Re: [Tagging] service:car for car shops and repair

[Dave Swarthout]

Then, to make matters more confusing, there is the discrepancy between the
tagging for shop=bicycle and shop=motorcycle offered in the JOSM presets
under Transport. Note that the motorcycle tagging offers in addition to
yes/no, "brand" as a value for sale, rental, repair, parts, and clothes.
Also, there is a fourth very strange value offered for repair and parts,
"old_timer", whatever the hell that is. It's a very messy system

name=Bike Shop
service:bicycle:cleaning=yes
service:bicycle:diy=yes
service:bicycle:pump=yes
service:bicycle:rental=yes
service:bicycle:repair=yes
service:bicycle:retail=yes
service:bicycle:second_hand=yes
shop=bicycle


brand=BMW
clothes=yes
name=BMW Motorcycle Shop
opening_hours=24/7
parts=brand
rental=yes
repair=no
safety_inspection=no
sale=yes
second_hand=only
services=Note for service information
shop=motorcycle
wheelchair=yes

The tag we're discussing now, service:bicycle:xx, is the form used for
bicycle shops but services="text description" is used for motorcycle shops.
The "services" tag is a mess as well IMO (see Taginfo
) and I think its
use for motorcycle service is a mistake at best. Having such disagreement
and ambiguity built into JOSM makes the present situation difficult to
resolve at best.

Dave

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Holger Jeromin  wrote:

> wille  Wrote in
>  message:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some days ago I made a pull request to iD editor with some fields to
> make it easy for the user to set the service:bicycle tags in Bicycle shops.
> Bryan Housel, iD main developer, proposed to use the same pattern to car
> repair and shop tags.
> >
> > Currently, the wiki recommendation is to tag the services offered by a
> car_shop or car_retail using service=dealer;repair;tyres;parts
> >
>
> Often the car repair has different opening hours (telephone or
>  other meta data) that's why I tag them as a separate poi:
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4436235201
> --
> Holger
>
>
> Android NewsGroup Reader
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
>
>
> ___
> 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] Busways

[Janko Mihelić]

I look at service highways as most general highways. All highways are
service highways, but residential highways are a special type, motorways
are another special type and so on. So anything that is a highway but is
none of these special types, then it's a service.

Janko
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Tijmen Stam]

On 02-11-16 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



sent from a phone


Il giorno 02 nov 2016, alle ore 19:33, Hubert87  ha scritto:

I think you should consider the access rights (access=no, bus=yes) and the road 
classification (highway=service/unclassified) as two separate things.



careful with access=no, I suggest to use vehicle=no in this case, because you 
risk of excluding pedestrians (and other means of transport you didn't think 
about) as well (happened around here in the real life).


That's a good one, although the way most busways are signed (with a 
round "no access" sign red border on white circle) in the Netherlands 
that means no access at all, not even to pedestrians, not even in the 
hard or soft shoulder.


Tijmen


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] service:car for car shops and repair

[Holger Jeromin]

wille  Wrote in
 message:
> Hi,
> 
> Some days ago I made a pull request to iD editor with some fields to make it 
> easy for the user to set the service:bicycle tags in Bicycle shops. Bryan 
> Housel, iD main developer, proposed to use the same pattern to car repair and 
> shop tags.
> 
> Currently, the wiki recommendation is to tag the services offered by a 
> car_shop or car_retail using service=dealer;repair;tyres;parts
> 

Often the car repair has different opening hours (telephone or
 other meta data) that's why I tag them as a separate poi:
 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4436235201
-- 
Holger


Android NewsGroup Reader
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-11-02 21:47 GMT+01:00 Bill Ricker :

> From above discussion it sounds like it should be ptv=designated not
> psv, but public bus access is PSV in the EN side of wiki; PTV is only
> in DE/NL wiki ??  Maybe a wiki problem there too.
>


the tag is "psv". "ptv" is just a typo with almost no actual usage (27
instances as of now). If the wiki has references to "ptv" it should be
corrected.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Bill Ricker]

From above discussion it sounds like it should be ptv=designated not
psv, but public bus access is PSV in the EN side of wiki; PTV is only
in DE/NL wiki ??  Maybe a wiki problem there too.

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Tijmen Stam  wrote:
> But, your explanation if highway=unclassified needing to connect to at least
> one tertiary makes the following case contradictionary:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53672494 is now mistagged as residential.
> It is a busway, sandwiched between two true residential roads. The only
> non-service road type that would apply here is unclassified, yet it can't be
> that one as being only connected to residentials :-)

I see no problem with calling that bus-only shortcut a 'service' way.
Getting too pedantic about literal definitions when we can't have
every edge case covered in every language on the wiki is delightful
but pointless pedantry.

But since it's a through-route (albeit access=psv|bus|ptv whatever) i
could accept 'unclassified' too. And that might not be an exception if
we think logically ...
 If a bus-route runs through a residential neighborhood, the
(otherwise obviously) residential streets it uses may be upgraded to
unclassified or tertiary by being the through-route or primary
ingress/egress of the neighborhood?
   (Is this mapping what is on the ground? yes.  When driving around,
seeing signage indicating a bus-route tells me this is a more major
way, and likely connects to the rest of the world somehow. Even if the
pavement isn't wider, it's been recognized as the preferred route.
Likely has stop-sign/traffic-light preference due to higher volume
too, if only because buses.)

Conversely, if the busway is a segregated lane on a  tertiary ( or
secondary or unclassified) highway, isn't it the same highway=tertiary
as the parent but with  psv=designated and/or access=bus ?  ( I guess
that'd be merely lanes:psv if separated only by paint, but would be a
separate way if separated by grass, curb/kerb, or taller
(semi)permanent physical barrier e.g. our accursed Jersey Barrier ?)

Re Access=no inadvertently excluding pedestrians :  signage here is
$300 fine for unauthorized vehicles OR pedestrians in dedicated
busway. Prohibiting Jaywalking up the busway at a station is a safety
matter, bus driver is NOT looking for you there.
  E.g this transit station interchange busway is correct
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8651057
access=no,  highway=service, note=busway, oneway=yes, psv=designated
( since indeed it feeds a building / station and pedestrians are excluded )


(As rebuilt, the _other_ , southern / westbound busway there has been
recently modified to  allow pedestrian access on a sidewalk to the
lower-level of the rebuilt station, so I may need to change that ...
after a walkabout to double-check details ! )

-- 
Bill Ricker
bill.n1...@gmail.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Hubert87]

Am 02.11.2016 um 20:01 schrieb Tijmen Stam:

On 02-11-16 19:33, Hubert87 wrote:

Hi,

I think you should consider the access rights (access=no, bus=yes) and
the road classification (highway=service/unclassified) as two separate
things.


First, I'm not proposing something new, I'm proposing to formalize (by 
documenting on the wiki) a practice that is already widespread, namely 
to tag busways as highway=service.


Worldwide there seems to be a very large preference of highway=service 
for busways over highway=unclassified.


From taginfo:
highway=service + bus=yes = 16040
highway=service + psv=yes = 35658
highway=unclassified + bus=yes = 1535
highway=unclassified + psv=yes = 5707

Those are not small numbers.
Highway=service in any kind of busway appears to be over 7 times as 
abundant as highway=unclassified, even if this is an undocumented in 
the wiki.
In contrast : about one seventh of cases are tagged as 
highway=unclassified. That's a lot in osm.
Apparently it "feels natural" to more people to tag busways as 
highway=service.
And they are free to do so. But there can be cases too, where a busway 
is not a highway-service. Just because most sheep are white, doesn't 
mean that all sheep are white. Also, we don't have highway=busway  (or 
highway=cyclestreet.)
That's why I'll state that it doesn't feel natural so natural for people 
after all.

Ask yourself what kind of highway-tag you would use, if the road was not
limited to buses only.


In the cases I can imagine the roads themselves are usually very 
specifically designed for bus use only: very hard pavement (often 
concrete instead of asphalt) no hard shoulders, no guardrails, lanes 
narrower than public roads for this speed. All meant to be driven only 
by professional drivers. So the point of "imagining the road not being 
limited to buses only" is moot;
It's not moot. It's exactly what I wanted to ask you. You just described 
one specific type of busway. Who says  that a busway always has to look 
like that.

the road wouldn't exist if it weren't for buses.

That's a different story.

Also, did you consider using "bus/ptv=designated" instead of bus=yes?


Nope.
a) what is ptv? Typo of psv?

Yes. (I had Public Transport Vehicle in mind, not Public Service Vehicle)
b) I personally haven't used designated a lot. Looking at the above 
use cases, they aren't used a lot worldwide, which is not an excuse to 
not start using them. Thanks for introducing me to the tag!

It's uncommon, but fitting.

P.S.:
(btw, for clarification: last time I checked, "unclassified" isn't used
were one can't classify a road - that's what highway=road is for


I am fully aware of that.

But, your explanation if highway=unclassified needing to connect to at 
least one tertiary makes the following case contradictionary:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53672494 is now mistagged as 
residential. It is a busway, sandwiched between two true residential 
roads. The only non-service road type that would apply here is 
unclassified, yet it can't be that one as being only connected to 
residentials :-)
No. Not contradictory. One should not use highway=unclassified in that 
case. However "residential" could be fine; "service" could be fine( or 
"road" could be fine, if you really can't decide.) But please use local 
knowledge.

Tijmen / IIVQ

Hubert87

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 02 nov 2016, alle ore 19:33, Hubert87  ha scritto:
> 
> I think you should consider the access rights (access=no, bus=yes) and the 
> road classification (highway=service/unclassified) as two separate things.


careful with access=no, I suggest to use vehicle=no in this case, because you 
risk of excluding pedestrians (and other means of transport you didn't think 
about) as well (happened around here in the real life).


cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Tijmen Stam]

On 02-11-16 19:33, Hubert87 wrote:

Hi,

I think you should consider the access rights (access=no, bus=yes) and
the road classification (highway=service/unclassified) as two separate
things.


First, I'm not proposing something new, I'm proposing to formalize (by 
documenting on the wiki) a practice that is already widespread, namely 
to tag busways as highway=service.


Worldwide there seems to be a very large preference of highway=service 
for busways over highway=unclassified.


From taginfo:
highway=service + bus=yes = 16040
highway=service + psv=yes = 35658
highway=unclassified + bus=yes = 1535
highway=unclassified + psv=yes = 5707

Those are not small numbers.
Highway=service in any kind of busway appears to be over 7 times as 
abundant as highway=unclassified, even if this is an undocumented in the 
wiki. Apparently it "feels natural" to more people to tag busways as 
highway=service.



Ask yourself what kind of highway-tag you would use, if the road was not
limited to buses only.


In the cases I can imagine the roads themselves are usually very 
specifically designed for bus use only: very hard pavement (often 
concrete instead of asphalt) no hard shoulders, no guardrails, lanes 
narrower than public roads for this speed. All meant to be driven only 
by professional drivers. So the point of "imagining the road not being 
limited to buses only" is moot; the road wouldn't exist if it weren't 
for buses.



Also, did you consider using "bus/ptv=designated" instead of bus=yes?


Nope.
a) what is ptv? Typo of psv?
b) I personally haven't used designated a lot. Looking at the above use 
cases, they aren't used a lot worldwide, which is not an excuse to not 
start using them. Thanks for introducing me to the tag!



P.S.:
(btw, for clarification: last time I checked, "unclassified" isn't used
were one can't classify a road - that's what highway=road is for


I am fully aware of that.

But, your explanation if highway=unclassified needing to connect to at 
least one tertiary makes the following case contradictionary:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53672494 is now mistagged as 
residential. It is a busway, sandwiched between two true residential 
roads. The only non-service road type that would apply here is 
unclassified, yet it can't be that one as being only connected to 
residentials :-)


Tijmen / IIVQ

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Busways

[Hubert87]

Hi,

I think you should consider the access rights (access=no, bus=yes) and 
the road classification (highway=service/unclassified) as two separate 
things.
Ask yourself what kind of highway-tag you would use, if the road was not 
limited to buses only.
For me both cases you presented look fine to me in regard of the 
highway=unclassified/service in use.

