[Tagging] Power networks European codification scheme
Hi all, I've just discovered a document published by ENTSO-E which is the European authority for power Transmission System Operators (like RTE in France or TenneT in Germany : https://www.entsoe.eu/about-entso-e/inside-entso-e/member-companies/Pages/default.aspx ) This document summarizes a couple of principles for power system elements codification. http://clients.rte-france.com/htm/fr/vie/telecharge/EIC-Reference%20Manual%20v4r4.pdf I think it would be great to introduce the key ref:EU:EIC to tag transmission power lines, power plant or transmission power substation with it. These codes seem to be unique all around Europe and they would allow us to sustainably identify a lot of features (instead of using the OSM ID only). I only found one instance of eic_code=* on taginfo which actually concern a feature located in Czech Republic (they do have a wikipedia page for it http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/EIC_k%C3%B3d) If everyone agree about the key, I may add it to the Power Transmission Refinement proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_transmission_refinement All the best *François Lacombe* fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com www.infos-reseaux.com @InfosReseaux http://www.twitter.com/InfosReseaux ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
It would be nice if the default rendering at www.openstreetmap.org would also recognize the intermittent tag. Implementing that I mentioned in top post is for default style - see https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1000 2015-01-14 18:00 GMT+01:00 Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com: On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: * Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com [150114 15:45]: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. In my experience a wadi will go from completely dried up waterway or small stream to a raging river within a few seconds after some rainfall upstream, and back to its former self within a few hours. Depending on the location, these rainfall events might very well be a few years apart. When I tag an intermittent stream I usually have something more benign in mind, like a stream that only exists during the spring snow melt and is dry the rest of the year, but maybe that is only my interpretation of an intermittent stream. Wolfgang Your description of wadi matches many things locally called a wash in the U.S. desert southwest. Yet when I suggested that I tag those as wadi I was shot down. :) I've taken to tagging them as waterway=river/stream (depending on width) and intermittent=yes. And, yes, in these cases intermittent may mean that it only carries water for an hour or two every couple of years. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps will show them as either a line of sand or an intermittent waterway depending, I think, on whim of the cartographer. A while back I submitted a change to the rendering for OsmAnd to recognize intermittent=yes as without that desert areas look way to wet. For the paper maps that I generate I've also created a Mapnik style that recognizes intermittent=yes and uses the USGS style intermittent rendering. It would be nice if the default rendering at www.openstreetmap.org would also recognize the intermittent tag. ___ 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] Basic philosophy of OSM tagging
On 14/01/2015 11:00 PM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 07:59:49 +0100 From: Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org To:tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Basic philosophy of OSM tagging Message-ID:54b613e5.8020...@remote.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, On 01/14/2015 01:28 AM, Warin wrote: What is the basic philosophy of OSM tagging at the top level? There is no basic philosophy at the top level from which everything else can be derived. It's like evolution - some things are a bit strange but you can often understand them by looking at how they came to be. There is a tendency however to tag for What things are? eg highways simply because something can always have side effects that are not related to the primary purpose, or the primary purpose is not immediately obvious. For example, a motorway is not only a transport feature, it is also an insurmountable barrier for pedestrians or cyclists. Tagging is very often based on what you see, not what you know. If you see a body of water (and you might be doing that from aerial imagery, sitting 1000s of miles away), you tag it as a body of water even if you don't know whether this is an artificial reservoir that supplies drinking water or a crater lake or anything else. Tagging What things are used for? eg amenity might require more knowledge than the mapper has, especially in the case of mapping from aerial imagery. Bye Frederik I like this. I'm not after changing what has happened in the past but adopting an approach that will help future new tags. It may also influence future 'tiding' efforts, like those for power infrastructure? Don't know but I'd like some guidance as to the suggestion by some on the tap tag that it should be somewhere else ..where? And what are the 'rules'? From my 'diary' entry .. amenity and man_made are not liked ... and I can see the thinking from your post Frederik. Thanks. I'll put a bit of it up on my Diary .. might get more comments. The rest of you can think about it .. I know it is an essential question with a basic answer that will help guide in the future. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addrN:*
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/addrN I once made a proposal for multiple addresses, which I think was fairly eleborate, but too complex. This is now a simplified version, and hopefully more acceptable. This tagging scheme is already in use (e.g. 7000 occurances of addr2:housenumber), but unfortunately limited to one country or so, due to a lack of international communication and documentation. I hope that this proposal will get it a wider audience, and that application support will subsequently improve. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Cluster
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Cluster This is for grouping features that are more or less of the same kind. See examples. No, this is not the same as a site relation. See the respective comment in my proposal. It is hard to compare to the site relations proposal anyway, because it is full of contradictions and it lacks valid examples. See my comments there. Please view my proposal independent of the site relation proposal. The type=cluster proposal aims for simplicity and usability, and I hope that we can proceed to real voting at some point. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Power networks European codification scheme
On 14.01.2015 21:54, François Lacombe wrote: I think it would be great to introduce the key ref:EU:EIC to tag transmission power lines, power plant or transmission power substation with it. These codes seem to be unique all around Europe and they would allow us to sustainably identify a lot of features (instead of using the OSM ID only). Please no upper case letters in key names. And I am not sure about the EU part. Shouldn't it be ref:entsoe:eic (or just ref:eic) rather than ref:eu:eic? -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Cluster
On 15.01.2015 02:40, Michael Kugelmann wrote: I for myself would put all related objects inside a multipart relation and add the attributes (key/values) to that relation. For my understanding that's at least one thing what multipart relations are for... (except for e.g. making holes into areas) Do you refer to this proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Multipart ...? -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
I strongly disagree. A wadi is usually only an active river through very rare flash flood events, and almost never any other time. Entire biomes are defined by the presence of (and situated in) a wadi. In america, the words Arroyo and wash roughly translate into wadi, and because of the ambiguous nature of arroyo, the term wadi is used for a wash or arroyo when referring to a usually dry stream/riverbed that is dangerous in flash flood conditions. my experience with washes stems from the Southern California Desert, where most of the state park would basically be covered in blue, if washes were somehow labeled as rivers - some are 100m across. Whole road systems exist in the washes (and are reestablished purely by use after a flood), as the rest of the land is almost impassable. I have driven a couple thousand miles in a roughly 50x50 mile box over a hundred or so driving trips, and only on 3 occasions was water ever present, and at that time, the roads were completely impassable (a meter or so of water filled up the Carrizo wash 30m wide). Although several famous arroyos (like the LA River) are now basically man-made drainage ditches, mapping desert areas properly requires the wadi tag, as they are different from intermittent rivers - in the fact that water in the “bed is *never expected* - even seasonally - and if present it is a dangerous flash flood. There is never an in-between state of what you would call “a river” for longer than a day. - as it disappears almost immediately as soon as the flood is over (except in the most exceptional of weather conditions). - kind of like an avalanche is only an avalanche while it is moving, or an earthquake is is an event. A wadi is a place where flash floods occur. It is not an intermittent river - it isn’t really seasonally wet, and doesn’t provide any real expectation that water will be present (except deep underground) - because they are located in places where rain itself is unexpected for most of the year. A wadi has an expectation of always being dry, except for the rare and unpredictable flash flood. t and in that case, you should assume it is a dangerous, and impassable place. I think, espcially since it is defined and used so heavily, and has a different connotation than a river - even a intermittent one, it should be kept. a wash near Borrego springs, CA (ironwood wash, Tubb canyon). it drains to a sink in the middle of the desert (the white spot in the upper right) https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091366554/in/set-72157638113734675 https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091366554/in/set-72157638113734675 https://goo.gl/maps/fpSxE Javbw On Jan 14, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. ___ 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] waterway=wadi problem
On Jan 15, 2015, at 2:00 AM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: In my experience a wadi will go from completely dried up waterway or small stream to a raging river within a few seconds after some rainfall upstream, and back to its former self within a few hours. Depending on the location, these rainfall events might very well be a few years apart. When I tag an intermittent stream I usually have something more benign in mind, like a stream that only exists during the spring snow melt and is dry the rest of the year, but maybe that is only my interpretation of an intermittent stream. Wolfgang +1. This is exactly how I see the difference - especially since when there is water, it is usually a dangerous, unexpected thing. Your description of wadi matches many things locally called a wash in the U.S. desert southwest. Yet when I suggested that I tag those as wadi I was shot down. I added wash as a description to wadi on the osm wiki last year when I was thinking of mapping the San Diego county deserts (as even in Wikipedia it is a round Robbin of links between arroyo and wadi). I'll have to look at the edit history to see if it got pulled off. This was before I understood that adding a description to the wiki was potentially controversial: I thought I was adding something glaringly obvious and helpfully updating the wiki at the same time I'm really surprised you were shot down from using wadi when it is the most applicable tag for the item, and I'm surprised that there is discussion of axing a well used tag, which defines a known and named geographic feature, for the sake of jamming it under rivers. I always imagine we will be discussion of adding more and more specialized tags, as micro mappers keep labeling smaller an smaller stuff - or. Like the wadi tag - expand our definitions of basic tags to better define what is around us. I wonder if the people who shot you down have even ever seen a wash, let alone are familiar with them. I know it's a no true Scotsman fallacy, but that's what it feels like. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Cluster
Am 15.01.2015 um 02:02 schrieb Friedrich Volkmann: This is for grouping features that are more or less of the same kind. See examples. No, this is not the same as a site relation. I for myself would put all related objects inside a multipart relation and add the attributes (key/values) to that relation. For my understanding that's at least one thing what multipart relations are for... (except for e.g. making holes into areas) Just my 2 cents, Michael. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addrN:*
That’s really interesting. I had no idea there were locations with more than 1 commonly used address. The proposal seems to be a good solution to this problem. Javbw On Jan 15, 2015, at 10:46 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/addrN I once made a proposal for multiple addresses, which I think was fairly eleborate, but too complex. This is now a simplified version, and hopefully more acceptable. This tagging scheme is already in use (e.g. 7000 occurances of addr2:housenumber), but unfortunately limited to one country or so, due to a lack of international communication and documentation. I hope that this proposal will get it a wider audience, and that application support will subsequently improve. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ 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] waterway=wadi problem
waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
Can you consider making proposal for waterway=wadi on wiki? Or maybe other tag, as waterway=wadi is frequently used to mark intermittent streams? Currently http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dwadi is not mentioning anything like that. Note, I am not disputing usefulness of term wadi. I am disputing usefulness of waterway=wadi tag due to lack on any agreed definition and description on OSM wiki. 2015-01-15 3:41 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: I strongly disagree. A wadi is usually only an active river through very rare flash flood events, and almost never any other time. Entire biomes are defined by the presence of (and situated in) a wadi. In america, the words Arroyo and wash roughly translate into wadi, and because of the ambiguous nature of arroyo, the term wadi is used for a wash or arroyo when referring to a usually dry stream/riverbed that is dangerous in flash flood conditions. my experience with washes stems from the Southern California Desert, where most of the state park would basically be covered in blue, if washes were somehow labeled as rivers - some are 100m across. Whole road systems exist in the washes (and are reestablished purely by use after a flood), as the rest of the land is almost impassable. I have driven a couple thousand miles in a roughly 50x50 mile box over a hundred or so driving trips, and only on 3 occasions was water ever present, and at that time, the roads were completely impassable (a meter or so of water filled up the Carrizo wash 30m wide). Although several famous arroyos (like the LA River) are now basically man-made drainage ditches, mapping desert areas properly requires the wadi tag, as they are different from intermittent rivers - in the fact that water in the “bed is *never expected* - even seasonally - and if present it is a dangerous flash flood. There is never an in-between state of what you would call “a river” for longer than a day. - as it disappears almost immediately as soon as the flood is over (except in the most exceptional of weather conditions). - kind of like an avalanche is only an avalanche while it is moving, or an earthquake is is an event. A wadi is a place where flash floods occur. It is not an intermittent river - it isn’t really seasonally wet, and doesn’t provide any real expectation that water will be present (except deep underground) - because they are located in places where rain itself is unexpected for most of the year. A wadi has an expectation of always being dry, except for the rare and unpredictable flash flood. t and in that case, you should assume it is a dangerous, and impassable place. I think, espcially since it is defined and used so heavily, and has a different connotation than a river - even a intermittent one, it should be kept. a wash near Borrego springs, CA (ironwood wash, Tubb canyon). it drains to a sink in the middle of the desert (the white spot in the upper right) https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091366554/in/set-72157638113734675 https://goo.gl/maps/fpSxE Javbw On Jan 14, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. ___ 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] waterway=wadi problem
I’ll make one up in the next few hours. I want to research wadis in other countries to make sure I’m not assuming my regional experience is misrepresenting the whole. Javbw On Jan 15, 2015, at 3:24 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Can you consider making proposal for waterway=wadi on wiki? Or maybe other tag, as waterway=wadi is frequently used to mark intermittent streams? Currently http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dwadi http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dwadi is not mentioning anything like that. Note, I am not disputing usefulness of term wadi. I am disputing usefulness of waterway=wadi tag due to lack on any agreed definition and description on OSM wiki. 2015-01-15 3:41 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com: I strongly disagree. A wadi is usually only an active river through very rare flash flood events, and almost never any other time. Entire biomes are defined by the presence of (and situated in) a wadi. In america, the words Arroyo and wash roughly translate into wadi, and because of the ambiguous nature of arroyo, the term wadi is used for a wash or arroyo when referring to a usually dry stream/riverbed that is dangerous in flash flood conditions. my experience with washes stems from the Southern California Desert, where most of the state park would basically be covered in blue, if washes were somehow labeled as rivers - some are 100m across. Whole road systems exist in the washes (and are reestablished purely by use after a flood), as the rest of the land is almost impassable. I have driven a couple thousand miles in a roughly 50x50 mile box over a hundred or so driving trips, and only on 3 occasions was water ever present, and at that time, the roads were completely impassable (a meter or so of water filled up the Carrizo wash 30m wide). Although several famous arroyos (like the LA River) are now basically man-made drainage ditches, mapping desert areas properly requires the wadi tag, as they are different from intermittent rivers - in the fact that water in the “bed is *never expected* - even seasonally - and if present it is a dangerous flash flood. There is never an in-between state of what you would call “a river” for longer than a day. - as it disappears almost immediately as soon as the flood is over (except in the most exceptional of weather conditions). - kind of like an avalanche is only an avalanche while it is moving, or an earthquake is is an event. A wadi is a place where flash floods occur. It is not an intermittent river - it isn’t really seasonally wet, and doesn’t provide any real expectation that water will be present (except deep underground) - because they are located in places where rain itself is unexpected for most of the year. A wadi has an expectation of always being dry, except for the rare and unpredictable flash flood. t and in that case, you should assume it is a dangerous, and impassable place. I think, espcially since it is defined and used so heavily, and has a different connotation than a river - even a intermittent one, it should be kept. a wash near Borrego springs, CA (ironwood wash, Tubb canyon). it drains to a sink in the middle of the desert (the white spot in the upper right) https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091366554/in/set-72157638113734675 https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091366554/in/set-72157638113734675 https://goo.gl/maps/fpSxE https://goo.gl/maps/fpSxE Javbw On Jan 14, 2015, at 11:45 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com mailto:matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - addrN:*
What's the difference to alt_addr:xxx ( http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=alt_addr#keys), apart from the fact that addrN is used more frequently? Other point: I know that in the UK addresses may have two alternative forms: house name or number. This would also fall in this category and could be mentioned in the proposal page. On 15 January 2015 at 02:46, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/addrN I once made a proposal for multiple addresses, which I think was fairly eleborate, but too complex. This is now a simplified version, and hopefully more acceptable. This tagging scheme is already in use (e.g. 7000 occurances of addr2:housenumber), but unfortunately limited to one country or so, due to a lack of international communication and documentation. I hope that this proposal will get it a wider audience, and that application support will subsequently improve. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ 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] bicycle:lanes=designated|... vs cycleway:lanes=lane|...
Am 13.01.2015 um 13:38 schrieb Martin Vonwald: When writing the :lanes-proposal I used those tags in an example. But in my opinion bicycle:lanes=...|designated|... fits better. I was irritated by your example, as well. Maybe, you can rework some examples and add them to the wiki. At least, marking the original ones as outdated would be really appreciated. Thanks fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
* Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com [150114 15:45]: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. In my experience a wadi will go from completely dried up waterway or small stream to a raging river within a few seconds after some rainfall upstream, and back to its former self within a few hours. Depending on the location, these rainfall events might very well be a few years apart. When I tag an intermittent stream I usually have something more benign in mind, like a stream that only exists during the spring snow melt and is dry the rest of the year, but maybe that is only my interpretation of an intermittent stream. Wolfgang ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I appreciate you concerns. They should have been raised in the commenting period of the proposal rather than the voting period that is coming to a close. -1. Why would it be too late ? It is not because a small group of people (1?) decides that is time to vote, that others cannot object. regards m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:28 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: * Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com [150114 15:45]: waterway=wadi is used (18 180 times) and has some support (for example JOSM and default map style). During implementing rendering of intermittent=yes I discovered major problem with this tag - the same waterway=wadi may be used for completely dried up waterway, intermittent stream, intermittent major river and intermittent ditch. Therefore - it seems that using waterway=river/canal/stream/ditch/drain + intermittent=yes is clearly superior to using waterway=wadi. In my experience a wadi will go from completely dried up waterway or small stream to a raging river within a few seconds after some rainfall upstream, and back to its former self within a few hours. Depending on the location, these rainfall events might very well be a few years apart. When I tag an intermittent stream I usually have something more benign in mind, like a stream that only exists during the spring snow melt and is dry the rest of the year, but maybe that is only my interpretation of an intermittent stream. Wolfgang Your description of wadi matches many things locally called a wash in the U.S. desert southwest. Yet when I suggested that I tag those as wadi I was shot down. :) I've taken to tagging them as waterway=river/stream (depending on width) and intermittent=yes. And, yes, in these cases intermittent may mean that it only carries water for an hour or two every couple of years. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps will show them as either a line of sand or an intermittent waterway depending, I think, on whim of the cartographer. A while back I submitted a change to the rendering for OsmAnd to recognize intermittent=yes as without that desert areas look way to wet. For the paper maps that I generate I've also created a Mapnik style that recognizes intermittent=yes and uses the USGS style intermittent rendering. It would be nice if the default rendering at www.openstreetmap.org would also recognize the intermittent tag. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem
On Wednesday 14 January 2015, Tod Fitch wrote: [...] The United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps will show them as either a line of sand or an intermittent waterway depending, I think, on whim of the cartographer. USGS data distinguishes between intermittent, perennial and ephemeral: http://nhd.usgs.gov/userGuide/Robohelpfiles/NHD_User_Guide/Feature_Catalog/Hydrography_Dataset/NHDFlowline/StreamRiver.htm which well translates into OSM tags: intermittent: waterway=*, intermittent=yes, seasonal=yes perennial: waterway=* ephemeral: waterway=*, intermittent=yes, seasonal=no although i don't think past imports of NHD data have made this distinction. waterway=wadi can mean either intermittent or ephemeral or permanently dry, see also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:waterway%3Dwadi -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap
On Jan 14, 2015 5:53 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I appreciate you concerns. They should have been raised in the commenting period of the proposal rather than the voting period that is coming to a close. -1. Why would it be too late ? It is not because a small group of people (1?) decides that is time to vote, that others cannot object. Especially when they have raised early concerns https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/water_tap#amenity.3Ddrinking_water ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap
On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 10:45 +1100, Warin wrote: used it for - blubbers. Some have suggested using amenity=drinking_water with portable=no ... I'd like it changed to [...] portable=yes/no/boil/filter+boil/ Minor correction: potable, not portable. -- Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?
that is not a problem, as multi doesn't exclude all, but all requires all Indeed, it is not a problem, it is a solution ! :) Use two values for slightly different concepts. multi == multifaith == multiconfessional == various == value1;value2;... all == non-denominational == nondenominational == all_religions == every_religion Anyway I hope that Andy aka SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk can give us his feedback. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
