no

seems like a logical extension of the current access tags.

thanks,
   richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread SomeoneElse
It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck?  You're correct that 
HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does truck have one 
in the US?


If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count?  What 
something like an El Camino?


Cheers,
Andy

* Westminster Council via Google reckons that:
The technical definition of an HGV is a 'mechanically propelled vehicle 
that is:


   * of a construction primarily suited for the carriage of goods or
 burden of any kind; and
   * designed or adapted to have a maximum weight exceeding 3,500
 kilograms when in normal use and travelling on a road laden.'




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Richard Welty

On 11/19/10 8:27 AM, SomeoneElse wrote:
It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck?  You're correct 
that HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does truck 
have one in the US?


If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count?  What 
something like an El Camino?


that would be up to the local ordinance, but generally pickup trucks and 
smaller
things don't count for a no truck sign. there are way too many people 
using those
for their personal transportation.  also truck prohibitions are not 
intended to prevent
lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new 
refrigerator) and

the like from carrying out normal business.

i guess you could say truck=destination even though the sign says no trucks.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread SomeoneElse

On 19/11/2010 13:40, Richard Welty wrote:

On 11/19/10 8:27 AM, SomeoneElse wrote:
It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck?  You're correct 
that HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does truck 
have one in the US?


If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count?  What 
something like an El Camino?


that would be up to the local ordinance, but generally pickup trucks 
and smaller

things don't count for a no truck sign.


From memory in the Western US I've seen no trucks and then in smaller 
writing over 6 tons or similar.  Some kind of note about what the 
local rules are likely to be (or something explicit, if it's explicit).  
I'm sure other people can suggest how they'd tag max weight for a road 
(it's not something that I've done).


Cheers,
Andy


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a (main) entrance to a large feature?

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=41.85594mlon=-89.9528zoom=15layers=M


 Hum...

 Should private access roads really render as ordinary roads in zoom 14
 and less? Bug in mapnik?


I think you are right. It would probably better not to display them at
all in low zooms, where no access is displayed.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
 Probably use a multipolygon with place=island.


-1. I agree for the multipolygon but I wouldn't put place=island,
because IMHO that would mean that there is one island where in this
example in the real world there are actually two. I would simply put
the name in the relation and the islands as role outer. Then the
single islands would have the place=island and their name.

Cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com:
 place=island is used to identify noteworthy places that are isolated
 enough to justify a label at a low zoom. ...So it would be wrong to apply it 
 to a single island in a group...


I don't know where you get this impression from (especially that
place=island is used for more then one island), it can't be from the
wiki:

An island is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water
and isolated from other significant landmasses.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Richard Mann
HGV = Heavy Goods Vehicle. It seems to be broadly identical (give or
take a couple of tons/tonnes) with a US truck

so hgv=destination (or hgv=no) would seem to be correct

Feel free to add a note on the wiki that hgv is en-gb for truck

Or feel free to use truck=destination (or truck=no), and if it catches
on put it in the wiki.

hgv is currently running at about 2 uses in Europe, truck only 10

Richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk:
 From memory in the Western US I've seen no trucks and then in smaller
 writing over 6 tons or similar.  Some kind of note about what the local
 rules are likely to be (or something explicit, if it's explicit).  I'm sure
 other people can suggest how they'd tag max weight for a road (it's not
 something that I've done).


Yes, I'd say that's best represented with maxweight.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maxweight


The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation
has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different
value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:


 That definition is correct - for single islands. piece should
 probably be changed to piece (or group of pieces) to make it work
 for archipelagos, and fit with the general intention of the key (to
 determine what priority should be given to labels)

 It's not exactly unheard of to extend the class island this way; for
 instance search http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/ for name islands
 and feature class island.


I wouldn't do it like this, even if the USGS does it like this. I
would use island for a single island and something else for a group of
islands. I wouldn't use islands either, because that is too close.
Archipelago sounds OK. I wouldn't even require a place tag. A name on
the multipolygon could be sufficient (as suggested in my first post).

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Pieren
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation
 has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different
 value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki.


No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the Heavy Goods
Vehicle definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same
thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers.
Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a
different name just because the speed limit is different in each country:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions

Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Apollinaris Schoell

On 19 Nov 2010, at 8:58 , Pieren wrote:

 On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 
 The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation
 has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different
 value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki.
 
 
 No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the Heavy Goods 
 Vehicle definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same 
 thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. 
 Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a 
 different name just because the speed limit is different in each country:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions

fully agree, the legislation is very similar in US and Europe. just the weight 
limits differ. hgv is a generic term yhst we shouldn't use 3.5t. And in some 
countries there are 2 limits. one for small trucks and real heavy trucks ( 
around 7t). usually only the heavy trucks are limited. trucks above 3.5t need a 
different drivers license but are rarely limited for access.
a tag like hgv shouldn't have a exact weight limit. instead a router can use 
the implicit limits defined by local legislation or aan explicit limit on signs

 
 Pieren
 ___
 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 no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread john
I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight limit.  
I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to trucks over a 
certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, because the road in 
question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to turn around.

