Re: [Tagging] Mapping a negative
On 9 November 2011 16:12, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > I've run into a curious use of a tag, to map the lack of a thing. > At least that's what I think mappers are doing. > > One might normally expect a well, mountain hut, highway rest area, or toilet > to offer drinking water. Some mappers have placed: > drinking_water=no > To indicate the normal expectation is wrong. All the signs round here have potable yes/no depending if it's safe to drink or not. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Mapping a negative
I've run into a curious use of a tag, to map the /lack/ of a thing. At least that's what I think mappers are doing. One might normally expect a well, mountain hut, highway rest area, or toilet to offer drinking water. Some mappers have placed: drinking_water=no To indicate the normal expectation is wrong. I've attempted to document at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinking_water ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
2011/11/8 Serge Wroclawski : >> How should such a meeting location be tagged? > > It shouldn't. > > We mark locations and just like you don't mark every class on a > university campus, you don't mark your monthly LUG meeting's location. IMHO you can tag it. If those meetings happen at the same place for a lot of time they can be considered an attribute of this place. While I agree with Richard that you wouldn't need a tag to link to the place, we might still find it interesting to tag all the places where LUGs meet. That's the kind of data we will surely manage to keep up to date ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
Richard, I have to agree. Some problems aren't tagging problems, and there's enough debate over tagging as it is.. Your suggestions are excellent ones. That said, if you'd really really want to tag this, you could find a way. There's nothing against that, as long as it satisfies some basic rules (which I tried to find in one place in the wiki but couldn't so I'll phrase them in my own words) * not copied from other maps * representing a geographically persistent reality (oh there's got to be a better way to phrase that) * verifiable Martijn On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:21 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: >> In addition to being a mapper, I am the secretary of the Nashville Linux >> Users Group. I have been debating whether the club's monthly meeting >> location should be tagged in OSM, and, if so, what tag to use. The question >> arises because the club doesn't have its own dedicated space; instead, it >> meets once a month in a particular lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. >> For the rest of the month, there is no sign or marker designating the >> lecture hall as NLUG's meeting space. >> >> How should such a meeting location be tagged? > > Make sure the venue is properly tagged, with address. Add local > parking and transit amenities, etc so that the map is really useful. > > Link to that venue with a permalink, or even better, with a shortlink > and marker whenever you want to provide a map. > > If you want to display the location on your LUG web site, consider > using OpenLayers to put a nice big LUG logo on the map (or Tux the > Penguin) in your location. > > Some problems aren't tagging problems. > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:21 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > In addition to being a mapper, I am the secretary of the Nashville Linux > Users Group. I have been debating whether the club's monthly meeting > location should be tagged in OSM, and, if so, what tag to use. The question > arises because the club doesn't have its own dedicated space; instead, it > meets once a month in a particular lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. > For the rest of the month, there is no sign or marker designating the lecture > hall as NLUG's meeting space. > > How should such a meeting location be tagged? Make sure the venue is properly tagged, with address. Add local parking and transit amenities, etc so that the map is really useful. Link to that venue with a permalink, or even better, with a shortlink and marker whenever you want to provide a map. If you want to display the location on your LUG web site, consider using OpenLayers to put a nice big LUG logo on the map (or Tux the Penguin) in your location. Some problems aren't tagging problems. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
On the lecture hall point or building outline. I'm assuming here that the lecture hall web site will list the event on an event schedule on their schedule. If that's not the case it becomes less obvious, but you could still invent and propose a subtag (website:user for shared spaces for example - although keys must be unique so if there are more users you'd have to add them all to one tag with a separator). On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 11/8/2011 3:08 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: >> >> You could of course use the website tag (formerly url) to link to a >> page with more info. >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website > > Use that tag on *what*? It's not the website of the lecture hall or anything > else that should be mapped. > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
On 11/8/2011 3:08 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: You could of course use the website tag (formerly url) to link to a page with more info. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website Use that tag on *what*? It's not the website of the lecture hall or anything else that should be mapped. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
On 11/8/2011 2:03 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 11/7/2011 5:41 PM, Dmitri Lebedev wrote: Is a ridge something that can be auto-generated from good elevationdata? If so, probably only named ridges need to be mapped. I think it's ok to map unnamed ridges, just to show that some borders go by them. Also, on a flat map without elevation lines, but with semi-transparent overlay imitating shadows, peaks connected together will make more sense. Right now, look at any mountaineous region, the peaks just stick out chaotically. I think it's worth connecting them together. What I mean is that if the ridges can be auto-generated, they can be rendered without being in the database. What data source are you suggesting that the renderer should use, if not the OSM database? The same one that the cycle map layer uses to draw contour lines. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
You could of course use the website tag (formerly url) to link to a page with more info. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website Martijn On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:21 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: >> In addition to being a mapper, I am the secretary of the Nashville Linux >> Users Group. I have been debating whether the club's monthly meeting >> location should be tagged in OSM, and, if so, what tag to use. The question >> arises because the club doesn't have its own dedicated space; instead, it >> meets once a month in a particular lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. >> For the rest of the month, there is no sign or marker designating the >> lecture hall as NLUG's meeting space. >> >> How should such a meeting location be tagged? > > It shouldn't. > > We mark locations and just like you don't mark every class on a > university campus, you don't mark your monthly LUG meeting's location. > > - Serge > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- martijn van exel geospatial omnivore 1109 1st ave #2 salt lake city, ut 84103 801-550-5815 http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 2:21 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > In addition to being a mapper, I am the secretary of the Nashville Linux > Users Group. I have been debating whether the club's monthly meeting > location should be tagged in OSM, and, if so, what tag to use. The question > arises because the club doesn't have its own dedicated space; instead, it > meets once a month in a particular lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. > For the rest of the month, there is no sign or marker designating the lecture > hall as NLUG's meeting space. > > How should such a meeting location be tagged? It shouldn't. We mark locations and just like you don't mark every class on a university campus, you don't mark your monthly LUG meeting's location. - Serge ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Tagging a club's meeting location
In addition to being a mapper, I am the secretary of the Nashville Linux Users Group. I have been debating whether the club's monthly meeting location should be tagged in OSM, and, if so, what tag to use. The question arises because the club doesn't have its own dedicated space; instead, it meets once a month in a particular lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. For the rest of the month, there is no sign or marker designating the lecture hall as NLUG's meeting space. How should such a meeting location be tagged? -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 11/7/2011 5:41 PM, Dmitri Lebedev wrote: > >> Is a ridge something that can be auto-generated from good > >> elevationdata? If so, probably only named ridges need to be mapped. > > > > I think it's ok to map unnamed ridges, just to show that some > borders go > > by them. Also, on a flat map without elevation lines, but with > > semi-transparent overlay imitating shadows, peaks connected together > > will make more sense. Right now, look at any mountaineous region, > the > > peaks just stick out chaotically. I think it's worth connecting them > > together. > > > What I mean is that if the ridges can be auto-generated, they can be > rendered without being in the database. > What data source are you suggesting that the renderer should use, if not the OSM database? -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
