[Tagging] Billboard or something else
Just doing some tagging along a motorway & spotted an electronic traffic information sign: https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.5884424,152.8232412,3a,75y,110.42h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKWvFW2sU9ugwzCMYv6hTkA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 At this moment, it's showing travel times to various spots up ahead, but can also display warnings re crashes etc Don't think it really counts as advertising=billboard https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:advertising=billboard, but what is the better alternative? Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] place or border_type ?
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 09:16, Colin Smale wrote: > > Country-specific concepts require country-specific tagging, > Yes, but how that country-specific tagging is implemented matters. Rest of world uses A=B to denote objects of type P. Country X decides that A=B denotes objects of type Q. Definitely not good. Rest of world uses A=B to denote P. Country X decides that A:xx=B denotes Q. But that may also apply to country Y so either mappers in Y use A:xx=B or a synonym A:yy=B to denote Q. Still not good. We decide that A=B denotes P globally and that A=C denotes Q globally. Or we have A=B + subtag=P or subtag=Q. Works well. Yes, there are likely to be many country-specific variants that aren't quite identical. But still better handled with more tag values or subtag values than by sticking country codes everywhere. Semantically either way means the same thing but one is preferable syntactically and for sanity. Yes, local government has extra complications that mean it's not as simple as new values. But probably soluble by means other than sticking country codes all over the place. Even admin_level=4;5;6 would be better than that. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] place or border_type ?
sent from a phone > Il giorno 29 ott 2019, alle ore 10:16, Colin Smale ha > scritto: > > If X:de, X:it and X:fr appear to mean the same thing, it doesn't mean there > aren't subtleties which would be lost for ever if the tagging was conflated. whether or not they are lost depends on how you interpret them, the information in which legislation the entity is located is already there in OpenStreetMap, it mustn’t necessarily be added to the key. Generally, de:place=city is not working on a tag level, because city is not a German term as suggested by the key. It should be DE:place if referring to Germany. As this tag doesn’t seem to be documented, it is also unclear in meaning and might be used for different things. IMHO if we went for country specific tags it would be better to have the actual term in the tag, like DE:place=kreisfreie_Stadt but then I would still prefer to have a key that refers to administrative entities, rather than socio-cultural ones, e.g. DE:admin_type=kreisfreie_Stadt or admin_type:DE=... Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging estuaries: estuary=yes or river=estuary?
On 2019-10-29 02:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > There is also a proposal to map the mean low spring tide line, the > lowest tide line along the coast: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:natural%3Dmean_low_water_springs > - so the estuary could end at the point where this line meets the > mouth of the river. > > This would usually be different than the political "baseline", which > is often further out to sea, though sometimes it would match. Assuming you mean the baseline for the purposes of territorial waters etc, it is based on the low water line. There are rules which allow the baseline to cut across inlets, bays, estuaries etc. So I would invert your statement: the "political" baseline is the low water line, although sometimes it is further out to sea.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] place or border_type ?
On 2019-10-29 01:21, Paul Allen wrote:
> I have an innate dislike of such countrification on a global map. It's
> better than
> hijacking tags without adding a country code ("The rest of the world uses X=Y
> to mean
> Z but in my country X=Y means W"), but only marginally so. The problem comes
> when
> we add X:de=* and then find it also applies to France, and Italy, so have to
> then either
> add X:fr and X:it which are synonyms of X:de or persuade mappers in France
> and Italy
> to use X:de.
I suspect that the similarities of meaning between countries are more by
coincidence than by design, unless they are defined by some
supranational body like the EU or UN. If X:de, X:it and X:fr appear to
mean the same thing, it doesn't mean there aren't subtleties which would
be lost for ever if the tagging was conflated.
> From a very brief examination of what kreisfreie Städte are they seem to bear
> some
> similarities to the UK's unitary authorities.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_authority
> If the concepts are substantially the same, then we end up adding
> border_type:uk or
> using border_type:de in the UK.
In the UK a combination of admin_level and designation is adequate. The
UK local government system is not always hierarchical, however. At the
parish level much is unparished, and concepts like "lands common" don't
fit a perfect hierarchy. There are also Combined Authorities.
The UK system of local government means there is a wider-than-usual gap
between local authority areas and "places" (which I define to be the
answer given by a local to "where do you live"). The admin boundary
system and "place" demarcation (where that is possible) are completely
orthogonal.
> I'd prefer a way of handling these that doesn't require country codes.
Country-specific concepts require country-specific tagging, and there is
nothing more country-specific than local government. The only way to
avoid country-specific tagging is to agree on a common definition for
the whole world. This is OSM... Good luck with that___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of bicycle anti-features
I would suggest adding a suitable "hazard" tag to the end of the cycleway (probably the last node before the common node with the road). Rationale: you probably want to maintain connectivity to the road because in the worst case it would still be possible to get to the road, on the other hand you might want to apply weighting so that an earlier exit from the cycleway can be taken, or display/sound a warning in a navigation app (note imho if you are not paying enough attention that you would see this any way you are doing something wrong). Simon Am 28.10.2019 um 19:45 schrieb Tobias Zwick: > We know how to tag certain bicycle features such as the "advanced stop line" > [1] > > It would be interesting to tag also anti-features. Most commonly, a cycleway > that just ends without merging it back onto the street. Currently, such a > situation would be tagged the same as a track that is merged correctly onto > the road. This situation is especially hindering if combined with cars > parking closely to each other on the sides of the road. > > How could this be tagged, for cycleways mapped on the road-way? Any > suggestions how a tag for this could be named? > > Greetings > Tobias > > [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dasl > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] place or border_type ?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 12:48:42AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > Il giorno 28 ott 2019, alle ore 10:00, Sarah Hoffmann ha > > scritto: > > > > It is one possibility to tag such administrational oddities > > as German "kreisfreie Städte" where an admin_level=6 may be > > a county or a city. > > > thank you, this is indeed a case where it actually adds detail and is not > simply replicating the meaning of the admin boundary tags. Looking at some > data, there’s also de:place=city, likely to avoid conflicts with place=city > areas seen as built up / settlement area, sadly the nature of many kreisfreie > Städte is still only tagged in note and de:place:note tags. The tagging is very inconsistent in that matter. I don't think that it was ever discussed anywhere. It just happened. But these oddities are not a purely German matter. There are quite a few cities around the globe with a special status, e.g. Algiers, Moscow, Vienne, Havanna. So I'd be in favour of a globally applicable place=* tagging. Sarah ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] place or border_type ?
sent from a phone > Il giorno 29 ott 2019, alle ore 01:23, Paul Allen ha > scritto: > > From a very brief examination of what kreisfreie Städte are they seem to bear > some > similarities to the UK's unitary authorities. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_authority > If the concepts are substantially the same, then we end up adding > border_type:uk or > using border_type:de in the UK. wouldn’t this definition include kreisfreie Länder as well? We’d still have to have another distinction. Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
