[Tagging] Parking meters

[Tristan Anderson]

How do parking meters fit in to the parking:condition tagging scheme?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Multiple transformers

[Tristan Anderson]

Is there a way to indicate that a power pole has multiple transformers such as 
this one?

http://oi65.tinypic.com/2rfu8ly.jpg

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

Re: [Tagging] railway=level_crossing with in-street trams?

[Tristan Anderson]

Where a tram line shares a right-of-way with the street, that is, where I can 
drive my car down the tracks, no crossing tag is necessary as the whole street 
is one big level crossing.  Where it's separate, railway=level_crossing should 
be used.  There is no need to specify a tram crossing as this is implied by the 
way the highway is crossing.



From: Mike N 
Sent: April 4, 2017 5:03 PM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] railway=level_crossing with in-street trams?

On 4/4/2017 4:42 PM, Jo wrote:
> Any suggestions for a tag? Or leave those crossings untagged? It's quite
> obvious from the geometry there is a crossing and quite logical that
> it's level.

   It would be convenient for data consumers to have the crossing
explicitly tagged without having to examine the crossing street to find
the correct rule.

   The first thing that comes to mind is railway=tram_crossing, but
there's the fuzziness that comes with light_rail.

   Another solution is to add a modifier railway:crossing=tram  since
it's not level and to avoid conflict with crossing=* or railway=crossing



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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

Re: [Tagging] address property of features

[Tristan Anderson]

I"m not sure I agree.


Let's say a store has three entrances: 2, 4 and 6 Main Street.  The store uses 
it's main entrance, 4 Main Street, as it's address.  Are you suggesting using 
the addr:housenumber key four times: a node at each entrance in addition to a 
tag on the store?  Now you've tagged 4 Main Street twice, even though there is 
only one 4 Main Street.  Either tag the store or the entrance, not both.


From: Janko Mihelić 
Sent: March 18, 2017 12:28 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] address property of features

I agree. Duplicating addresses on features is not a problem, but a feature.

Janko

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

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Tristan Anderson]

Thanks for the input everone.  I like the idea of grass/scrub/grassland 
depending on the site if there is no trace of the demolished buildings.  If 
there is still something like a foundation, or slabs of broken concrete or 
other debris, then it would be tagged as a brownfield.

There seems to be consensus that brownfield sites are not necessarily slated 
for redevelopment so the wiki pages should be changed to reflect this.  What is 
less clear is whether the term brownfield is limited to sites contaminated from 
past industrial activity, or whether broken slabs of concrete from a house 
would qualify.  In my opinion, they would.


From: Tom Pfeifer 
Sent: March 13, 2017 1:53 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
> I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does
> not mean just "scheduled for development".  It just means "was used for
> some development but is no longer".  It _may_ then be used for something
> else in the future (you often hear "redevelopment of brownfield sites),
> but that's not a requirement.
>
> It'd be perfectly meaningful to say "in XYZ place there are lots of
> brownfield sites not scheduled for any development".

Fine, so maybe we losen the Wiki definition a bit, saying that the land
_might_ be scheduled for future development. That leaves the focus on
the fact that the land had been used before.

On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
 > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something.
 > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing.

Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus I'd prefer
brownfield as above.

I agree that landcover=* can describe what has grown there.

tom

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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

[Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

[Tristan Anderson]

What is the most appropriate landuse tag for vacant lots in urban areas?  That 
is, land that was previously occupied by a house or other building that has 
been demolished, no trace of the building remains, and the land is currently 
overgrown or covered in untended grass.  In the past I have used brownfield, 
but this is for land scheduled for redevelopment, which is often not the case.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Center turning lanes: centre_turn_lane=yes method vs. lanes:both_ways method

[Tristan Anderson]

In that case the developers at Osmand have some work to do.

All we do is provide the data.  Individual consumers can choose whether they 
want to use it.


From: Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>
Sent: February 19, 2017 6:24 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Center turning lanes: centre_turn_lane=yes method vs. 
lanes:both_ways method



On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Tristan Anderson 
<andersontris...@hotmail.com<mailto:andersontris...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

I've always used


lanes=5

centre_turn_lane=yes


as a shortcut that implies


lanes=5
lanes:forward=2
lanes:both_ways=1
lanes:backward=2
turn:lanes:both_ways=left

It's just a way to reduce five tags to two in a common, special-case situation. 
 Lanes can be any odd number greater than one.

I'm not sure of any data consumers that would assume that shorthand.  I know 
Osmand correctly recognizes the latter, but would not parse the former.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access: motorcar and goods, how to read the hierarchy

[Tristan Anderson]

I think I see what the problem is and correct me if I'm wrong.  Under the 
current tagging scheme the only way to tag a road that prohibits Kraftwagen 
would be something like...


bus=no

goods=no

hgv=no

moped=yes

motorcar=no

motorcycle=yes

 ...and probably several others


Even though this situation is unheard of in North America and the UK, it is 
common enough in Germany that there should be a way to streamline it, something 
along the lines of double_track=no, or, if there isn't a suitable English 
translation, kraftwagen=no.  I would agree that Personenkraftwagen translates 
perfectly into motorcar in the OSM sense of the word.



From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com>
Sent: February 18, 2017 8:26 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] access: motorcar and goods, how to read the hierarchy



sent from a phone

On 18 Feb 2017, at 22:36, Tristan Anderson 
<andersontris...@hotmail.com<mailto:andersontris...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

I don't see anything wrong with the hierarchy.  It was mentioned that there are 
signs in Germany that forbid motorcars to pass.  Are you sure that these signs 
aren't prohibiting all vehicles from passing?  This may be the case even if 
there's a picture of a car on the sign.


in Germany the sign with the car on it is about "Kraftwagen" which includes 
besides pkw (cars) also buses and hgv, but it doesn't include motorbikes 
(Kraftrad), typically you'll see a sign which forbids entry for both these 
classes: 
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildtafel_der_Verkehrszeichen_in_der_Bundesrepublik_Deutschland_seit_2013#/media/Datei%3AZeichen_260_-_Verbot_für_Krafträder_und_Mofas_und_sonstige_mehrspurige_Kraftfahrzeuge%2C_StVO_1992.svg

there's no class for "Kraftwagen" in osm if motorcar is about cars  
(Personenkraftwagen, or is that passenger car?): 
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personenkraftwagen
but I'm not sure about the corresponding term because you can't really rely on 
wikipedia interlinking here, at least the italian article should be linked to 
Personenkraftwagen, not to automobile as it is now: 
https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autovettura
and likely the English one as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car
but the English one is not clear in any way, anyway.

Apparently the uk doesn't have a traffic sign restricting the access just for 
cars:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs

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

Re: [Tagging] access: motorcar and goods, how to read the hierarchy

[Tristan Anderson]

I don't see anything wrong with the hierarchy.  It was mentioned that there are 
signs in Germany that forbid motorcars to pass.  Are you sure that these signs 
aren't prohibiting all vehicles from passing?  This may be the case even if 
there's a picture of a car on the sign.

The motorcar key is for private vehicles primarily for transporting people, as 
distinct from buses, delivery vans, motorcycles etc.  Sure there's a little 
ambiguity in the definition and it may vary slightly among different countries. 
 But I think I know a motorcar when I see one, and as with all things, we as 
mappers sometimes need to make judgement calls.


From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: February 18, 2017 4:55 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] access: motorcar and goods, how to read the hierarchy



sent from a phone

> On 17 Feb 2017, at 21:40, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dictionary motor car: a vehicle, especially one for passengers, carrying its 
> own power generating and propelling mechanism for travel on ordinary roads


Isn't this a motorbike or a bus ;-) ? Does it include a Jeep? If the purpose is 
for transporting goods rather than passengers?
"especially" does not help to define what is excluded.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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

Re: [Tagging] Center turning lanes: centre_turn_lane=yes method vs. lanes:both_ways method

[Tristan Anderson]

I've always used


lanes=5

centre_turn_lane=yes


as a shortcut that implies


lanes=5
lanes:forward=2
lanes:both_ways=1
lanes:backward=2
turn:lanes:both_ways=left

It's just a way to reduce five tags to two in a common, special-case situation. 
 Lanes can be any odd number greater than one.


From: Paul Johnson 
Sent: February 16, 2017 9:20 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Center turning lanes: centre_turn_lane=yes method vs. 
lanes:both_ways method

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Albert Pundt 
> wrote:
To go along with my earlier question about "semi-divided" streets, what is 
considered the best way to map center turning lanes? I know of the 
centre_turn_lane=yes key, as well as lanes=3 used together with 
lanes:both_ways=1 and turn:lanes:both_ways=left, but which of these two is 
considered better or is simply used more? Additionally, are there any other 
ways of doing it?

centre_turn_lane=yes seems more straightforward, but the lanes:both_ways method 
offers a more detailed description of lane layout. I've seen both used in the 
wild.

Try (assuming drive on right areas):

lanes=3
lanes:forward=1
lanes:both_ways=1
lanes:backward=1
turn:lanes:both_ways=left

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

Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge

[Tristan Anderson]

barrier=dead_hedge feels more correct to me than barrier=fence 
fence_type=dead_hedge


From: Chris Hill 
Sent: February 13, 2017 3:46 PM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge


Do we need a new term? Surely a wooden fence is made of dead trees?

