Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Mark Wagner]

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:27:21 -0700
Tod Fitch  wrote:

> There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that
> have different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some
> examples with this search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time
> as they vary with the time of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how
> to tag the speed limits on the roads affected?

I've been using "maxspeed:conditional=65 mph @ (dusk-dawn)" for Montana
highway speed limits.

-- 
Mark

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

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[John F. Eldredge]

At least in American English, there is an intermediate term, pond, for a 
body of water smaller than a lake but larger than a mere wide spot in a 
stream.  Ponds can be man-made or natural.




On March 13, 2017 4:19:47 AM Martin Koppenhoefer  
wrote:



2017-03-13 10:13 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:


If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a
water oasis for all.
And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.




so where's the distinction to lake? How much is the water flow reduced
there, can you still perceive you're in a river, or is it more like a still
water body with water flowing in and out?

Cheers,
Martin



--
___
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] Landuse for vacant lots

[John F. Eldredge]

Note that cities sometimes also include vacant lots that have not yet been 
built on, particularly around the outer edges. When I was a child, there 
was a vacant lot between our house and the next one, because the original 
landowner had chosen to buy two lots and build on just one of them. They 
continued to be sold as a pair through a couple more sales, before the 
vacant lot was eventually sold separately, and built upon.



On March 12, 2017 4:42:35 PM Tristan Anderson  
wrote:


What is the most appropriate landuse tag for vacant lots in urban areas?  
That is, land that was previously occupied by a house or other building 
that has been demolished, no trace of the building remains, and the land is 
currently overgrown or covered in untended grass.  In the past I have used 
brownfield, but this is for land scheduled for redevelopment, which is 
often not the case.




--
___
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] Landuse for vacant lots

[John Willis]

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> "brownfield" seems quite misleading as description for a plot formerly 
> occupied by a house, it would be appropriate for former industrial or 
> commercial areas with suspected pollution

I always understood the definition as "land that was previously used, then 
cleared to prepare for a different use. Lots are usually the site of existing 
structures or similar that were destroyed/demolished. 

With this definition, a vacant lot in a neighborhood (where a building or house 
stood) is definitely a brownfield. 

It is the opposite of greenfield construction - land cleared of native/natural 
habitat to be made ready for use for the first time - bulldozing a forest or 
filling in a swamp for construction. I was unaware of a pollution angle. 

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Dalibor Jelínek]

Hi,
this is not an example of troll tagging.

Trolltag is a tag, not a value.
landuse=disused is therefore not a troll tag

landuse=something + disused=yes 
here disused=yes woudl be a trolltag as it negates another tag
and data consumer must look for this tag to see what
is the current status

See here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trolltag

landuse=disused just does not seem nice to read
but it will cause no problems to data consumers.

 Dalibor (chrabros)

> -Original Message-
>  > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
>  > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.
> 
> Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer 
> brownfield
> as above.
> 
> 
> tom
> 
> ___
> 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] Landuse for vacant lots

[John F. Eldredge]

Yes, that makes sense to me. Nashville, TN, where I live, has purchased 
some houses that were built in flood plains, demolished them, and doesn't 
allow anything to be built there now. The tag disused:landuse=residential 
seems like the logical one to use for those vacant lots. I suspect the 
foundation structures were filled in rather than removed.




On March 13, 2017 6:28:09 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:


On 14-Mar-17 09:13 AM, ael wrote:

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:55:24AM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

I favor "landuse=disused".

English is not my primary language, but it seems a little contradictory here.

"landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.


I have had problems with this rather literal interpretation of disused.
I have tagged certain quarries as 'disused' because stone is no longer
being harvested. But those quarries are still quarries, are still major
features on the landscape with 100s of metres of quarry faces, and
massive spill heaps. People do walk there, and sometimes there is
informal rock climbing in some of them, but they are not in proper use
for any other purpose: they are quarries.

Yet some people object to them being rendered on the basis of the
superficial contradiction that you highlight.

Maybe we need a tag=out_of_use or some such?  But that is open to the
same literal objection.


'

I think disused is correct ...
but it needs to be applied correctly so that not only OSM 'rules' are done, 
but it gives some comprehension as to what is going on.


disused:landuse=residential

This gives the under standing that it is disused now, but was a past land 
use of residential.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:

Does that help?




___
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] Landuse for vacant lots

[Warin]

On 14-Mar-17 04:53 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote:

I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does
not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for
some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something
else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites),
but that's not a requirement.

It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of
brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".


Fine, so maybe we losen the Wiki definition a bit, saying that the 
land _might_ be scheduled for future development. That leaves the 
focus on the fact that the land had been used before.


Might is rather too pessimistic for me to place that in OSM. I would 
prefer 'probable', both terms are subjective .. so some will object.

So I would have
the land _probably_  will be developed.


On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for 
something.

> Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer 
brownfield as above.


I think it says what it was used for .. a disused church is still a church.
The question should be ... is it still recognisable for what it was?

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Warin]

On 14-Mar-17 09:13 AM, ael wrote:

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:55:24AM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

I favor "landuse=disused".

English is not my primary language, but it seems a little contradictory here.

"landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.


I have had problems with this rather literal interpretation of disused.
I have tagged certain quarries as 'disused' because stone is no longer
being harvested. But those quarries are still quarries, are still major
features on the landscape with 100s of metres of quarry faces, and
massive spill heaps. People do walk there, and sometimes there is
informal rock climbing in some of them, but they are not in proper use
for any other purpose: they are quarries.

Yet some people object to them being rendered on the basis of the
superficial contradiction that you highlight.

Maybe we need a tag=out_of_use or some such?  But that is open to the
same literal objection.


'

I think disused is correct ...
but it needs to be applied correctly so that not only OSM 'rules' are done, but 
it gives some comprehension as to what is going on.

disused:landuse=residential

This gives the under standing that it is disused now, but was a past land use 
of residential.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:

Does that help?




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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse and disused

[ael]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 06:53:50PM +0100, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
> > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

Then how should I tag a quarry in which stone extraction has ceased, as
mentioned in my other post?

Presumably not with a landuse tag? But that seems to be the only
existing tag for a quarry? Maybe man_made=quarry? 

I have the same problem in mapping old tin workings, currently tagged
with landuse=surface_mining and disused as the only possible documented
tags. So how do I avoid being one of your trolls, preferably while still
getting the major features in an area rendered?

Yes, I do also use the historic tag as well, where appropriate, but that
has even less chance of a proper render on standard maps.

ael


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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[ael]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:55:24AM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:
> > I favor "landuse=disused".
> 
> English is not my primary language, but it seems a little contradictory here.
> 
> "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
> Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.


I have had problems with this rather literal interpretation of disused.
I have tagged certain quarries as 'disused' because stone is no longer
being harvested. But those quarries are still quarries, are still major
features on the landscape with 100s of metres of quarry faces, and
massive spill heaps. People do walk there, and sometimes there is
informal rock climbing in some of them, but they are not in proper use
for any other purpose: they are quarries.

Yet some people object to them being rendered on the basis of the
superficial contradiction that you highlight.

Maybe we need a tag=out_of_use or some such?  But that is open to the
same literal objection.

ael

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

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Richard]

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 08:24:35PM +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
> stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
...
...
...
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
> them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
> what the 226 current uses of the tag are.

when using natural=water + water=pool they would become distinct (though 
adjacent)
water body from the river/creek which they are part of which is not quite right.
They are part of the river with special properties.

So perhaps
 natural=water + water=river
 + stream_pool=yes


Richard

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

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Tod Fitch]

That sounds like a reasonable tagging system, I’ll go with it. Thanks!

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:50 AM, Gsc  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> In Poland, in urban areas, we use maxspeed=50 with
> maxspeed:conditional=60 @ 23:00-05:00 (53628 occurrences). So probably
> you should tag it using both maxspeed (45 mph) and maxspeed:conditional
> (40 mph @ dusk-dawn).
> 
> W dniu 13.03.2017, pon o godzinie 09∶40 -0700, użytkownik Tod Fitch
> napisał:
>> Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it
>> might be tagged as:
>> 
>> "maxspeed:conditional”="45 mph@dawn-dusk;40 mph@dusk-dawn”
>> 
>> Is this correct? (I seem to have a comprehension issue with the
>> conditional tagging syntax).
>> 



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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Tristan Anderson]

Thanks for the input everone.  I like the idea of grass/scrub/grassland 
depending on the site if there is no trace of the demolished buildings.  If 
there is still something like a foundation, or slabs of broken concrete or 
other debris, then it would be tagged as a brownfield.

There seems to be consensus that brownfield sites are not necessarily slated 
for redevelopment so the wiki pages should be changed to reflect this.  What is 
less clear is whether the term brownfield is limited to sites contaminated from 
past industrial activity, or whether broken slabs of concrete from a house 
would qualify.  In my opinion, they would.


From: Tom Pfeifer 
Sent: March 13, 2017 1:53 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
> I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does
> not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for
> some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something
> else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites),
> but that's not a requirement.
>
> It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of
> brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".

Fine, so maybe we losen the Wiki definition a bit, saying that the land
_might_ be scheduled for future development. That leaves the focus on
the fact that the land had been used before.

On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
 > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
 > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer
brownfield as above.

I agree that landcover=* can describe what has grown there.

tom

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote:

I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does
not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for
some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something
else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites),
but that's not a requirement.

It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of
brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".


Fine, so maybe we losen the Wiki definition a bit, saying that the land 
_might_ be scheduled for future development. That leaves the focus on 
the fact that the land had been used before.


On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
> Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer 
brownfield as above.


I agree that landcover=* can describe what has grown there.

tom

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

[muzirian]

On Monday, March 13, 2017, Thilo Haug  wrote:

> I think I missed the beginning.
> Is this tag also about the places where you may pick up your parcels
> in case you weren't at home ?
>
> In this case, amenity would fit, as they usually aren't offices
> (I got a station, a laundry and a convenience shop as an example, for
> UPS, Hermes and DHL).
>
> By the way, how to distinguish between amenity=post_office
> and amenity=courier in case of DHL ?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Post_DHL
>
>
>
In India the same facility is often used to book and drop or pickup
packages if missed, not sure if its same there. And not sure about if this
tag should be used for places only for pickup or sub tag should be made.

And in case of Germany, search tells Deutsche Post is still the name used
for post offices in Germany, and those should be marked as post offices and
other wings under Dhl still has different names like Dhl express etc.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits / taginfo, overpass

[Thilo Haug]

Hi Tod,

here's an overview of the existing entries :
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/maxspeed%3Aconditional#values

And some tagged entities :
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/nt2

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 13.03.2017 um 17:40 schrieb Tod Fitch:
> Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it might be 
> tagged as:
>
> "maxspeed:conditional”="45 mph@dawn-dusk;40 mph@dusk-dawn”
>
> Is this correct? (I seem to have a comprehension issue with the conditional 
> tagging syntax).
>
> Thanks!
>
>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:27 AM, Tod Fitch  wrote:
>>
>> There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that have 
>> different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some examples with this 
>> search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time as they vary with the 
>> time of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how to tag the speed limits on 
>> the roads affected?
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=arizona+day%2Fnight+speed+limit+sign&bext=msl&atb=v45-6&iax=1&ia=images
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856


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

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Gsc]

Hello,

In Poland, in urban areas, we use maxspeed=50 with
maxspeed:conditional=60 @ 23:00-05:00 (53628 occurrences). So probably
you should tag it using both maxspeed (45 mph) and maxspeed:conditional
(40 mph @ dusk-dawn).

W dniu 13.03.2017, pon o godzinie 09∶40 -0700, użytkownik Tod Fitch
napisał:
> Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it
> might be tagged as:
> 
> "maxspeed:conditional”="45 mph@dawn-dusk;40 mph@dusk-dawn”
> 
> Is this correct? (I seem to have a comprehension issue with the
> conditional tagging syntax).
> 
> Thanks!
> 

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

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Tod Fitch]

Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it might be 
tagged as:

"maxspeed:conditional”="45 mph@dawn-dusk;40 mph@dusk-dawn”

Is this correct? (I seem to have a comprehension issue with the conditional 
tagging syntax).

Thanks!

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:27 AM, Tod Fitch  wrote:
> 
> There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that have 
> different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some examples with this 
> search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time as they vary with the time 
> of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how to tag the speed limits on the 
> roads affected?
> 
> [1] 
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=arizona+day%2Fnight+speed+limit+sign&bext=msl&atb=v45-6&iax=1&ia=images
> 
> Thanks!
> 


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

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Thilo Haug]

Hi Tod,

there's the same in Germany,
from Stuttgart to Munich you just got 8pm to 10pm "without" limit.

How about maxspeed:10:00-20:00=120
or maxspeed:22:00-06:00=100

This would be the format which is used by opening_hours,
just in front of the equal sign.
Have no clue if this may be interpreted by the affected frontends.

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 13.03.2017 um 17:27 schrieb Tod Fitch:
> There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that have 
> different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some examples with this 
> search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time as they vary with the time 
> of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how to tag the speed limits on the 
> roads affected?
>
> [1] 
> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=arizona+day%2Fnight+speed+limit+sign&bext=msl&atb=v45-6&iax=1&ia=images
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856



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

[Tagging] Day/night speed limits

[Tod Fitch]

There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that have 
different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some examples with this 
search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time as they vary with the time 
of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how to tag the speed limits on the roads 
affected?

[1] 
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=arizona+day%2Fnight+speed+limit+sign&bext=msl&atb=v45-6&iax=1&ia=images

Thanks!



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

Re: [Tagging] Request for Discussion - Drying_room or Drying_area : Proposal page draft created

[Thilo Haug]

Hi all,

I created a (separate) proposal page for this,
to keep the overview :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/drying

Feel free to change it, as it's in draft state,
just thought to keep everything together (to me it's difficult to keep
track of everything in the mailing list)

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 13.03.2017 um 11:51 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
> 2017-03-12 11:14 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson  >:
>
> +1 to drying-room=yes
> or drying-space=room
> , also it would seem to be a place to dry your motorcycle with
> the prefix.
>
>
> I see drying-space=room as being handy.  Bonus round is if it
> starts getting rendered in default style sheets, it makes things
> that much easier for making a local branch for a convention or
> other event, e.g., a fursuit or cosplay lounge with a fan rack...
>
>
>
> I think we have room for both and could well distinguish with
> different main tags places like this (collective open air place to dry
> washing in the sun/wind):
> https://farm8.static.flickr.com/7431/28074475256_12ecb3b9de_b.jpg
>
> and like this (drying room inside a facility):
> https://www.smartertravelworkplaces.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ESB-Partner-Site-Visit-2012..Drying-Room1.jpg
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> 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] Landuse for vacant lots

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/03/2017 21:42, Tristan Anderson wrote:


... In the past I have used brownfield, but this is for land scheduled 
for redevelopment, which is often not the case.




I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does 
not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for 
some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something 
else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites), 
but that's not a requirement.


It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of 
brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".


Cheers,

Andy

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:
> I favor "landuse=disused".

English is not my primary language, but it seems a little contradictory here.

"landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

use = no use?

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

[Thilo Haug]

I think I missed the beginning.
Is this tag also about the places where you may pick up your parcels
in case you weren't at home ?

In this case, amenity would fit, as they usually aren't offices
(I got a station, a laundry and a convenience shop as an example, for
UPS, Hermes and DHL).

By the way, how to distinguish between amenity=post_office
and amenity=courier in case of DHL ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Post_DHL


Am 09.03.2017 um 01:06 schrieb Philip Barnes:
> On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 10:33 +1100, Warin wrote:
>> At least some courier firms have offices where you can go to;
>> send things - saves waiting for a courier to arrive at "some time" 
>> during the day.
>> pick something up .. when you have not been home when the courier 
>> arrived (supposedly).
> True, I think that it should be mapped as office. It doesn't really fit
> in with amenity. When an estate agent says close to the amenities they
> are not considering a nearby Fed-ex depot.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
>> On 09-Mar-17 08:56 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
>>> Are you trying to map the location of an office of a courier
>>> service? 
>>> Couriers themselves are people, and by the nature of their
>>> business 
>>> have no fixed location.
>>>
>>>
>>> On March 8, 2017 3:32:23 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 On 08-Mar-17 08:42 PM, muzirian wrote:
> A company that transports commercial packages and documents.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcourier
>
 What physical feature are you mapping?

 The description says "A company.." Companies are legal entities
 ... not
 physical features.






 ___
 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



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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed - autobalancing:segway=* ?

[Thilo Haug]

I know a guy who got a "segway" wheelchair. The acceleration is impressive.
("autobalancing device or *similar technical equipment*")
Think if this would become usual (like electric cars do),
there might also be restrictions of usage (speed),
similar to the Pedelec example.

In Germany, law includes the term "maximum speed depending on the type
of construction".
Means it might be forbidden if there's only the possibility you could go
faster.

This one is "generally forbidden" in Germany as it's faster than 6 km/h
(counts as "motor vehicle")
and therefore forbidden on sidewalks and bicycle lanes.
For street usage, the technical specification is currently missing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-balancing_two-wheeled_board
German :
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Board#Rechts-_und_Zulassungsfragen

Perhaps
autobalancing:segway=*
autobalancing:hoverboard=*
autobalancing:unicycle=*
autobalancing:wheelchair=*

(leaves the possibility to extend it if needed) ?

Here's an overview of restrictions by country depending on the type of way :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions

But I don't think that in the near future
there will be a countrywide regulation for those auto-balancing devices
for many countries (as technical development is faster than the
government's rule definition).

HTH, cheers,
Thilo


Am 13.03.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Max:
> On 2017년 03월 13일 12:17, Dalibor Jelínek wrote:
>>> Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled?
>> Nope, they do not have that autobalancing device.
>>
>>> Do the devices have to have motors?
>> Aparently no.
>
> Those two contradict. If it is self balancing it needs a motor.
>
> Maybe interesting in this context: Most countries in the EU treat
> Pedelecs (Pedal-Electric-Cycles) as bicycles, even though they have a
> motor assistance up to 25km/h. Only when there is assistance over
> 25km/h they fall in the category of motorized vehicles.
>
> ___
> 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] Holiday house for groups --> group_accommodation ?

[Thilo Haug]

Hi all,

I checked whether there is some word for it.

In German, it seems it's called group_house :
https://gruppenhausmieten.com
https://www.gruppenhaus.de - 5096 Houses
https://www.belvilla.de/ferienhaus-gruppen
http://www.gruppenhäuser.info
https://www.ep-reisen.de/reisen-fuer-gruppen/gruppenhaeuser/gruppenhaeuser-mieten

In English, i found several group_accommodation
"hotels, countryside estates and castles, holiday villas and chalets"
http://www.groupaccommodation.com
"Large Group Accommodation in the UK" :
http://www.partyhouses.co.uk
https://www.stayz.com.au/large-groups-accommodation
Large group self catering holiday accommodation
*"large holiday villas to a group of holiday cottages to suit large
numbers"*
http://www.lovetoescape.com/idea/1163/large-group-self-catering-holiday-accommodation.htm*
*self-catering *country house, mansion or cottage**complex *
https://www.countrycottagesonline.net/project/search/Large-group-accommodation_Somerset.php

As those a really huge (different to a chalet or apartment),
I'd assume you should find some phrases to distinguish it from smaller ones
and name it group_accommodation ?

like
tourism=chalet
group_accommodation=yes

tourism=hotel
group_accommodation=yes

What's missing, is a tag for *mansion*/villa,
but it would be hard to define :
"In British English a mansion block refers to a*block of flats or
apartments* designed for the appearance of grandeur. In many parts of
Asia, including Hong Kong and Japan, the word mansion also refers to a
block of apartments.[...]
These town mansions were referred to as '*houses*' in London, *hotels*
in Paris and *palaces* in most European cities elsewhere."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansion

"a large impressive house"
http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/mansion

(I think it's better to use "chalet" instead)

Cheers,
Thilo


Am 13.03.2017 um 09:27 schrieb Lorenzo "Beba" Beltrami:
> 2017-03-12 22:27 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer  >:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 12 Mar 2017, at 17:04, althio  > wrote:
>
>> Well then as Thilo said, if it is not
>> "tourism=apartment"
>> it is
>> "tourism=chalet"
>
>
> it is neither, the established tourism tags describe quite
> specific accommodation types in osm and these bigger venues to
> rent as a whole are not covered by any of them, as far as I can see.
>
> a chalet according to the wiki :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dchalet
> 
> A type of accommodation. The term chalet is used in the
> hospitality industry to describe one or more detached holiday
> cottages with self-contained cooking facilities and/or bathroom
> and toilet facilities.
>
>
> +1
> I totally agree.
> Both tourism=apartment and tourism=chalet are for detached houses.
> With number_of_apartments=* you can specify a building with many
> apartments, but not a building like a very big apartment.
>
> To clarify I've found some pictures:
> - https://ibin.co/3FOpHCbLtFVo.jpg
> - https://ibin.co/3FOph7H8yefQ.jpg
> - https://ibin.co/3FOpr6iSeNT6.jpg
>
> Some of them were formerly (50 to 70 years ago) hotels, the capacity
> is from 30 to 80 people. The kitchen is only one for all.
>
> Doing some proposal: is best to create a new tag (like
> tourism=vacation_house) or to add a tag to tourism=apartment (like
> groups=yes or simply capacity=80)?
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-13 14:09 GMT+01:00 Shawn K. Quinn :

> On 03/13/2017 07:40 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> >
> > I favor "landuse=disused".
> > That implies that there was previous significant human use, and now
> > there is no real use.
>
> +1
>
> I really like this idea; it fixes the issue of using
> brownfield/greenfield, which imply "slated for future development".
>


+1, I also like the idea. details could be added in disused=...



>
> My suggestion including landuse=grass comes from JOSM presets. Should we
> change these to natural=grass or similar?



I'd prefer landcover=grass if the only notion is "grass"

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 03/13/2017 07:40 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
> I favor "landuse=disused".
> That implies that there was previous significant human use, and now
> there is no real use.

+1

I really like this idea; it fixes the issue of using
brownfield/greenfield, which imply "slated for future development".

My suggestion including landuse=grass comes from JOSM presets. Should we
change these to natural=grass or similar? I agree that it doesn't belong
in landuse=* unless there's some subtlety about landuse=grass that I'm
missing.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com



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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Greg Troxel]

I favor "landuse=disused".
That implies that there was previous significant human use, and now
there is no real use.

As to "if no use, no tag", the point is that there is a difference
between knowing that an area is essentially abandoned, vs it being
forested or meadow or whatever and being left as it is, which is quite
different.


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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-13 13:01 GMT+01:00 Max :

> Those two contradict. If it is self balancing it needs a motor.



there's no contradiction, the law may require a motor or not, regardless
what the technical possibilities are to actually perform the balancing
action.

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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Max]

On 2017년 03월 13일 12:17, Dalibor Jelínek wrote:

Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled?

Nope, they do not have that autobalancing device.


Do the devices have to have motors?

Aparently no.


Those two contradict. If it is self balancing it needs a motor.

Maybe interesting in this context: Most countries in the EU treat 
Pedelecs (Pedal-Electric-Cycles) as bicycles, even though they have a 
motor assistance up to 25km/h. Only when there is assistance over 25km/h 
they fall in the category of motorized vehicles.


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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-13 12:17 GMT+01:00 Dalibor Jelínek :

> What is their definition of "segway and similar"?
>
> It is named “personal transporter with autobalancing device or similar
> technical equipment”
>
>
>



what about a new access key "pat"? It would be an abbreviation, like it is
tradition for access keys, could stand for
"personal_autobalanced_transporter" and be for things like segways. Would
we require motorized for the osm definition?

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10 Mar 2017, at 14:01, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> 
> A post office on the other hand is a bank, you go there to withdraw cash, get 
> foreign currency, tax your car, collect your pension, pick up government 
> forms, renew your passport.


then it's also a bank, these services are not what a post_office necessarily 
implies (globally)

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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Dalibor Jelínek]

OK. Many questions really.

 

What is their definition of "segway and similar"?

It is named “personal transporter with autobalancing device or similar 
technical equipment”

 

Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled?

Nope, they do not have that autobalancing device.

 

Do the devices have to have motors?

Aparently no.

 

Must they have pole?

must not.

 

How many wheels, what size of wheel? Do you have to stand or does it include 
devices to sit on as well? Are there limits for the motor power (i.e. are toys 
for children allowed?).

Not defined, not defined, not defined.

 

Does this apply to using them on the road, on the sidewalk, everywhere?

Everywhere. It is a same category as a walker. Depens on the road signs.

 

Can you use them on private ground?

Sure you can.

 

Can a city introduce a new vehicle group, isn't this something the country has 
to do in national law?

They believed they can but it turned out that they can not. So we had to pass a 
new country legislation because of it.

 

   Dalibor (chrabros)

 

From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 11:44 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools 
Subject: Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

 

 

2017-03-10 5:46 GMT+01:00 Dalibor Jelínek mailto:dali...@dalibor.cz> >:

the center of my beautiful city of Prague has been marked in a large scale 
recently by new road signs stating

that use of Segway PT and similar devices is prohibited there.



Wow, this leads to many questions. What is their definition of "segway and 
similar"? Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled? Do the devices 
have to have motors? Must they have pole? How many wheels, what size of wheel? 
Do you have to stand or does it include devices to sit on as well? Are there 
limits for the motor power (i.e. are toys for children allowed?). Does this 
apply to using them on the road, on the sidewalk, everywhere? Can you use them 
on private ground? Can a city introduce a new vehicle group, isn't this 
something the country has to do in national law? 


Cheers,

Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] Request for Discussion - Drying_room or Drying_area

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-12 11:14 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson :

> +1 to drying-room=yes
>> or drying-space=room
>> , also it would seem to be a place to dry your motorcycle with the prefix.
>>
>
> I see drying-space=room as being handy.  Bonus round is if it starts
> getting rendered in default style sheets, it makes things that much easier
> for making a local branch for a convention or other event, e.g., a fursuit
> or cosplay lounge with a fan rack...
>


I think we have room for both and could well distinguish with different
main tags places like this (collective open air place to dry washing in the
sun/wind):
https://farm8.static.flickr.com/7431/28074475256_12ecb3b9de_b.jpg

and like this (drying room inside a facility):
https://www.smartertravelworkplaces.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ESB-Partner-Site-Visit-2012..Drying-Room1.jpg