On 08.11.11 16:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > So how would you tag a de:"Grat"? Don't know what the correct English phrase would be. Maybe the mountain guys @talk-at know... User fkv/0/ has done a lot of mountain edits, AFAICT. BTW, should also be discussed rendering-wise, comparing a cliff (where it goes down on one side) vs the "Grat" (where it goes down on both sides). /al /0/ http://osm.org/go/0JookMGyY-- ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/8 Michael Krämer : > I would consider both a ridge. But honestly my personal definition would be > to the German "Grat"...:-) To give a negative example, here something I > would not consider a ridge but either cliff or rock: > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/H%C3%B6rnleLochenstein.jpg +1, it's all about age ;-), I'd tag the steep parts natural=cliff. > More seriously: > I would suggest to use "ridge" for the distinct feature. ... So basically a > ridge is a feature of one or two mountains only. not sure, from what I read a "ridge" can probably span between several mountains (or hills). it can also form a "crest"? As you wrote, you are thinking about a de:"Grat" for which I agree it does not extend over the summit of a mountain (while a "Kamm" will, it consists of several "Grat"). > I think we all agree, that a continental divide or the "Alpenhauptkamm" are > not ridges. They these large scale features will very likely contain many > ridges but also other features. well, "Haupt"kamm (main .) does also imply sub-objects. We could make relations type=route, route=ridge (or mountain_ridge or mountain_range,) containing each other. With relations we could also map similar geographic features like gorges without additional geometry: we put the adjacent cliffs in a relation, e.g. type=area, and tag the relation with natural=gorge, name=xy so you'd know that the feature is between these ways. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
Hi Martin, 2011/11/8 Martin Koppenhoefer > Yes, that's unambigous, but what about this? > Thanks, that's what I tried . > 1 > http://www.rainerundclaudia.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/20090419-Mit-Julia-u.-Alex-am-Karlsruher-Grat-0232.jpg > 2 > http://alpinestock.com/grat_sareiserjoch_malbun_liechtenstein_sjpg1883.jpg > I would consider both a ridge. But honestly my personal definition would be to the German "Grat"...:-) To give a negative example, here something I would not consider a ridge but either cliff or rock: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/H%C3%B6rnleLochenstein.jpg More seriously: I would suggest to use "ridge" for the distinct feature. A could extend (more or less) horizontally like the image I've referenced before. There I would claim that a ridge at maximum extends from one peak to another. There are also ridges more "vertically" oriented and separating the slopes of a mountain. So basically a ridge is a feature of one or two mountains only. I think we all agree, that a continental divide or the "Alpenhauptkamm" are not ridges. They these large scale features will very likely contain many ridges but also other features. This is probably like the distiction between "cliff" and "coast". Mapping mountain ranges IMO is a different story, more related to mapping large features (e.g. valleys like the Great Rift Valley). To my point of view this is already adequatly covered in the proposal. Also I just came across the region proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/8 Andreas Labres :
> "Ridge" IMO closest means "Kamm" in German.
yes, I'd also see it like this. So how would you tag a de:"Grat"? natural=edge?
> - we should distinguish this from -
> a whole mountain range ("das Gebirge" in German)
> natural=range or mountain_range (Gebirge or Gebirgszug) (mapped as an area)
not sure if we should map them at all. Mapping geographical features
as big as those is usually not an OSM domain (we do this is no field:
we don't map oceans and seas, we don't map landscapes, valleys and
mountain ranges, ...
Our data model, processing and db organisation is not very suited to
handle this kind of stuff.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
Martin,
"Ridge" IMO closest means "Kamm" in German.
eg. "Nordkette" north of Innsbruck
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inntalkette (German)
- we should distinguish this from -
a whole mountain range ("das Gebirge" in German)
eg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinernes_Meer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennengebirge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berchtesgaden_Alps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzb%C3%BChel_Alps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolomites
...
or even bigger ("Gebirgszug" or "Gebirgszugsystem"):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Limestone_Alps
(other mountain ranges are named there)
=>
natural=ridge (Gebirgskamm) (mapped as a way)
vs
natural=range or mountain_range (Gebirge or Gebirgszug) (mapped as an area)
/al
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/8 Michael Krämer : > This would definetly help - especially for us Germans trying to understand > the difference :-) Here a picture of what I personally would consider a > ridge: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Herzogstand_HQ.jpg Yes, that's unambigous, but what about this? 1 http://www.rainerundclaudia.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/20090419-Mit-Julia-u.-Alex-am-Karlsruher-Grat-0232.jpg 2 http://alpinestock.com/grat_sareiserjoch_malbun_liechtenstein_sjpg1883.jpg btw.: The wikipedia article about ridge (which the osm-proposal links as definition) defines a lot of different ridge types, including also submarine ridges and volcanic crater ridges and even sand ridges (dunes). Maybe these should be subtagged if the proposal should be used for all of them. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/8 Martin Koppenhoefer > I am not sure for the wording though. Isn't this an edge? Maybe I am > confused, because wikipedia "told" me that a ridge would be a natural > feature (your proposal doesn't give any definition what a ridge is) > occuring at a _chain of mountains_ (but in the osm wiki you also speak > about hills) while for shorter places I found > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ar%C3%AAte (french words do IMHO not > really make sense) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spur_(topography), > "crest" and "edge" (could also be that interlanguage links are not > precise, I am mostly referring to the difference between > de:"Gebirgskamm" and de:"Grat"). > Looking at Wikipedia I can follow your point. But I think this is more due the language links. I think "ridge" is the common term which encompasses both German terms "Grat" and "Gebirgskamm". Here some articles from Wikipedia that should show their common use: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crib_Goch - especially legend of map * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Everest#Southeast_ridge Also interesting is the definition of Arête as a kind of ridge in Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arete Is this all the same? Shall we distinct between them? > Basically I think we shouldn't. > I think due to the various words in use for features of this kind a > definition should be given and alternatives proposed for features that > are close but excluded by this definition. > This would definetly help - especially for us Germans trying to understand the difference :-) Here a picture of what I personally would consider a ridge: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Herzogstand_HQ.jpg Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/8 John Sturdy : > I think it's easier to survey a ridge (either from aerials, or by > walking along it with GPS) than to get enough altitude points to > generate it automatically, so I think we should allow them to be > entered as ways (which won't prevent renderers from finding more > ridges from altitude points). +1, they are also often important connections for hikers (will have additional highway=path tag). I don't see the point why we shouldn't map them. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
2011/11/7 Dmitri Lebedev : > Hello, > this is the page with the proposal: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ridge > > Just look at this picture: > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/North_Ridge_of_Mount_Rohr.jpg/400px-North_Ridge_of_Mount_Rohr.jpg > > There are peaks that can be tagged properly (although it's technically > possible to deduct them with some accuracy from elevation maps), but > between them there are ridges, the top edges of the mountains. I like this proposal, because it is truly important to have these connections in a map (you will usually see them in the elevation isolines, but they might have a name) I am not sure for the wording though. Isn't this an edge? Maybe I am confused, because wikipedia "told" me that a ridge would be a natural feature (your proposal doesn't give any definition what a ridge is) occuring at a _chain of mountains_ (but in the osm wiki you also speak about hills) while for shorter places I found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ar%C3%AAte (french words do IMHO not really make sense) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spur_(topography), "crest" and "edge" (could also be that interlanguage links are not precise, I am mostly referring to the difference between de:"Gebirgskamm" and de:"Grat"). Is this all the same? Shall we distinct between them? I think due to the various words in use for features of this kind a definition should be given and alternatives proposed for features that are close but excluded by this definition. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - second_hand shops
2011/11/7 Ferenc Veres : > 2011.11.07. 0:24 keltezéssel, Laurence Penney írta: >> About a year ago Sean Horgan, Craig Wallace and I thrashed out some >> ideas for charity shops. It just seemed wrong not to tag an Oxfam >> bookshop as shop=books! The discussion was fruitful although, >> reprehensibly, we didn't put anything in the wiki. >> >> shop=books operator=Oxfam operator:type=charity > > I added this to the Talk page at least, because I find this idea important. I also think that we could need some classes for operators (maybe even subclasses, think of government, we'd tag operator:type=government and then subtag again which kind of entity it is). > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:operator#operator:type > (I don't know how changes are added to approved features' pages afterwards.) someone hits the "edit" button, modifies the page and hits OK ;-) You should only do this if the tag is widely in use and the given definition mostly undisputed (e.g. by announcing here and waiting some time to see what others think, before modifying the page). Btw.: the key is already in use, but nobody in the whole world so far used the value "charity", that's the actual usage: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/operator%3Atype#values btw2: Please do not encourage the use of abbreviations, if you are to add more suggested values to the wiki (IMHO we should set up a distinct key-page for "operator:type" with some suggested values). cbo for instance can mean anything from Central Boycott Office (a specialized agency of the Arab League based out of Damascus) to Congressional Budget Office, but here maybe the intended meaning is Community Based Organization. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
