Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels
Am 16/mar/2014 um 01:42 schrieb Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Also building=bridge is the wrong tag for this bridge why? Let's be cautious with judgements like wrong tag and even more in situations where there is not clearly a generally adopted tagging scheme (like for bridges). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
Am 16/mar/2014 um 02:20 schrieb johnw jo...@mac.com: I am looking for a tag to define the area the townhall building sits on what about amenity=townhall ? That's how we do it for schools, universities etc. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] building=bridge vs. man_made=bridge
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 09:36:43AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 16/mar/2014 um 01:42 schrieb Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Also building=bridge is the wrong tag for this bridge why? Let's be cautious with judgements like wrong tag and even more in situations where there is not clearly a generally adopted tagging scheme (like for bridges). building=bridge has been described in the wiki since March 2012 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Building_typologyoldid=753458 so I see no good reason to change that. For the purpose of mapping the outlines of bridges man_made=bridge has been proposed some time ago and maybe should be cleaned up and adopted. Afaics the example use of man_made=bridge for multilevel bridges does not work as currently described, see talk page. Otherwise the proposal looks good for me.. so maybe the multilevel part of it should be postponed and get the simple stuff approved soon? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/man_made%3Dbridge Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixing wrong opening_hours automatically
Thanks for the hint … I fixed it in this commit: https://github.com/ypid/opening_hours_map/commit/d45c8b6776091845576342f61e80dfef3bd698ba More issues can be reported here: https://github.com/ypid/opening_hours_map/issues On 12.03.2014 07:52, Peter Wendorff wrote: Hi Robin, small suggestion for your opening-hours map (nice map, by the way): The tags list in the lower part of the markers box is (technically and visually) a table but the key is postfixed with an additional :, which is confusing because it may as well be part of the key itself. Within the table layout it would have no negative consequences to omit the : after the key but make it slightly better readable. regards Peter -- Live long and prosper Robin Schneider ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] opening-hours and closing-hours
On 14.03.2014 15:45, fly wrote: Did you every think about 00:00-24:00; Fr 14:00-22:00 off +1 I really do not get your problems as the syntax already allows a lot. +1 Still do not have any need for open/closed or closing_hours. I strongly represent the opinion that closing_hours is unnecessary. Please give me an example which can not be expressed with the current syntax and would be covered by the proposed closing_hours. To elaborate a little more on the point of having the 'open' and the 'closed' keywords. They became mandatory with the introduction of comments. Because a comment is by default evaluated to the state unknown. But there are many cases in which the comment does not influence if the facility is open but rather gives additional information. (Search for 'open ': http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:opening_hours). open\s+: is used 152 times closed\s+: is used 42 times (\s+ stands for one or more white space characters for example spaces). One good point about the discussion is that appointment is considered valid. Is valid since the existence of comments. Also search for 'open ': http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:opening_hours. Some mappers have the intention to define keywords but this is not proposed yet (and I am not working on an proposal for this either). On 14.03.2014 12:37, André Pirard wrote: On 2014-03-13 19:06, Pieren wrote : On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Robin `ypid` Schneider ypi...@aol.de wrote: It's unclear if your proposal is opening_hours=SH(summer holiday) or opening_hours=SH (then you should correct the wiki because the tag template is using the first version) I guess you plan to update the main opening_hours wiki if the proposal is accepted ? As well as * choose one of the 5 or 6 contradictory forms, each denying the former ones, that were answered to my case that I finally proposed unambiguously as *closing-hours=Fr 14:00-22:00* (in a message followed by -1 -1 -1 and 2 or 3 more contradictory tags) * if the answer to the simplified diagram I added to try to clarify many things is really it's wrong, say what is wrong and correct it http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:opening_hours#.22Some_people_don.27t_fully_agree_with_the_following_simplified_diagram.22_-_what_is_the_problem.3F * especially, regarding *your* particular proposition *opening_hours=open; Fr 14:00-22:00 off* o explain: open and closed appear to be some new invention [*of mine, *in the diagram] See above. o write a definition for *off* or validate/correct the definition in my diagram and explain the following replies to this request or its usage: + it's not used; + it's used but not like that; + *off* must not be defined but grasped; + the meaning of off is wrong + off [must not be defined because it] has been in use for quite some time already. + http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Time_domains explains quite well how the overall opening_hours syntax works (why then did I have to add its URL to the main page?) Not sure what you are saying. 