Re: [Tagging] Casing in values

2016-08-25 Thread Jerry Clough (SK53) 

On 25/08/2016 08:47, markus schnalke wrote:

snip
Is it the same for genus=Tilia, i.e. should it be genus=tilia?

(Recently iD started to tab-complete it in lowercase, even if I
started to type it in uppercase.)

meillo



This has just been pointed out to me. I've filed an issue with iD on 
Github: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/3377


At the moment the bulk of values in Genus are sensible & according with 
Botanical nomenclature, so let's keep it that way!


I'm not sure if there is a single good worldwide open source of plant 
genera. The obvious candidate is The Plant List, but this is
closed, see Roderic Page's blog post: 
http://iphylo.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/plant-list-nice-data-shame-it-not-open.html


Jerry

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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

2015-10-31 Thread Jerry Clough (SK53) 

This description of crossing=island is at odds with what I understand.

The crossing you show is a fairly standard crossing=uncontrolled as 
described in the wiki (i.e., with explicit markings, but no signals) , 
albeit with an island.


I think I have used crossing=island for places like this: 
http://openstreetview.org/available/4f48a26d9dd4a99914393aeea9f2c032b4af4c0a-large.jpg.


The island is clearly designed to facilitate pedestrian crossing, and 
has a beacon light as well (although I am not at all sure what these 
mean in the UK: they are fairly rare).


I can think of other islands where there is no form of marking for 
crossings, but again the available evidence, suggests that these are 
placed deliberately (e.g., dropped kerbs on pavements adjacent to the 
island). Example: 
http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/R87SRSO6XaEvW3SC_jgBTg/photo


In many case controlled (signalled) crossings have islands too.

Conclusion: the island property may more properly be thought of as 
attributive, so something like island=yes might be appropriate.


Finally: I think these are perhaps more correctly known as pedestrian 
refuges, and using a term like this may avoid ambiguity.


Jerry

On 31/10/2015 18:36, Volker Schmidt wrote:


Example for keep clear:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13820411

This seems to be the only instance of highway=keep_clear in OSM 
(according to taginfo).
This is a common horizontal road sign in the UK. It indicates tht 
vehicles should not anter the cross-hatched area if the traffic 
situation does not allow them to leave the area.
Strange that it is only used once in the data base. Maybe our UK 
friends use another tag for these.


The node also is in such a marked area,

The tag is on the junctio of the two ways

reg. crossing=island: ok, your example shows

a simple case where the island is in the middle.

What if there are multiple islands?

If there are multple islands, I presume there are several roads that 
are crossed by a footway. In this case each crossing is tagged 
according to how it's constructed. If each is protected by island, 
than each is tagged with crossing=island.

Do you have an example? (I can't recall one at the moment)







___
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] Pubs with accommodation

2015-09-29 Thread Jerry Clough (SK53) 
Because a guest house with a bar is different from a pub with rooms. At 
least in Britain only residents would be allowed to buy drinks at a 
guest house bar.


As an aside, there may be a problem here with br-en "guest house" and 
"Gasthof", the latter being better translated as br-en "inn". I would 
generally regard Pensionen as more akin to the British guest house.


The issue is far commoner in rural Spain where many bars & restaurants 
will have a sign "Habitaciones" outside. These will usually be decent en 
suite facilities on the floor above the restaurant/bar, comprising 2-3 
rooms. There is often a separate door largely to allow access when the 
main facility is closed. These are very much ancillary features of the 
bar/restaurant to the extent that an overnight stay is sold from the 
till exactly like a beer (and either has to be payed for in advance or a 
passport/id card left until one has payed). These fit the 
accomodation=yes tagging very well. Some high-end restaurants in the UK 
may have a limited number of rooms too, such as Sat Bains 
http://www.restaurantsatbains.com/, usually rooms are available only for 
customers of the restaurant.


Larger places in Spain usually called Hostales are often also run from a 
bar, but will have many more rooms, distinct entrance/foyer areas and 
will be distinctly signed as such externally. I map these as tourism=hotel.


Jerry

On 28/09/2015 15:24, Georg Feddern wrote:

Am 28.09.2015 um 14:46 schrieb Andy Townsend:


Depends on the pub, I'd say.  Some places are both a hotel and a pub, 
some have essentially separate "hotel" and "pub" bits (for which 2 
nodes within a building might work)  and some (e.g. 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/75844692 ) are pubs that do 
accommodation, but not really hotels, so I'd use accommodation=yes 
for those.




Why not the already established tourism=guest_house for this B offer?

Regards,
Georg

___
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] Orchards and their crops

2015-09-16 Thread Jerry Clough (SK53) 

Replies in-line:
On 16/09/2015 06:33, johnw wrote:



On Sep 15, 2015, at 6:44 PM, Jerry Clough - OSM > wrote:


Hi John,

No there is nothing I'm aware of which discriminates anywhere between 
cultivated pears in general (/Pyrus communis/) & specific cultivars 
('Conference' ). 
Cultivar just is shorthand for "cultivated variety" so of course 
there is no hierarchy variety=>cultivar.



I guess I was looking for an idea of where people draw the lines 
between the trees, like we can with potatoes and sweet potatoes. I 
know there are many many kinds of both, but usually they can easily be 
divided into two groups, because we can say that a potato and a sweet 
potato are commonly referred to by those two separate names, and 
usually not confused with each other by the people that grow them and 
consume them.


Sweet Potatoes & Potatoes are completely different things: different 
plant families (Convolvulacae vs Solanaceae), different origin as a 
cultivated plant (Central America vs Andes), different method of 
cultivation, they have in common that they are root vegetables. When I'm 
buying potatoes in the supermarket I pay a great deal of attention to 
the variety: King Edwards have very different properties from Desiree or 
Maris Piper. The 'Lumper' variety is historically important because of 
the Irish Potato famine, as it was this variety's susceptibility to 
/Phythophora /which was the proximate cause of the famine. (See for 
example Salaman's /The History/ /& Social Influence of the Potato/ 
 
, and late works on the same subject).




I am very comfortable throwing all grapes into “grapevines”  or all 
oranges into “orange_trees” - but I don’t know about some obviously 
different fruits that share the same words - Asian pears look 
different, taste different - and most importantly - not considered a 
“pear” by the people that grow them - “pears” are “western pears” to 
them.  So I feel comfortable saying that having “pear_trees” and 
“sand_pear_trees” is a good idea.


Hmm, not all grapes are the same. In NY state and elsewhere in the NE of 
the US, grapes are grown which are native to North America 
. The vast majority of 
grapes grown for fruit and wine-making are however /Vitis vinifera/. 
Similarly your pears are different species not varieties.


But when it comes to all the other trees I have never heard of until I 
was cleaning up that list (is a "Governor’s plum" a plum? Is a 
 “Custard Apple” an Apple?), I was looking to see if there is some 
known way of putting the trees into usable categories or types for 
mapping without having people suggest them one by one - otherwise 
we’ll get odd regional or slang names - or things possibly grouped by 
distant mappers who don’t understand the nuances - like me with some 
of these trees.



Javbw


For these types of differences I think it is important to be aware that 
things are different, and not try and subsume them in some artificial 
category.  We're still living with early American colonists calling 
things Robins, Blackbirds and Sparrows, when they weren't. In general 
wikipedia is your friend here!


The whole point of taxon/species tags is to allow much more precise 
tagging than is possible, say with the trees tag. Even in the UK an oak 
wood may be made up of one of 2 species, and we have a very impoverished 
set of trees. There are not mutually exclusive, although one idea of 
taxon was to allow any taxonomic level to be used. Thus I'm fine with 
trees=pear_trees and taxon=Pyrus pyrifolia for Asian Pear (I would 
always recommend using taxon:en or taxon:ja to add a vernacular name as 
well) and trees=pear_trees and taxon=Pyrus communis for the Common Pear.


Jerry

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

Re: [Tagging] Cemetery section tagging

2011-06-09 Thread Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM 

On 08/06/2011 20:57, Alan Mintz wrote:
I'm working on the Riverside National Cemetery here: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.88467lon=-117.28189zoom=17layers=M 
after having found their official map (non-copyright USVA product) 
to have mistakes and omissions - seeing a useful contribution for OSM.


Locations within the cemetery are known by section and site. I've 
drawn the section polygons based on the official maps, Bing imagery, 
and some discussion with them, but the boundaries do not really render 
in Mapnik. The latest iteration I've tried tags the individual 
sections as amenity=grave_yard + boundary=administrative + 
admin_level=12. If you look carefully, you can see a disruption in the 
symmetry of the background fill trees along the boundaries, but I'm 
looking for something a bit more obvious (like the black lines used 
for barrier=wall).


Well aware not to tag for the renderer, there are still many 
different ways to tag here - I'm just looking for a clue as to which 
one might result in the rendering I'm looking for. If there isn't one, 
how can I get the default Mapnik rendering to draw a thin, contrasting 
outline around amenity=grave_yard, assuming there isn't an objection?


--
Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net


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

Hi Alan,

I think some work has been done on Arlington National Cemetery which 
might be relevant.


A couple of years ago I made this proposal: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Section which 
attempts to capture this sort of requirement. The main interest was 
European forests, but cemeteries were very much on my mind because it is 
often really difficult to find a particular grave even in small cemeteries.


I don't know if anyone has used it (I wasn't particularly happy with the 
tag name because its meaning is non-obvious) for tagging. Obviously it 
is unlikely to be supported by renderers, although if you look at the 
discussion you can see interest for some renderers.


I did do one cemetery but it was horribly tagged for the renderer  I 
really ought to fix it!


I think admin_level is getting terribly overused (e.g., neighbourhood) 
and would deprecate its use for anything except administrative 
boundaries. I tend to think of it as a rendering hack anyway: and it may 
force the data consumer to use the wiki to interpret it.


Regards,

Jerry Clough

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr keys (2011-04)

2011-04-25 Thread Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM 

On 25/04/2011 15:20, Brad Neuhauser wrote:
In the US, this is usually generically called a unit--for a full 
list of USPS secondary units:
http://www.usps.com/ncsc/lookups/usps_abbreviations.html#secunitdesig  You 
can see Suite is one of these, along with Apartment and many others.


This page collects info about worldwide mail systems, at least Canada 
and Australia seem to have unit designations similar to the US: 
http://www.bitboost.com/ref/international-address-formats.html


Royal Mail does have a way to search for flat number, but didn't see 
anything more than that on their website. 
http://postcode.royalmail.com/portal/rm/postcodefinder?pageId=pcaf_pc_searchpostcodeSearchType=detailedcatId=28400668 
http://postcode.royalmail.com/portal/rm/postcodefinder?pageId=pcaf_pc_searchpostcodeSearchType=detailedcatId=28400668  Guess 
this leaves us with Richard's question: is there a different British term?


Brad

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net 
mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:


On 4/25/11 9:44 AM, Josh Doe wrote:

I was just thinking about this myself. We have lots of strip malls
around here, where a particular strip will have the same address
number, but is divided into a number of suites. Some of
these suites
are combined to contain one business, but the business will
only use
one of the suite identifiers for their address. In one strip
you'll
see 9570-A, 9570-B, 9570-F depending on the size of the
businesses. I've just been putting this in addr:housenumber.

i have been putting it into housenumber too, to a degree, but it's not
really natural.

and the suite model is very, very common, anytime you are looking
at a shared building, whether it's office space, industrial space, or
retail space.

my concern here is purely making sure the tag name is well chosen.
given that OSM tends to lean towards british usage, i'd like to know
what that is.


richard


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



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


Personally, I'd put this is addr:full.

I suspect that there are too many local variants to handle. When I've 
rented offices in places where multiple offices shared premises, the 
Royal Mail just expect the business name  the postal address. Of course 
you can put lots of other stuff (Flat 12, Top Floor office, ...) but the 
post office doesn't in general care because these will all share a 
delivery point. Post is usually sorted out internally.


In Zurich when I rented an apartment this was more significant as the 
delivery point was an individual post box inside the building  the 
postie had a key to the building. In this case the building had 
apartments on the top floor, but business suites on other floors, (and 
an up-market knocking shop in the basement, which had a separate entrance).


The most extreme case that I'm aware of is Spain: it's not uncommon for 
addresses to consist of a building which will have a street address, 
followed by a floor number and a door (often just left  right). This is 
common enough to be asked for in questionnaires and online address 
forms. As many small companies I've visited are often located in 
residential buildings, addresses for business suites and residential 
apartments are often identical in form.


So I'd tend to keep the standard addr:* tags for stuff which more 
closely relates to a postal address: and put the non-standard stuff in 
the addr:full tag. The key issue is really what use cases can you 
envisage. The main one I can think of is actually finding the entrance 
when visiting the premises.


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - daycare

2011-04-22 Thread Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM 

On 21/04/2011 16:13, Flaimo wrote:

created a proposal for amenity=daycare:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/daycare

more information on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daycare

flaimo

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
I hadn't looked at this proposal, having assumed it addressed day-care 
for the elderly, handicapped, or other adults.


I'm not aware of anyone using the term regularly this way in British 
English. Before reaching school age the places kids go to tend to be one 
of the following Nursery, Pre-school, a child-minder. To my mind these 
are pretty much covered by the amenity=kindergarten tag. I would not 
think there is any mileage in OSM trying to identify childminders. Once 
kids reach school, facilities where they stay before being picked-up by 
their parents will (Imaginatively) be called after-school.


The OSM convention is to use British, *not* American, English. You 
should therefore change this proposal to child_care (as described in the 
wiki page in your link). Particularly as the latter is much less 
ambiguous (the main reason why some American English terms have been 
used in tags e.g. sidewalk/pavement).


I do think that day_care covering facilities for adults under a variety 
of categories (elderly, learning difficulties, health) would be useful, 
but this seems to warrant a different tag. I can immediately think of 
several places locally which I haven't added to OSM for want of a tag.


Jerry


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