Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 167, Issue 3 emergency vertical stairways.

[St Niklaas]

Hi Anne,

Have a look here,
Not a link but an adress 'Nieuwe Kade 41 Arnhem'
The shoreline is made out of corrigated metal sheets, with every now and then a 
stairway build in.

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 166, Issue 10

[St Niklaas]

Hi Camelia, I once tried to mark inundations (flooded areas) for defensive 
reasons of methodes, since the borders are not very present or alike I stopd 
the project you wont be able to point the borders accurate.
So stick to the markings of roads and pois. dont trie to map area's as "flood 
dangerous". Or just an node on a potential flood prone with intermittemd or 
seasonal.

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 165, Issue 8, accidental memorials

[St Niklaas]

Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: zondag 11 juni 2023 01:08
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 165, Issue 8

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. road accident memorials (Anne-Karoline Distel)
   2. Re: road accident memorials (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   3. Re: road accident memorials (Anne-Karoline Distel)
   4. Re: road accident memorials (Greg Troxel)
   5. Re: road accident memorials (Anne-Karoline Distel)
   6. Re: road accident memorials (Marc_marc)


--

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 15:40:46 +0100
From: Anne-Karoline Distel 
To: OSM Tagging 
Subject: [Tagging] road accident memorials
Message-ID: <63f2b3c0-f333-8a90-6870-6ed24ab31...@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

I would like to be able to differentiate memorials for road traffic
accidents from other memorials along a road, because I'd really like to
know how many there are. Sometimes, it will be difficult to say without
local knowledge whether it was that or maybe if the family uses
"accident" as a euphemism for suicide, of course. I don't know if
wayside_cross is used for this in some instances, for example, which
IMHO it shouldn't be.

On a side note, I'd also like to tag memorials for pets different than
for events and people. They're not terribly common in public places, but
I just mapped this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10967549672
and there are two in the Army Barracks in Kilkenny for dogs as well (one
not mapped yet, because it's fairly new).

I can't find anything for "pet" or "accident" on taginfo.

Anne


Hi Anne,
There are several problems/remarks for making such memorials visible or 
viewable on a roadside.
Traffic is too busy to spend or giving attention time to memorials while 
driving along.
The old memorials would just be visible by walkers.
The long grasses make a cover for the memorials.
The mourning families stated that they want a warning alongside the road to 
prevent more death its contra dictional, a memorial on a cemetery would do as 
well.
You’ll never be able to read nor understand when driving or passing by the 
memorial.
And above all, they are / should be temporarily by permissive rules. Without 
permission to visit along the roadside, it attrack’s to much attention,a  
gathering on the banks alongside the road.
Who’s is keeping up with the none excysting ones ?
Just like flowerbeds are there a fortnight as being on farmland, the product 
are bulbs and they grow best without flowers on top.
Greetz
Ps and what; if the accident was between a crossing tree and a motor vehicle ? 
Just suicide, youll never know ?
So it is mappable but should we want it ?


--

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 18:01:17 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] road accident memorials
Message-ID: <604202b5-7b1d-467e-aea1-0713e4857...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"



sent from a phone

> On 10 Jun 2023, at 17:58, Anne-Karoline Distel  wrote:
>
> I don't know if
> wayside_cross is used for this in some instances, for example, which
> IMHO it shouldn't be


agreed. One tag I am aware of in this context is memorial=ghost_bike
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/memorial=ghost_bike#overview
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 


--

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 20:53:07 +0100
From: Anne-Karoline Distel 
To: Greg Troxel 
Cc: OSM Tagging 
Subject: Re: [Tagging] road accident memorials
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 10/06/2023 20:33, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Anne-Karoline Distel  writes:
>
>> I would like to be able to differentiate memorials for road traffic
>> accidents from other memorials along a road, because I'd really like to
>> know how many there are. Sometimes, it will be difficult to say without
>> local knowledge whether it was that or maybe if the family uses
>> "accident" as a euphemism for suicide, of course.
> In general I don't think it's possible to  separate "accident" from
> "suicide" fully for "motor vehicle crashes", just as it isn't possible
> to separate "overdose" from "suicide" for opiod deaths.
>
> I think OSM has to tag what 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 164, Issue 10

[St Niklaas]

Hi there,
Most invalid parking spaces are marked with a traffic sign, accordingly those 
space will be sufficient of width and length. There is not much need to measure 
it like I do using several measurement tools. OSM is still a better map by 
making surveys, locally but by using arials it is not getting better.
Ps a kerb is mostly 1.00 m and tiles are 0.30x0.30, so an estimation is quit 
simple to make on a survey and a laser won't do during dayligth.
Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68 Seats or capacity ?

[St Niklaas]

Hi Anne,

By lack of friends use your elbows they wont mind.
A seat with friends is 0.50 m closely of cosey. With a 'normal' format of 
strangers its about 0.60 the length of the top of your stretch fingers up to 
the backside of your elbow. But an estimated guess would do as well or the size 
of the pavement could be helpful as well.
A tile is 0.30 x 0.30 or 0.40 x 0.60 regular size and a kerbstone is 1.00 
length. Take you’re pick.

Greetz


Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: vrijdag 30 september 2022 04:07
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 68

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (martianfreeloader)
   2. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps (Davidoskky)
   3. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   4. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (martianfreeloader)
   5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Anne-Karoline Distel)
   6. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (Peter Elderson)
   7. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity
  (stevea)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 11:58:35 +
From: martianfreeloader 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion
that my proposal is not considered useful by the community.

I thus decided to retract it.



--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:10:25 +0200
From: Davidoskky 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mobile apps
Message-ID: <693129da-c6e8-cb0b-5e3d-8992db7b3...@yahoo.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Hi,

I have added a few comments in the wiki.


Davide

On 29/09/22 10:18, Martin Fischer wrote:
> Hey everybody,
>
> I just drafted a proposal to formalize app:* which is currently used
> in Sweden to link Android & iOS apps of pharmacies.
> My proposal also addresses the inconsistency between the currently in
> use app:apple, app:google, payment:app:android and payment:app:ios.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Mobile_apps
>
> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



--

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:19:51 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: <01e0cfda-c88f-4032-9e81-cbfc7936e...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii



sent from a phone

> On 29 Sep 2022, at 14:10, martianfreeloader  
> wrote:
>
> Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion that my 
> proposal is not considered useful by the community.
>
> I thus decided to retract it.


as you are interested in consistency, have you considered proposing the 
opposite, retagging of the 1000 capacity on benches to seats?

Cheers Martin


--

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 16:26:59 +
From: martianfreeloader 
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats
by capacity
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

I personally find it more consistent to reduce the number of synonymous
keys across all objects.

But yes, I am considering two groups of mutually exclusive proposals to
settle this issue. Something along these lines:

-
ISSUE 1
Should the capacity of a bench be tagged on all benches or only on those
which have clear seat separation? This is independent of issue 2.

Proposal 1A) Only on benches with have clear seat separation.

Proposal 1B) On all benches.

Question to be resolved:
Can a thing that has individual seats be considered a bench at all?

---

ISSUE 2:
Which key should be used to tag the capacity of a bench? This is
independent of issue 1.

Proposal 2A) Use seats=* 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 156, Issue 25, surface; concrete

[St Niklaas]

Hi John,

Is not it just right to use concrete if your not able to determine what kind of 
surface your looking at ?
Or should we talk with developers of these kind of programms that they should 
do more research before the programs are excepted to use for edits in OSM ?
If you work with JOSM, it is permenantly damaged by prgrams like StreetComplete 
GoMap and others These editors are just as hungry as the old P1 and dont 
respect ways draen closely together besides that the editors lack the right 
menus.

My 10 cnts

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

[St Niklaas]

Hi everyone,

I react on the notes of Graeme,
There are a lot of things to map, but Animal trails or nature tracks are not 
the high items to map and if as suggested that they are found on areal views, I 
find that a good argument to stop using views without surveying locally and 
outside for a closer look and good description.
A horse track is not a good choice to tend to walk on foot, it already has its 
own tag bridle way.
So practical I would not spend time to argu about this kind of paths, but dont 
map them and specially short cuts, they are damaging nature unneccesary and 
should get access=no.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 133, Issue 35 man-made

[St Niklaas]

Hi Martin & members,

Besides the frequently named bridge, there are several oil / petroleum wells in 
the same category man-made.
I reccon no one has ever counted them, you could Fill the Albert Hall with them.
In my humble opinion its a not very well thought idea and the describtion of 
the old English man made is undoubtely sex less.

Greetz.


Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: donderdag 15 oktober 2020 11:41
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 133, Issue 35

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: What does bicycle=no on a node means? (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   2. Re: Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made
  (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   3. Re: Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made
  (Robert Delmenico)
   4. Re: railway=station areas (Martin Koppenhoefer)
   5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Rideshare Access (nathan case)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 09:42:59 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] What does bicycle=no on a node means?
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"



sent from a phone

> On 13. Oct 2020, at 23:42, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> I changed the crossing to the way we do it in many parts of Europe, i.e. a 
> crossing node and a crossing way.


I thought the standard was highway=crossing on the nodes where they cross the 
road and highway=footway with footway=crossing on the way segment between the 
kerbs (if sidewalks are mapped) or between the crossing nodes (if several 
carriageways are present).

The crossing=* tags in this scheme go on the nodes, and after some wiki 
fiddling a long time ago, possibly also on the ways.

The idea to use crossing=* as a on ways stems from user ULamm 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Acrossing=revision=1077856=1068935

And became successively popular:
https://taghistory.raifer.tech/#way/highway/crossing/crossing/


The reason for the edit is “see discussion”, but frankly, looking at the 
discussion, it is all but convincing that this edit was justified: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Key:crossing=1093129#Node_or_line

Generally, I would propose to only tag crossing =* on the crossing node, but 
refrain from access like tags on this node (no bicycle or foot tags). The 
access should be derived from the crossing ways.
This still fails to add crossing specifics for situations where the crossing 
ways are not mapped, so alternatively we could state that we only add positive 
access tags to crossings. Imagine I would add hgv=no or motorcycle=no tags to 
pedestrian crossings, IMHO this would be as correct as adding bicycle=no, 
because neither of them can cross at the pedestrian crossing, but overall it 
could be seen as very bad tagging because of the ambiguity (for the road users).

Cheers Martin
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 


--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 10:36:13 +0200
From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to
key:human_made
Message-ID: <43016bbc-f429-447c-afd2-8533ecca7...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8



sent from a phone

> On 15. Oct 2020, at 02:57, Robert Delmenico  wrote:
>
> I also understand that generally speaking the use of man_made is commonly 
> accepted as a gender neutral term, but in reality it has been adapted that 
> way due to past practices of gender bias.


I fear in „human“ there is still a man, even in every woman there‘s a man, as 
in female there is a male. Overall it looks as if English is not suitable for 
gender neutral language, everything refers back to men. I propose to use German 
as the language for tags.
It might look like an impossible endeavor at first glance to retag those 
millions or billions of objects, but if you dig deeper you will find that many 
tags are already more German than English, so ultimately it wouldn’t be as much 
change as it may sound initially.

Cheers Martin




--

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:46:14 +1100
From: Robert Delmenico 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 133, Issue 10 message 3

[St Niklaas]

Hi Greame,
Manure, specially from horses, seems to be very healthy for roserays. I even 
have bought some from cows in the past. In 2 options get it delivered or take 
it away in your booth of the car. 
The direct delivery stands could evaluate into a so called automatic pay and 
open the box by the glass door, which could hold meat, milk or eggs aso.
Have fun and keep mapping.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 133, Issue 2

[St Niklaas]

Hi Wieland,

Whats wrong with shop=farm,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.05459/5.15648
This is not the only one and they all are mraked with a sign or a flag or 
alike, with different products. Up till even meat, eggs and milk.
So whats the advantage of a new tag besides shop ?

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 132, Issue 77

[St Niklaas]

Hi Lukas,

Since the green energy is transported by the present transport facility and 
even my own solar cells are not able to provide sufficient energy there is a 
mix of energy provided by the net energy line.
I would not start to tag solar (green)=energy to any loading point, despite a 
few exceptions which are not controllable by just a mapper. The basic rule for 
OSM, the next mapper should be able to notice the same knowledge.

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 126, Issue 81, message 2, Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

[St Niklaas]

Hi Paul.,

The flag of this discussion is IMHO not the question, but more about the source.
Like you stated there are a lot of objects without a page, so lets stop 
announcing Wikipedia & Wikimedia as reliable sources, but name them for what is 
is second hand information.
Which is not usable for OSM, that florish by first hand information found or 
seen on the spot by a surveying mapper.

Greetz

Hendrikklaas

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 171 Path for all

[St Niklaas]

Hi All,



IMHO it is never a well taken decision to tag a path / bridleway for walking or 
pedestrians at the same time. Ill shut up when walking a path and Equestrians 
have been using the same trail or path, a horseshoe tends to spoil the surface 
ruinous. Only a rocky hillside trail could stand it.

I would not consider a bridleway as anything else despite Andy’s opinion.



Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 109 no 5 disused=:

[St Niklaas]

Hi Paul

++1

Hendrikklaas


Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: donderdag 16 januari 2020 17:50
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 109

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   5. Re: building=disused (Paul Allen)

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 15:48:15 +
From: Paul Allen 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] building=disused
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:55, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

>
> 16 Jan 2020, 02:22 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> If the 'standard map' starts rendering 'disused=yes' the same way as
> 'disused:*=*' (presently not rendered) then what?
>
> Then standard map style will be fixed to
> remove this bug.
>

I took Warin's question to mean what would happen if standard carto
deliberately chose to handle disused=yes the same way as
disused:*=*.  Therefore not a bug to be fixed, but an intentional
permanent change to behaviour.

If that happened, I would stop marking physical objects as disused.  The
fact that a physical object exists, and is therefore rendered, is far more
important than whether it is in use or not.  I suspect many mappers would
do the same.  I'd add a note saying that it's disused, so might many other
mappers.  But notes are free-form, so they may use words other than
"disused."  That would make it harder to craft reliable queries to find or
ignore disused objects of a particular type.

--
Paul

++!

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 40 brick laying technics.

[St Niklaas]

Hi Fernando,


To start here, have a good 2020.


I have been active laying bricks and stones (vert & hor), some people will 
notice the patterns, but not the sizes.

How about the thickness of pavement in pedestrian area's ? Are you aware of the 
fact that they will be good to walk (4,5 cm) but for a ride you’ll need 6 - 8 
cm or more to let an HGV pass without damaging the pavement ?

My other argument is why using Wikipedia as a source, its IMHO the last place I 
would look for reliable info, good for using in OSM, another mapper should be 
able to control my doings. Since every one is able to ad to pedia its not a 
very well or reliable source to quote that is not the case with that medium it 
can or will change. And even "mistakes" can be un attended there for ever, so 
don’t quote another Wiki's then our own is the most reasonable is not it ?

The technic of laying bricks like that is called Vleiwerk, the bricks are 
placed on a very well prepared strech of sand, even a robot could do 100 or 
more at once. But they still have to be tightened together by using a shaker, 
the old not even likely shaped by hand, just putting a lump of clay in a 
squarre made box. They could be 3-4 mm difference in thickness and form not a 
match for an robot to cope with so one for one for all, to form a pavement.


Greetz


Hendrikklaas


Ps did you ever walked a flagstone surface during or after a rainy day ? It 
will be a slippery surface with dangers for oldies and cyclists. I would expect 
a router to tell me if a cycle route is planned over cobblestones as it is not 
very even.




Van: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
Verzonden: donderdag 9 januari 2020 02:14
Aan: tagging@openstreetmap.org 
Onderwerp: Tagging Digest, Vol 124, Issue 40

Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
tagging@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: surface=block_paved, or surface=paved + paving=block
  (Paul Allen)
   2. Re: amenity=tourist_bus_parking (Volker Schmidt)
   3. Re: Feature proposal - RFC - Overhead lines management
  (consecutive to line_attachment) (François Lacombe)
   4. Re: surface=block_paved, or surface=paved + paving=block
  (Fernando Trebien)
   5. Re: How to tag oneway restriction applying to pedestrians?
  (Jarek Piórkowski)


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 23:22:38 +
From: Paul Allen 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] surface=block_paved, or surface=paved +
paving=block
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 23:06, marc marc  wrote:

> why it isn't a paving_stones ? the max height ?
>

Shape and size.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brick#Optimal_dimensions,_characteristics,_and_strength

I ask myself how and how many mappers 'll see a diff.
>

Any who have ever laid bricks, or handled bricks, or seen bricks.  Maybe.

Oh, and those who happened to watch a YouTube video about the history of
bricks, :)

--
Paul
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 


--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 00:37:00 +0100
From: Volker Schmidt 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

It is not unusual to have one parking area with one name with dedicated
areas for different vehicle categories. I cannot use amenity=parking for
both the entire parking area and the vehicle-type-specific "sub"-areas, at
least JOSM does complain when you do that. We could ignore that and use
nested amenity=parking tags.

.


