Re: [Tagging] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Warin]

On 13-Feb-18 08:16 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:

Nearly all the residential roads in my part of the world should default to 
lanes=2.

What drives me crazy is in my neighborhood, the residential roads are
physically wide enough for 3 lanes, but with parking lanes on both
sides, and some are still signed for two-way traffic. Winds up being
like a one-lane two-way bridge ... Ooops.
And that's before snow narrows things ...


Snow? What is that? :)

I too live in a narrow street.
People park illegally on the road verge blocking pedestrians so they have to 
walk on the road .. making things worse.
People take extreme care on bin day to get their bins emptied.

The only world wide default I know of is:
All people are stupid ... from time to time.  :))




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

Re: [Tagging] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Matej Lieskovský]

Mentioning defaults on the wiki is not machine-readable. We've been
talking about this for a while now - can someone please set up a
separate channel for a discussion about the mechanism for setting
defaults?

Matej Lieskovský

On 12 February 2018 at 22:28, Selfish Seahorse
 wrote:
>> I don't see how it would be possible to set a default global value.
>
> I thought that just mentioning them in the wiki would be enough (like
> the default access restrictions). But as residential roads with more
> than one lane seem to be common elsewhere, there is no need for such a
> global default value.
>
>
> On 12 February 2018 at 22:16, marc marc  wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Le 12. 02. 18 à 22:02, Selfish Seahorse a écrit :
>>> There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
>>> to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
>>> wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
>>> as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
>>> the wiki. What do you think about that?
>>
>> I don't see how it would be possible to set a default global value.
>> and even for a country-scale default value, here lanes=1 and lanes=2
>> are just as common.
>> If you think that a default value makes sense for a country, discuss it
>> with the country mailing. but as long as there is no mechanism to set
>> default values in osm, the info on the wiki page will still be useless
>> for applications that use the data. your wish therefore requires you to
>> work on the proposed feature "default values".
>>
>> For cycleway:both=no, setting this to the default value does not change
>> anything, what is missing is a way to make the difference between "this
>> route has the default values after verification" of "this route has not
>> been checked, let's suppose it is the default values as long as nobody
>> has filled accurate value".
>> If not, you should also remove surface=asphalt because it's the default
>> for a residential highway in a lot of country. also remove maxspeed, ...
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marc
>> ___
>> 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] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Selfish Seahorse]

> I don't see how it would be possible to set a default global value.

I thought that just mentioning them in the wiki would be enough (like
the default access restrictions). But as residential roads with more
than one lane seem to be common elsewhere, there is no need for such a
global default value.


On 12 February 2018 at 22:16, marc marc  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Le 12. 02. 18 à 22:02, Selfish Seahorse a écrit :
>> There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
>> to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
>> wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
>> as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
>> the wiki. What do you think about that?
>
> I don't see how it would be possible to set a default global value.
> and even for a country-scale default value, here lanes=1 and lanes=2
> are just as common.
> If you think that a default value makes sense for a country, discuss it
> with the country mailing. but as long as there is no mechanism to set
> default values in osm, the info on the wiki page will still be useless
> for applications that use the data. your wish therefore requires you to
> work on the proposed feature "default values".
>
> For cycleway:both=no, setting this to the default value does not change
> anything, what is missing is a way to make the difference between "this
> route has the default values after verification" of "this route has not
> been checked, let's suppose it is the default values as long as nobody
> has filled accurate value".
> If not, you should also remove surface=asphalt because it's the default
> for a residential highway in a lot of country. also remove maxspeed, ...
>
> Regards,
> Marc
> ___
> 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] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Selfish Seahorse]

> Nearly all the residential roads in my part of the world should default to 
> lanes=2.

OK, I didn't know that (this is why I asked). Thanks for your reply!


On 12 February 2018 at 22:09, Tod Fitch  wrote:
>
>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:02 PM, Selfish Seahorse  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
>> to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
>> wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
>> as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
>> the wiki. What do you think about that?
>>
>
> Nearly all the residential roads in my part of the world should default to 
> lanes=2.
>
> Apparently that is different from where you are which implies that a world 
> wide default written into the wiki would be inappropriate.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Bill Ricker]

> Nearly all the residential roads in my part of the world should default to 
> lanes=2.

What drives me crazy is in my neighborhood, the residential roads are
physically wide enough for 3 lanes, but with parking lanes on both
sides, and some are still signed for two-way traffic. Winds up being
like a one-lane two-way bridge ... Ooops.
And that's before snow narrows things ...


-- 
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] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[marc marc]

Hello,

Le 12. 02. 18 à 22:02, Selfish Seahorse a écrit :
> There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
> to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
> wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
> as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
> the wiki. What do you think about that?

I don't see how it would be possible to set a default global value.
and even for a country-scale default value, here lanes=1 and lanes=2
are just as common.
If you think that a default value makes sense for a country, discuss it 
with the country mailing. but as long as there is no mechanism to set 
default values in osm, the info on the wiki page will still be useless 
for applications that use the data. your wish therefore requires you to 
work on the proposed feature "default values".

For cycleway:both=no, setting this to the default value does not change 
anything, what is missing is a way to make the difference between "this 
route has the default values after verification" of "this route has not 
been checked, let's suppose it is the default values as long as nobody 
has filled accurate value".
If not, you should also remove surface=asphalt because it's the default 
for a residential highway in a lot of country. also remove maxspeed, ...

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

Re: [Tagging] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Tod Fitch]

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:02 PM, Selfish Seahorse  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
> to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
> wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
> as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
> the wiki. What do you think about that?
> 

Nearly all the residential roads in my part of the world should default to 
lanes=2.

Apparently that is different from where you are which implies that a world wide 
default written into the wiki would be inappropriate.



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

[Tagging] Default values for residential roads and living streets

[Selfish Seahorse]

Hi

There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags
to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me
wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1
as default values for highway=residential and highway=living_street on
the wiki. What do you think about that?

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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Feb 2018, at 18:55, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> The key aspect is that it is a pilgrimage site


nice research on “shrine” in catholic law, but we’re discussing “wayside 
shrine”, which is, as I understand it, not any shrine with a way nearby 
(because every church has at least one way leading to it, and we don’t tag 
churches with wayside shrine). I’d read it as a term of its own.

Also, our definition tries to cater for different religions (but I’m not sure 
if it is actually used for other than catholic places)

Cheers,
Martin 


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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[Volker Schmidt]

There is another type of a combination of open waterway, underground
waterway, and pressurised waterway/pipeline:
a siphon (see [1]). This is a frequent situation here in northern Italy.
They came in all sizes, and there are hundreds of them around here.
The technical trick with these is that the lower part of the siphon has
reduced cross section, and thus is pressurized, to increase the water speed
to flush out any deposits or avoid them in the first place .
This is a nice example [2]. Location on the map: [3]

[1] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont-siphon
[2] http://www.acquerisorgive.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/IMG_0121.jpg
[3] https://osm.org/go/0ICdUgNrl-?m==1549226607


On 12 February 2018 at 16:44, François Lacombe 
wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> The hydro power waterway proposal has been updated to take care of several
> useful comments made during the last vote.
>
> Here is a changelog :
> - Moving from waterway=drain to waterway=canal since a drain is mainly
> intended to remove superfluous water. A canal carries water from A to B for
> a particular usage. It can be overground and underground with tunnel=*, as
> not to break existing underground ways with waterway=canal on them
> - Introducing mill race concept thanks to Janko Mihelic (mill race = head
> race + mill + tail race)
> - Introducing tunnel=headrace, tailrace and canal=headrace, tailrace,
> spillway
> - Moving from waterway=spillway to waterway=canal + canal=spillway
>
> waterway=pressurised stays in the document currently, I still believe this
> value is useful and bring consistency for hydrology mapping, as a
> continuation of rivers/stream inside tunnels and pipelines.
>
> I've updated pictures :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_flows.png
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_manmade_structures.png
>
> The second one shows how various are waterways and why a waterway=* value
> is useful to get all of them without leak.
>
> Depending on comments, voting may restart shortly.
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
> ___
> 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] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:
> For me it is something that I would describe as shrine and it is certainly
> the same in function.
>
> I guess that to solve that somebody should check how "shrine" tends to be
> defined (I am not a native speaker of English).

For what it's worth, the definition of 'shrine' being tossed about here reflects
popular language in *some* parts of the English-speaking world.
It is assuredly not the definition in canon law:

> 1230 By the term shrine is understood a church or other sacred place
> to which numerous members of the faithful make pilgrimage for a special
> reason of piety, with the approval of the local Ordinary.
(http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P4J.HTM)

The 'or other holy place' covers a lot of ground. A shrine may be anything
from a simple churchyard 'bathtub Madonna' to a pilgrims' church seating
thousands, like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Shrine_of_the_North_American_Martyrs
to a great cathedral such as
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_of_the_National_Shrine_of_the_Assumption_of_the_Blessed_Virgin_Mary_%28Baltimore%29
or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_of_the_National_Shrine_of_the_Immaculate_Conception
The key aspect is that it is a pilgrimage site.

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

Re: [Tagging] AutoEdit rename roof:slope:direction to roof:direction

[Rebo]

Nice,thank you for processing and wiki completions ;DGreets,ReboOn 12 Feb 2018 1:06 AM, marc marc  wrote:Hello,



https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/56277877

the POC for the first part



Regards,

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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[Paul Allen]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:44 PM, François Lacombe  wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> The hydro power waterway proposal has been updated to take care of several
> useful comments made during the last vote.
>
> Here is a changelog :
> - Moving from waterway=drain to waterway=canal since a drain is mainly
> intended to remove superfluous water. A canal carries water from A to B for
> a particular usage. It can be overground and underground with tunnel=*, as
> not to break existing underground ways with waterway=canal on them
>

I'm coming late to this discussion, so this has probably already been
discussed to death, but...

A canal is an artificial waterway which may be used for water conveyance of
for transportation.  In my part of
the world "canal" almost always means a navigable channel (strictly called
a navigation canal or just a
navigation) and doesn't convey water in meaningful amounts.  In my part of
the world, an artificial waterway used
for conveying water is almost always referred to as an aqueduct.  And yes,
occasionally an artificial waterway may
be constructed for both purposes, but it's not common.

Does that help or make matters worse?

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

[Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

[François Lacombe]

Hi everybody,

The hydro power waterway proposal has been updated to take care of several
useful comments made during the last vote.

Here is a changelog :
- Moving from waterway=drain to waterway=canal since a drain is mainly
intended to remove superfluous water. A canal carries water from A to B for
a particular usage. It can be overground and underground with tunnel=*, as
not to break existing underground ways with waterway=canal on them
- Introducing mill race concept thanks to Janko Mihelic (mill race = head
race + mill + tail race)
- Introducing tunnel=headrace, tailrace and canal=headrace, tailrace,
spillway
- Moving from waterway=spillway to waterway=canal + canal=spillway

waterway=pressurised stays in the document currently, I still believe this
value is useful and bring consistency for hydrology mapping, as a
continuation of rivers/stream inside tunnels and pipelines.

I've updated pictures :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_flows.png
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Waterway_manmade_structures.png

The second one shows how various are waterways and why a waterway=* value
is useful to get all of them without leak.

Depending on comments, voting may restart shortly.

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[José G Moya Y .]

There could be some bias on the translation.

As an example, the name ID gives to it in Spanish (santuario al borde del
camino=holy place close to a road) is somehow arbitrary.
As most beginners read the translated
tag name only, and different languages make different segmentations of
reality, having translated tag names is prone to errors.

In Spanish we have "humilladero": any place to pray in the street;
"crucero": a column with cross to mark road crossings which is some times a
worship place; "picota": a simple column without cross intended to sign
road crossings were people was bound and executed (so its neither a worship
place nor a milestone), and "hornacina", that seems to be what you mean by
shrine here, a hollow wall containing an image. There are also small
pet-house like shrines we don't call "hornacinas" and I've marked them as
"shrines" -- did I do right?


El 12/2/2018 14:56, "Mateusz Konieczny"  escribió:

> For me it is something that I would describe as shrine and it is certainly
> the same in function.
>
> I guess that to solve that somebody should check how "shrine" tends to be
> defined (I am not a native speaker of English).
>
> On 12 Feb 2018 1:30 p.m., "Martin Koppenhoefer" 
> wrote:
>
>> The wiki has an example for a wayside shrine which I wouldn't classify as
>> "shrine", it's rather a column, no space inside:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Eleonorens%C3%A4ule_Penzing.jpg
>>
>>
>> What do you think, shall we remove the image?
>>
>> Context:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dwayside_shrine
>>
>>
>> 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
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Mateusz Konieczny]

For me it is something that I would describe as shrine and it is certainly
the same in function.

I guess that to solve that somebody should check how "shrine" tends to be
defined (I am not a native speaker of English).

On 12 Feb 2018 1:30 p.m., "Martin Koppenhoefer" 
wrote:

> The wiki has an example for a wayside shrine which I wouldn't classify as
> "shrine", it's rather a column, no space inside:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Eleonorens%C3%A4ule_Penzing.jpg
>
>
> What do you think, shall we remove the image?
>
> Context:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dwayside_shrine
>
>
> 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] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Feb 2018, at 14:06, Nelson A. de Oliveira  wrote:
> 
> For example, this Buddhist shrine doesn't seem to have any space or
> cavity (the Buddha is placed on an altar, it seems).
> http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=61,12053,0,0,1,0


I’m wouldn’t call this a wayside shrine though, and I guess it is covered


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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:47 AM, OSMDoudou
<19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote:
> According to this description in French [1], to be defined as "oratoire" / 
> "shrine", there should be a cavity to exhibit something (with a cross, a 
> roof, etc.).

Maybe the definition of a "shrine" could be different between the religions?

For example, this Buddhist shrine doesn't seem to have any space or
cavity (the Buddha is placed on an altar, it seems).
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=61,12053,0,0,1,0

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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Feb 2018, at 13:39, Nelson A. de Oliveira  wrote:
> 
> If a symbol is sacred (even if it's a column) and people use it for
> praying/worshiping, is really there any difference from a a small
> building with a space inside?


I think it is about terminology, for instance there is also a tag for wayside 
crosses. With the same argument we could tag a cross as shrine or a column as 
cross, no?

There is also the possibility to use man_made=column (for a column)

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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[OSMDoudou]

Yes.

According to this description in French [1], to be defined as "oratoire" / 
"shrine", there should be a cavity to exhibit something (with a cross, a roof, 
etc.).

So, it's also my interpretation that the picture is more a column than a shrine.

[1] http://www.les-oratoires.asso.fr/presentation-oratoires



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

Re: [Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
> The wiki has an example for a wayside shrine which I wouldn't classify as
> "shrine", it's rather a column, no space inside:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Eleonorens%C3%A4ule_Penzing.jpg

If a symbol is sacred (even if it's a column) and people use it for
praying/worshiping, is really there any difference from a a small
building with a space inside?

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

[Tagging] wayside shrine tag definition page

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

The wiki has an example for a wayside shrine which I wouldn't classify as
"shrine", it's rather a column, no space inside:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Eleonorens%C3%A4ule_Penzing.jpg


What do you think, shall we remove the image?

Context:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dwayside_shrine


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