[Tagging] Call for Pictures
Hello, Out of interesting talk on the community forum about hiking techniques https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/99869 the idea for a key to tag certain challenges for pedestrians emerged and I split that to https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/106865 summarizing terms there. Word was, pictures needed, so I created a Gallery in the Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Hungerburg/FootScaleGallery - Basic idea to get as much input from subjectively or regionally distinct points of view on what such a key might account for. If you have something to add, please do so, on the wiki if you are comfortable editing there, or post grouped list with links to commons per mail here. Thank you in advance -- Asa ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Wave Lounger
Following discussions in various places, I came to the conclusion that the loungers I care about are not the loungers documented as such under the amenity=lounger tag, but rather a kind of bench https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bench%3Dwave_lounger Thank you all for participating. Now wondering how to mark the proposal out of draft. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Wave Lounger
I want this amenable to consumers. If I were to propose an attribute to the other tag, I'd have to propose to deprecate the uses on areas that allows for such atrocities as "amenity=lounger; surface=grass". ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Wave Lounger
Am So., 2. Juli 2023 um 10:10 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > > Why not subtag for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dlounger ? That other tag can be applied to areas in two different ways: either representing a single item - or as a place, where commonly/sometimes/seasonally/depending on time of day/and who knows what - none, one, or more loungers can be found. This one is meant for fixed installs only and not for use on areas. The lounger tag cannot be reused because it is designed too badly. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Wave Lounger
Please weigh in on this proposed new tag, here, in the community forum, in the wiki talk page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Wave_lounger Looking forward ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Foot / sidewalk access tagging
Am So., 18. Dez. 2022 um 21:32 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano : > > I recently came across an unexpected tagging combination and I would like to > understand how folks in various places would interpret this: > > highway= > foot=no > sidewalk=separate > > In my software's logic, I've made the assumption that foot=* applies to "the > whole of the road" including the roadway, shoulders, verge, sidewalks, and so > forth and thus excluded any roads that include that tag, regardless of other > tagging. I came to understand that this tagging was used by a mapper to > indicate that "pedestrians are not allowed on the roadway, however, they are > allowed on the sidewalk" > > 1) Would folks regard that as accurate data modeling? 2) I.e. should I > change my software to treat streets tagged in this way as > pedestrian-accessible, 3) or would folks regard this combination as a tagging > error? This made me open gmail :) There are three questions: I marked them up in the quote above. My take on 3) It is a tagging error, if foot=use_sidepath was meant. 2) If foot=use_sidepath was meant, you still should not change your software, because 1) the tagging might be correct and not in error, in case there was a sign on the road, that explicitly prohibited pedestrians from the carriageway, like the wiki says. I can conceive of a case, where even without a sign changing the software would be wrong: A motorway tunnel. They have sidewalks, to escape in case of accidents. And guess what, foot=no applies to the sidewalk! Asa ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - highway=scramble
There is still considerable heat in the voting. Ballot casting time will be extended to give three weeks of voting. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble Hungerburg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - highway=scramble
Voting has started for Highway=Scramble. The proposal underwent substantial changes during RfC. I am much obliged to all those who did contribute sound advice and helped shape the proposal. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble Hungerburg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging standards [moved from osmf-talk]
Am Mo., 24. Okt. 2022 um 01:05 Uhr schrieb Illia Marchenko : > > I suggest alternative solution: some machine readable spec, which defines > mapping between stable identifier and tags. For example (XML): > > > […] In XML, ids must be unique. Did you mean "my personal notion of what this stands for ID"? After reading https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua consumers are doing that already. Asa ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Better term for unisex
Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 19:42 Uhr schrieb Amanda McCann : > > I'm a native English speaker, and I agree! I also wrote that part of the wiki > (years ago). I think some non-native speakers treated `unisex=yes` as meaning > “gender segregated but male & female are available”, i.e. read that paragraph > as “some OSMers might have been wrong, and we don't know how many > unisex=yes/no tags in OSM were affected by the misunderstanding” > Not a native speaker: unisex is a property of the infrastructure: Toilets that accommodate any person regardless of sex are unisex, garments that can be worn, regardless of sex are unisex. If a facility is to be used by men and women at the same time, this is not a property of the infrastructure, so unisex will not apply. The sauna is unisex all the time, but the schedule is not, there are mixed and un-mixed times instead. Such is the language here, translated into English. just my 2c; Hungerburg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Hallo Georg, I guess your demands are met by the proposal in current state. I'd say, now only people that would oppose introduction of "highway=steps" , because we can map hw=path+steps=yes can oppose "highway=scramble", not the least, due to your nagging :) What do you think? Convenience link https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble Hungerburg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Nearly two weeks passed since the RfC started. Quite some changes have happened. I’d like to invite a second reading, to help weed out remaining problems. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway=scramble Please comment in the medium of your choice. Thank you in advance ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Thank you Alan for the insightful comment. The scrambles I have in mind require little to no generalization step. This is the concept that I was missing to understand some previous comments. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Thank you Volker for linking cai_scale. During my research on the subject, I learned, that the SAC itself is using its scales quite like the CAI, as a means to note hikers about requirements of what in OSM are called "routes", something, which starts at a POI and has a POI as its goal, where the most demanding section determines overall grade. It is just in openstreetmap, where the key derived from the SAC hiking scale could be used to create climbing-topo-like mappings, where difficulty over a route from a hut to a summit e.g. could change from easy to difficult back to easy and so on, in 5m increments, by splitting the route in several sections, in OSM called "ways", that could get separately graded. Such a practice is not widely used, mostly mappers that laid the groundwork did follow the SAC spirit, and drew a single way through from start to goal. Yet, I have seen such topo-like mappings too. Looking at the crossing of Monte Pirio, it is mapped as several ways all tagged demanding_mountain_hiking. Other pictures on the web show grade mountain_hiking there, so in my eyes, this is not a climbing-topo-like application of sac_scale, not in 5m sections, such I only observed on MTB grading, but at least in 100m sections, where the splits sometimes appear at questionable waypoints. I conceived of the proposed tag during RfC on "sport=mountaineering" on the community forum, where it was suggested to go for "highway=*" instead. A switch that I happily took part in. Feedback has been quite positive indeed. This is the trending base. Switching base key had other implications. For me, "highway=scramble" immediately became the "highway=unclassified" of the path multiverse. Lots of comments later, I must conclude, that for many though, it is perceived more a cousin of "highway=steps". I guess, a proposal that wants to win the voting and the mapping communities approval has to cater for the lazy and the busy mappers alike and take care, that it supports neither in tagging wars. WDT? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Hello Georg, yes, Ueli Steck certainly is the wrong person, to grade anything openstreetmap trails. I was a bit surprised, that openstreetmap does not have a path up Eiger. If so, I'd propose "highway=mountaineering" for it, just like the one up Mönch, which now is T6 in fine-print, while personally, I'd say, that sac_scale there is just "not_applicable". In one of the Snowdon photos, a woman is using hands for balance. I guess, that makes it a grade1 scramble then, whereas use of hands to advance might make a higher grade scramble? C.f. https://www.thebmc.co.uk/understanding-scrambling-grades The site is operated by a business, no idea if that is just something they made up or if use is spread wider. I like on the proposed tag, that discriminating by use of hands makes it much more easy on mappers, many of which just do not have the desire to become proficient in sac_scale. There certainly are a number of scrambles in the data that are not marked, because mappers are not even aware, that key sac_scale exists. More over, as we have seen in this thread, even proficient hikers can get it quite wrong, likely due to cultural background. I doubt, that many routers or renderers will have to change anything. To the opposite, very few routers and renderes will have to. Even those routers, that claim "hiking" profiles usually give unreasonable estimates. And the other consumers will get a reminder before they fill any gaps. I see introduction of a special tag a win win situation. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Am Fr., 16. Sept. 2022 um 00:24 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny : > > yeah, looks like a YDS class 2, or `sac_scale=hiking`. Maybe > `mountain_hiking` if that talus is unstable, because then you start to need > some technique. I know some runners who would do that barefoot, but I think > they're nuts. >From the looks of it, the person on the photo is heading straight up. No trail is visible, that she might be following along, just bare scree. Hands not needed here. Mappers that read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale will most certainly set "demanding_mountain_hiking", alone from the similarity of the scene and the sample illustration there. Only the Wiki pictures for the *alpine*hiking grades show scrambling. If sac_scale gets applied so wrong, does that mean, it is too complicated? > Do we need `sac_scale=no` for `paved path in a city park`? No, we need a base, that allows to shrink the "path" space, so reasonable expectations can be held, without reading small-print. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:30 Uhr schrieb martianfreeloader : > > Imo, scramble would not only include via ferrata. Unlike what I wrote yesterday, there is indeed some overlap of scramble and via ferrata. There are via ferratas, that can be hiked/scrambled without gear: Where the tourism office decided to jump on the trend and invested in iron to make well-known hiking routes more attractive, which of course does not make a trail more difficult, rather the opposite, if you allow yourselves to use the iron for support. Still, there are lots of via ferratas, that truly warrant to be based in their own tag. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:09 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson : > > I like this proposed highway value. I would probably apply it to the actual > scramble sections, though, not including path sections leading up to the > scramble part. Renderers can then show the actual scramble sections. Well, that way, 5m path, 5m scramble, … you could achieve the dotted/dashed rendering on OSM Carto, that some of the "path" aficionados crave so much for, if only OSM Carto would follow their advise. In earnest: Usage of the highway key originates from discussion on the forum, and I rather not take this lightly, it is indeed a new kind of highway, not another attribute of "path" that I propose. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 21:15 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny : > I don't usually bother breaking up a way by scale if there are no > intersections or PoI's along it. There may be flat spots in among the > scrambles, and I generally don't bother trying to distinguish them. In my opinion, this is the only sane way to deal with this. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
No idea, what should come first, and what should wait. Personally, I do not see much overlap between a scramble and a via ferrata. A via ferrata is a highway, where people follow a steel cable and enjoy some easy climbing, all the while following a simple process, carabiner click click, so they remain safe; in theory at least. Perhaps, the proposal should be amended, spelling out, a scramble is "not technical"? No harness, fall dampener and such equipment, and also no glacier equipment (not everything SAC T6 is a scramble!) Am Mi., 14. Sept. 2022 um 23:03 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging : > > > via ferrata value is far more likely to succeed and I would recommend trying > to get it first > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble
It is proposed to create the tag highway=scramble as a base tag for hiking paths, where use of hands is required, be that for keeping balance or be it for pulling up. Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/highway%3Dscramble Thank you in advance Asa ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