On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, 15:52 John Willis via Tagging, <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> If I have a sign that says all cars go here, and all HGV goes over there,
> and one is painted for 1000 car spots and one has 50 giant bus spots, those
> are designated lots.
>
> I have used parking_space when I have found A lone disabled space - but a
> group of 50 spots for busses is a bus lot.
>
> At least being able to say “this is the lot for busses” as an attribute of
> amenity=parking should be doable (with a subtag).
>
> Javbw
>
> On Jan 8, 2020, at 7:18 PM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>
> make use of the fact that amenity=parking_space
> 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 122, Issue 70 reinforced shooting walls ?

[St Niklaas]

Hi I dont expect an embankment on a shooting range to be reinforced. The so 
called bullet-catcher is safely made out of sand or alike just to avoid 
swurling bullets at the end of the range, the sand allows the projectile to 
enter to wall and slowing it down.
Another advantance is the recovering of bullets will be much easier shifting 
the material through a strainer.

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 122, Issue 68, earth walls

[St Niklaas]

Hi you could tag them by surroundings and on top, with 2 circular ways tagged 
with man-made=embankment, be shure the short lines point up and down to 
eachother. Tats the way a slpe is determed in technical drwaings, the length 
and frequency of the lines is used to figure the decline, but since we only get 
short ones next to eachother let it be. Like this 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.27366/4.72674  And yes youll have to 
walk it 4 times for a survey.
Greetz
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 116, Issue 160 constructive comminucations

[St Niklaas]

Hi OSM / mappers,

I do have some remarks;

IMHO there are too much channels or Fora, from OSM to Github, to read or talk 
about or over OSM. Par example if you want to read them all, you won’t be able 
to contribute as a mapper to OSM .

I can’t admit what has been written before, but reactions tend to be emotional 
as if the writer made a personal remark as a comment on an earlier statement, a 
reason not to participate anymore, I don’t want to be one of the bunch.

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 113, Issue 73

[St Niklaas]

Hi Stephan & all,

I realised this see the lines below,

Sergio Manzi 
Za 16-2-2019 16:06

Hello!


Actually the analysis was not mine, but just the result of a query in taginfo 
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=building%3Astart_date), but I 
guess I understand what's going on here:


all of the objects you're referring are tagged with a start_date=* key, while 
the tag I was referring to (and was discussed in the mailing list) is 
building:start_date=* (note the presence of the "building:" namespace 
prefix...).


A query for "your" key (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=start_date) 
returns 14246906 objects!!


I don't know how many of those more than 14 millions objects are buildings, but 
I suspect quite a good number (an appropriate query in overpass turbo can 
clarify that, I guess).


Normally I'm all in for supporting namespaces, but I understand that we have a 
problem here and it would be just silly to throw away such a bunch of good 
information.


I suggest you to answer to the mailing list too and underline this situation. 
You can quote my answer in full or in part, if you wish.


Regards and my compliments for your outstanding contribution,


Sergio




On 2019-02-16 15:42, St Niklaas wrote:

Hi Sergio,


I doubt your analyses, since almost all buildings (5 million) in the 
Netherlands that have been imported since 2014, carry  "start_date = 2022" or 
alike. Have a look here https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.53890/4.83687

The import comes straight out of the Dutch Cadastre after a lot of hard work 
getting the go ahead from the government. But my contributions are not among 
them, the BAG (Basis Addresses and Buildings) don’t measure covered buildings 
even if they are historic monuments, so that’s my speciality and they import my 
OSM work into the BAG 


Greetz


[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]<https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.53890/4.83687>

OpenStreetMap<https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.53890/4.83687>
OpenStreetMap is the free wiki world map. OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, 
created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
www.openstreetmap.org<http://www.openstreetmap.org>





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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 113, Issue 51 Re: tree rows vs individual trees

[St Niklaas]

Hi
Just an addition to Peters lines, follow the link,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/52.6446/5.6931
Each row is invalid marked as managed forest, yes the row is managed but just 
for residential use. Almost every farmyard has been surrounded by one or more 
rows of trees in this barren flat country.
I would not avoid the mapping of single trees, dont do it if you dont want it, 
but in reality the singel tree option gives this country just its own 
caracteristics. The tree rows are mostly used by easy goiing mappers. As Peter 
stated there are a lot of rows to map like these fields, use this link for 
excample.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.636612998627385=5.7831217612532555=20=bxufKHlJCt8k1sGQzlV6BA

Greetz

[https://images.mapillary.com/bxufKHlJCt8k1sGQzlV6BA/thumb-640.jpg]

Netherlands, image by 
commodoortje
Map data at scale from street-level imagery
www.mapillary.com


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 110, Issue 135 Trans Alaska oil line

[St Niklaas]

Hi Dave,


Did you thought about movable=yes just as an extra value ?


Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 108, Issue 71, languages & borders

[St Niklaas]

HI folks,



What about a local language that is used on a small island (Schiermonnikoog) by 
a minor number (15) people ?

Or a group of whistling guys living in the eastern European borders, that has 
no words just sounds to communicate over long distances ?



Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 89, Issue 15

[St Niklaas]

Hi Ross,


These reserve called areas looking like greens or parks, dont have any logic in 
or being connected thus left open for transport of any kind. They seem to be 
left overs, but they are all over Longwarrin (au)

Signed with access=yes, motor cycles= no, closed with a gate.
So your hint park seems allright.

Greetz

Ps but yould better ask this at the local council or City Hall, just to be 
shure.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 80, Issue 17, building digester

[St Niklaas]

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 20:37:07 +1000
From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] building=digester
Message-ID: <557af9fb-35b2-2160-4770-b71a94110...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed



>Some 'greenhouses' are too low to enter- you simply raise the 'roof' to gain 
>access.

>Other 'greenhouses' are huge - tractors and trucks enter these.

>For me a 'building' must have sufficient volume for a person to enter with 
>ease.
>Dictionary definition? a 'substantial structure' whatever that means.

Do you mean that any substantial structure that can be entered is getting the 
building=yes tag ?
If I do agree

+1
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 79, Issue 26

[St Niklaas]

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 21:39:54 -0500
From: John Eldredge 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"

Subject: Re: [Tagging] Masts vs Towers yet again
Message-ID:
<154273c9f48.2777.8c042f3e6e983dd0f57452e62f7f8...@jfeldredge.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

The 808-foot antenna for radio station WSM fits both the tower and mast
descriptions we are using.


John, read Marcs remarks as well, the WSM antenne is clearly a mast standing on 
one point, for mechanical reasons and yes it has a foundation on the ground as 
well.
The Gebrandytower is a tower at first (106m), gets a mast (hollow) on top, lift 
inside to a higher socalled reportersroom and even higher to almost 376 m to a 
digital antenne. But the structure is still a tower. We dont call a 
motorvehicle with a bicycle on top a bicycle, well ?


>> Op 16 apr. 2016, om 08:27 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer
>>  het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> but in these cases there would typically be a room in the tower, i.e. the
>> pole is there to support something on top, or is big and hollow and
>> accessible in the inside.
>>
>> this is not a tower:
>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Borough_Hill_mast.jpg
>> 
>>
>> this is not a mast:
>> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torre_della_televisione_di_Stoccarda#/media/File:Stuttgarter_Fernsehturm6.jpg
>> 
>
> I agree with this vision, but in the last case, which we also see very
> often in my country (The Netherlands), one still could say that we see a
> mast on top of a tower, like this one:
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Gerbrandy_tower.jpg
> 
>
> Which creates even more confusion.
>
> A tower is built on the spot where you see it. But a mast is very often
> constructed elsewhere and simply erected on the spot where you see it,
> although I’m not sure if we can use this in our decision on how to tag.
>


Subject: Digest Footer

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


--

End of Tagging Digest, Vol 79, Issue 26
***

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 79, Issue 21

[St Niklaas]

Hi,

The Gerbrandy tower is an example of a build concrete tower with some 
prefabricated steel accessible elements on top of it. It’s still a tower on the 
ground. Guided as well.
A mast is a structure out of one piece, tall sailing ships excluded, a 
structured mast or lattice tower will be standing on 1 - 3 points supported by 
guidelines but it remains a mast.
Change the Wiki to make a clear distinction between mast and tower despite the 
names they get from human beings.
Man_made=mast for a mast and man_made=tower for a building that’s a tower.

IMHO, the translation of the original word mast into English is the main reason 
for this dispute go back to KISS.

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

Re: [Tagging] Contents of Tagging Digest, Vol 64, Issue 148, discussion, strategy and related tools

[St Niklaas]

Today's Topics:
 
2. Re: Lifecycle concepts, REMOVED (althio)
 
 Message: 2
 Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:58:27 +0100
 From: althio althio.fo...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, REMOVED
 Message-ID:
   caf1yudbqrvozeskk3keek-qzubj6hxe085xr2tasfd1a5ou...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote:
  Yes, feature that does not exist anymore (or even never existed!) or
  is only proposed has no place in OSM.
 
 +1. No place on rendered map and apps. +/-1. No place on DB.
 
  With possible caveat that features that are extremely likely to be added
  (recently destroyed building visible on aerial images etc) element with
 note
  explaining situations makes sense.
 
 +1. Tag:note=* is useful for such cases.
 
  But not a full tagging scheme!
 
 -1. If you keep the outline in OSM database, removed:building=* instead of
 building=* is efficient, can be quicker than free-form note=*, clear and
 informative.
 
Hi,


Just a link we had the same discussion earlier this year, link 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=29723 in
Dutch sorry.


The outcome was tag or ad plans if there’s any kind of activity, signs (?)
,  but measuring, groundwork and so on is
sufficient to mark an area as landuse=construction and make a start drawing the
supposed trace, step by step.


OSM is not an official planning’s map for anyone, don’t start drawing if
there nothing out there to see.


Greetz



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

Re: [Tagging] ContentsTagging Digest, Vol 64, Issue 138, length= Francois

[St Niklaas]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Tagging digest...
 
 Today's Topics:

5. Re: length= (François Lacombe)

 Message: 5
 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 09:13:38 +0100
 From: François Lacombe fl.infosrese...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] length=
 Message-ID:
   CAG0ygLcExWgiFbGqMV=Hv3RT-wf3RS-3RCEPE=uft1qfkom...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
 Since OSM editing tools aren't AutoCAD you can't be 100% precise on the
 geometry.
 Some small features can actually be summarized as nodes when drawing their
 shape sounds irrelevant regarding the cluttering it introduces.
 
 I'm sorry that was trivial for me.
 I won't draw a circle for a 5cm diameter pole and so on...
 
 That's why tags are intended for several kind of primitives instead of only
 one sometimes.
 *François Lacombe*



Francois if you’re using JOSM you’re be able to work
up till 0,06 - 0,04 =0,02 m accuracy and with the other tools flip, turn and so
on the complete structure, so I don’t agree, your able to work quit accurate up
to building standards. 
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 5 floating bridges

[St Niklaas]

 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 5
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 15:29:42 +

 Today's Topics:
 
1. Re: Feature Proposal - Voting - nudism (John Packer)
2. Feature Proposal - RFC - cliff clarification (Friedrich Volkmann)
3. Re: floating or pontoon bridges? (Volker Schmidt)
4. Re: floating or pontoon bridges? (Martin Koppenhoefer)
5. Re: floating or pontoon bridges? (Clifford Snow)
6. Re: floating or pontoon bridges? (John F. Eldredge)
7. Re: floating or pontoon bridges? (Richard Z.)
 
 
 --

 Message: 3
 Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:14:06 +0200
 From: Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] floating or pontoon bridges?
 Message-ID:
   CALQ-OR4HQGvoaav=upx99ij+miptizqfvmhqruhu1d5a+kb...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
 
 
Hi Volker,

What’s up against the tag building=bridge, floating=yes, with additional
floating=pontoon / ship, a pontoon is a sturdy hardly to move object, a ship
bridge where each part / section is based on a one or more ships, and one
section can be removed to let a vessel pass by.  



https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/RP-P-OB-79.978


The Duke of Alva made this
crossing at Antwerp, a road upon ships. It looks more like a barrier then the
possibility to remove a section out of the way. With one exception
the Dutch vlotbrug.



 http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlotbrug



The Sint Maartensvlotbrug consists
of 2 pontoons floating to and from the middle with a bridge (ramp) on each
side.



Hendrikklaas



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

[Tagging] To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools

[St Niklaas]

To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Tagging] bridges
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
I d like to contribute to the bridge discusson



One
remark I would go for building=bridge, since a bridge is a building, if you ad
it completely as a bridge to OSM. The simple man_made=bridge is sufficient if 
it’s
added to the way directly. Bridge=movable and for instance the following tags to
make clear what kind of bridge it is. So anyone will able to add the specific
tags later.

Hefbrug
lift-bridge two sides together


Voetbrug
pedestrian_bridge small


Draaibrug
swing-bridge


Basculebrug,
ophaalbrug lift_bridge on one side


Hangbrug
hanging suspension_bridge


Schipbrug
build on ships


Vlotbrug
pontoons moving aside to and from


Vastebrug
non movable bridge


Aqueduct,
with path alongside – bridge yes


Materials


Metselwerk masonry


Beton concrete


Hout wood


Kunststof fiber composite 


IJzer iron


Staal steel


Aluminium


Touw  rope  fiber


 I hope its not too late.
Hendrikklaas
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13

[St Niklaas]

From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 15:02:53 +

 Today's Topics:
 
4. Re: tag man_made=campanile to be replaced with

  The normal tagging for an English Belltower, Italian campanile, or
  German Glockenturm should remain man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower
  (it's used more then 5000 times).
 
  Volker
 
Volker and Dave, There some in Holland as well, about 230 in totall.
http://nl.ask.com/wiki/Lijst_van_klokkenstoelen_in_Nederland?qsrc=3044lang=nl
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 End of Tagging Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13
 ***

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

Re: [Tagging] Contents of Tagging Digest, Vol 43, Issue 33, 1

[St Niklaas]

 Message: 1
 Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 23:54:43 +0200
 From: Pieren pier...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Surge tank
 
  If nothing had been defined yet, I may use water=surge_tank on a member
  node of a pipeline=water way.
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pipeline


Hi Pieren, your Wiki link gets me puzzled. Why is a
pipe-line tagged underground, instead of layer -1 ? I would say or interpret
ate a -1 tag as below something even if it’s just bottom, ground level or
surface. Why is ever decided to tag it this way ?

Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 43, Issue 6, Tagging city details, message 4

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 43, Issue 6
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 18:59:06 +
 
 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Message: 4
 Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 11:37:20 -0700
 From: Martin Atkins m...@degeneration.co.uk
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [Tagging] Mismatched Level of Detail in highways vs. other
   elements
 Message-ID: 5161bce0.7060...@degeneration.co.uk
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
 
 
 Hi all,
 
 I do mapping in San Francisco, CA and I'm frustrated about the 
 inconsistent levels of detail we typically use when mapping urban 
 environments.
 
 For example, most highways are mapped in a network-oriented fashion with 
 one string of ways representing both directions of traffic, often 
 encapsulating other features like cycle lanes and sidewalks, and 
 intersections simply represented by crossing the streets at a single 
 common node.
 
 On the other hand, rail lines are most commonly mapped by their physical 
 shape, so the rail ways come in pairs. The people who mapped the tram 
 lines in San Francisco also mapped the curves of the rails at 
 intersections, rather than having them meet at a single node as with the 
 highways. This creates the following ridiculous effect in rendering:
  http://osm.org/go/TZHvFT5aF--
 
 Notice how the rails only just fit inside the rendered street on 
 straight sections, and cut the street corner completely at the intersection.
 
 However, here's how it actually looks on the ground (looking across the 
 intersection from east to west). Notice that the rails are completely 
 contained within this 4-lane intersection (all four being normal traffic 
 lanes with no physical separation except for the tram boarding platforms):
  http://oi45.tinypic.com/w6qsgh.jpg
 
 (On the plus side, we're doing better than Google Maps, whose rendering 
 makes it look like the rails on Church street are both off to the west 
 side of the street! http://tinyurl.com/cedot4n )
 
 This problem shows up in various other contexts too: it's impossible to 
 accurately tag a bench or bus stop on a sidewalk because the sidewalk 
 doesn't exist as a separate construct. Fences or buildings directly abut 
 the street end up rendering either over the street or set back from it 
 because the true width of the street is not represented.
 
 For most normal street mapping and vehicle routing purposes it seems 
 sufficient to just know simple landmark details that aid in orientation, 
 e.g. that whether particular street contains a railway or it passes 
 alongside a railway. Of course, more detail-oriented uses like 3D 
 renderings it'd be more important to have the full physical street 
 layout described, with separated lanes and proper physical relationships 
 with surrounding objects.
 
 How have others resolved this fundamental conflict? More detailed 
 streets, or less-detailed everything else?
 
 Hi Martin, Isn’t mapping the same as making choices, what to do or not ? From 
1:1.000.000 up to 1:25.000, from less to lots off it, but it’s getting easier 
since were mapping digital. If we don't make detailed choices, results wont get 
perfect. Just tag the situation large and shrink it back again.And yes the 
choice is between detailed maps or fuzzy ones, it comes with a lot of extra 
work !Greetz
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 42, Issue 27

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 42, Issue 27, historic huts.

