Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects
On 2020-01-07 08:27, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 6 Jan 2020, 16:35 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: sent from a phone On 6. Jan 2020, at 07:29, Maarten Deen wrote: Baltic Sea to be the "Baltic Sea" or for South America to be "South America" - this is an example of English imperialism. This "imperialism" idea of yours is just your idea. It is not something that is widely felt. regarding imperialism, I think it’s hard to reject the reasoning that English is in widespread use because of imperialism. Yes, but using it for a pragmatic reasons for an international communication is usually not imperialism. I am also not a fan of blaming history for the current situation and taking the long road because you don't like that history. It would mean that I couldn't speak dutch with my Surinam friends just because 400 years ago the ideas of how we should conduct ourselves were different. That is just counterproductive. Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects
On 2020-01-05 23:25, Tomek wrote: EN (automatic translation) I plan to remove the "name" and "wikipedia" tags from places that are not associated with a specific nation or language: * continents * north and south poles * seas and bays, but exceptionally leaving the "name" tag for seas with a maximum of two (or three) languages of neighboring countries, so for example "Белое море" will not change. The purpose of this edition is to make the OSM map more neutral and not humiliate people from any country. There is no reason for the Humiliation is your own feeling. I am not British or American and I am not humiliated (or have any negative feelings) when I see such a tag. Can you explain also what this fixes? If any rendering engine wants to render a name and the name tag is not present, it will want to revert to another name. That may be name:en. That probably will not be to your liking, so will you then also remove the name:en tag? Baltic Sea to be the "Baltic Sea" or for South America to be "South America" - this is an example of English imperialism. This "imperialism" idea of yours is just your idea. It is not something that is widely felt. Any data will not be lost - programs will be able to extract the desired name from the tags name:en, name:pl, etc., Wikipedia links will be available via Wikidata. Please support (vote) my proposal or write a reason why not. I vote against it, if not only because your stance on this is flawed, but also because this might remove correct and valuable information. Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway=fairway?
I think the general concencus is that waterway=fairway is a useful tag. I'll just add it to the wiki so people will know about it. I'm also going to change the waterway=lake to waterway=fairway where I come across it and think it should be changed. Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] waterway=fairway?
I'm seeing some ways tagged with waterway=fairway in the Netherlands. Some examples: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/215071961 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/210382535 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/215071958 These examples have all been added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/15581966, there are more examples in the changeset. Taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=waterway&value=fairway This user also added waterway=lake on unclosed ways. Both waterway=fairway and waterway=lake are not described in the wiki. I do get the idea of waterway=fairway. This user seems to have added this in lakes to indicate the navigatable route. Since these lakes are shallow, there are predeterminded routes marked by buoys. So it makes sense. The waterway=lake I don't get. What is the thought on this. Is this something to keep or should these routes be tagged as waterway=canal? These are not canals, so I do see the added value of using a different tag. Is fairway an acceptable one? Fairway does seem to be the english term for this feature. Should this be up for for vote as a proposed feature of should we just add it to the waterway wikipage? Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] If a school is a shelter when a disaster happens...
On 2015-12-30 16:33, Dongpo Deng wrote: Hi all, There is a problem for tagging shelters. In Taiwan, some of schools are selected to be shelters for villages or small regions when a disaster happens. However, it is conflict to annotate two amenities on a geometry object. That is, we cannot simultaneously use amenity = school and amenity = social_facility; social_facility = shelter for a school with shelter functionality. Some Taiwanese mappers proposed to add 'emergency' as prefix for distinguishing shelter, e.g., emergency : amenity = amenity emergency : social_facility = shelter http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4790949 I'm just wondering if it is a good manner for this case. Because the tag 'emergency' is used for emergency facilities but not including shelters. Thus, adding emergency prefix to amenity is suitable? Any suggestions for such situation? How about shelter=emergency? I don't really see why social_facility would be applicable. I don't see why an emergency shelter would be connected to social services. Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess
On 2015-06-03 12:08, Shaun McDonald wrote: On 3 Jun 2015, at 07:00, Maarten Deen wrote: I agree that in every case where oneway=yes is not implied, oneway=no is superfluous (in a network design way), but that does not make oneway=no superfluous. There are some cases where oneway=no is useful. For example an area where there is lots of one way streets and only a few that are two way, adding the oneway=no confirms that the data is correct rather than the oneway=yes being missing. Similarly where a street was oneway previously and has recently been made two way, this makes it explicit that it is now two way in addition to whatever changeset note there may be. Yes, that's why I said "in a network design way". Looking at the data, oneway=no is not necessary on any object where it is not implied. However, adding it does make clear to people editing the map that it is not an omission if surrounding objects are all oneway=yes. Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess
On 2015-06-03 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should not show oneway at all. I agree. In OSM if oneway=no then it's not oneway and the oneway tag should not appear at all. Here I don't agree. The only time oneway should appear is in the case of oneway=yes - and the '=yes' is superfluous. Some roads are implied oneway. E.g. junction=roundabout and highway=motorway both imply that the road is one-way only. If for some reason the object in case is not oneway, a oneway=no tag is very much needed. I agree that in every case where oneway=yes is not implied, oneway=no is superfluous (in a network design way), but that does not make oneway=no superfluous. There is also the occurence of oneway=-1 in case someone reverses the direction of a way. What should be done when the only possibility for oneway is either set or unset and the direction gets reversed? Should reversing be disallowed? Should you get a warning "oneway street can not be reversed"? Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] foot=yes or bicycle=yes on track without other limitations?
Is there a deeper meaning of adding foot=yes or bicycle=yes to highway=track or highway=path without adding other limitations? I thought track and path are by default routable for foot and bicycle, so IMHO they add nothing. Examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/53561813 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/68796031 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/195440134 Regards, Maarten ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