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

Re: [Tagging] New access key for Segway needed

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-10 5:46 GMT+01:00 Dalibor Jelínek :

> the center of my beautiful city of Prague has been marked in a large scale
> recently by new road signs stating
>
> that use of Segway PT and similar devices is prohibited there.
>


Wow, this leads to many questions. What is their definition of "segway and
similar"? Does it include skateboards, vehicles for disabled? Do the
devices have to have motors? Must they have pole? How many wheels, what
size of wheel? Do you have to stand or does it include devices to sit on as
well? Are there limits for the motor power (i.e. are toys for children
allowed?). Does this apply to using them on the road, on the sidewalk,
everywhere? Can you use them on private ground? Can a city introduce a new
vehicle group, isn't this something the country has to do in national law?


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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-12 23:12 GMT+01:00 Andy Townsend :

> I'd use "brownfield", both in OSM and more generally, for land that isn't
> scheduled for redevelopment yet.



"brownfield" seems quite misleading as description for a plot formerly
occupied by a house, it would be appropriate for former industrial or
commercial areas with suspected pollution (in case of former industrial and
some kind of commercial use it is very likely that the former use has left
some kind of pollution). The wiki confirms this point of view.
I know, the only other established landuse tag in OSM for vacant building
plots is "greenfield", and this requires no previous occupation by
buildings according to the wiki.

So basically it doesn't seem we have an established tag for this kind of
plots, and something new will have to be proposed.

Cheers,
Martin



https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dgreenfield
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dbrownfield
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-13 10:13 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a
> water oasis for all.
> And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.
>


so where's the distinction to lake? How much is the water flow reduced
there, can you still perceive you're in a river, or is it more like a still
water body with water flowing in and out?

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

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Warin]

On 13-Mar-17 07:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:

Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand
to "stream_pool", like:

natural=water
water=lake
lake=stream_pool


I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it still 
is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or are they 
simply the wider parts of the river?



Not only wider but deeper.
They are nice places for a dip.
If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a water 
oasis for all.
And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.


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

Re: [Tagging] Holiday house for groups

[Lorenzo "Beba" Beltrami]

2017-03-12 22:27 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 12 Mar 2017, at 17:04, althio  wrote:
>
> Well then as Thilo said, if it is not
> "tourism=apartment"
> it is
> "tourism=chalet"
>
>
>
> it is neither, the established tourism tags describe quite specific
> accommodation types in osm and these bigger venues to rent as a whole are
> not covered by any of them, as far as I can see.
>
> a chalet according to the wiki :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dchalet
> A type of accommodation. The term chalet is used in the hospitality
> industry to describe one or more detached holiday cottages with
> self-contained cooking facilities and/or bathroom and toilet facilities.
>

+1
I totally agree.
Both tourism=apartment and tourism=chalet are for detached houses.
With number_of_apartments=* you can specify a building with many
apartments, but not a building like a very big apartment.

To clarify I've found some pictures:
- https://ibin.co/3FOpHCbLtFVo.jpg
- https://ibin.co/3FOph7H8yefQ.jpg
- https://ibin.co/3FOpr6iSeNT6.jpg

Some of them were formerly (50 to 70 years ago) hotels, the capacity is
from 30 to 80 people. The kitchen is only one for all.

Doing some proposal: is best to create a new tag (like
tourism=vacation_house) or to add a tag to tourism=apartment (like
groups=yes or simply capacity=80)?

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

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:
> 
> Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand
> to "stream_pool", like:
> 
> natural=water
> water=lake
> lake=stream_pool


I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it still 
is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or are they 
simply the wider parts of the river?

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

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:
> 
> 
> If you don't need a new tag, I would go for
> natural=water
> water=lake
> (and let the size and position of the feature show that it is a small
> body of water on a river)
> After all, it is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;)



no, it's not a kind of lake similar like 3 trees can never be a kind of forest. 
Both a lake and a forest require a certain size in order to develop the 
ecosystem that characterizes them.

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