It's a fence.

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)

On 13/02/2017 20:41, John F. Eldredge wrote:

Well, I just learned a term I didn't know. I had assumed you were referring to 
a regular, planted hedge in which all of the bushes or trees had died. Yes, I 
suppose we do need a separate tag for a barrier composed of cut branches.

On February 13, 2017 2:35:41 PM Marc Gemis 
 wrote:

Sorry, I looked up the word on wikipedia 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hedge and thought it was a common phrase 
for branches that form a barrier. So it is not about a plant that is dead but 
about a human made barrier mainly made from branches

m

Op 13 feb. 2017 21:17 schreef "Chris Hill" 
>:
Wait until spring to see if it is really dead? :-)

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)

On 13/02/2017 20:13, Marc Gemis wrote:

How do you map a dead hedge?
As barrier=hedge or barrier=fence with some appropriate fence_type e.g. 
dead_hedge ?

m


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

Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

[Tristan Anderson]

I thought a load of laundry was the amount that could fit into a washing 
machine at one time.  Therefore, every washing machine that has ever been 
manufactured in the history of the world and every washing machine that will 
ever be manufactured between now and the end of time, no matter how big or how 
small, has a capacity of EXACTLY one load.  If I am wrong, please quantify how 
much is in one load, in any unit of measurement you like: volume, mass or 
anything else, metric or imperial.  No search engine can seem to give me a 
straight answer.


I see LG makes a "two-load" machine that can do two loads at once in separate 
compartments (such as whites/colours) but that doesn't seem to be what's 
referred to here.


From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
Sent: February 13, 2017 1:10 AM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

On 13-Feb-17 03:42 PM, John Willis wrote:
>
> Javbw
>
>> On Feb 13, 2017, at 5:38 AM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
>>
>>
>> That wouldn't work too well in the US.  Here, capacities are
>> typically measured in notional "loads": the average laundromat would
>> have a large number of "single-load" machines, a few "double-load" or
>> "triple-load" machines, and possibly a side-loading "five-load" machine
>> for things like quilts or sleeping bags.
> Since it can be converted to Kg, it could be normalized, or a US tagging 
> scheme used, since there are tons of laundromats in the US:
>
> Laundromat:US:1load_agitator_washer=20
> Laundromat:US:2load_agitator_washer=2
> Laundromat:US:5load_sidewasher=1
>
> I wonder what the rest of the world uses for laundry measurement - pieces? 
> Loads? Weight?

I would think it is best to use the same practices used for other units ...

The default should be SI units ... like kilometre km for distance, but other 
units like miles can be used if the unit is appended.

Washing machines sizing looks like they use mass (kg) for some places (UK, 
Australia, NZ), pounds for some (USA) and volume (cubic foot) in other places 
(USA?)... so that is a bit confusing.

See the web links below for examples of size units.


I would think that the same tag values should be used so

laundry:top_loading:1_load=20 (if 'load' can be found as a size .. somewhere?)

laundry:top_loading:5_cu_ft=20

laundry:top_loading:6_lbs=20

laundry:top_loading:20_kg=20

laundry:front_loading:15_kg=8

laundry:shoe_washer=2

--

I have never heard the terms 'sidewasher' .. I assume this is what I call front 
loading?
UK - front loader 
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Washing-Machines-Front-Load/b?ie=UTF8=494926031
Amazon.co.uk: Front-Load - Washing Machines: Large 
Appliances
www.amazon.co.uk
Online shopping for Front-Load - Washing Machines from a great selection at 
Large Appliances Store.




I note that front loaders are common in the domestic area .. but commercially 
(in Laundromats) top loaders are more common.

Agitator I have heard of .,.. but that is a 'top loader'?

USA - front loader and top loader 
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_5_10?url=search-alias%3Daps=washing+machine=washing+ma%2Caps%2C428=30REZUSOII599



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power pole extension

[Tristan Anderson]

There's an intersting discussion about this here:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:power%3Dtransformer


Here it is suggested that split single-phase power be tagged as phases=2.  I 
disagree with this, and instead advocate tagging it as phases=1 voltage=240.  
In North America at least, this implies split single-phase power.  The tag 
phases=2 should be reserved for the rare instances (maybe not so rare in some 
parts of the world?) where actual two-phase power is present.


Either way, this needs to be standardized and whatever decision we come to 
needs to be made clear on the wiki pages for power=transformer and the new 
power pole extension proposal.


