Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[stevea]

I have mapped perhaps tens of thousands of miles of bike routes in OSM.  Yes, 
really.  I don't do this sort of "apply the name of the route to the element 
track/path."  We shouldn't.

Zeke's example is excellent and is a good reason for "route element naming" to 
be "case by case" rather than there be a "one-size-fits-all" approach, which 
simply cannot work for all cases.  There are other examples (let's stick with 
bicycle routes) where it won't be a residential street, but a path which is 
specifically unnamed, but IS part of a route relation (which DOES have a name), 
as well as (almost?) every combination that can be thought of.  If the path is 
unnamed, LEAVE it unnamed, even if it is part of one or more route relations.  
Indeed if it is part of one route relation, you might think you should name it, 
though, you shouldn't.  If it is part of MORE than one route relation, you 
might think there is ambiguity and shouldn't name it, but Zeke presents us with 
an example where "the dominant" (I paraphrase what I think he means) route name 
DOES (happen to) influence the naming of the element way, but that is very much 
a "local rules apply" situation.  In fact, I am of the strong opinion that ONLY 
"local rules apply" and OSM must strive to "name" things (like this, in 
relations) on a case-by-case basis.  Because one-size-fits-all doesn't work in 
our real, messy world.

The world is a messy place, meaning there can be and are inconsistencies when 
it comes to applying OSM "rules" for applying specific tags to specific 
features in our map.  Yes, we should strive to apply (name=*) tags as correct 
as possible, verifiable on-the-ground and where applicable, both to ways 
correctly and to relations correctly.  This might mean that a way is named, or 
not.  It might mean that a named way is different than the route relation it 
belongs to (or even multiple route relations).  Anything that can be imagined 
is likely possible in our messy real world, and our tagging should reflect our 
real world, rather than we should strive to apply artificial rules, like "route 
names should be applied to tracks/paths" (in a route relation) — UNLESS it is 
clearly known that they ARE named (or are named something else).  My apologies 
of all of this is confusing, it's not meant to be, but the world is messy.

Whew:  what's the short version?  Don't name elements of a relation after the 
named relation.  (There may even be exceptions to this, like UNLESS the element 
really IS known by that name independently of the route — but I'm trying to 
keep the short version somewhat simple).  So, I'm adding my +1 (to DaveF and 
Peter) that "the 'names' should be removed from these 'unnamed' things."  
Generally speaking and absent something else going on.

This almost seems like it shouldn't have to be said, but, there:  I said it.  
"Hard and fast rules" are seldom a good idea in OSM, as the world is messy.  
Sure, let's try to be consistent and complete, but let's not invent reasons for 
tagging things when there isn't a good one to do so.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Zeke Farwell]

On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 2:51 PM Dave F via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I think this inconsistency is bad for OSM.
>
> Many ways don't have names, even if they have routes along them. They are
> just footpaths, & tracks etc.
>
> This instance on giving them a name tag is fake. It'll mean sections with
> one route will have their name tag rendered, but where additions routes
> join there will be no rendering.
>
> If multiple routes are of equal standing, but you insist on adding a name
> tag to the way, how do you decide which takes precedent?
>
> This thread reinforces my belief there's a lack of understand of route
> relations' purpose.
>

Perhaps an example will help.  Here is a bike path in my town:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14781095

The name is Burlington Greenway.  It is mostly a dedicated bike path, but
it also uses residential streets for a few short sections.  The purpose
built ways have name="Burlington Greenway".  The residentials streets do
not get tagged with that name but instead the name of the street ("Austin
Drive", "Proctor Place",  "Harrison Avenue") because they are first and
foremost residential streets, not bike paths.  Because of these shared
street sections, a route relation is appropriate.  The route relation also
gets name="Burlington Greenway".  All the sections of this route are also
included in three other longer bicycle routes:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/72012
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5508467
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2328456

Why do the dedicated bike path ways get the name "Burlington Greenway"
instead of "Island Line Trail", "Champlain Bikeway", "USBR 7"?  Because
that is the most local name and most of the signage you'll see says
Burlington Greenway, not those other names.

This type of situation may not be common (or exist at all) in some parts of
the world, but in my region it is quite common.  I can certainly understand
that there are places where paths are considered nameless locally despite a
longer distance named route following them.  This is fine and in that case
adding the route name to the way is clearly wrong.  However, in the example
above, putting the name Burlington Greenway on the bike path ways is not
fake.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Peter Elderson]

Vr 30 dec. 2022 om 20:51 schreef Dave F via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:

> I think this inconsistency is bad for OSM.
>
> Many ways don't have names, even if they have routes along them. They are
> just footpaths, & tracks etc.
>
> This instance on giving them a name tag is fake. It'll mean sections with
> one route will have their name tag rendered, but where additions routes
> join there will be no rendering.
>
> If multiple routes are of equal standing, but you insist on adding a name
> tag to the way, how do you decide which takes precedent?
>
> This thread reinforces my belief there's a lack of understand of route
> relations' purpose.
>

I agree that in general you do not apply the route's name to the way, but I
would not exclude it.
I have hiked a couple of paths actually named after a hiking trail; I have
hiked a paths created solely for a wellknown long trail, and locally called
by that name.

In Nederland this would not happen, because just about every path is used
by multiple foot routes and it's never necessary to create a dedicated path
for a hiking route. I guess in more nature-blessed environments can be a
different story.

Which means you can't correct naming errors without additional
verification, preferably local survey.

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

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Peter Neale via Tagging]

+1
PeterPan99

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 at 20:02, Dave F via Tagging 
wrote:   On 29/12/2022 09:47, Warin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the 'names' should be removed from these 'unnamed' things 
> ..the 'name' is the name of the route not the individual tracks/paths 
> some of which existed before some routes were created.

+1

DaveF

___
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] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 29/12/2022 09:47, Warin wrote:

Hi,

I think the 'names' should be removed from these 'unnamed' things 
..the 'name' is the name of the route not the individual tracks/paths 
some of which existed before some routes were created.


+1

DaveF

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

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Dave F via Tagging]

I think this inconsistency is bad for OSM.

Many ways don't have names, even if they have routes along them. They 
are just footpaths, & tracks etc.


This instance on giving them a name tag is fake. It'll mean sections 
with one route will have their name tag rendered, but where additions 
routes join there will be no rendering.


If multiple routes are of equal standing, but you insist on adding a 
name tag to the way, how do you decide which takes precedent?


This thread reinforces my belief there's a lack of understand of route 
relations' purpose.


DaveF

On 30/12/2022 19:15, Yves wrote:
Remove the name of the way, put a name on each relations. Except if it 
makes sense to keep the name also on the way for whatever reason you 
see fit.


Le 30 décembre 2022 18:06:12 GMT+01:00, Dave F via Tagging 
 a écrit :


What do you do if there are two routes?

DaveF

On 30/12/2022 02:19, brad wrote:

+1
If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to
put it on the local way too, that's the name of the trail.

Brad

On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote:

I've heard the assertion that a way has no name but the route
that passes over it does many times.  While this is true in some
cases, in others it is not. Where the primary purpose of the way
is not for the route, this does make sense.  For example
mentioned by Jmapb where the Appalachian trail follows an
unnamed driveway or sidewalk.  In these cases, the primary
purpose is a driveway or sidewalk for local use, and the
Appalachian Trail just happens to follow it as well.  Here
putting the name Appalachian Trail on the way makes no sense. 
However, there are also dedicated sections of trail built first
and foremost to be a part of the Appalachian Trail and that have
no other name.  Omitting the name Appalachian Trail in a case
like that makes no sense to me.  That section of trail is indeed
called the Appalachian Trail.  The whole route is also called
the Appalachian Trail and that's ok.


On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Jmapb  wrote:

On 12/29/2022 10:13 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:

Yes, the way name tag should be the most local trail name. 
However, sometimes there is no local trail name and the
long distance route name is the only name.  In this case
putting the long distance route name on the ways also makes
sense.


I've been doing some mapping on the Appalachian Trail lately
and this appears to be the common practice, although the AT
is dominant enough that constituent trails sometimes lose
their local names over time.

Some mappers will take it a little too far and tag sections
of sidewalk and driveway that the AT follows with
name=Appalachian Trail (or even name=Appalachian National
Scenic Trail... IMO this is an official_name, and probably
only belongs on the route superrelation.)

It's common to see ref=AT as well, which is fine on trails
(even locally named ones) and perhaps ok on the sidewalks,
but adding it to a vehicular road seems iffy.

Jason




___
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


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

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

One of the names might be the predominant name used locally.

On Fri, Dec 30, 2022, 2:19 PM Yves via Tagging 
wrote:

> Remove the name of the way, put a name on each relations. Except if it
> makes sense to keep the name also on the way for whatever reason you see
> fit.
>
> Le 30 décembre 2022 18:06:12 GMT+01:00, Dave F via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> a écrit :
>>
>> What do you do if there are two routes?
>>
>> DaveF
>>
>> On 30/12/2022 02:19, brad wrote:
>>
>> +1
>> If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to put it
>> on the local way too, that's the name of the trail.
>>
>> Brad
>>
>> On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote:
>>
>> I've heard the assertion that a way has no name but the route that passes
>> over it does many times.  While this is true in some cases, in others it is
>> not.  Where the primary purpose of the way is not for the route, this does
>> make sense.  For example mentioned by Jmapb where the Appalachian trail
>> follows an unnamed driveway or sidewalk.  In these cases, the primary
>> purpose is a driveway or sidewalk for local use, and the Appalachian Trail
>> just happens to follow it as well.  Here putting the name Appalachian Trail
>> on the way makes no sense.  However, there are also dedicated sections of
>> trail built first and foremost to be a part of the Appalachian Trail and
>> that have no other name.  Omitting the name Appalachian Trail in a case
>> like that makes no sense to me.  That section of trail is indeed called the
>> Appalachian Trail.  The whole route is also called the Appalachian Trail
>> and that's ok.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Jmapb  wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/29/2022 10:13 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, the way name tag should be the most local trail name.  However,
>>> sometimes there is no local trail name and the long distance route name is
>>> the only name.  In this case putting the long distance route name on the
>>> ways also makes sense.
>>>
>>> I've been doing some mapping on the Appalachian Trail lately and this
>>> appears to be the common practice, although the AT is dominant enough that
>>> constituent trails sometimes lose their local names over time.
>>>
>>> Some mappers will take it a little too far and tag sections of sidewalk
>>> and driveway that the AT follows with name=Appalachian Trail (or even
>>> name=Appalachian National Scenic Trail... IMO this is an official_name, and
>>> probably only belongs on the route superrelation.)
>>>
>>> It's common to see ref=AT as well, which is fine on trails (even locally
>>> named ones) and perhaps ok on the sidewalks, but adding it to a vehicular
>>> road seems iffy.
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing 
>> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing 
>> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://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] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Yves via Tagging]

Remove the name of the way, put a name on each relations. Except if it makes 
sense to keep the name also on the way for whatever reason you see fit. 

Le 30 décembre 2022 18:06:12 GMT+01:00, Dave F via Tagging 
 a écrit :
>What do you do if there are two routes?
>
>DaveF
>
>On 30/12/2022 02:19, brad wrote:
>> +1
>> If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to put it on 
>> the local way too, that's the name of the trail.
>> 
>> Brad
>> 
>> On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote:
>>> I've heard the assertion that a way has no name but the route that passes 
>>> over it does many times.  While this is true in some cases, in others it is 
>>> not.  Where the primary purpose of the way is not for the route, this does 
>>> make sense.  For example mentioned by Jmapb where the Appalachian trail 
>>> follows an unnamed driveway or sidewalk.  In these cases, the primary 
>>> purpose is a driveway or sidewalk for local use, and the Appalachian Trail 
>>> just happens to follow it as well.  Here putting the name Appalachian Trail 
>>> on the way makes no sense.  However, there are also dedicated sections of 
>>> trail built first and foremost to be a part of the Appalachian Trail and 
>>> that have no other name.  Omitting the name Appalachian Trail in a case 
>>> like that makes no sense to me.  That section of trail is indeed called the 
>>> Appalachian Trail.  The whole route is also called the Appalachian Trail 
>>> and that's ok.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Jmapb  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 12/29/2022 10:13 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:
 Yes, the way name tag should be the most local trail name. 
 However, sometimes there is no local trail name and the long
 distance route name is the only name.  In this case putting the
 long distance route name on the ways also makes sense.
>>> 
>>> I've been doing some mapping on the Appalachian Trail lately and
>>> this appears to be the common practice, although the AT is
>>> dominant enough that constituent trails sometimes lose their
>>> local names over time.
>>> 
>>> Some mappers will take it a little too far and tag sections of
>>> sidewalk and driveway that the AT follows with name=Appalachian
>>> Trail (or even name=Appalachian National Scenic Trail... IMO this
>>> is an official_name, and probably only belongs on the route
>>> superrelation.)
>>> 
>>> It's common to see ref=AT as well, which is fine on trails (even
>>> locally named ones) and perhaps ok on the sidewalks, but adding
>>> it to a vehicular road seems iffy.
>>> 
>>> Jason
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Dave F via Tagging]

What do you do if there are two routes?

DaveF

On 30/12/2022 02:19, brad wrote:

+1
If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to put 
it on the local way too, that's the name of the trail.


Brad

On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote:
I've heard the assertion that a way has no name but the route that 
passes over it does many times.  While this is true in some cases, in 
others it is not.  Where the primary purpose of the way is not for 
the route, this does make sense.  For example mentioned by Jmapb 
where the Appalachian trail follows an unnamed driveway or sidewalk.  
In these cases, the primary purpose is a driveway or sidewalk for 
local use, and the Appalachian Trail just happens to follow it as 
well.  Here putting the name Appalachian Trail on the way makes no 
sense.  However, there are also dedicated sections of trail built 
first and foremost to be a part of the Appalachian Trail and that 
have no other name.  Omitting the name Appalachian Trail in a case 
like that makes no sense to me.  That section of trail is indeed 
called the Appalachian Trail.  The whole route is also called the 
Appalachian Trail and that's ok.



On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 10:38 AM Jmapb  wrote:

On 12/29/2022 10:13 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:

Yes, the way name tag should be the most local trail name. 
However, sometimes there is no local trail name and the long
distance route name is the only name.  In this case putting the
long distance route name on the ways also makes sense.


I've been doing some mapping on the Appalachian Trail lately and
this appears to be the common practice, although the AT is
dominant enough that constituent trails sometimes lose their
local names over time.

Some mappers will take it a little too far and tag sections of
sidewalk and driveway that the AT follows with name=Appalachian
Trail (or even name=Appalachian National Scenic Trail... IMO this
is an official_name, and probably only belongs on the route
superrelation.)

It's common to see ref=AT as well, which is fine on trails (even
locally named ones) and perhaps ok on the sidewalks, but adding
it to a vehicular road seems iffy.

Jason




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

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

[Jmapb]

On 12/30/2022 2:22 AM, stevea wrote:

I agree with Mateusz here:  whether to tag a way after the name of a route which includes 
it (if it didn't have a name=* tag beforehand) isn't a "one size fits all" 
situation.  It's difficult to describe what the right thing to do is in all cases.


I've also generally avoided doing it on bridges, lest the trail name be 
mistaken for a bridge name. (I know bridge:name=* exists but plenty of 
mappers still use name=*.)


J


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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a point-of-interest sign

[brad]

Sorry for my email noise, I misread the email & my comment wasn't necessary

On 12/30/22 02:03, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Thanks, Brad. It is a pass, as there are two identical signs in 
opposite directions, 175 meters apart. The pass may have a name, after 
all, which is on another sign. Anyway I will check with a local person.
The signs in question can be considered as geographical information 
boards.


On Fri, 30 Dec 2022, 03:05 brad,  wrote:

I think you should check your data.   Looking at USGS topo, that
point does look very close to the continental divide.
Usually, but I suppose not always,  when you go over the divide
you are going over a pass.  This one seems to be fairly flat so
perhaps never got named.
I don't use mapillary, but according to the USGS topo loaded into
qmapshack the divide crosses that road at
N35.005307° W108.081164°

I have seen a similar sign in NM that wasn't on the divide & I
assumed it was a joke put up by a local prankster, but this one
seems right.

On 12/29/22 11:52, Volker Schmidt wrote:

I have now checked on Gmaps: that sign is not on the continental
divide, but it is announcing the continental divide. About 175m
further there is an identical sign on the other side of the road,
and facing the opposite direction. Hence there is a pass, but the
highest point itself is not marked. I have added a mountain pass
in the middle between the signs with a provisional name, which I
will have checked by a local, whom I happen to know.
.The "Continental Divide" is not a pass, but a watershed that is
several thousand km long.

Il giorno gio 29 dic 2022 alle ore 16:40 Joseph Eisenberg
 ha scritto:

This example should also be mapped as a pass, with a node
tagged mountain_pass=yes on the highway, with the elevation

On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 2:26 PM Volker Schmidt
 wrote:

I would like to tag signs that do refer to Points of
Interest like this example






___
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


___
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] How to tag a point-of-interest sign

[Volker Schmidt]

Thanks, Brad. It is a pass, as there are two identical signs in opposite
directions, 175 meters apart. The pass may have a name, after all, which is
on another sign. Anyway I will check with a local person.
The signs in question can be considered as geographical information boards.

On Fri, 30 Dec 2022, 03:05 brad,  wrote:

> I think you should check your data.   Looking at USGS topo, that point
> does look very close to the continental divide.
> Usually, but I suppose not always,  when you go over the divide you are
> going over a pass.  This one seems to be fairly flat so perhaps never got
> named.
> I don't use mapillary, but according to the USGS topo loaded into
> qmapshack the divide crosses that road at
> N35.005307° W108.081164°
>
> I have seen a similar sign in NM that wasn't on the divide & I assumed it
> was a joke put up by a local prankster, but this one seems right.
>
> On 12/29/22 11:52, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> I have now checked on Gmaps: that sign is not on the continental divide,
> but it is announcing the continental divide. About 175m further there is an
> identical sign on the other side of the road, and facing the opposite
> direction. Hence there is a pass, but the highest point itself is not
> marked. I have added a mountain pass in the middle between the signs with a
> provisional name, which I will have checked by a local, whom I happen to
> know.
> .The "Continental Divide" is not a pass, but a watershed that is several
> thousand km long.
>
> Il giorno gio 29 dic 2022 alle ore 16:40 Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>> This example should also be mapped as a pass, with a node tagged
>> mountain_pass=yes on the highway, with the elevation
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 2:26 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to tag signs that do refer to Points of Interest like this
>>> example 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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 
> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://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