Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway
Am 03.04.2014 21:43, schrieb Richard Z: On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 06:08:46PM +0100, Dave F. wrote: On 02/04/2014 17:14, Richard Z. wrote: as explained in the rationale the dimensions of the bridge/culvert are frequently only a fraction of the achievable precision. Think of a track crossing a small creek in a forest valley int the mountains. The GPS precision will be 10 meters if you are lucky, the brunnel 2-3m. Mapping this the old fashioned way will produce junk data, not precision. Rubbish. Please don't rely on a GPSr. It is only one, of many, ways to survey. If I see a small bridge over a stream, say 3m I'll map is as that, because that's how it accurately is in the real world. Some users have access to detailed aerial imagery to help map accurately. so again: *** a small creek in a forest valley int the mountains *** Where is your aerial imagery? I want that!! In the mountains you are very lucky if your imagery has less than 10 meter offset and forests render most aerial imagery useless. The offset (either GPS or imagery) has influence on _where_ you can map the bridge - but not much on _how_ you are able to map it. I'm neither a friend of a crossing node when there is no connection in reality. Missing or loosing the bridge tag I would always assume a ford there ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway
2014-04-03 22:42 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Don't dismiss that argument so casually. The current rule is that the way below the bridge should not share a node with the bridge itself. the current idea that culverts float bellow roads without having anything common with them is not correct in most cases. These culverts are part of an integral highway-culvert-waterway construction. The same is true for most bridges, only a small fraction does float independently above valeys but most are connected with the lower way by the actual bridge construction. The bridge structure may also be related to the riverbed structure, but ways are not. As you drive on the road on the bridge you have no idea whether down below there's a river or a stream or a valley. I could imagine adding an exception to that rule if it were hard to avoid a shared node. But in this case, it can very easily be avoided by mapping the bridge in the same manner two million other bridges have already been added: as a way. easily? So you have biked 60 miles along a forest track and know reliably that there was not a single ford on your route today. You look at OSM data in the evening and see there are 120 streams which you crossed with missing bridges/culverts. What do you do? Leave those 120 crossings in incomplete state even though someone might be really interested to know whether there are some fords on the way? Add fictional bridges or culverts? Say ford=no? This is nonsense. If two ways don't cross, they don't cross. Missing the bridge/culvert tag is a minor error: it just leaves you without information as to how that road and that waterway intersect their paths. However, if they share no common node at the intersection, you can assume that there's no way you could stop driving and dive into the water. In case there's a ford instead, map it: put a node on the intersection and use ford=yes, so people will know that *those* two ways cross with a ford. Missing the tag is missing information with a fallback that makes sense (you'd notice an unmapped ford with your eyes and go fill it in). Putting in a node is *wrong* information, and consumers would assume that the ways cross, thus ending up with a wrong routing graph (maybe they'll penalize the route thinking there's a ford). The other point - even if you know it is a bridge or culvert - is it worth painting an insignificant structure which is perhaps 3m in size when the GPS error is more likely 10 meters? In a deep valley and forest in the mountains you are often lucky to get GPS precision better than 60m. Stop saying GPS. Forget even about aerial imagery. When I had no aerial imagery in my area, I either did not draw such features (leaving them for future improvements), or approximate. The road there is about 6 meters wide, so I'll draw two nodes about 6 meters apart, split the waterway there and tag the middle piece as a culvert. It's not that hard, it's not that much imprecise, sure it may be improved with better measurements, but it is not wrong, especially it is not topologically wrong. Regards, Simone ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. -- Matthijs On 4 Apr 2014 10:50, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote: Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ 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] shop for baby strollers only
Strollers are, I think, called pushchairs in English. shop=baby_goods baby_goods=push_chairs Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 04/04/2014 11:05 Matthijs Melissen wrote: Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. -- Matthijs On 4 Apr 2014 10:50, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote: Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ 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] shop for baby strollers only
At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=stroller 2014-04-04 12:25 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: Strollers are, I think, called pushchairs in English. shop=baby_goods baby_goods=push_chairs Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 04/04/2014 11:05 Matthijs Melissen wrote: Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. -- Matthijs On 4 Apr 2014 10:50, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote: Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://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] shop for baby strollers only
André Riedel wrote: At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. But it's ambiguous, even in American. It's a noun meaning pushchair only in American; in both English AND American it means a person going for a walk. I can't comment on other English variants (AU, SA, Scots etc.). It makes sense to avoid the ambiguity (more so on access ramps than shops, obviously). It's for the same reason that when tagging a roadside footpaths I'll use the American word sidewalk for it instead of the English one. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
And it appears John Lewis department stores sell strollers: http://www.johnlewis.com/search/strollers Steve On 04/04/2014 11:36, André Riedel wrote: At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=stroller 2014-04-04 12:25 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: Strollers are, I think, called pushchairs in English. shop=baby_goods baby_goods=push_chairs Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 04/04/2014 11:05 Matthijs Melissen wrote: Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. -- Matthijs On 4 Apr 2014 10:50, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote: Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
Hi, Almost same discussion when I try to define baby care tagging. :) (sorry for my inactive status.) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/babycare Baby care tagging is still under RFC, so I'll change my proposal as the result of this discussion. BTW, +1 to subtag scheme for original question. shop=baby_goods baby_goods= * Cheers. 2014-04-04 19:45 GMT+09:00 Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com: And it appears John Lewis department stores sell strollers: http://www.johnlewis.com/search/strollers Steve On 04/04/2014 11:36, André Riedel wrote: At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=stroller 2014-04-04 12:25 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: Strollers are, I think, called pushchairs in English. shop=baby_goods baby_goods=push_chairs Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 04/04/2014 11:05 Matthijs Melissen wrote: Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. -- Matthijs On 4 Apr 2014 10:50, André Riedel riedel.an...@gmail.com wrote: Should I tag a shop, where I can buy a baby strollers (and only strollers, nothing more) as shop=baby_goods ? Or is it better to use shop=stroller ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dbaby_goods ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Satoshi IIDA mail: nyamp...@gmail.com twitter: @nyampire ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
On Apr 4, 2014 11:44 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: André Riedel wrote: At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. But it's ambiguous, even in American. It's a noun meaning pushchair only in American; in both English AND American it means a person going for a walk. I can't comment on other English variants (AU, SA, Scots etc.). It makes sense to avoid the ambiguity This is where a Wikidata link would usefully add disambiguation. wikidata:subject=q or wikidata:baby_goods=q -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
I never heard the term pushchair in any American context. In fact, this is the first time I've ever seen it. We use stroller, or if you're old enough, walker, when we talk about conveyances for small babies. Nowadays walkers are those wheeled frames that help older or disabled folks get around but when I was a kid a stroller was a walker. Of course, a perambulator was called a buggy too. Ah, so many years have passed sigh On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote: On Apr 4, 2014 11:44 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: André Riedel wrote: At the moment stroller is used for ramps or ways as access condition. But it's ambiguous, even in American. It's a noun meaning pushchair only in American; in both English AND American it means a person going for a walk. I can't comment on other English variants (AU, SA, Scots etc.). It makes sense to avoid the ambiguity This is where a Wikidata link would usefully add disambiguation. wikidata:subject=q or wikidata:baby_goods=q -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
2014-04-04 12:05 GMT+02:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: Personally I would use shop=baby_goods, baby_goods=strollers. That way you preserve full detail, and you also accomodate data consumers that don't know about stroller shops. what about the tag sells? It is not used very often right now: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/sells but could be a universal way to indicate selling particularities (wouldn't use the German values like mostly in the current values, if this should be a somehow formalized tag, English values should be used) Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway
On 4/4/14 5:51 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: Stop saying GPS. Forget even about aerial imagery. When I had no aerial imagery in my area, I either did not draw such features (leaving them for future improvements), or approximate. The road there is about 6 meters wide, so I'll draw two nodes about 6 meters apart, split the waterway there and tag the middle piece as a culvert. It's not that hard, it's not that much imprecise, sure it may be improved with better measurements, but it is not wrong, especially it is not topologically wrong. and if you are not sure about the extent of the structure or its nature there's no harm in nipping out a short section, setting layer=1 and skipping the other tagging (bridge=yes or whatever.) you have accurately represented what you know and maintained correct topology. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway
Richard Welty wrote: and if you are not sure about the extent of the structure or its nature there's no harm in nipping out a short section, setting layer=1 and skipping the other tagging (bridge=yes or whatever.) you have accurately represented what you know and maintained correct topology. ... providing there's a QA site that will continue to flag that as an error. The fact that a QA site flags an error is good if something isn't correct; it means that someone can go and have a look and map it properly. Another option would be to add an OSM note, I guess. We sometimes forget that the aim is to have data that actually represents the world, not data that generates no errors on QA sites Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
On 03.04.2014 21:22, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:17 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? The way has one side that has/is an exit :-) Tagging the whole way as noexit=yes seems strange. If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Is there any value than yes acceptable ? Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only
2014-04-04 14:27 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: what about the tag sells? It is not used very often right now: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/sells but could be a universal way to indicate selling particularities +1 I like sells=* more than baby_goods=*. That way a shop=sports can have sells=push_chairs, and a specialized map for mums and dads can render that instead of a football or something. shop=sports + baby_goods=push_chair isn't very intuitive. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: On 03.04.2014 21:22, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:17 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? The way has one side that has/is an exit :-) Tagging the whole way as noexit=yes seems strange. If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). I also can't see why, but people also use noexit=no http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/noexit#values ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit, aka noexit=yes on ways ?
Hi, Following a long dated thread, dormant draft here, what is said in the wiki article and now clarified... We now agree, Georg. It seems that this tag is one of the most understood one, and I have modified the wiki with a warning ahead so that the reader read more that the first phrase and a change to the definition stressing that the end of a way is a node indeed and that the tag does not indicate the impossibility but the fact that it is normal. Feel free to improve my English, the meaning and the rest of the text. Update: Warning: this tag is by no means an access restriction (indicating that passing is not allowed). It must be ignored by routing (GPS). It's very seldom necessary and its sole purpose is to inform quality assurance software or a human reader that an otherwise suspicious tag or road layout preventing passing further than the end of a road is perfectly intentional. Use the *noexit*=yes tag on the node at the end of a highway http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway=* to indicate when doubtful that the impossibility to travel further by any transport mode along a formal path or route is perfectly normal, due to otherwise existing road layout or access restrictions. removed way in *Used on these elements http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements* EOU (was: Use the *noexit*=yes tag at the end of a highway http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway=* to indicate that there no possibility to travel further by any transport mode along a formal path or route.) I've made a little survey. Out of ~300 000 noexit=yes tags * 40% are wrong because on ways * for the rest, o ~35% are simply a dead end o ~25% are no more than the junction between a road and a track or path o just one special case found: on a buffer stop at the end of a *railway* siding :-) (with clouds, we should really start a listing of humorous tags!) No justified /*noexit*/ was found. So, it appears that incoherent tagging is caused much by loose instructions again. Cheers, André. On 2013-12-03 15:41, Georg Feddern wrote : Am 03.12.2013 14:48, schrieb André Pirard: ... I agree to: This tag is - not necessary for routing - senseless on ways - only useful on nodes (the last one, where no other way is connected) The wiki should be changed, especially the use on ways should be removed. But I do not agree to I doubt very much that this tags helps anybody or any quality-check program to understand anything. A note should suffice, and I think the best option would be to remove that confusing tag. It is useful for quality-check programs to determine This is not a missing connection to nearby ways. (false positives) A note would have to be clear and machine-readable for this case. It might be useful for renderers as on a map it might look as a connection (because of oversize of rendered ways). But this could be determined by preprocessing also. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
On 2014-04-04 16:14, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote : On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: On 03.04.2014 21:22, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:17 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? The way has one side that has/is an exit :-) Tagging the whole way as noexit=yes seems strange. If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). Yes, except that it's a little bit unclear and hence much misunderstood. I made a revisable update according to what has been said before. I also can't see why, but people also use noexit=no http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/noexit#values In fact, the most misleading point is noexit itself. According to the true meaning, it should be intentional_tag or something that could apply to other seemingly funny tags too. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
I also can't see why, but people also use noexit=no http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/noexit#values noexit=no is the same as fixme=continue I believe fixme=continue should be favored since it actually appears in QA Tools and in JOSM 2014-04-04 11:56 GMT-03:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com: On 2014-04-04 16:14, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote : On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: On 03.04.2014 21:22, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:17 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? The way has one side that has/is an exit :-) Tagging the whole way as noexit=yes seems strange. If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text ofhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). Yes, except that it's a little bit unclear and hence much misunderstood. I made a revisable update according to what has been said before. I also can't see why, but people also use noexit=nohttp://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/noexit#values In fact, the most misleading point is noexit itself. According to the true meaning, it should be intentional_tag or something that could apply to other seemingly funny tags too. Cheers, André. ___ 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] noexit=yes on ways ?
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). As I understood, the noexit=yes means this way is a cul-de-sac. What is unclear if the tag is on the last node or on the way itself ? It is still a cul-de-sac... It seems that 40% of the noexit=yes tags are on ways and are understandable by their contributors but 100% of the persons writing on this thread do not understand what 40% of the contributors do ... So, instead of trying to change 40% of the contributors with wiki fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like OpenStreetMap ;-) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
On 04.04.2014 17:35, Pieren wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). As I understood, the noexit=yes means this way is a cul-de-sac. What is unclear if the tag is on the last node or on the way itself ? It is still a cul-de-sac... Think this is a misinterpretation. It seems that 40% of the noexit=yes tags are on ways and are understandable by their contributors but 100% of the persons writing on this thread do not understand what 40% of the contributors do ... So, instead of trying to change 40% of the contributors with wiki fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like OpenStreetMap ;-) We do not need this tag to tag a cul-de-sac. There are other ways as even the geometrie and connected ways give you this information. If you want to tag the sign that is fine, please use traffic_sign=*. I am trying to find reasons why it is used that much on ways and if it is useful but you are the first one in favour of ways. If you have a look at the wiki history you will find wiki fiddling some years ago, later the activism on the page was little. I am still looking for good reasons to use it on ways but I did not find any so far. Please, tell me if you know some. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit
On 03.12.2013 17:08, Jo wrote: Or possibly somebody changed the meaning of the tag on the wiki, without telling dinosaurs like myself. At first it was a tag that went on ways which are a dead end for cars. The wiki history tells a different story. It got an icon in JOSM when put on nodes and people started using it on end nodes. fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
I was thinking the same thing, but couldn't put it into words properly. If 40% of noexit tags are on ways, this is meaningful, not some sort of accident. FWIW I also prefer to put the tag on the way, I don't care about the gratification that it gets rendered with a nifty icon in JOSM when put on a node. Also, the way I understand this tag, it applies to motor vehicles, not to bicycles or pedestrians. If the road continues as a path for cyclists or pedestrians, I'd still give the way a noexit tag, as that is what I see on our Belgian roads. Polyglot 2014-04-04 17:35 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). As I understood, the noexit=yes means this way is a cul-de-sac. What is unclear if the tag is on the last node or on the way itself ? It is still a cul-de-sac... It seems that 40% of the noexit=yes tags are on ways and are understandable by their contributors but 100% of the persons writing on this thread do not understand what 40% of the contributors do ... So, instead of trying to change 40% of the contributors with wiki fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like OpenStreetMap ;-) Pieren ___ 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] noexit
OK, I didn't check. Maybe I consulted the wiki at the wrong point in time and got it wrong for the past 6 years. Polyglot 2014-04-04 17:53 GMT+02:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: On 03.12.2013 17:08, Jo wrote: Or possibly somebody changed the meaning of the tag on the wiki, without telling dinosaurs like myself. At first it was a tag that went on ways which are a dead end for cars. The wiki history tells a different story. It got an icon in JOSM when put on nodes and people started using it on end nodes. fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
On 2014-04-04 17:35, Pieren wrote : On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). As I understood, the noexit=yes means this way is a cul-de-sac. What is unclear if the tag is on the last node or on the way itself ? It is still a cul-de-sac... As it has been said before I think, there is no need for a cul-de-sac tag. A cul-de-sac is obvious either because the end of the way is a cul-de-sac or because other tags make it one. At which end of the way would be a cul-de-sac if some tag were on a way to indicated it? Or, maybe, we're inventing ways with a cul-de-sacs at both ends? It seems that 40% of the noexit=yes tags are on ways and are understandable by their contributors but 100% of the persons writing on this thread do not understand what 40% of the contributors do ... So, instead of trying to change 40% of the contributors with wiki fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like OpenStreetMap ;-) It's not a question of understanding what contributors do, it's a question of the contributors understanding what the wiki says, clearly: This tag is mainly useful where a road or path ends close to another way but where it isn't possible to get through due to a barrier or other obstruction which may otherwise look like a mistake for a connection to the nearby road. It helps other mappers and quality-check programs to understand the situation correctly. What many contributors do is indicating obvious cul-de-sacs like saying the tip of my finger is the end of it. Or should we complain that all cul-de-sacs are not tagged? There are a great many !!! Others make the mistake tagging a cul-de-sac traffic sign with noexit. On one hand, this is obviously trying to tag the cul-de-sac where it is not. On the other hand, such signs exist because the driver can't see the blocked end of the road. That does not happen when one looks at a map. That's another error that was spotted by a lynx-eyed contributor and that I corrected in another part of the wiki. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?
I always thought the meaning of noexit=yes was very clear. Obviously there is some confusion I was not aware of. If a highway ends with no way to continue, the final node is tagged with noexit=yes. I only use it if I am sure there is no way forward from the end of the particular way. As someone who started working with OSM in order to improve my Garmin's GPS maps it adds no special rendering of the node AFAIK. Whether Garmin's autorouting algorithm notices the tag is unknown to me, however, as a mapper working in an area where other mappers are active, I know that when I see that tag there is no need to revisit that highway to see where it goes. I'm just guessing now when trying to understand why someone would tag an entire way with noexit. In the United States there is often a sign at the entrance to a street that has no outlet. It sometimes says NO OUTLET or DEAD END. Maybe these people are tagging the way because they expect someday to see a sign or symbol on their maps at the beginning of the way rather than the end? Regards, Dave On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:51 AM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.comwrote: On 2014-04-04 17:35, Pieren wrote : On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com nao...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:54 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: If it is accepted, I gonna hange the wiki accordingly and gonna ask a for validator checks in JOSM, as we have more than 100,000 ways with this tag. Basically I agree with the current text ofhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit (except that I don't agree to use it on ways). As I understood, the noexit=yes means this way is a cul-de-sac. What is unclear if the tag is on the last node or on the way itself ? It is still a cul-de-sac... As it has been said before I think, there is no need for a cul-de-sac tag. A cul-de-sac is obvious either because the end of the way is a cul-de-sac or because other tags make it one. At which end of the way would be a cul-de-sac if some tag were on a way to indicated it? Or, maybe, we're inventing ways with a cul-de-sacs at both ends? It seems that 40% of the noexit=yes tags are on ways and are understandable by their contributors but 100% of the persons writing on this thread do not understand what 40% of the contributors do ... So, instead of trying to change 40% of the contributors with wiki fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like OpenStreetMap ;-) It's not a question of understanding what contributors do, it's a question of the contributors understanding what the wiki says, clearly: This tag is mainly useful where a road or path ends close to another way but where it isn't possible to get through due to a barrier or other obstruction which may otherwise look like a mistake for a connection to the nearby road. It helps other mappers and quality-check programs to understand the situation correctly. What many contributors do is indicating obvious cul-de-sacs like saying the tip of my finger is the end of it. Or should we complain that all cul-de-sacs are not tagged? There are a great many !!! Others make the mistake tagging a cul-de-sac traffic sign with noexit. On one hand, this is obviously trying to tag the cul-de-sac where it is not. On the other hand, such signs exist because the driver can't see the blocked end of the road. That does not happen when one looks at a map. That's another error that was spotted by a lynx-eyed contributor and that I corrected in another part of the wiki. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