---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
From  :mailto:ascho...@gmail.com
Date  :Fri Nov 19 11:25:38 America/Chicago 2010



On 19 Nov 2010, at 8:58 , Pieren wrote:

 On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 
 The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation
 has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different
 value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki.
 
 
 No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the Heavy Goods 
 Vehicle definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same 
 thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. 
 Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a 
 different name just because the speed limit is different in each country:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions

fully agree, the legislation is very similar in US and Europe. just the weight 
limits differ. hgv is a generic term yhst we shouldn't use 3.5t. And in some 
countries there are 2 limits. one for small trucks and real heavy trucks ( 
around 7t). usually only the heavy trucks are limited. trucks above 3.5t need a 
different drivers license but are rarely limited for access.
a tag like hgv shouldn't have a exact weight limit. instead a router can use 
the implicit limits defined by local legislation or aan explicit limit on signs

 
 Pieren
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Paul Johnson
On 11/19/2010 07:40 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
 also truck prohibitions are not
 intended to prevent
 lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new
 refrigerator) and
 the like from carrying out normal business.

This is true only if the Except Local Deliveries or similar add-on
signs are used in conjunction with the No Trucks sign.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/11/19 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
 The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation
 has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different
 value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki.


 No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the Heavy Goods
 Vehicle definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same
 thing.


it is not the same thing. Do you have goods in France? In Germany we
don't have this class and nobody had the idea to improve the
definition and invent a use for something that isn't applicable.

 This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers.


no, it would horribly complicate their lifes, as they would have to
figure out for every feature where it is in order to understand the
meaning of the tag. It is not impossible but it is time consuming.


 Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a
 different name just because the speed limit is different in each country:


because they don't imply any speed limit. Speedlimits are maxspeed. It
is a difference if a abstract key like

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Richard Welty

On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:

I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight limit.  
I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to trucks over a 
certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, because the road in 
question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to turn around.


we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in
these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that
fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just
use maxweight where it's appropriate.

the no trucks sign i saw yesterday in Schenectady (on Wendell
Avenue) was clearly intended to prevent big trucks from using
a quiet residential street as a shortcut. there was no posted
weight limit on the sign.

probably if the wiki entry for hgv were revised to reflect
weight limits are per applicable ordinance that'd do the job.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Richard Welty

On 11/19/10 2:47 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:

On 11/19/2010 07:40 AM, Richard Welty wrote:

also truck prohibitions are not
intended to prevent
lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new
refrigerator) and
the like from carrying out normal business.

This is true only if the Except Local Deliveries or similar add-on
signs are used in conjunction with the No Trucks sign.

this is going to vary based on local ordinance. i would be really, really
shocked if Schenectady intended that UPS, Fedex, and Sears were denied
access to part of Wendell Avenue for legitimate business reasons.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
 On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:

 I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight
 limit.  I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to
 trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers,
 because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to
 turn around.

 we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in
 these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that
 fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just
 use maxweight where it's appropriate.

At the other extreme are signs like this:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.25903,-81.764159spn=0.031828,0.082397t=kz=15layer=ccbll=28.259019,-81.764282panoid=Xn0O_XTCa26l3-SxRHJrkAcbp=12,323.76,,0,11.47
Usually you see them at bridges (since different truck configurations
will put different loads on the bridge) but I don't recall there being
a bridge on this road.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

2010-11-19 Thread Paul Johnson
On 11/19/2010 06:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
 On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Richard Welty 
 rwelty-Fu78d/dmhrmzesifbgk...@public.gmane.org wrote:
 On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:

 I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight
 limit.  I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to
 trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers,
 because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to
 turn around.

 we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in
 these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that
 fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just
 use maxweight where it's appropriate.
 
 At the other extreme are signs like this:
 http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.25903,-81.764159spn=0.031828,0.082397t=kz=15layer=ccbll=28.259019,-81.764282panoid=Xn0O_XTCa26l3-SxRHJrkAcbp=12,323.76,,0,11.47
 Usually you see them at bridges (since different truck configurations
 will put different loads on the bridge) but I don't recall there being
 a bridge on this road.

Bridges aren't the only highways susceptible to load stress, however.
Forest service, county and especially privately owned roads are often
heavily patched chipseal and can potentially contain some really steep
grades that simply make some configurations physically impassable or
unaffordably expensive to maintain if they are subjected to heavier loads.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging