Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

[David Bannon]

I would think shop=laundry means there is  some sort of service provided 
at the campsite that involves someone else actually doing your laundry 
for you for a fee.


As you say, thats not the same thing as having machines available at a 
camp for you to do your laundry. I would prefer something like 
laundry=yes|no|fee.


David



On 08/02/17 20:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:

I see on the wiki page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site
the option
shop=laundry

This does not seem to be appropriate to map caravan sites that offer 
self-service coin-operated washing machines or dryers (and it seems 
not to be in use anyway).


Is there a common scheme that I have overlooked?



___
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] Beef fattening stations

[Viking]

I've read [1], [2] and [3], and for me produce=cattle is ok.
Anyway, I've found also this wiki page [4] that proposes farming_system=feedlot.
But there are only 9 recurrences [5] of it, and I think that farmland=feedlot 
is better.

So at the end:

landuse=farmland
farmland=feedlot
produce=cattle

If you agree, I think that we should write a new wiki page about feedlot and 
about general uses of farmland=* (that is already in use [6], although 80% of 
recurrences are useless farmland=field).
And then remove references to feedlot in [4].
Who wants to do it?

Alberto


[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:produce
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:product
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle
[4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:farming_system
[5] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/farming_system#values
[6] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/farmland#values




---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Carport

[John Willis]

> On Feb 8, 2017, at 1:55 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> +1, building=carport is ok IMHO  in the building tag tradition, it's the same 
> specificity as building=garage.

+1

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for Pipe Line Reserves

[François Lacombe]

Hi all,

Please have a look to man_made=cutline
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcutline

This can be extended to other landuses to mark such a reserve.


Corresponding pipeline section can be tagged with this accordingly, but
since it doesn't have anything to do with network, I'd prefer a dedicated
way beside.

All the best

*François Lacombe*

fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
www.infos-reseaux.com
@InfosReseaux 

2017-02-08 13:36 GMT+01:00 Ross Scanlon :

> Agree Dave.
>
> As I said it could be a park but without on the ground survey or other
> info it's unknown.
>
> These are quite often parks and should be tagged as leisure=park but
> onwards from that is the reason it is a park.
>
> In these situations the park could also be a reserve or easement for the
> pipe line.
>
> The discussion on talk_au was that it could be tagged leisure=park
> park=pipeline_reserve.
>
> Cheers
> Ross
>
>
>
> On 08/02/17 22:02, Dave Swarthout wrote:
>
> Thanks Ross,
>
> It *might *be a park but we can't be sure. The mapper only says
> source=Bing. For all we know he's merely making an educated guess. His
> changeset comment suggests he has also added some "pipeline reserves"
> although a quick look doesn't turn any up.
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Ross Scanlon  wrote:
>
>> This is the aerial imagery of the area the original poster is talking
>> about:
>>
>> https://binged.it/2kN1tfC
>>
>> To all intents it could be a park.
>>
>> In osm it's at:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Ross
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08/02/17 19:51, Dave Swarthout wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I see now you're asking about the land that the pipeline either runs
>> over or through.
>>
>> I would avoid the term reserve, however. I generally think of a reserve
>> as a larger area, often a park or historic area, e.g., the Gabo Island
>> Lighthouse Reserve in Canada or the Hinchinbrook Lighthouse Reserve,
>> which is a Park in Valdez-Cordova County, Alaska. There is also this
>> reserve which is related to your illustration; the huge area known as the
>> National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, but I would not want it to be
>> confused with your tagging targets.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Petroleum_Reserve%E2%80%93Alaska
>>
>> Maybe landuse=pipeline would be a good pick?
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08-Feb-17 06:51 PM, François Lacombe wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Warin,
>>>
>>> Do you have pictures of such areas plz ?
>>>
>>> I don't see anything corresponding to 'reserve'
>>>
>>> All the best
>>>
>>>
>>> Not personally ... and it is a fair way away. As I say .. reported on
>>> the Australian group.
>>> I assume there is a sign locally to advise on the 'pipeline  reserve'.
>>>
>>> Gas pipe lines cover fair distances in Australia ..
>>>
>>> One line is 1,300 km here https://www.apa.com.au/our-ser
>>> vices/gas-transmission/east-coast-grid/moomba-sydney-pipeline/
>>>
>>> The reserve might be up to 25 meters wide from
>>> https://www.seagas.com.au/safety/
>>> Photo of their warning sign http://www.seagas.com.au/wp-co
>>> ntent/uploads/2014/01/danger.jpg
>>> I have seen similar signs for gas and fibre optic lines in my
>>> wanderings, some warning of a restriction in use of area above the line -
>>> thus advising of a restrictive reserve.
>>>
>>> There will be local storm water, potable water lines too.
>>> Long distant buried communication lines too, a number over 8,500 km. At
>>> least some of these will have 'reserves' evident on the surface.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 8 févr. 2017 08:24, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>
 That tags the pipe line itself.

 The request is to tag the area set aside for a pipe line ... a reserve.



 On 08-Feb-17 04:38 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote:

 There is already a tagging structure for pipelines that takes into
 account whether it's underground or overground. See

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8964252

 for a section of the Trans Alaska Pipeline. However, the land area
 above the pipeline, which is restricted for casual access throughout
 Alaska, has no special tagging.

 On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> A question came up on the Australian list that would be more
> appropriate here.
>
> "My local area (and I'm sure many others) have lots of pipeline
> reserves.
>
> I'm really not sure how to tag these. They appear to have
>
> public access for walking at least. (One local one has a sign
> disallowing golf...) Some others appear to be across private
> land, and i'm less interested in those, I'd really like to
> show those ones with public access.
>
> examples:http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-
> 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for Pipe Line Reserves

[Greg Troxel]

Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes:

> That tags the pipe line itself.
>
> The request is to tag the area set aside for a pipe line ... a reserve.

I would avoid the word "reserve" as it has lots of connotations, at
least in en_US, that don't really fit.

Here, we have strips of land, sometimes owned, sometimes easement, for
various utility purposes, including:

  buried electricity

  overhead electricity

  buried gas pipeline

  buried aqueduct

  mounded aqueduct (sort of buried with elevated dirt, and mounded is
  not a real term)

All of these are somewhat similar in purpose.  I'm a big fan of having a
single landuse= appropriate for every bit of land, so I would call this:

  landuse=utility_protection

and also leisure=park, only if it's park-like (maintained/mowed),
perhaps leisure=nature_reserve if it's wilder and intended for
creatures, and probably we need some leisure=trails for areas that are
not really like parks but not really intended for creatures where you
can hike under the power lines or on the gas line right-of-way.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-de]Fussgänger Routing durch Anlagen in denen Eintritt verlangt wird.

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am 9. Februar 2017 um 15:23 schrieb :

> Hier nochmals meine Links:
>
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_
> foot=52.50705%2C13.34466%3B52.50743%2C13.33256#
> map=16/52.5075/13.3349
>
>
>




der Zugang ist schonmal eher ungünstig gemappt (sofern man da Eintritt
bezahlen muss):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/413669685

da ist an access-tags nur
barrier=gate
bicycle=no
foot=yes

das ist einer der Wege dahinter:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/458056301
access=customers
fee=yes


Das Elefantentor ist auch nicht so gemappt, dass man es halbwegs einfach
auswerten kann (als Router):
auf einem node:

barrier=turnstile
entrance=exit
(und sonst gar nix, keinerlei access-tags)

wie soll das denn ausgewertet werden? Raten, für welches feature das der
Ausgang ist?

Grundsätzlich halte ich es für richtig, dass auch Wege die "fee" kosten,
bei der Routenberechnung berücksichtigt werden, es sei denn, man hat sie
explizit bei der Anfrage ausgeschlossen.

Zum Thema turnstiles als way: das war bereits im Proposal 2010 so
vorgesehen und wurde bei der Abstimmung auch so angenommen:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/New_barrier_types=840159

Leider ist das trotzdem zwischenzeitlich aus dem Wiki "gefiddelt" worden.
Nodes machen nur dann Sinn für diese Art von features, wenn sie in beide
Richtungen begangen werden können. Habe das daher auch wieder dazugefügt
(aber nicht systematisch für alles barriers überprüft ob da noch mehr
solche Dinger drin sind).

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