6. Re: Historic huts (Martin Koppenhoefer)
  
 looking at the tags maybe
 historic=wilderness_hut would be better (according to a proposal and
 the current wiki state, tourism=alpine_hut is for places where you can
 get food and accomodation, while tourism=wilderness_hut is for places
 that offer less comfort and are not usually managed, i.e. you bring
 what you need).
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/wilderness_mountain_buildings
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dwilderness_hut
 
 you could also add building=hut if you are adding the object as an
 area and you could have a look at the shelter_type tags if the hut can
 provide shelter:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shelter_type%3Dbasic_hut
 
 cheers,
 Martin
 Hi Martin,Thanks, I would have asked for a chozo and the Swedisch shelter. 
Listed in Wikipedia yes !. Are those terms usable in OSM still ?Greetz 
HendrikPs there in Scandinavian practical three kinds of huts, served 
(managed), supplied (seasonal supervised) and no supplies lodge only. The last 
2 categories are  opened by a member key and you should put a check in a box 
with a little trust.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 42, Issue 26 Historic huts

[St Niklaas]

Hi Steve and Volker, Message: 4
 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:16:13 +0100
 From: Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Historic huts
 Message-ID:
   CALQ-OR5=qtjqyk25mxdfh1axmxbuvxtyifcgabtf1wy5qti...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
 
 What about:
 amenity=shelter
 historic=alpine_hut
 ruins=yes (if appropriate)
 
 Volker
 (Padova, Italy)
 
 On 27 March 2013 05:16, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Hi all,
Just wondering how best to tag the historic alpine huts we have in
  the mountains of southeast Australia. Some basic properties:
  - usually fully enclosed (4 walls and a roof) although not necessarily
  weatherproof
  - usually have fireplaces
  - sometimes in good enough condition to sleep in (bring your own
  mattress and bedding)
  - primarily of historical interest, rather than for accommodation.
  That is, you might have lunch in the hut, or camp next to it - you
  wouldn't hike without a tent and plan to sleep in the huts. (They
  often have rodent and/or snake inhabitants...)
  - could possibly be completely uninhabitable or ruined. (Hiking maps
  here typically don't make much distinction, they might say Smith Hut
  (ruins))
  - typically built between 1850 and say 1920 by stockmen (cattle farmers).
  - only maintained for their heritage value - no one improves them,
  there's no hut warden or anything.
 
  Is this just an Australian thing? tourism=basic_hut seems like the
  closest, but still promises accommodation. I think most Australians
  would know what to expect, but there are frequent stories of unhappy
  Europeans expecting hot meals in the middle of nowhere...
 
  An example of a hut I visited on the weekend, Kelly Hut near Licola.
  Rough wooden walls, corrugated iron roof, stone chimney, dirt floor.
  There's a very rough sleeping platform (no mattresses), no table or
  chairs. The door is a sheet of corrugated iron. I'd have lunch in
  there, especially on a cold day, but I wouldn't sleep in there unless
  desperate.
 
  Steve

 

Since the hut is situated in Australia, why
name it Alpine hut ? I always thought the Alps to be a European
mountain range. In rural uninhabited areas there
will be shelters like it all over the world.

I would rather name it neutral, fi (mountain) hut, cabin or lodge. Despite
of the former use, for cattle, hunting or just for emergency like Alpine
shelters in remote areas. 

If it’s not maintained I would use abandoned instead of ruins. And yes
without maintenance it would graduatedly become a ruin but that’s mainly the
climate.

amenity=shelter, (mountain)hut, cabin or lodge

historic=cattle or stockmen, hunting or mining.

disused, abandoned or ruin=yes

Just to avoid the disappointment of reaching a hut being a ruin or inhabetable.

Greetz
Hendrik

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging proposition for a classification of a path, Vol 41, Issue 46 message 1

[St Niklaas]

Balaitous wrote 
 1. Re: Proposition for a classification of path (Balaitous)  Also, the 
proposed path types would classify any path that ends in a cul-de-sac as the 
least-used and least-maintained category, which isn't necessarily the case.
 
 When I say cul-de-sac I refer to paths that go nowhere, like this :
 
 At the beginning, there look good, but there are more and more bad, and
 at the end there simply disappear !
 
 I have corrected :
 This path can be end in cul de sac without any POI. I dont see why you 
 would make a definition like this, since theres a path grade 1 - 5 option.For 
 instance in the situation of Cirque de Gavarnie, 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.6973lon=-0.0017zoom=14layers=M theres 
 a path with cul du sac, since a hiker wont climb up, but the path will be 
 well maintaned. A path with a cul dus sac with POI ! And there will be more.I 
 would tag it grade 5 without hesitation. But theres one point I like to ad to 
 this discussion if you want to build a new order. What about the quality of a 
 track usable for less valid or invalid people and thats not just the pavement 
 or the lack of it but also about space.   
   ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Contents of Tagging Digest, Vol 41, Issue 27

[St Niklaas]

 Message: 7
 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:31:06 +0100
 From: Pieren pier...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'averaged' paths in rural Mali
 Message-ID:
   CAPT3zJp=vshkmwt9jmkqekgyzt3+s88q65gaqv3nnohuevn...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 
 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 
  How about drawing a single 'representative' way as you have been doing, and
  adding width=100?
 
 ?? and why not 500...
 First, from what I can see on this aerial imagery, congratulation. It
 is very hard to distinguish something on these pictures. What I see is
 not a 'highway' but more an informal track in the desert or the
 shortest way between point A and point B. Something that will
 disappear or change after the next sandstorm.
 Maybe try a new highway=track + tracktype=grade6 where grade6
 would be defined as informal track in open area (e.g. desert); might
 be an average of several parallel vehicles marks ?
 
Hi like Pieren said its a infromal bundle of tracks, in Holland we call them 
Hessenwegen, Hessen, merchants from Germany used these tracks with heavy 
vehicles and just changed the track if it was ruined. Take a arial look here 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.04435lon=5.7163zoom=15layers=M and even 
the original tracks are visible here 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.01674lon=6.65436zoom=16layers=M between 
Gasteren and Rolde, the tracks are 400 to 500 m apart, but form a route between 
the places. They are concentrated at the voorde, (river crossing) Its also 
possible to take a look through google maps, but dont tell everyone.I would 
consider the area to tag as it is an area with several (middle aged, 1000 - 
1600 years) roads. The same as in Africa, no obstacles so youre free to go 
anywhere, one road is as good as another or even better and tag it 
accordingly.Greetz

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

Re: [Tagging] Contents of tagging digest, Vol 41, Issue 8, message 4

[St Niklaas]

 Message: 4
 Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:57:36 +0100
 From: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bridge types
 Message-ID:
   cabptjtc1onh4o7zegqa7cb7zyk6wvqvd78q478hrftbassn...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Martin, 

 null
 viaduct
 A ''long'' rail, road, or other bridge made up of many short spans.
 no
 7?572 0.45%   hint for other mappers, no special treatmentI used that one, 
 after reading the Wiki I abandoned it.+1

 null
 aqueduct
 1?084 0.06%  prefer historic=aqueduct for historic aqueducts (also
 fragments) and would rather introduce a tag similar to power for
 water if I wanted to map modern aqueducts. Anyway an aqueduct has not
 much to do with bridges-1Both are IMHO originally latin, a viaduct is a 
 crossing between 2 ways and a aquaduct a crossing between a way and a 
 waterway. The last one has always a track or even 2 besides or above the 
 waterway. Whats the difference between this 'bridge' and a the other ones ? 
 Since I use them to cross a valley or a highway, since there less footbridges 
 over that kind of obstacles.
GreetzHendrik ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Contents of Tagging Digest, Wiki Building - HangarVol 40, Issue 49

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 40, Issue 49
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:29:40 +
 
 Message: 6
 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:29:31 +0100
 From: Pieren pier...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] wiki building=hangar
 Message-ID:
   capt3zjp2mee5eagzx0jmsq_-rtgfzn0hi-twmdjruwoyzvs...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
 
 On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
 
  * english: aircrafts
 
 Is that not used for boats as well ? Note that the english hangar
 comes from the French hangar. And the usage doesn't seem to be so
 different (the correct word for a warehouse in French is entrep?t or
 magasin for a small one).
 
 Pieren
 
Hi Pieren is right. The original word has spread around. In Dutch a hangar is 
initially for planes, but we do use the same words as magazijn for a storage 
room or even a shop. But a large magazine is also called pakhuis - warehouse 
and an entrepot, the last one is also used for a customs facility, to prevent 
the trouble of making clearance papers over and over again.I agree that the 
original use or design should get back into the tag of a building. Youre able 
to reuse a church for condos, but the outside still will be a recognisable 
church.Like Martin said english ; aircrafts, I expect that all the old, since 
1500, trading countries are roughly using the same names or expressions for a 
storage facility. And as its has been spread all over the world by the leading 
trading countries.GreetzPs with all this confusion, it seems IMHO that the Wiki 
has to be corrected a bit.
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground

[St Niklaas]

 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 40, Issue 22
 Message: 3
 Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:24:42 +0100
 From: Fran?ois Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [Tagging] [Proposed features/Power] Difference between aerial
   and underground power lines
 Message-ID:
   CAG0ygLcL4hSxqWanRpH1OiE4t2jO=shnpuwze1ubhzt-fqq...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

 My basic proposal is to use power=line + location=underground instead of
 power=cable + location=underground.
 Because it would be difficult to make request with location=underground
 negation as for obtaining only plain aerial lines, we can use different
 power=* tag too for aerial and underground lines. With or without
 location=underground.
 It's hard to make a choice.
 What are the tagging expert's or proposal author's opinion?
 
 The goal is to obtain a well documented topology of power grids. It's
 important to use the right vocabulary even if it seems to be dumb or
 engineering stuff.
 
Hi Francois,Excuse but despite of all the technical remarks you made, if a 
powerline goes underground, why bother to tag it, theyre not visible though ? I 
might be a NB but I got the message please tag all visible items in OSM. I even 
look surprised finding community borders and residential areas on the map. I 
wont start adding a large tube for the export of LNG or oil from here to there. 
Although it has some visible marks every now and then for live aircontrol of 
the transport system. And if you really want to proceed do you ad the dept of 
the line excactly ? My advise is dont do or make youre own map OSM based map on 
the outcome of external or your own contributions, since you cant do it 
yourself all alone in the end.
Greetings,
Hendrik   ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 40, Issue 30
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:52:42 +
5. Re: Powerlines underground (Fran?ois Lacombe)
Hi Guys, since I had the wrong impression, it looks like were tagging 
underground powerlines. How do we recognize the connections between the sations 
? Or is the data added by external sources as mentioned ? But something else 
crossed my mind. What do we do with the other underground transport systems, 
like oil (sometimes secret military lines) natural or industrial gas and waste 
and drinking water ? I search for it but no WIKI solution IMHO.Greetz   
   ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30

[St Niklaas]

 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:23:55 -0500
 From: nerou...@gmail.com
 CC: st.nikl...@live.nl
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Powerlines underground, Vol 40, Issue 30 Hi,Thanks, I 
 didnt use the right key word to see the tags. But the way of a underground 
 line remains secret to most of us if the data isnt backup by extrenals. I 
 doubt to draw a powerline straight between to substations !Greetz
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Multiple purposes for buildings

[St Niklaas]

Hi All, I choose not to make them as multipolygon,  but drew the condo's ontop.

 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [Tagging] Multiple purposes for buildings

Maybe a bit late, I
struggled with this building some time ago and even asked around. But after 
this thread I made a
change today. I didnt tag several business from out the condo's. Its commercial 
use but out of a living space or room. IMHO this last group makes it tricky to 
tag.http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.316659lon=4.948477zoom=18layers=M

It’s a building with a large covered parking space
(residents only), storage rooms at ground level and condo’s on top.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 39, Issue 22 message 1 Chateau

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 39, Issue 22
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 12:00:07 +
  
 Message: 2
 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 21:22:39 +0100
 From: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] ch?teau
 Message-ID:
   cabptjtaw2vwnveec9ckjxjyhush2d-zlhnq2emwv8tais7k...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
 2012/12/8 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com
 
  I have to tag a number of what we call ch?teau(x) in French.

 I think castle and also stately home/mansion and maybe also ch?teau
 could all be fine for these ;-).
 
 http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/mull/torosaycastle/index.html
 
 Hence, inescapably  building=ch?teau  but that doesn't seem to exist.

 Fortunately there is not a single one in the current db according to
 taginfo, so you are free to do what you want ;-)
 
 Cheers,
 Martin


Hi, I struggled with the same taggs and made a list, not complete yet with 
military and other buildings used and build long ago up to nowadays. Military  
Hillfort or ringfort,   simple round stronghold with (earth)walls 600
– 900 AD

Military  Fortress, build of wood or stone (The
Tower of London Gb, 1100 AD or  Fort William Henry Ny 1750 AD) 

Military  Stronghold, simple
arrow like earth walls with ditch or trench 1300 AD

Historic  Castle stonebuilding
to impress, (Pfalzgrafenstein De) 1320 AD

Military   Motte- or baileytower a tower made of wood or
stone, a shelter standing on a hilltop, 1400 AD 

Military   Redoute,closed
(round) stronghold or fortress with earth walls 1400 AD

Vesting  Reinforced city,  Vauban like (Bourtange Nl) 1590 - 1740
AD

Historic  Palace,   stone building with extravagance, (Le 
Louvre
Fr) 1600 AD

Military   Factory / Outpost   made out of what was available (Fort
Nassau Al) 1620 AD

Military   Trench,   made man ditch with earth
walls for protection

Military   Anti_tank_ditch, ditch with steep and high sides,
sometimes filled with water

Military   Fort,old Vauban like
fortress (Old Fort Henry Ca) 1830 AD

Military   Emplacement site
to setup one or more artillery guns

Military   Inundation_canalcanal
specific for inundations

Military   Inundation_lock  lock
or sluice to let large amounts of water in, no ships

Military   Inundation_dike  dike
special made to keep the water in

Military   Fortification,   collection of bunkers and shelters 
(Fort Eben Emael) 1935
AD

Historic   Abandoned(military)
structure left without care or destruction

Military   Embankment, possible
route through inundated areas And I didnt find tags for them either, should 
they become tags to and made into a proposition ? I dont expect to be the first 
one to signal these buildings and obstructions. Or is it better to leave it 
open ? Although I wouldnt mind to get some reactions.Greetz Hendrik.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 38, Issue 52, message 7

[St Niklaas]

 Message: 7
 Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:47:30 +
 From: Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - age groups in schools
 Message-ID: clpwow.me3i7d.8pp0sw-...@auth.smtp.oneandone.co.uk
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
Hi Martin  Phil,More problems, in the Netherlands theres a even different 
system, the schools are founded on basis of religion or any direction the 
parents like to get for theyre kids fi Dalton, Jena aso and the governement has 
to provide other parents a non school. Your allowed to start a school with a 
certain amount of kids and a decent planning. The school could be one a a kind 
or part of a larger foundation with several schools. But how to describe all 
variations in schools, just name them in a value ?Hendrik   
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 38, Issue 47 proposed feature ages schools

[St Niklaas]

2. Re: Proposed feature - age groups in schools (Steve Bennett)
Hi Kjarrval Isnt the school system different in every country or even State ? 
In some they even dont get schooling !Why are you making a proposal for every 
one, that doesnt fit at all  ? Or would end up unlogic for every one to use ?So 
I agreed with Steve, its troublesome.Hendrik
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] (tagging) RFC Advertising

[St Niklaas]

 Am 28/ott/2012 um 15:32 schrieb Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.is:
 
  In Iceland we sometimes have companies parking cars in public spaces or
  in private land after making a deal with the owner. The cars are marked
  with the company and almost always have advertising signs on the side.
  How would that be marked in your proposal?
 
 
 They are currently not contemplated, and I also am not sure if they should be 
 added. The ones that I know of are of too less permanence to be worth being 
 added. If they were parked for a very long time it would be no problem to add 
 something or maybe use sign for them.
 
 Cheers,
 Martin
Martin  Svavar,Ive seen large trucks with ads in the USA, but in the 
Netherlands its, according to landscape rules, forbidden to post ads in the 
open area in anyway. Large poles with ads are situated in or near industrial 
areas or close by roads. Even the governamental ads regarding traffic safety 
along highways are of limit in wide open areas. A rural area (city) has by 
local law more space for permission.Hendrik
 End of Tagging Digest, Vol 37, Issue 62
 ***
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 44, 3 John Sturdy

[St Niklaas]

Hi, John,
 
 Message: 3
 Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:20:04 +0100
 From: John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Uses of parts of buildings
 Message-ID:
   cafjf9kpouboq2kypav1_iereu7zxcbx+hq-nhhgp1ff5y5e...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
 
 On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Martin Vonwald (imagic)
 imagic@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
  A quick question how you would tag this:
  * one building (looks from the outside mostly like a residential building)
  * the building is used for three different things: an office, a riding 
  ground (just assume it's a pitch) and a stable.
  * the building is not separated - it's just one building
  * I'm not interested in the detail- tagging, just how you would tag three 
  different uses.
 