Also, did you consider using "bus/ptv=designated" instead of bus=yes?

Yours
Hubert87

P.S.:
(btw, for clarification: last time I checked, "unclassified" isn't used 
were one can't classify a road - that's what highway=road is for - but 
is the lowest category for interconnected road networks just below 
highway=tertiary, meaning it must connect to a highway=tertiary or 
higher and should not connect to a residential or service on BOTH ends.)


Am 02.11.2016 um 07:35 schrieb Tijmen Stam:

On 02-11-16 07:23, Tijmen Stam wrote:

In the local Dutch forum there was a discussion on how to tag what I
call busways*.


BTW the forum discussion was at 
. Note that 
the Dutch term "HOV" means Hoogwaardig Openbaar Vervoer or High-grade 
Public Transport, not High-occupancy-vehicle.



___
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] Busways

[Tijmen Stam]

On 02-11-16 07:23, Tijmen Stam wrote:

In the local Dutch forum there was a discussion on how to tag what I
call busways*.


BTW the forum discussion was at 
. Note that the 
Dutch term "HOV" means Hoogwaardig Openbaar Vervoer or High-grade Public 
Transport, not High-occupancy-vehicle.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] test track tagging (vs highway=raceway)

[Tijmen Stam]

On 30-10-16 00:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

btw. also this test track which I have seen personally, is mistagged as
"raceway", while it actually is a private test track for new cars inside
the production
plant: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6060348#map=14/48.6953/8.9940
(there's another one just besides it). These are not raceways, as there
are no races. They're used to test new models and to individually adjust
the settings of every produced car of the current top models (prior to
delivering them to the customer)


To add in, at  we 
have a nice collection of circuits, from northeast to southwest:
* The RDW (state office for road traffic) test track, marked mainly as 
highway=service but some raceway
* A cart track (marked as raceway) with associated dirt track (not 
marked other than with land use)
* The ANWB (driver's club, say AAA) driver's training track (not for a 
driver's permit but for anti-slip training etc), most marked as raceway
* A seemingly commercial (or non-profit) race track, marked on their 
site as "for events, tv-productions and races", all actual track marked 
as raceway, but the small connecting bits as service, with a dirt track 
only marked by landuse


Tijmen / IIVQ



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Busways

[Tijmen Stam]

In the local Dutch forum there was a discussion on how to tag what I 
call busways*.


a) as highway=service
with access=no and bus=yes (or psv=yes)
e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/364983960

b) as another highway type, such as highway=unclassified in cities and 
the country, or highway=motorway_link when it is e.g. a highway ramp.
e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/7391275 and 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24297125


There are examples of both in the Netherlands. While the majority of 
busways is tagged as highway=service, there are some people who feel 
very strongly against it.


While I personally prefer the highway=service, the description of 
highway=service 
 doesn't fit 
it really well: "Generally for access to a building, service station, 
beach, campsite, industrial estate, business park, etc. This is also 
commonly used for access to parking, driveways, and alleys."


However, unclassified (the only other possible highway tag if it's not a 
_link) "doesn't feel right" to me.


Looking at taginfo, the undocumented service=bus has 4462 uses, and is 
in use globally: 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=service=bus. 
service=busway adds another 1400-ish.


I propose expanding the highway=service to roads that are for one very 
specific, non-general-public use, and the addition of service=bus for 
roads that are dedicated to buses, with an implied access=no and bus=yes 
tag.


Any ideas? Suggestions?

Tijmen / IIVQ


* With busways I mean separate roads that are legally (and sometimes by 
use of a bollard or lift gate also practically) only accessible for 
buses. This can be a short connection between two roads, but also a 
mayor stand-alone road netword, e.g. 
. I am _not_ talking 
about bus lanes nor about guided busways.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging