Re: [Tagging] Hill figures

[Warin]

Not all of them are on hills.

Marree Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marree_Man

Possibly  artwork=geoglyph ???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoglyph**

*
*

On 4/9/19 8:49 am, Andy Mabbett wrote:

In the UK, hill figures include:

* The Cerne Abbas Giant [1], [2], [3]
* The Fovant badges [4], [5], [6]
* RNLI Dunkirk Memorial at Margate [7], [8]
* Osmington White Horse [9], [10], [11]]

and others exist elsewhere [12]. As can be seen from my examples,
these usually significant landmarks are often not rendered on the map
- the exception in my examples is at Osmington.

Some cover areas (e.g. Osmington, which is why it renders), some are
"tramlines" (Cerne Abbas), and some (the RNLI memorial) are single
lines.

I propose we tag the latter two types as, say, artwork=hill_figure,
and request that such items be rendered at higher zoom levels.

What alternative approaches are available?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerne_Abbas_Giant

[2] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.813611=-2.474722=15#map=15/50.8136/-2.4747

[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675453847 (part)

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovant_Badges

[5] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=51.0534=-1.9783=15#map=15/51.0534/-1.9783

[6] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136177861 (single badge)

[7] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.38736/1.37969

[8] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9995162

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmington_White_Horse

[10] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.65741=-2.40438=11#map=17/50.65741/-2.40438

[11] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120665846#map=18/50.65788/-2.40433

[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_figure

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Warin]

On 4/9/19 12:48 am, Diego Cruz wrote:



Does anybody know about other areas in the world where there is an 
extensive mixed use of territory?




Way: Woomera Prohibited Area - Defence Infrequent Zone (544274312)


Some of this area is also 'used' for cattle grazing... by farmers. The 
farms have shelters for times when there are missile flights. 'Tourists' 
are allowed in the area .. but only when there are no scheduled missile 
flights, and then they have to get permission from the farmers.  Note - 
all natural pasture, no tilling etc.


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

[Tagging] Hill figures

[Andy Mabbett]

In the UK, hill figures include:

* The Cerne Abbas Giant [1], [2], [3]
* The Fovant badges [4], [5], [6]
* RNLI Dunkirk Memorial at Margate [7], [8]
* Osmington White Horse [9], [10], [11]]

and others exist elsewhere [12]. As can be seen from my examples,
these usually significant landmarks are often not rendered on the map
- the exception in my examples is at Osmington.

Some cover areas (e.g. Osmington, which is why it renders), some are
"tramlines" (Cerne Abbas), and some (the RNLI memorial) are single
lines.

I propose we tag the latter two types as, say, artwork=hill_figure,
and request that such items be rendered at higher zoom levels.

What alternative approaches are available?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerne_Abbas_Giant

[2] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.813611=-2.474722=15#map=15/50.8136/-2.4747

[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675453847 (part)

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovant_Badges

[5] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=51.0534=-1.9783=15#map=15/51.0534/-1.9783

[6] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136177861 (single badge)

[7] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.38736/1.37969

[8] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9995162

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmington_White_Horse

[10] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.65741=-2.40438=11#map=17/50.65741/-2.40438

[11] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120665846#map=18/50.65788/-2.40433

[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_figure

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

you might want to refer to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nudism as 
suitable combination.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

[Vadim Shlyakhov]

That's what I've just posted at the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/sunbathing :

   1. It's definitely for the designated locations (like in the 1st
   example).
   2. For the other ones consider if some places could be more suitable,
   popular or simply good for sunbathing, as contrasted with the rest where
   sunbathing is still accepted/legal. The later case is obviously quite
   subjective, while somewhat similar to the tourism
   =viewpoint
   


On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 00:54, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In Australia most people 'sunbathe' on a beach of sand. Some 'sunbathe'
> in their own backyard. High rates of sun exposure gets 'melanoma' and
> there are publicity campaigns to get people to cover up from sun
> exposure. It is not something that would be mapped in Australia .. you
> can 'sunbathe' pretty much anywhere, parks, beaches, pools, backyards,
> beside rivers, etc etc.
>
> On 3/9/19 12:31 am, Vadim Shlyakhov wrote:
> >  From my understanding, sunbathing isn't merely exposing you skin to
> > the sun, but it's rather a recreational activity. One may say it's
> > rather a ritual in the modern society.
> >
> > As per the Oxford dictionary
> > (https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/sunbathing) "sunbathing" is:
> >
> > "The activity of sitting or lying in the sun, especially to tan the
> skin".
> >
> > "leisure=sunbathing" is a place where people come specifically to
> > practice sunbathing. As I wrote, it may be a designated place
> > somewhere at the beach (and not only). Perhaps it could also be just a
> > popular place for "sitting or lying in the sun, especially to tan the
> > skin".
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 16:38, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> sent from a phone
> >>
> >>> On 2. Sep 2019, at 15:14, Vadim Shlyakhov  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> There is no currently a standard way to tag an outdoor location
> >>> (probably designated) where people can practice sunbathing.
> >>
> >> sunbathing is exposing your skin to the sun, AFAIK it doesn’t require
> special equipment or a specific space, is this about a legal property (are
> there places where sunbathing is forbidden?), or what prevents me from
> drawing this feature everywhere?
> >>
>
> ___
> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Paul Allen]

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 15:49, Diego Cruz  wrote:

>
> I don't know the existence of this type of mixed usage of land in other
> parts of the world, but I don't mind dropping the Spanish name in favour of
> a universal concept, such as landuse=agrosylvopastoral (which would be the
> most accurate so far). However, it is true that it wouldn't be intuitive to
> non-native English speakers in other parts of the world where a mixed
> system is in use,
>

It's not intuitive to English speakers, either.  They may recognise the
"agro" and "pastoral" parts
but few would know "silvo" derives from the Latin for "wood" or "forest"
(as do the names Sylvester"
and "Sylvia)."


> and consequently they may choose to use a local name instead. How would
> agrosylvopastoral sound to native English speakers?
>

Well, if it's documented in the wiki, some people would find it that way.
They look through landuse
hoping to find something that matches what they want to map, or something
that is close enough.

Some editors allow synonyms when searching for suitable tags so, if you ask
them, they may
make it so that if you search for dehesa or montado it will offer you
landuse=agrosylvopastoral.

Does anybody know about other areas in the world where there is an
> extensive mixed use of territory?
>

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture
which is quite widespread.  I can't see any great distinction between
silvopasture and
agrosylvopastoral, but I'm not a horny-handed son of the soil and the
closest I get to farming
is looking at it as I go past on the bus.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Di., 3. Sept. 2019 um 17:22 Uhr schrieb Diego Cruz :

> How about landuse=mixed_rural? Would that be useful to areas you know
> about?
>


no, it would not allow to tell anything and would be completely unclear.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Diego Cruz]

Hi again,

How about landuse=mixed_rural? Would that be useful to areas you know about?

Best regards
Diego

El mar., 3 sept. 2019 a las 16:48, Diego Cruz ()
escribió:

> Hi everybody,
>
> Thank you for your replies!
>
> I'm not so happy about the idea of having three different landuse tags
> that in most cases will be rendered incorrectly. Besides, how can you know
> what is the main use and what is the secondary one? The thing is that this
> is a mixed system, and in Spain and Portugal it covers tens of thousands of
> hectares.
>
> I don't know the existence of this type of mixed usage of land in other
> parts of the world, but I don't mind dropping the Spanish name in favour of
> a universal concept, such as landuse=agrosylvopastoral (which would be the
> most accurate so far). However, it is true that it wouldn't be intuitive to
> non-native English speakers in other parts of the world where a mixed
> system is in use, and consequently they may choose to use a local name
> instead. How would agrosylvopastoral sound to native English speakers?
>
> Does anybody know about other areas in the world where there is an
> extensive mixed use of territory?
>
> Best regards
> Diego
>
> El dom., 1 sept. 2019 a las 0:44, Paul Allen ()
> escribió:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 22:46, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I would not renounce from having dehesa somewhere in the value, if this
>>> is an „English“ term and exactly what you want to tag.
>>>
>>
>> It's not a term this Englishman has heard of.  But there are a lot of
>> specialist terms I've
>> learned since I started mapping.  So I did some googling.  It doesn't
>> appear to be a
>> term in English.  It seems to be something found in southern and central
>> Spain,
>> and also southern Portugal (where it's called a montado).  See
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehesa
>>
>> The Wikipedia article suggests a possibility for a landuse tag:
>> landuse=agrosylvopastoral.
>> A bit of a mouthful, but perhaps gets around the objection to calling it
>> agroforestry.  An
>> alternative found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture would be
>> landuse=sylvopasture.
>> Disadvantage of either of those is they may not be intuitively obvious.
>> Advantage is we
>> don't have to come up with subtags to define it.
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Fwd: Walking & Cycling Node Network tagging: undoing the hijacking of rcn and rwn

[Peter Elderson]

Op zo 1 sep. 2019 om 12:35 schreef Andy Townsend :

> On 29/08/2019 15:52, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > LS
> > With the arrival of cycling node networks, the Dutch, German and
> > Belgian mappers decided to claim (hijack)  the network value rcn for
> > those node networks. This exception was copied with the claim of
> > network=rwn for the walking node networks.
>
> Would it be possible to try and describe in a bit more detail what has
> happened, without using judgmental terms such as "hijack"?  I'd start
> with a link helping people understand what a "cycling node network" is.
>

Sure. A node network consists of numbered nodes (signs) with short routes
between pairs of adjacent nodes. Eg nodes 10, 35 and 22 with routes 20-35,
10-22 and 22-35, and then each of these nodes has other connections to
other nodes. The idea is that a cyclist/hiker plans a route along these
nodes, so a  trip consists of a series of node numbers. This differs from
regular cycling/walking routes which contain chains of ways to follow, or
subrelations containing the ways. Node networks were first designed and
implemented for cycling  in Belgium, then spread to Nederland and Germany,
and they are now also used extensively for walking.


Tagging of regular cycle route relations is route=lcn for local routes, rcn
for regional routes, ncn for national routes, icn for international routes.
Node network connections are short local routes, but if you just tag these
as lcn you cannot tell the difference between regular local routes and
node2node routes belonging to a node network. For rendering, checking
integrity, planning and routing, the types need to be different. Same for
other scopes.
Rather than creating a new network value, cycle network taggers decided
that rcn wasn't much used anyway, so they reserved that value for cycling
node networks.
The walking node networks later copied that: lwn, nwn and iwn for regular
and long distance walks, rwn for walking node networks.

To get an idea how that works out: this is a part of the waymarked trails
hiking view in Nederland, around Eindhoven. Walking network routes are
orange.

https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=10!51.4726!5.6261


> Can you give an example of a "normal" rcn and a "node network" that
> someone has tagged as an rcn and explain what the problem is with this
> tagging?
>

The problem is that node networks are different from regular
walking/cycling routes in most aspects, except the mode of transport.
They need different rendering, different planning tools, different routing
and different integrity checking.

At the same time, node networks and regular routes for more modalities are
emerging. Node networks can also have different geographical scopes. If you
call them all regional, you lose the actual scope.
The idea now is to stop reserving rXn (a scope value) for a specific
network configuration type. rcn should just mean regional cycling, and by
default regular route configuration (chain of ways)  is assumed.
We now want to add a separate tag for network configuration type. Could
have more than one value, but for now we need only one, indicating that the
route relation belongs to a node network.

This will return the network=rXn in Germany, Belgium and Nederland for its
intended use as documented on the OSM hiking/cycling wiki's, while at the
same time opening up a more generic way to document network configuration
type for data users including rendering.

There are significant advantages in maintenance load as well, but that's a
bonus.

I hope this clears things up?  In terms of proposal, we propose one extra
value "node_network" for the key "network_type".
Nothing is changed, nothing is removed. So we think zero impact on the
current base. It's up to renderers and other data users to make use of the
extra tag.


Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

[Diego Cruz]

Hi everybody,

Thank you for your replies!

I'm not so happy about the idea of having three different landuse tags that
in most cases will be rendered incorrectly. Besides, how can you know what
is the main use and what is the secondary one? The thing is that this is a
mixed system, and in Spain and Portugal it covers tens of thousands of
hectares.

I don't know the existence of this type of mixed usage of land in other
parts of the world, but I don't mind dropping the Spanish name in favour of
a universal concept, such as landuse=agrosylvopastoral (which would be the
most accurate so far). However, it is true that it wouldn't be intuitive to
non-native English speakers in other parts of the world where a mixed
system is in use, and consequently they may choose to use a local name
instead. How would agrosylvopastoral sound to native English speakers?

Does anybody know about other areas in the world where there is an
extensive mixed use of territory?

Best regards
Diego

El dom., 1 sept. 2019 a las 0:44, Paul Allen ()
escribió:

> On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 22:46, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I would not renounce from having dehesa somewhere in the value, if this
>> is an „English“ term and exactly what you want to tag.
>>
>
> It's not a term this Englishman has heard of.  But there are a lot of
> specialist terms I've
> learned since I started mapping.  So I did some googling.  It doesn't
> appear to be a
> term in English.  It seems to be something found in southern and central
> Spain,
> and also southern Portugal (where it's called a montado).  See
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehesa
>
> The Wikipedia article suggests a possibility for a landuse tag:
> landuse=agrosylvopastoral.
> A bit of a mouthful, but perhaps gets around the objection to calling it
> agroforestry.  An
> alternative found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvopasture would be
> landuse=sylvopasture.
> Disadvantage of either of those is they may not be intuitively obvious.
> Advantage is we
> don't have to come up with subtags to define it.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Agility park for dogs

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Date: 3 Sep 2019, 09:13
From: luke.mar...@viacesi.fr
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Agility park for dogs


> > > Sometimes there is an obstacle track for the dogs."
>
> Sure, but I think it's a loss not to be explicit about the presence of the 
> track.
> If I were to look to some other around me, I wouldn't be able to.
>
> >And obstacle track itself may be additionally
> >mapped, as property or object inside
> >(like playground=sandpit).
>
> Why not, however is there a tag for this?
>
Probably not.  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Ddog_park 
 
is not mentioning anything, search for obvious values on taginfo failed.

Feel free to start using tag (and at least mention it in the discussion of wiki 
page).
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like

If you are interested you may use part or entire tag proposal process
( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process 
 ) - I usually go through 
through 
draft and RfC, and then simply use the tag and once popular I create wiki page 
for it.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

2 Sep 2019, 23:20 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

>
>
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 16:38, Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com 
> > > wrote:
>
>> This kind of data is not
>> verifiable and not surveyable by an
>> OSM mapper.
>>
>
> The place I'm thinking of, there's a yellow line painted on the wall of the 
> car park, approximately 1.2m high, labelled "1 in 100 year flood level".
>
> To me, that's verifiable & surveyable.
>
In this case - it makes sense to map it.

I reacted this way without specifying 
"Except in case of explicit signs"
as I have never seen something like that
and I am aware about multiple
(contradictory) studies of food probability
for my region.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Agility park for dogs

[MARLIN LUKE]

> Sometimes there is an obstacle track for the dogs."

Sure, but I think it's a loss not to be explicit about the presence of the 
track.
If I were to look to some other around me, I wouldn't be able to.

>And obstacle track itself may be additionally
>mapped, as property or object inside
>(like playground=sandpit).

Why not, however is there a tag for this?



De : Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Envoyé : lundi 26 août 2019 23:55
À : Tag discussion, strategy and related tools 
Objet : Re: [Tagging] Agility park for dogs




On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 01:53, MARLIN LUKE 
mailto:luke.mar...@viacesi.fr>> wrote:
I'm going to map a small dog park where there are obstacles for agility 
training, and I'm not sure if I should use sport=dog_training[1] or not.

Would leisure=dog_park 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Ddog_park not cover it?
"Sometimes there is an obstacle track for the dogs."

Thanks

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