  My idea right now is:
  * building=yes for the whole building. Or should it be residential?
  * for each part draw a separate polygon and tag with building:use=whatever.
 
  What I'm missing here is the connection between the building and its parts. 
  So I thought I could use the 3D-extensions for this, namely 
  building:parts=yes on the main polygon and building:part=yes on the parts.
 
 You'd certainly need 3D for many such buildings, as flats / apartments
 over shops are quite common; the different uses will be in the same 2D
 location.
 
 I do have IMHO a simple suggestion, whats up against adding layers (+1, +2) if 
the functions are located at different levels ? If not, youll have to separate 
them by multipolygones as Martin stated. Or even -1 if the parking facilities 
are below ground level ? Its happening more and more when new residential areas 
are build. Private parking below !Greets Hendrik
 
 End of Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 44
 ***


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 38, animal_shelter

[St Niklaas]

 Message: 6
 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:46:22 +0100
 From: Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Animal_shelter, multiple semicolon separated
 Message-ID: 505b2c3e.6030...@raggedred.net
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
 
 Why? We don't label hospital and hotel in the same way, with some extra 
 tags to describe them. They are both places people stay for a while, but 
 we recognise they are very different.
 
  Maybe animal shelter doesn't sound very good in some cases, but it is the
  most general definition we found.
 
  I have a cousin who runs boarding kennels for cats, dogs and a few other
  small pets. If he saw his business described on OSM as an animal shelter
  he would be horrified.I am as a newbie horrified by the tags OSM uses, its 
  necessary, but trying to translate all the English terms into my own 
  language it almost needs a dictonary.
 
  An animal shelter is a place where abandoned or injured animals are
  taken to be cared for. Some stay for life, some pets may be found new
  homes and some wild animals that recover from injuries may be released.
  The wild animal version and the pet versions are usually separate.
  Animal shelters are often run by charities.Hi, agree with Phil, but my 
  comment is more general and I disagree with Phil there should be more or 
  less possible. OSM might be from GB but should every name or tag get a yes 
  from Brittania ? No offence.It could be a bit late, but did anyone spend 
  thoughts about pets (small animals) and catlle (large animals) to divide 
  both groups of animals. By using pet_shelter theres no need to use 
  multiple tags to discripe all the variaties, since I misted one for birds 
  ? Most of the shelters accept lost and found animals, but offer (to earn 
  some extra money) extra boarding services in general. Even the vets in the 
  Netherlands are specialiced along this principle pet or catlle and of 
  course there will be some mix too.animal_shelter = pet (companion 
  animals)and if necessary, but I doubt itanimal_shelter = 
  catlleandanimal_boarding = horsesriding_stable = yesGreetz Hendrik 
 ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 20, 9

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 20
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 10:13:53 +0100
 
 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
   tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Tagging digest...
 
 Message: 9
 Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:13:39 +0900
 From: Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (amenity=kennel)
 Message-ID: 201209131813.39872.erringt...@gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain;  charset=iso-8859-1
 
 On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:00:19 Martin Vonwald wrote:
  2012/9/13  te...@free.fr:
   Thank you for your proposal.
   Couldn't we have some more general tagging for this purpose? Such
   facilities can generally keep other kinds of animals (like SPA,
   Soci?t? Protectrice des Animaux in France) so why having a specific tag
   for dogs?
 
  Actually I just revived an old proposal for stables [1]. My first
  thought was to simply use stables=animal until someone with much
  better english language skills pointed out that stables usually only
  refer to horses. I would also like to see one common tag for some
  place where animals are kept and taken care of. Any suggestions from
  native speakers?
 
 I'm not sure if a common tag would be ideal.
 
 Off the top of my head we have 'stables', 'kennels' and 'cattery'.  Each name 
 is very specific.  Also, they are not limited to welfare (lost, abandoned or 
 abused animals), there are commercial businesses which look after animals 
 while their owners go on vacation.  Since they generally look after the same 
 kind of animal (not mixed), this should be indicated by the tag, i.e. 
 amenity=kennels, amenity=stables, amenity=cattery
 
 For the welfare situation I suppose we could have amenity=animal_shelter, or 
 animal_sanctuary.  These generally do have a mix of animals, but of course 
 dogs and cats are most common.  There are also specialist shelters for birds, 
 seals, otters etc., but probably animal_shelter would cover those too.
 
 Just my thoughts on the matter.
 
 Best wishes,
 
 Andre
Hi Andrew  Co,What about Asylum, for all animals and a tag for the spieces, 
cats, dags, horses or guinea pigs ?As follows, Building - asylum, (latin for 
pension) that would not give much confusion.horses - yesYou dont have to tag 
if the animal was found or just placed out of its home for a holiday ? With 
fee - yes, value - weekGreetz Hendrik ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 17, 7

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 17
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:42:36 +0100
 
 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
   tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Tagging digest...
 
 
 Today's Topics:
 
7. Re: Fishing allowed? (Andr? Pirard)

 On 2012-09-10 18:46,  Jason Cunningham wrote :
  On 10 September 2012 14:05, Jonathan Bennett 
  openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk mailto:openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk 
  wrote:
 
  On 10/09/2012 12:36, te...@free.fr mailto:te...@free.fr wrote:
 
   I would like to store information about the legality of fishing
  a lake, a river, etc.
   Is there already any tag with such a meaning?
 
  fishing=yes/no ?
 
 
  There is a tag leisure=fishing thats already being used
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dfishing
 
  Bit surprised by the lack of info on the wiki page. I'd have though 
  someone would have drawn up proposals for a way to tag other info 
  linked to fishing.
  With regards to lawfulness of fishing I think it's a bit more 
  complicated than yes/no? as pointed out in other emails
 
 Even more surprising, I can't find tagging for a pond or pool, fishery, 
 you name it, that was fitted for fishing.
 People come and pay for fishing (and the wife sits doing her knitting).
 
 On 2012-09-10 17:53,  John F. Eldredge wrote :
  Note that you may need to have both a government-issued fishing 
  license and also permission from a landowner, depending upon where you 
  are fishing.
 
 Let alone the wife's permission ;-)
 
 Is a map really a good place for a *general* fishing information (database)?
 Or is it website=www.local.reglations - other www?
 
 I think that website= is too often overlooked.
 I asked JOSM to recall it in their Preset menus.
 
 land (water?) owner *is* of course appropriate, if he agrees to be 
 mentioned.
 
 This all recalls me a Natural Science teacher.
 - throw any animal in the water, it will come out
 - not true
 - [cut to the quick] what???
 - not the fishes
 He told everybody and laughed for 3 days.
 
 Andr?.
 Hi, Jonathan  Andr? For fishing and leisure look at this node 272496132, our 
 Belgian friends love to go fishing at special ponds or lakes or whatever 
 contains water and is seperated from everything else. The fill the water with 
 fish and your able to catch some after paying a fee. Around the Nete (river) 
 youll find more.Happy fishing Hendrik ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 17, 8

[St Niklaas]

 From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 17
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:42:36 +0100
 
 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
   tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Tagging digest...
 

8. Re: Clarify tag access doc (Martin Koppenh?fer)
 
 Message: 8
 Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 15:42:23 +0200
 From: Martin Koppenh?fer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Cc: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Clarify tag access doc
 Message-ID: d02b5280-a56b-4d00-8610-280f11b8e...@gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
 
 
 Am 11/set/2012 um 14:17 schrieb Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
  
  I'm currently trying to refresh a wiki translation of the Access key page:
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
 
 
  I think too that a signle value is enough as already mentionned there.
  If we keep customer, we need another one for employee (vs
  custormer parkings/entrances). Or I may suggest a subtag like
  access=destination + destination=customer/employee.
 
 
 Employee would be private IMHO, not destination
 
 
 
  
  - designated vs official. If I understand the wiki, the first is
  not compulsory and often marked by a traffic signal where the second
  is complusory and always marked by a traffic signal. Is that correct
  ?
 
 
 IIRR those were initially intended to mean the same.
 
 
  So, for instance, as a router for
  cars, how should I handle a road tagged with access=official (or
  designated) + bicycle=yes ?
 
 
 Strange tagging. Access=designated does not follow the convention mode of 
 transport=designated. You cannot infer access restrictions for cars from 
 this (I.e. fall back to the default, which depends on the highway class).
 
 
  
  - is permissive a legal status, as the introduction says that values
  are all about legal access ?
 
 
 Yes, it is a legal status that says you don't have an official right of way.
 