'off' is equal to 'closed' as defined here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours:specification o write a definition or *open*, make up your mind between, and clarify: + open and closed appear to be some new invention + It was introduced by Netzwolf some years ago because it is needed as rule_modifier (when used together with a comment). It is now used over 150 times to do exactly that (regex: /open\s+/). Of course it is an invention but one which is required + make explanations for the general tagger (I'm fine with regexp but not everybody) o clarify: Because of the definition that following rules will overwrite previous once, times which span over midnight have to use additional rules which are separated by comma instead of semicolon. + probably override previous ones and general syntax + instead of a casual remark about an example, make it a proper explanation # of the difference between comma and semicolon # of how rules override one another; graspingly, ranges specifying opening time would add themselves to opening time and ranges specifying closing time would subtract themselves from it, but I've seen an example for which the range was said to both add and subtract. I and Netzwolf did try to explain it and I would say it is straight to the point. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours:specification I suggest you to play a bit with the evaluation software and just try it out:
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
What about for the area where the town hall, city administration buildings (offices for building and safety, parks and recreation, etc.), public safety (police and fire headquarters) and a county court building are located in my city. They are all on one landscaped area with buildings scattered around. And it definitely looks different than a typical office park. The individual buildings are tagged as appropriate but the land use is neither commercial, industrial nor residential. -Tod On Mar 16, 2014, at 1:45 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 16/mar/2014 um 02:20 schrieb johnw jo...@mac.com: I am looking for a tag to define the area the townhall building sits on what about amenity=townhall ? That's how we do it for schools, universities etc. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - use_sideway (was bicycle=use_cycleway)
This is an RFC for a new value: use_sidewayhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sideway. (which is an access value) Last november we proposed the bicycle=use_cyclewayhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_use_cycleway. There was a lot of discussion before https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013-November/015592.htmland duringhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Bicycle_use_cyclewayvoting. The voting was very close but we decided to reject the proposal and work on a new one. We think we've now made a better proposahttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/use_sidewayl (use_sideway) with more emphasis on the access issue and some more examples with regard to routing. Cheers Masi Master and PeeWee32 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: They all sound much like offices (landuse=commercial) to me. Ownership has nothing to do with land use. In this case, the city council happen to be the users of the property, but if they need to downsize for whatever reason and a particular building gets a new tenant, will the land use change? I wouldn't have thought so. Well, in my country, these are classified as a different landuse and not commercial. Please see this land use map as an example: http://mandaluyong.gov.ph/img/profile/map9.gif Hospitals, schools, universities, and civic/admin facilities (such as municipal or village townhalls) are classed as institutional landuse. So for my country, landuse=civic_admin (or similar) would make sense. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
At least in the USA, courthouses generally contain other types of government offices in addition to courtrooms and related judicial offices, particularly county courthouses. In some less-populated areas, the courthouse may be the only governmental building in the jurisdiction. On March 15, 2014 11:09:20 AM CDT, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 14/mar/2014 um 00:54 schrieb johnw jo...@mac.com: I'm very interested to hear people's opinion on landuse=civic_admin It would be a landuse for townhalls and other capital buildings, Federal Buildings, DMV, courthouses, and other basic civic administrative offices where it is clearly a government building. maybe this is a language or cultural problem, but I'd consider neither courthouses nor government buildings administration. Courthouses serve the Judiciary and administration is together with government the executive branch. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
Interesting! That is more generic than simply civic_admin - one would not expect the primary land use of a school or a hospital to be administration. When/to whom is this classification significant? Colin On 2014-03-16 19:49, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: They all sound much like offices (landuse=commercial) to me. Ownership has nothing to do with land use. In this case, the city council happen to be the users of the property, but if they need to downsize for whatever reason and a particular building gets a new tenant, will the land use change? I wouldn't have thought so. Well, in my country, these are classified as a different landuse and not commercial. Please see this land use map as an example: http://mandaluyong.gov.ph/img/profile/map9.gif [2] Hospitals, schools, universities, and civic/admin facilities (such as municipal or village townhalls) are classed as institutional landuse. So for my country, landuse=civic_admin (or similar) would make sense. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] http://mandaluyong.gov.ph/img/profile/map9.gif ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-15 16:29 GMT+01:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: tracktype is the degree of compaction of the material (regardless of material) I have always more thought of it how much it was constructed, while tracktype=1 is a paved road, 5 will be a track on grass (almost or not constructed at all) and the rest in between. Generally a tracktype=grade1 should be easily navigable by bike or foot also after days of rain while for grade2 you would hope so and grade3 is not clear, 4 and 5 probably not. In the end it is a generalized hierarchical system that comprises several single characteristics to come to a summarizing tag value (and the single characteristics are not documented and may vary on individual basis). Somehow it still works as you can compare the values with other tracks in the same area. Hm I think that someone on a city bike (not on a mountain bike) would find tracktype=grade2 somewhat inconvenient, but still usable indeed. Anyway, I'm making these questions because thinking of degree of compaction (same as hardness maybe) makes tracktype essentially independent from both smoothness and surface tags. You can then guess more accurately things such as expected speed, comfort level, draft forces, and the risk of getting bogged. One question: do you think that an almost flat natural rock path should be tracktype=grade1 (because it's closer to compacted) or tracktype=grade5 (because it's not constructed)? - smoothness is the degree of irregularity of the surface (for wheeled vehicles, also regardless of material) yes. in other words how smooth or even the surface is. - surface more closely represents the material structure, usually regardless of other characteristics (with a few exceptions) yes, surface is a mixture of the ~material (roughly classified) and in some cases the way of application / the overall structure (e.g. cobblestones). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Opinion on meaning of tracktype, smoothness and surface for routing
Hello, Following from this conclusion (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-March/016904.html), I'm now trying to find a way to use tracktype, smoothness and surface to improve routing quality. For an average 4 passenger car (not an SUV, not a truck, not a motorcycle), I believe that: 1. Maximum safe speed is limited by how regular the surface is and also by how dense the surface material is. The exact material (in the surface tag) is not so important for routing as are these other two qualities (smoothness and material density). 2. Smoothness and surface density could be somewhat guessed from surface tag in most cases, and smoothness and tracktype could refine this guess. The exact safe speed for each value is probably a concern of each application, but for a guess of expected smoothness and expected tracktype (in the absence of these tags) in the absence of those tags, I need opinions. I think these associations make sense when the other tags are absent: [format: surface=smoothness,tracktype] asphalt=excellent,grade1 concrete=excellent,grade1 tartan=excellent,grade1 paved=good,grade1 paving_stones=good,grade1 concrete:plates=good,grade1 metal=good,grade1 compacted=intermediate,grade1 sett=intermediate,grade1 concrete:lanes=intermediate,grade1 bricks=intermediate,grade1 cement=intermediate,grade1 cobblestone=bad,grade1 wood=bad,grade1 stone=bad,grade1 rocky=bad,grade1 gravel=bad,grade2 fine_gravel=bad,grade2 grass_paver=intermediate,grade2 unpaved=bad,grade3 ground=bad,grade3 dirt=bad,grade3 grass=bad,grade3 pebblestone=bad,grade3 clay=bad,grade4 sand=bad,grade5 earth=bad,grade5 mud=very_bad,grade5 What do you think? I know each surface type can vary wildly, but I'm thinking of those situations in which people probably mean when they add a surface tag but not a smoothness or a tracktype tag. I'm not proposing these as defaults for tagging in OSM. I'm thinking about Emil Tin's idea (https://www.mail-archive.com/osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org/msg00389.html) of setting OSRM's speed according to surface as the minimum of several measures. I tried to multiply two factors as he suggests, but I was not satisfied with the resulting values. Then I tried to take the minimum of two speed values associated to smoothness and tracktype and it seemed much better. -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin
I'd like to clarify what I said before that landuse=civic_admin would be useful. It would be useful for tagging the only the compounds where government offices are located (townhall, courthouse, etc.). I am not suggesting that schools and hospitals would use the same landuse=civic_admin tag. Anyway, the institutional landuse itself is useful for assessing real property taxes as institutional entities typically are tax-exempt. Thus the expected tax base is the residential + commercial + industrial land area. Also, the institutional landuse may be useful for planning purposes. You typically would not want schools and hospitals located near industrial areas. On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Interesting! That is more generic than simply civic_admin - one would not expect the primary land use of a school or a hospital to be administration. When/to whom is this classification significant? Colin On 2014-03-16 19:49, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nlwrote: They all sound much like offices (landuse=commercial) to me. Ownership has nothing to do with land use. In this case, the city council happen to be the users of the property, but if they need to downsize for whatever reason and a particular building gets a new tenant, will the land use change? I wouldn't have thought so. Well, in my country, these are classified as a different landuse and not commercial. Please see this land use map as an example: http://mandaluyong.gov.ph/img/profile/map9.gif Hospitals, schools, universities, and civic/admin facilities (such as municipal or village townhalls) are classed as institutional landuse. So for my country, landuse=civic_admin (or similar) would make sense. ___ Tagging mailing listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
