Re: [Tagging] RFC free_water
sent from a phone > On 18. Jan 2020, at 18:08, Florimond Berthoux > wrote: > > Hi, I added my proposal: > > drinking_water:fee=yes/no > drinking_water:fee:conditional="no @ customers" alternavite: > drinking_water:fee:customers=no > drinking_water:bottle=yes/no > > I think that the key bottle=* can fit your needs to know if you can refill > you bottle easily or not. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bottle > I suffix it by drinking_water because bottle alone would look like a lost tag > in a cafe/restaurant tag table fee is relative. I’ve seen municipal/public water dispensers which gave chilled/sparkling drinking water for a small fee ( 0.10 eur per liter), although this is not free, it comes close. This one I’ve tagged as vending machine: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6840148574 Admittedly without the “description“ it would loose a lot of information and your tag proposal would encourage to add these in a formal way. For “fee”, the amount is interesting (without going into more complex pricing details it could be defined as the price for one bottle refill) Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] What values of 'emergency=' should be on the main Map features page?
Joseph Eisenberg writes: > That tag is probably emergency=suction_point - seems much better to > tag that rather than identifying the whole pond. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aemergency%3Dsuction_point Sounds basically reasonable to me. The page does not make it clear if this is just a place you can put a hose in, or if the piping is pre-installed. What I'm talking about is a red 3 or 4" pipe that runs from under the middle to the edge with "FD Water Source #6" sign or some such. Maybe that's what emergency=fire_hydrant + fire_hydrant:type=suction_point - strange alternative tagging is all about. But I don't see getting that straightened out as a bar to what you want to do. > That's probably emergency=assembly_point - > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aemergency=assembly_point That's exactly the kind of thing I meant. So no objections to your plans here. >>> ) =landing_site "Preselected flat area for a helicopter to land in an >>> emergency" 2543 uses >>> - Uncertain: the tag aeroway=helipad is more common, and the >>> distinction is unclear >> >> There is a difference between a helipad and a place for an emergency. >> Around me helipads are fenced and have lights, and landing there is >> within normal practice. >> >> There are also pre-planned sites for medical helicopters to land, and >> these are definitely not helipads. They are merely places that are hard >> enough surface and open enough (no poles or wires) that a Medflight or >> police helicopter pilot can safely land and take off from. Almost >> always some fire department equipement/people are sent to secure the >> landing site and provide lighting / denote the center with headlights. > > Ok, that makes sense. I actually know of a number of these which I > could map (I sometimes fly along with the local helicopter medevac > service). So sounds like you are not going to remove landing_site? In addition to real helipads and merely planned places, I have also seen a crazy-extra-wide turning circle at the end of a road to a ~mountain hiking trail, with paint marks that are obviously about helicopters. But I am 99% sure this is for medevac only -- I think they just expect to need it more often given the trail steepness, and there wasn't anything close, so they cleared and paved a 100' circle (and you can park around the edge only, IIRC). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 109 no 5 disused=:
Hi Paul ++1 Hendrikklaas Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org Verzonden: donderdag 16 januari 2020 17:50 Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 109 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to tagging@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..." Today's Topics: 5. Re: building=disused (Paul Allen) Message: 5 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 15:48:15 + From: Paul Allen To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Subject: Re: [Tagging] building=disused Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:55, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 16 Jan 2020, 02:22 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > > If the 'standard map' starts rendering 'disused=yes' the same way as > 'disused:*=*' (presently not rendered) then what? > > Then standard map style will be fixed to > remove this bug. > I took Warin's question to mean what would happen if standard carto deliberately chose to handle disused=yes the same way as disused:*=*. Therefore not a bug to be fixed, but an intentional permanent change to behaviour. If that happened, I would stop marking physical objects as disused. The fact that a physical object exists, and is therefore rendered, is far more important than whether it is in use or not. I suspect many mappers would do the same. I'd add a note saying that it's disused, so might many other mappers. But notes are free-form, so they may use words other than "disused." That would make it harder to craft reliable queries to find or ignore disused objects of a particular type. -- Paul ++! Hendrikklaas ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC free_water
Le sam. 18 janv. 2020 à 18:37, European Water Project a écrit : > drinking_water:fee=yes/no > drinking_water:fee:conditional="no @ customers" alternavite: > drinking_water:fee:customers=no > I can see how this works from a logic point of view, but still seems a bit > convoluted > > I still prefer this because in one tag, we get almost everything. I do > realize there is some inconsistency with this tag name. > drinking_water:free= Ok, I understand, if we look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fee#values other values exist like unknown, donation or even time table. There also some tags meaning "free for customers" but different syntax, it's little messy, so maybe we should normalize that with drinking_water:fee=free_for_customers ? (There is also drinking_water:fee=customers but I don't understand what it can means, only customers have to pay ? that's weird.) The problem I have with drinking_water:free is that free is not a tag currently, and it would be an alias for drinking_water:fee with opposite value. > I even think that drinking_water:free = yes might be a sufficient tag for all > cafes, bars, clubs and restaurants willing to participate in the refill > revolution. And that the bottle precision might only be necessary for those > refusing bottles and insisting on serving a glass of water. I agree. -- Florimond Berthoux ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] What values of 'emergency=' should be on the main Map features page?
On 19.01.2020 06:10, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: 2) =fire_water_pond " A man made or natural pond with water for a fire department." 2785 uses Why is that not verifiable? Such ponds typically have a red-framed sign "Löschwasserteich". Ground-verifiable, not necessarily Bing-verifiable. I see how that's verifiable in Germany, but isn't it actually an emergency=suction_point in that case? The sign is the place where you suction water into the fire engine, right? In other countries we are not so picky about what water sources we use for fighting fires. ;-) Indeed the Germans are picky about these things ;-) But suction_point and the pond are two different things. The first could also be some pre-installed pipe in a stream, the pond is a dedicated feature often prescribed in the planning permission when you erect something, and might need to be maintained so it is filled. The first is a point, the second is a water body. there should be a template separate from the Map features template that can be included in each of them. Do you know how to handle translation of the subheadings in such case? Since the page is just several taglists, I'm not sure if it's still necessary to have a separate template. Probably it's easier to just copy and past the taglists, then add the language and translate the headings? I will try this out for the Indonesian page and see if it works easily. either method is ok, a new template would have the advantage that it keeps the translations consistent. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
