[Tagging] Fwd: Ojeq Stand
OK, So i make bad (formatting and approach) proposal for tag ojeq stand. It is a motorcycle taxi stand. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesia/adaptation/ojeq_stand Help requested with proposal, please, for formatting, placement, generalization. Alex ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Ojeq Stand
2012/4/30 Alex Rollin alex.rol...@gmail.com: OK, So i make bad (formatting and approach) proposal for tag ojeq stand. It is a motorcycle taxi stand. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesia/adaptation/ojeq_stand You put this into the Indonesia-namespace of the wiki, but proposals like this, which describe potentially useful features for the whole world, should better go into the proposal namespace. This is probably not an Indonesia-only-feature. Have a look here for the established proposal process: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_a_proposal usually you do first a draft, then you ask for comments on this list (tagging) by sending a message beginning with RFC. After a reasonable time for other mappers to comment and discuss (usually at least 14 days), you can go to voting. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:29:52 Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Before that I added a point in the Open issues section about lanes=1.5 and modified the note at the end of the section Narrow road. As So, today I got a chance to revisit an unpaved residential road I've tagged as lanes=1.5 in the distant past. Here's two pictures of it (in one) Above, usual traffic drives almost in the center of the road, as if it were lanes=1. Below, the car in picture has it's right side mirror almost touching the fence, and there's 2.2 meters of the carriageway free for oncoming traffic, 2.6-2.7 meters of space to the fence on the other side of the road. Oncoming cars can get past each other, so it's not lanes=1. Yet all driveers will slow to a crawl, or at least to a jogging speed, so IMO it can't be lanes=2, either. http://i46.tinypic.com/2cfqivn.png Which value would people use for the lanes=*? Sometimes the answer is It doesn't matter. If you tagged it with lanes=1, but not oneway=yes, then it's clearly a bottleneck and should be avoided by routers. If you didn't tag lanes=* at all and you didn't have oneway=yes then my assumption would be lanes=2 (because it's not one way). Or you could tag it explicitly with lanes=2. Either way, map users would probably complain that it's too narrow for certain types of vehicle, so it should be re-tagged lanes=1. If you tagged the width then it wouldn't matter if it was lanes=1 or lanes=2 because we can see the overall width and use heuristics to decide if it's a slow road or 'normal' road. Furthermore, if it's classified as highway=residential that would be a hint that it's a narrow road not to be driven too fast. Any of these factors, either assumed, or explicit, should be used by a route planner to make this road unattractive for routing. It's very tempting to add explicit values for every tag, but I really think sometimes it just doesn't matter, and we can get the same meaning for combinations of other tags (even if the tags are absent). Best wishes, Andrew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:29:52 Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Before that I added a point in the Open issues section about lanes=1.5 and modified the note at the end of the section Narrow road. As So, today I got a chance to revisit an unpaved residential road I've tagged as lanes=1.5 in the distant past. Here's two pictures of it (in one) Above, usual traffic drives almost in the center of the road, as if it were lanes=1. Below, the car in picture has it's right side mirror almost touching the fence, and there's 2.2 meters of the carriageway free for oncoming traffic, 2.6-2.7 meters of space to the fence on the other side of the road. Oncoming cars can get past each other, so it's not lanes=1. Yet all driveers will slow to a crawl, or at least to a jogging speed, so IMO it can't be lanes=2, either. http://i46.tinypic.com/2cfqivn.png Which value would people use for the lanes=*? Sometimes the answer is It doesn't matter. If you tagged it with lanes=1, but not oneway=yes, then it's clearly a bottleneck and should be avoided by routers. If you didn't tag lanes=* at all and you didn't have oneway=yes then my assumption would be lanes=2 (because it's not one way). Or you could tag it explicitly with lanes=2. Either way, map users would probably complain that it's too narrow for certain types of vehicle, so it should be re-tagged lanes=1. If you tagged the width then it wouldn't matter if it was lanes=1 or lanes=2 because we can see the overall width and use heuristics to decide if it's a slow road or 'normal' road. Furthermore, if it's classified as highway=residential that would be a hint that it's a narrow road not to be driven too fast. Any of these factors, either assumed, or explicit, should be used by a route planner to make this road unattractive for routing. It's very tempting to add explicit values for every tag, but I really think sometimes it just doesn't matter, and we can get the same meaning for combinations of other tags (even if the tags are absent). Best wishes, Andrew ___ 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] area=yes on polygones (was Block names)
2012/4/30 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: I'm always standing in the contributor point of view. It is not the wiki (or better said our recommendations) to follow the osm2pqsql style file but the opposite. +1 especially when the main reaction is to say that mapnik/osm2pgsql will fail because the assumption is done on a key, not a key/value pair. +1, besides from the already named tags in this thread there is also leisure=track which is a nice example. Even it's wiki page says explicitly that it is not clear, whether this is an area or a linear feature, but there are asumptions that mapnik renders this as an area because the rest of the leisure tags are all areas (or nodes): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dtrack cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Ojeq Stand
At 2012-04-30 01:07, Alex Rollin wrote: OK, So i make bad (formatting and approach) proposal for tag ojeq stand. It is a motorcycle taxi stand. Why not first search for existing usage? Taxi stands are common all over the world. Searching the wiki for taxi yields: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dtaxi . Add taxi=motorcycle;car;hov or maybe individual tags like motorcycle=yes, etc. in the style of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access#Transport_mode_restrictions . -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Ojeq Stand
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote: At 2012-04-30 01:07, Alex Rollin wrote: OK, So i make bad (formatting and approach) proposal for tag ojeq stand. It is a motorcycle taxi stand. Why not first search for existing usage? Taxi stands are common all over the world. Searching the wiki for taxi yields: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dtaxi . Add taxi=motorcycle;car;hov or maybe individual tags like motorcycle=yes, etc. in the style of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access#Transport_mode_restrictions . Thank you to Martin for pointing out the generalization, and for telling me where to find the process. Thank you to Alan for noticing that uses exist. Alan, indeed the text of the page read motorcycle=yes and I am SO NEW to this that I didn't actually know if it's ok to just add motorcylce=yes or if I needed to make a proposal. Can I just do that? So far I have followed what I read to the letter, so, I'm trying play along. I did have to search to figure that out. Alex ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] roundhouses tagging
Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Droundhouse) or as building=roundhouse? Or both? And how would you tag an old roundhouse that is nowadays used for something else (building=warehouse)? Mihkel Rämmel ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] roundhouses tagging
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Mihkel Rämmel r...@hot.ee wrote: Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Droundhouse) or as building=roundhouse? Or both? And how would you tag an old roundhouse that is nowadays used for something else (building=warehouse)? building=yes, railway=roundhouse? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] roundhouses tagging
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Mihkel Rämmel r...@hot.ee wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Mihkel Rämmel r...@hot.ee wrote: Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Droundhouse) or as building=roundhouse? Or both? And how would you tag an old roundhouse that is nowadays used for something else (building=warehouse)? building=yes, railway=roundhouse? Would soon lead to building=roundhouse, railway=roundhouse . Which is information duplication. I don't see why building would have to duplicate the railway tag. building=yes asks Is there a building of any kind? and answers it with yes. Pretty commonly accepted practice. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] roundhouses tagging
On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 18:36 +0300, Mihkel Rämmel wrote: Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Droundhouse) or as building=roundhouse? Or both? And how would you tag an old roundhouse that is nowadays used for something else (building=warehouse)? Am not aware of any in the UK still in railway use, the most famous one is here http://osm.org/go/euu4dDLW7-- and tagged as a theatre. Phil ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