Do you all agree with these wiki edits? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Atracktypediff=1002090oldid=992679 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AMap_Features%3Atracktypediff=1002096oldid=971383 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Asmoothnessdiff=1002098oldid=905282 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Asurfacediff=1002099oldid=970317 On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-15 16:29 GMT+01:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: tracktype is the degree of compaction of the material (regardless of material) I have always more thought of it how much it was constructed, while tracktype=1 is a paved road, 5 will be a track on grass (almost or not constructed at all) and the rest in between. Generally a tracktype=grade1 should be easily navigable by bike or foot also after days of rain while for grade2 you would hope so and grade3 is not clear, 4 and 5 probably not. In the end it is a generalized hierarchical system that comprises several single characteristics to come to a summarizing tag value (and the single characteristics are not documented and may vary on individual basis). Somehow it still works as you can compare the values with other tracks in the same area. Hm I think that someone on a city bike (not on a mountain bike) would find tracktype=grade2 somewhat inconvenient, but still usable indeed. Anyway, I'm making these questions because thinking of degree of compaction (same as hardness maybe) makes tracktype essentially independent from both smoothness and surface tags. You can then guess more accurately things such as expected speed, comfort level, draft forces, and the risk of getting bogged. One question: do you think that an almost flat natural rock path should be tracktype=grade1 (because it's closer to compacted) or tracktype=grade5 (because it's not constructed)? - smoothness is the degree of irregularity of the surface (for wheeled vehicles, also regardless of material) yes. in other words how smooth or even the surface is. - surface more closely represents the material structure, usually regardless of other characteristics (with a few exceptions) yes, surface is a mixture of the ~material (roughly classified) and in some cases the way of application / the overall structure (e.g. cobblestones). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth
Fernando, Thanks for your efforts on this troublesome topic. I've been following the conversation but have avoided adding any comments up to now because of the complexity of any solutions I could offer. Begin rant I have problems with the whole relationship between tracktype, surface, and smoothness and how they work, or do not work, together. For instance, IMO tracktype should describe the physical characteristics of a track, not a highway, and it should have nothing to do with how well maintained it is. A track is a track (a rough road or trail, unpaved, mostly un-maintained) suitable for light use only, and is never a highway. Both tracks and highways, however, have surfaces whose character is often a function of the material they're made from, and those surfaces have an additional important characteristic called smoothness. How a highway ever got a tracktype tag is beyond me and seems a big mistake. But it's been used so many times it would be all but impossible to change it now. As far as smoothness is concerned, many have derided it as being too subjective. Yet, to me, it is a very important characteristic. How to measure it in any meaningful way is another entire issue. End rant Moving on: In the edited tracktype entry (first link above) where you say, particularly regarding surface stiffness, IMO the word stiffness is not a good term to describe a surface. Stiffness is resistance to bending. Perhaps soundness, permanence, or better yet, durability. Personally, I would remove the word paved from the definition of tracktype=grade1 entirely (link 2 above). I know this would meet with tons of argument but I would prefer something like: - Solid. Usually a heavily compacted and durable surface. The changes to smoothness and surface definitions are fine. I'm in total agreement. Cheers, Dave (AlaskaDave) On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: Do you all agree with these wiki edits? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Atracktypediff=1002090oldid=992679 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AMap_Features%3Atracktypediff=1002096oldid=971383 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Asmoothnessdiff=1002098oldid=905282 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Asurfacediff=1002099oldid=970317 On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-03-15 16:29 GMT+01:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com : tracktype is the degree of compaction of the material (regardless of material) I have always more thought of it how much it was constructed, while tracktype=1 is a paved road, 5 will be a track on grass (almost or not constructed at all) and the rest in between. Generally a tracktype=grade1 should be easily navigable by bike or foot also after days of rain while for grade2 you would hope so and grade3 is not clear, 4 and 5 probably not. In the end it is a generalized hierarchical system that comprises several single characteristics to come to a summarizing tag value (and the single characteristics are not documented and may vary on individual basis). Somehow it still works as you can compare the values with other tracks in the same area. Hm I think that someone on a city bike (not on a mountain bike) would find tracktype=grade2 somewhat inconvenient, but still usable indeed. Anyway, I'm making these questions because thinking of degree of compaction (same as hardness maybe) makes tracktype essentially independent from both smoothness and surface tags. You can then guess more accurately things such as expected speed, comfort level, draft forces, and the risk of getting bogged. One question: do you think that an almost flat natural rock path should be tracktype=grade1 (because it's closer to compacted) or tracktype=grade5 (because it's not constructed)? - smoothness is the degree of irregularity of the surface (for wheeled vehicles, also regardless of material) yes. in other words how smooth or even the surface is. - surface more closely represents the material structure, usually regardless of other characteristics (with a few exceptions) yes, surface is a mixture of the ~material (roughly classified) and in some cases the way of application / the overall structure (e.g. cobblestones). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months. (Moore's law) The speed of software halves every 18 months. (Gates' law) -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months.
