Re: [Tagging] dinosaurs
I'm just saying it would be nice if the editors (iD, JOSM) would give a warning if someone tries to put dinosaurs within the range of human habitation. On 16/10/2022 18:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 16 Oct 2022, at 18:05, Volker Schmidt wrote: Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot. It doesn’t seem a huge problem, but even if this was widespread my stance would be to fix these as errors rather than accepting them as consistent use 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] dinosaurs
sent from a phone > On 16 Oct 2022, at 18:05, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality > palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot. It doesn’t seem a huge problem, but even if this was widespread my stance would be to fix these as errors rather than accepting them as consistent use Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] dinosaurs
There were 4, tagged as dinosaur trackway or dinosaur footprints or similar. Obviously, even though dinosaurs were quite big, I can't see them on satellite view, so I just changed the key to description and added geological=palaeontological_site. Anne On 16/10/2022 17:02, Volker Schmidt wrote: Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot. On Sun, 16 Oct 2022, 17:33 Anne-Karoline Distel, wrote: Hello all, I'm doing a huge tidy-up amongst the values for "site_type", documented in a diary post: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/b-unicycling/diary/400151 I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology, because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to implement a warning into the editors not to combine "archaeological_site" with dinosaurs? I will replace the few I found with geological=palaeontological_site (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:geological%3Dpalaeontological_site). Maybe this is the wrong mailing list for it... Anne ___ 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] dinosaurs
Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot. On Sun, 16 Oct 2022, 17:33 Anne-Karoline Distel, wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm doing a huge tidy-up amongst the values for "site_type", documented > in a diary post: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/b-unicycling/diary/400151 > > I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology, > because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to > implement a warning into the editors not to combine > "archaeological_site" with dinosaurs? I will replace the few I found > with geological=palaeontological_site > ( > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:geological%3Dpalaeontological_site > ). > > Maybe this is the wrong mailing list for it... > > Anne > > > ___ > 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] dinosaurs
Am So., 16. Okt. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Anne-Karoline Distel < annekadis...@web.de>: > I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology, > because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to > implement a warning into the editors not to combine > "archaeological_site" with dinosaurs? I will replace the few I found > with geological=palaeontological_site > ( > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:geological%3Dpalaeontological_site > ). > > hm, a single footprint makes it a palaeontological site? Maybe, still I'd go for a footprint tag, on a node or polygon: natural=fossil_track or "ichnite" if it should sound scientific On a way: natural=fossil_trackway or protichnites (a trace / sequencs of tracks) you could then add another tag to specify the kind of beeing that has left the footprint, e.g. with "ichnotaxon"/ichnospecie/ichnogenus or something understandable. > Maybe this is the wrong mailing list for it... all tagging questions are welcome, but you could have also asked on osm-paleontology-talk, if you had created it before ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] dinosaurs
Hello all, I'm doing a huge tidy-up amongst the values for "site_type", documented in a diary post: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/b-unicycling/diary/400151 I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology, because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to implement a warning into the editors not to combine "archaeological_site" with dinosaurs? I will replace the few I found with geological=palaeontological_site (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:geological%3Dpalaeontological_site). Maybe this is the wrong mailing list for it... Anne ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*
On 14/10/22 22:33, Peter Elderson wrote: Just a remark: I think a mainly decorative object is not an amenity. An amenity may be near it, or attached to it, but that still does not make the object an amenity. Some view works of art as amenities. A road is an amenity .. yet they are not tagged amenity in OSM. A building is an amenity. I view most values of man_made as amenities... I think of OSM key 'amenity' as the miscellaneous folder .. a catch all. If there is a less general key then I think that other key should be used in preference to the key 'amenity'. An object that provides water for actual use, such as a tap or a pipe from which water permanently flows, is an amenity. It may be decorated, or fitted to a decorative object, but still is an amenity. The BE word fountain, I understand, primarily means the decorative structure including the decorative waterflow. That is one meaning of it. It can also mean the starting point of a river/stream... and other things. Possibly some view the word 'fountain' as meaning "a source of water'. Decorative fountains around me are not sources of water .. using the water from a fountain could have the Police/council Rangers called. So, to me, any tagging using amenity=fountain sounds like a contradiction. I reach the same conclusion, but for different reasons. Peter Elderson Op vr 14 okt. 2022 om 12:22 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer : Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 12:10 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging : This other fountain doesn't have such wall, thus it is not decorative and it cannot be tagged as amenity=fountain (assuming we disregard the recreational utility mentioned in the wiki). https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Water_fountain_with_water_basin_near_Santiago_de_Compostela.jpg this other fountain happens to be decorated as well. Let's ignore this for a moment, and assume it wasn't. It could still be a decorative fountain, if it can be seen as street decor. Setting up a fountain requires some effort, so there will usually be a purpose, even if it isn't necessary now as it was when it was constructed. I would generally see amenity=fountain applicable for any fountain that is not only a drinking fountain and that is not set up as a watering place for animals only. The shape and use of these two fountains looks the same to me. Why would you tag them as different features? I wouldn't I'm not necessarily saying they need to be tagged as amenity=fountain, but I would expect their main tagging to be the same and maybe differ in some secondary parameter. maybe, if you come up with an idea about these secondary parameters, we can discuss them. 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] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps
On 16/10/22 02:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:08, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: The flow of water is downwards making them difficult to drink from without an aid e.g. a cup. while it may be true, you have to acknowledge that there are many places in the world that are providing drinking fountains for a long time, sometimes for a very long time, and many of them have downward flow, so this should not be a criterion. For some examples have a look at the drinking water article in wp. I acknowledge the supply of 'drinking water' ... but not a 'drinking fountain' /'bubbler'. I would not ascribe the word 'fountain' to it in OSM. I do note that the word 'fountain' has many meanings .. some ~7 in my dictionary. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Hvad stiller vi op med tour de France ruterne?
On Sat, 15 Oct 2022, 20:02 Marc_marc, wrote: > Hello, > > Le 15.10.22 à 18:55, Volker Schmidt a écrit : > > ( > > It is certainly not something that can be represented > > by a bicycle route relation. > > witch issue did you see ? > It's not signposted. At least parts of it are off-limits for bicycles (e.g. motorway) Volker > > 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