From: Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>
Sent: February 12, 2017 7:14 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power pole extension

I think I've seen two-phase power once, in a commercial building in 
Philadelphia, built around 1905. All the high-power uses (HVAC, mostly) in the 
building were actually driven off 208 or 480 volt three-phase, provided by 
phase-converting transformers and switch gear. There were a handful 240-volt 
circuits that were stepped down (or tapped?) from the 480, and a lot of the 
lighting was run off the 277-volt phase-to-neutral of the 480 circuits. The 
building electricians regarded the two-phase four-wire power as a damned 
nuisance.

Two-phase is surely uncommon in the US, while split-single-phase is ubiquitous.

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Mike Thompson 
<miketh...@gmail.com<mailto:miketh...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Warin 
<61sundow...@gmail.com<mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 13-Feb-17 10:25 AM, Tristan Anderson wrote:

If two-phase power isn't currently in use anywhere, it simply means we won't 
see any instances of the tag phases=2, just like how we'll never see phases=17. 
 It doesn't make anything fundamentally wrong with the tagging scheme.  I 
believe this is a good proposal that should be voted on.


There will need to be very careful wording of phases=2 to avoid American 
mappers misusing this tag for 240v split single phase.

That is my concern. This is a typical mistake.

 I think there will be instances of phase=2 occurring in the USA, possibly many 
instances.

Do you mean instances of the tag phase=2, or actual two phase power?


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


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power pole extension

[Tristan Anderson]

If two-phase power isn't currently in use anywhere, it simply means we won't 
see any instances of the tag phases=2, just like how we'll never see phases=17. 
 It doesn't make anything fundamentally wrong with the tagging scheme.  I 
believe this is a good proposal that should be voted on.


From: Mike Thompson 
Sent: February 12, 2017 6:07 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power pole extension

After a little digging, it seems that there *was* at one time such a thing as 
two phase electric power, with the phases 90 degrees apart[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-phase_electric_power
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Elementary_Two_Phase_Alternator.jpg/400px-Elementary_Two_Phase_Alternator.jpg]

Two-phase electric power - 
Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Two-phase electrical power was an early 20th-century polyphase alternating 
current electric power distribution system. Two circuits were used, with 
voltage phases ...





On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Warin 
<61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the incorrect term '2 phase' is the split single phase (or single phase 
3 wire) that the Americans use, 120 v  from 'neutral' to either line but 240 v 
from line to line and that 240 v is termed '2 phase' despite the fact that it 
is a single phase. All of these lines are supposed to float - no connection to 
earth is supposed to be made.





 On 13-Feb-17 07:27 AM, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/02/2017 20:07, Mike Thompson wrote:
Jherome,

...  Having spent some time in the electrical industry (in the U.S.) my 
understanding is there is no such thing as "2 phase", only single phase and 
three phase.



In terms of supply to premises, you're going to get single phase or 3-phase, 
but I think that you can still get minor power lines carrying just 2 phases 
(e.g. to 2 houses, each single phase) can't you?

Best Regards,

Andy

(who hasn't actually done any 3-phase wiring in 40 years, so it might have 
changed a bit since then!)


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



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

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

Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

[Tristan Anderson]

All washing machines have a load capacity in kg.  It may not be printed on the 
front of the unit but it can be found in the owners' manual or online.  I would 
caution against the key "Laundromat:10kg_sidewasher" because they aren't always 
round numbers like that.  For example this triple-load machine is 13.6 kg:


http://www.macgray.com/pdf/specs/dexter/WCAD30KCS-12.pdf


Perhaps the following tagging scheme like this would be more appropriate:

Laundromat:sidewasher=5

Laundromat:sidewasher:capacity=13.6

Laundromat:sidewasher:colour=

Laundromat:sidewasher:cost=


And if there are multiple styles of machine with different capacities it could 
have a tag like Laundromat:sidewasher:1 and Laudromat:sidewasher:1:capacity etc.


It's a little complex but I'd imagine this scheme would work anywhere in the 
world.


From: Mark Wagner 
Sent: February 12, 2017 3:38 PM
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:28:17 +0900
John Willis  wrote:

> Javbw
>
> Side note:
>
> I imagine laundromats could have a whole
>
> Laundromat:foobar=n  scheme.
>
> Laundromat:10kg_dryer=8
> Laundromat:20kg_dryer=2
> Laundromat:10kg_sidewasher=3
> Laundromat:20kg_sidewasher=1
> Laundromat:shoe_washer=1
> Laundromat:shoe_dryer=1
>
> Would be the closest laundromat to my house, Kg are approx.

That wouldn't work too well in the US.  Here, capacities are
typically measured in notional "loads": the average laundromat would
have a large number of "single-load" machines, a few "double-load" or
"triple-load" machines, and possibly a side-loading "five-load" machine
for things like quilts or sleeping bags.

--
Mark

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Tagging Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
Your email address: Your name (optional): You may enter a privacy password 
below. This provides only mild security, but should prevent others from messing 
with ...



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