Re: [Tagging] Canoe route
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:42 PM Dave Swarthout wrote: > I've asked this question before on OpenStreetMap Help and mapped the route as suggested. ( https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/31449/how-do-i-map-a-canoe-route). I've mapped the portages where one carries the canoe as highway=footpath but the water portions of the route do not show up in OSM or OSMAnd. The canoe route is the Swan Lake Canoe Trail. There is a portion of it here ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/60.7101/-150.6839) where one can see the footway portions, the portages, but the untagged ways crossing the lakes are invisible. The ways are included in my route relation but I'm at a loss as to how to tag them so they exist as a part of the route. > > AFAIK, existing canoe routes use waterway tags to indicate the water portions of the routes, e.g., waterway=stream, but the routes I'm working on pass through lakes. There is no stream involved, nor is there a footway across the lakes. > > I know I'm raising the specter of tagging for the renderer but if the water portions of this route aren't visible or findable, how would a routing engine or a GPS make use of them? How should I tag those ways that cross the lakes? I don't know of any specialty map - yet - that does rendering of canoe routes. But I'd tag the thing as a route relation, with both waterway=* and footway=* segments. route=canoe would make sense, and for many specialty maps, it would want to have name, network, and ref. (For ref, for many shorter hiking routes, I just use the initials of the trail, and 'lwn' [local walking network] for network. If there's a plan to tag a bunch of these, I bet it would be possible to interest Lonvia https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/help/contact in adding a 'canoe' mode to Waymarked Trails, which might very well be the easiest path to getting rendered, integrated mapping for it. She already has 'hiking', 'cycling', 'riding', 'skating' and 'ski' modes, so I can't imagine that 'canoe' would be much harder. If you're unclear on how to construct a route relation, Northville-Placid Trail, which I know you're familiar with since we've corresponded about it, is built as one and is fairly simple. It couldn't be a single way, both because it's too big and because it shares the way with roads or other trails at various points. https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=4286650 is the WMT display of it (click on the gear at the bottom center of the screen and change the base map to Open Topo Map!) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4286650 is the corresponding display in OSM proper. If you can't find anyone else interested in rendering it, I could maybe have a go. I'd use something like https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=43.2910=-74.3641=12 (since that rendering already works) as a basemap, and then overlay your routes as heavy lines in some sort of bright colour. But I'd really prefer to have it hosted somewhere other than my home office! I don't think anyone's invented a canoe routing engine, and in general, the mind boggles at using a routing engine for a backcountry trip: the trip planning is part of the fun! Did you have, instead, a navigation system in mind? A lot of systems are capable of reducing a route, or a concatenation of route segments, down to a single multiline and telling a GPS,' Follow this!" That's different from 'try to find me the most efficient (by some metric) route from point A to point B." ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Boot cleaning stations
Hi, The bushwalking/tramping people have increasing numbers of boot cleaning stations between rejoins to stop the spread of plants/fungi/pathogens. They are not for beauty of the boots but for a practical purpose. Many have big brushes (mounted facing up) to clean soil out of your shoes and a disinfectant applier for the base of your shoe, example photo: https://www.npsr.qld.gov.au/parks/lamington/images/pathogen-control-station.jpg These are designed to educe soil and other contaminates being carried on shoes out of contaminated areas. How should these be tagged? man_made=boot_cleansing ?? I used 'cleansing' rather than 'cleaning' to try and get away from the beatification thing. May be at the same time a tag for boot/shoe beatification should be created so they are distinguishable in OSM and mappers then have the choice rather than lumping them all in together. man_made=shoe_cleaning ?? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Canoe route
Canoe routes doesn't render because few are mapped, and because few are interested in. Hiking routes and ski pistes are some niche data that get rendered by specialty maps. A specialty map dedicated to this kind of routes could be a nice and not so big project as a tile overlay, maybe along with with whitewater tags if you're looking for another hobby? This usually helps in the long run to have more people interested in mapping stuff like this. Yves Le 28 juin 2018 18:41:14 GMT+02:00, Dave Swarthout a écrit : >Hi, > >I've asked this question before on OpenStreetMap Help and mapped the >route >as suggested. ( >https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/31449/how-do-i-map-a-canoe-route). >I've mapped the portages where one carries the canoe as >highway=footpath but the water portions of the route do not show up in >OSM >or OSMAnd. The canoe route is the Swan Lake Canoe Trail. There is a >portion >of it here (https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/60.7101/-150.6839) >where >one can see the footway portions, the portages, but the untagged ways >crossing the lakes are invisible. The ways are included in my route >relation but I'm at a loss as to how to tag them so they exist as a >part of >the route. > >AFAIK, existing canoe routes use waterway tags to indicate the water >portions of the routes, e.g., waterway=stream, but the routes I'm >working on pass through lakes. There is no stream involved, nor is >there a >footway across the lakes. > >I know I'm raising the specter of tagging for the renderer but if the >water >portions of this route aren't visible or findable, how would a routing >engine or a GPS make use of them? How should I tag those ways that >cross >the lakes? > >Best, > >Dave > >-- >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] nautical channels
Have you checked out OpenSeaMap.org and their related wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap? It might get you started. Clifford On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:19 AM Volker Schmidt wrote: > > How to map a nautical channel [1] ? > > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_(geography)#Nautical_channels > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Canoe route
Dave, When you add a ferry route, route=ferry to a way it renders. You might want to tag the water route as route=canoe then create a relation that covers the entire route including the water portion and the portaging sections in the overall route? That the strategy used to map highway routes that include a route=ferry segment(s). They still may not render. For that you might need to created a ticket for the CartoCSS folks at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] nautical channels
How to map a nautical channel [1] ? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_(geography)#Nautical_channels ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Canoe route
Hi, I've asked this question before on OpenStreetMap Help and mapped the route as suggested. ( https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/31449/how-do-i-map-a-canoe-route). I've mapped the portages where one carries the canoe as highway=footpath but the water portions of the route do not show up in OSM or OSMAnd. The canoe route is the Swan Lake Canoe Trail. There is a portion of it here (https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/60.7101/-150.6839) where one can see the footway portions, the portages, but the untagged ways crossing the lakes are invisible. The ways are included in my route relation but I'm at a loss as to how to tag them so they exist as a part of the route. AFAIK, existing canoe routes use waterway tags to indicate the water portions of the routes, e.g., waterway=stream, but the routes I'm working on pass through lakes. There is no stream involved, nor is there a footway across the lakes. I know I'm raising the specter of tagging for the renderer but if the water portions of this route aren't visible or findable, how would a routing engine or a GPS make use of them? How should I tag those ways that cross the lakes? Best, Dave -- 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] esperanto=yes
I was going to suggest the same as Eric. Best to use the ISO codes for the languages (though I think maybe the three-letter codes are better) and to use language as the prefix. On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:30 PM, wrote: > Hi, > > > > language information could be an interesting tag for tourist places, > schools, etc. > > > > but I think that this method is not the best one. > > > > I’d expect something like: > language=eo > > > > Or with multiple languages > > language=en;de;fr;es;eo > > > > language:signs=en;de;fr > > language:spoken=de;en > > language:menu=cn;en > > > > Eric > > > > *Von:* Michał Brzozowski > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2018 12:22 > *An:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > *Betreff:* [Tagging] esperanto=yes > > > > Hi, > > > > Today user przem started to add esperanto=yes to two kinds of objects > > - streets named after Zamenhof (creator of it) > > - schools which presumably use or teach it > > > > For the first case it would be correct to tag > name:etymology:wikidata=Q11758 > > > > But how about the second case? > > esperanto=yes seems too vague to be useful, and is a precedent (I didn't > see english=yes etc. being used). It seems to be a catch-all for everything > related to esperanto, not unlike your typical hashtags in social media. > > > > Michał > > ___ > 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] esperanto=yes
Hi, language information could be an interesting tag for tourist places, schools, etc. but I think that this method is not the best one. I’d expect something like: language=eo Or with multiple languages language=en;de;fr;es;eo language:signs=en;de;fr language:spoken=de;en language:menu=cn;en Eric Von: Michał Brzozowski Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2018 12:22 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: [Tagging] esperanto=yes Hi, Today user przem started to add esperanto=yes to two kinds of objects - streets named after Zamenhof (creator of it) - schools which presumably use or teach it For the first case it would be correct to tag name:etymology:wikidata=Q11758 But how about the second case? esperanto=yes seems too vague to be useful, and is a precedent (I didn't see english=yes etc. being used). It seems to be a catch-all for everything related to esperanto, not unlike your typical hashtags in social media. Michał ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > I don’t, but apparently this mapper is interested in features regarding > their esperanto support, and I don’t see a reason not to allow it. > > Spoken languages could be an interesting attribute for tourists as well, > at least until automatic translation is ubiquitous and working sufficiently > well. > The examples previously given don't seem (to me) to be sufficient to justify mapping. "This school has an hour of Esperanto lessons a week. And 2 hours of French and 2 hours of German." Not sufficient to tag it as French, German or Esperanto. If the school taught EVERY lesson in Esperanto then that would (perhaps) justify mapping it. More concretely, I live in Wales. For many years English was the dominant language. More recently there has been a strong push to promote Welsh. Road signage is officially bilingual. Many schools in my area have switched from teaching all lessons in English to teaching all lessons in Welsh. It might be of interest to a handful of people from other parts of the UK considering moving to the area to know if the local schools taught in English or Welsh, and that might be sufficient to justify adding a language tag. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes
sent from a phone > On 28. Jun 2018, at 14:22, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> On 28 June 2018 at 11:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> >> teaches:esperanto=yes > > Do we really want to replicate schools' and colleges' prospectuses? I don’t, but apparently this mapper is interested in features regarding their esperanto support, and I don’t see a reason not to allow it. Spoken languages could be an interesting attribute for tourists as well, at least until automatic translation is ubiquitous and working sufficiently well. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes
On 28 June 2018 at 11:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > teaches:esperanto=yes Do we really want to replicate schools' and colleges' prospectuses? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging bicycle charging stations
On 2018-06-28 13:40, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:40 AM, André Pirard mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 2018-06-27 16:28, Paul Allen wrote: [Suggestion to use amenity=charging_station + charging:bicycle=yes + charging:car=yes I remember having been told off by someone who doesn't like namespaces: "we are not doing like that" ;-) People on this list have strong opinions. Often those opinions are in opposition. But whoever told you not to use namespaces is ignoring the fact that OSM already does use namespaces. If most people say yes and one person says no but presents no valid argument for his objection, ignore that one person. OK, but they shout louder and the problem is that it's the other contributors who must ignore them. And it's painful to read replies with just what is sub-optimal in a proposition and no better alternatives towards the same goal. But you are, like me, perfectly right using it because we could have charging:bicycle:amperage=* different from charging:car:amperage=* Do we need it? Please understand what I meant. I'm just demonstrating the general versatility and usefulness of namespace, not discussing amperage. "could have things like..." if you prefer. (But then, charging:amperage=* won't hurt and be consistent) The connectors have a maximum amperage, which may fall off as the battery becomes nearly full, or because battery temperature monitoring throttles the current. If there are different physical sockets for cars and bicycles then you specify their maximum current with socket:typeX=7 or whatever. If it's the same socket for both then you just specify the maximum current and it's down to whatever you plug in to draw as much or as little as it needs. You'd only need the charging:bicycle:amperage if it's a common socket but with the smarts to detect what kind of thing is plugged into it and limit the maximum current accordingly. All that said, if cars and bikes have different sockets then tagging the socket type is enough to determine if bikes can charge there. If it's a common socket then the maximum current is enough to figure out if you can charge only a bike, or a bike and a car, or a bike, a car and a truck there. Of course, there may be other constraints: the charging point may have a connector capable of being used by bikes, cars and trucks but trucks won't fit in the parking space and the operator doesn't like bikes taking up a socket but only permits cars. Which puts it into the realm of access restrictions. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes
czw., 28 cze 2018, 12:59 użytkownik Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> napisał: > > I agree it would be better to be more explicit, like teaches:esperanto=yes > or speaks:esperanto=yes > > Did you contact przem? > Sure. Waiting for reply, but I want to give constructive feedback to him for the second case, which is why I ask. Michał > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging bicycle charging stations
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 4:40 AM, André Pirard wrote: > On 2018-06-27 16:28, Paul Allen wrote: > > [Suggestion to use amenity=charging_station + charging:bicycle=yes + charging:car=yes > I remember having been told off by someone who doesn't like namespaces: > "we are not doing like that" ;-) > People on this list have strong opinions. Often those opinions are in opposition. But whoever told you not to use namespaces is ignoring the fact that OSM already does use namespaces. If most people say yes and one person says no but presents no valid argument for his objection, ignore that one person. But you are, like me, perfectly right using it because we could have > charging:bicycle:amperage=* different from charging:car:amperage=* > Do we need it? The connectors have a maximum amperage, which may fall off as the battery becomes nearly full, or because battery temperature monitoring throttles the current. If there are different physical sockets for cars and bicycles then you specify their maximum current with socket:typeX=7 or whatever. If it's the same socket for both then you just specify the maximum current and it's down to whatever you plug in to draw as much or as little as it needs. You'd only need the charging:bicycle:amperage if it's a common socket but with the smarts to detect what kind of thing is plugged into it and limit the maximum current accordingly. All that said, if cars and bikes have different sockets then tagging the socket type is enough to determine if bikes can charge there. If it's a common socket then the maximum current is enough to figure out if you can charge only a bike, or a bike and a car, or a bike, a car and a truck there. Of course, there may be other constraints: the charging point may have a connector capable of being used by bikes, cars and trucks but trucks won't fit in the parking space and the operator doesn't like bikes taking up a socket but only permits cars. Which puts it into the realm of access restrictions. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] esperanto=yes
2018-06-28 12:21 GMT+02:00 Michał Brzozowski : > Today user przem started to add esperanto=yes to two kinds of objects > - streets named after Zamenhof (creator of it) > - schools which presumably use or teach it > > But how about the second case? > esperanto=yes seems too vague to be useful, and is a precedent (I didn't > see english=yes etc. being used). It seems to be a catch-all for everything > related to esperanto, not unlike your typical hashtags in social media. > I agree it would be better to be more explicit, like teaches:esperanto=yes or speaks:esperanto=yes Did you contact przem? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] esperanto=yes
Hi, Today user przem started to add esperanto=yes to two kinds of objects - streets named after Zamenhof (creator of it) - schools which presumably use or teach it For the first case it would be correct to tag name:etymology:wikidata=Q11758 But how about the second case? esperanto=yes seems too vague to be useful, and is a precedent (I didn't see english=yes etc. being used). It seems to be a catch-all for everything related to esperanto, not unlike your typical hashtags in social media. Michał ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