 
 Cheers,
 Martin
 
Hi, I stumbled over this dispute, when I tagged a cycleway, designated as being 
special build, in my mind covering the allowed, with motorvehicles - 
permissive, allowed to go with a permit or a road with inhabitants only or HGV 
only ?What to use for a parkingaisle just for HGV ?Whats the difference between 
designated and allowed, when i started to tag I would like to fill it in ?
 --
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 End of Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 17
 ***
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 12

[St Niklaas]

 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 12
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 18:27:33 +0100 Hi, Im reading this as a cartonist. IMHO 
 is additional info harmfull for a map and the vieuw of it. Always keep in 
 mind that the added info has to be maintained. But why do we want to tag so 
 much info at a relation scheme, whos using it ? Like Martin stated  the more 
 dynamic the information is, the less we want it directly in OSM.The travel 
 time of a large or long distance ferry depends fi on the fees in the 
 harbours, theyre able to gain time by speeding up or loosing time by 
 travelling at economical speed. Even when a ferry crossing, a river from A, 
 B, C, D, is able to make a stopover on the trip D to A, when someone wants to 
 go along from C to A, its a seasonal ferry but nevertheless, no reliable 
 scheme ? Like Phil statedWith the advantige that the passenger gets more 
 time to sleep or to spend more money on the vessel. So its not a reliable 
 scheme. And how to tag two ferries meeting in between islands to allow 
 passengers to dismount from one ship to another ?Greetz Hendrik
 
 End of Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 12
 ***
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 53 foot versus hiking message 5

[St Niklaas]

Hi
  From: tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 53
 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:20:30 +0100
 
 Send Tagging mailing list submissions to
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 
 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 
 You can reach the person managing the list at
   tagging-ow...@openstreetmap.org
 
 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Tagging digest...
 
 

 That pesky Belgian is subscribed to this list as well. It's funny how in
 The Netherlands and France my announcement was met with: oh good, we've
 been tagging them with hiking all along. (Only one person in each country
 to be fair). Whereas in Germany I seem to have kicked a hornet's nest.
 
 Anyway, all I'd like to see is that all long distance routes (nwn) and all
 routes of the numbered node network (rwn) and all local routes (lwn) can be
 tagged in a consistent way. Since we had gotten the impression that foot
 and hiking had become synonyms and that hiking seemed to be becoming the
 favourite and also what Potlatch uses in its preset we were considering to
 change our Belgian wiki page about them. (We started out with
 route=foot/network=foot).
 
 As far as I'm concerned, if we change the wiki page, then we better also
 change the data all in one go.
 
 I guess we could live with nwn and rwn use route=hiking and lwn use
 route=foot.
 
 Or we can simply keep with all of them as route=foot. We don't really care
 what it is, but then change the global wiki page on walking routes and ask
 the Potlatch developers to use route=foot.
 
 route=hiking can then be used for routes going through the mountains and
 the wilderness with a backpack strapped on, which would be a lot more
 appropriate, linguistically speaking.
 
 What I'd prefer to get rid of is the hodge podge we have now, where some
 routes have route=foot and others have route=hiking, even when they belong
 to the same numbered node network.
 
 PolyglotHi I ve busy walking on foot and hiking in the Netherlands for some 
 time, Im just satisfied to know that theres a path. At first Im not 
 interested in the users or functions of it. There a lot of routes in the 
 country (Not just here but all over Europe) with just a description (book) 
 and no sign at all, are those routes not countable in OSM ? A path is just a 
 path that youll be able to go on your own feet.foot - yeshighway - 
 footwayname - law 5route - nordic_walkingowner - lawroute - hikingor any 
 other route that uses this track or path. But whats the difference between 
 hiking and foot, the distance or the backpack ? All long distance footpaths 
 are cut into daytrips. So that you dont have to take a large pack for just a 
 day.Dont make it to complex by building all the possible functions into the 
 definition of the path. Or tag it likewise. What to do with a footpath that 
 is used for several outdoor sports, how to tag that, a complete list ? Go 
 ahead like I did, keep it simple.Greetz Hendrik 
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 53 wayside shrine, message 3

[St Niklaas]

Hi
 Message: 3
 Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:59:17 +0200
 From: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
   tagging@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Potale
 Message-ID:
   cabptjtazcgjemq_41-s-tbtvwm-zfvxkskf3rusgse-a+tn...@mail.gmail.com
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
 
 2012/8/28 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com:
   religion: christian
  ok, but optional
 
 I think it would be quite useful to add this in general (it's more
 explicit, if it is not set you might have certain expectations about
 the religion according to the area you are in, e.g. in Italy it would
 very probably be christian/roman catholic)
 
  Otherwise you could put it in the monument category.
 
 -1, most of the ones I have seen are too small and unimportant to be
 monuments.
 
 cheers,
 Martin
 
Ill go for Martins opinion.
Most of the shrines will be roman catholic christian, the protestant christians 
dont worship outside the church that much and dont have saints in there 
believes. What about the moslim areas or Budhism, I never been there. The so 
called shrines could have some token int he past. And whats a chappel like 
wayside shrine ? 
Building - yes
wayside - monument
On the other hand there are growing numbers of points of rememberance monuments 
for lost friends or family alongside roads and mountain tracks.
Wayside - monument, would be nutral
name - St Mary or an individual
religion - catholic or unknown (no tag)
But whats the criterium for an object to be a monument, the size ? Like the WWI 
monuments or a simple cross in the woods for a single killed pilot ?
Hendrik
 

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 39

[St Niklaas]

Hi, some remarks from the Netherlands (Europe) we do have roads marked with a 
double centre line (max speed 80 - 100), separated by 0,90 to 1,50 m and 
sometimes even with obstacles standing in the middle. These obstacles Your not 
allowd to cross that line sideways at any time, just cross, over thats allowed. 
Changeable halve way the road or route, depending on the policy of the road 
management. Emergency (police, ambulance, firebrigade and vehicles with 
permission (permissive exception on all or some trafficrules) are allowed to do 
the things that arent allowed for everyone, regarding public safity. It seems 
to me that its quiet hard to seperate a lot of roads depending on these basics, 
but Im not the one, Im just a cartograph.Hendrik
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 36

[St Niklaas]

OSM, Ill put my reactions on on row (Issue 36).Even bare areas have growth 
youll only have to watch closely to see it. Thats a nice one for a herbologist 
or do we have a new tag ?My take would be that the entire lot on which a house 
stands should be landuse=residential, as long as there isn't an ancilliary 
farming
 business.And what to do with a field with a house (old farmhouse) on it, but 
 the owner rents it to his neighbour to let his sheep roam the field ? Youll 
 never able to see whats happening there, or if the sheep are his own 
 property.And lack of resedential streets dosnt mean there no houses or farms, 
 look fi at the Belgium streetplans. Long regional streets accompanied by 
 buildings on both sides, farms and houses one by one and all standing in a 
 area or field.I would nt see the difference without looking at the place or 
 the area itself.
Greetz Hendrik
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 32

[St Niklaas]

Hi,I followed the discussion about tagging a railway track or more. From a 
geografersvieuw its simple, the closer youll go the more youll see. The program 
hides all the extra info fi a 16 lanes highway or several railtracks aside. At 
first I want to see a track or road. After closing in Im interested in the 
complete pic.
 
 IMHO in OSM it would make sense to have several tags describing
 generic properties instead of having one single value with a very
 specific class.
 
 E.g. one tag might be vegetation=trees, shrubs, grass, no, where 
 no could follow the definition given by the FAO, i.e. a total
 vegetative cover of less than 4% for at least 10 months of the year,
 or an absence of Woody or Herbaceous life forms and with less than 25%
 cover of Lichens/Mosses which might sound complicated or lengthy, but
 for most of the places you find in the real world it would be easy
 because far from those limits)
IMHO is a grass covered area, temporarily, scrubbs and trees are covering it 
without care in an short period of time, whos tagging it again ? Why not nature 
as tag in nature reserve area 's. Just to avoid the immage Ive seen, with a 
large forest area and a view trees besides it. Tagged as beiing a group or a 
forest. You dont have to worry about the actually grow of the different plants 
if you use nature and forget if its 1,00 (grass), 3,00 (scrubbs)or 5,00 m 
(trees) high. Or is that to simple ? Greetz and keep mappingHendrik
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 35, Issue 20

[St Niklaas]

Hi taggers, Colins question are there more countries with different speed rules 
on tracks ? Yes all the TGV like tracks in Europe through, France, Germany and 
Netherlands are specially build for TGVs but somewhere there still tracks 
combined, limited speed up to 100 miles / hr. Hendrik   
 ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging