Re: [Tagging] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico
2014-12-15 15:52 GMT+01:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: 2014-12-15 15:42 GMT+01:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: I know we have an unusual amount of bureaucracy in Italy, but we may not need a custom tag for it http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpublic_building Why is this abandoned? I just read the talk page, but it is not really clear to me. TBH I didn't notice the message.. :-) BUT it could make sense to me (what about different offices in same building?) , for example replacing it with building=public + office=government http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Dgovernment Regards, Stefano ___ 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] [tagging] Amenity=Ufficio_Pubblico
2014-12-15 17:03 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-15 15:42 GMT+01:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: Hi, I know we have an unusual amount of bureaucracy in Italy, but we may not need a custom tag for it from my experience it is mostly not the amount of bureaucracy but the response times that are a real show stopper ;-) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpublic_building this is not a really an alternative, as it is not a synonymon, it is about a public building (and implicitly referring - how I interpret the intentions of the tag - to public services inside the building), and would from my interpretation include a lot of services that won't be included in ufficio pubblico (e.g. libraries, museums, schools, ...). Still I agree that amenity=ufficio_pubblico is in no way a good tag idea. First - if we were to introduce a country-specific tag for the public administration, what I oppose like you do - I'd expect a namespace for this, like it:ufficio_pubblico (to indicate that the tag is in Italian). Secondly, if the reason to introduce this tag was to tag informagiovani, and if this is their homepage: http://www.informagiovani.it/ , I wouldn't even classify these as public administration, as they are privately run. There are English words to express the concept of ufficio pubblico and the tag - if chosen as generic as it is here - could well be in English. As a tag proposal for this specific institution I would have expected something on the same specificy level, e.g. amenity=it:informagiovani (but I wouldn't support such a specific toplevel tag either). IMHO we should define the type of service that informagiovani is offering, and then try to find a suitable tag. Up to now there is no actual documentation or definition on the proposal page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ufficio_pubblico The one in my city is run by the municipality ( http://www.informagiovani.comune.genova.it/) and gives information and assistance (mainly, but not exclusively) to young people on education and work topics.. cheers, Martin ___ 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] Problems with historic=tomb
2014-10-16 8:33 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: It seems that are serious problems with this tag, is there somebody interested in this topic who want to make a better proposal? (1) This tag can not be used on the same object as historic=archaeological_site - despite the fact that many archaeological sites are excavated tombs. (2) There is no clear limit for notability, most likely this tag will be in future used to describe any grave. Even now, some people are using it this way. The same happened with natural=tree - originally defined as lone or significant tree. (3) There is no proposed tag to use for ordinary grave, further encuraging using this tag in way other than defined. There are used these two http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tomb and http://taginfo.osm.org/tags/cemetery=grave#overview The first is a structured proposal, the second is just used see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dtomb ___ 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water tap
2014-10-10 19:05 GMT+02:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Dear all, I would hereby like to propose a new value for the man_made tag: man_made=water_tap The proposal page is: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/water_tap Hi, I use amenity=drinking_water + drinkable=no Now I see this tag http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drinkable Perhaps it's nonsensical but... http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=entrance%3Dexit Thanks for comments in advance! Cheers, Kotya Cheers, Stefano ___ 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] University accommodation (was Re: Future proposal - RFC - amenity=dormitory)
On 19 Sep 2014 16:54, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 19.09.2014 14:22 Dan S wrote: for buildings: building=residential + residential=university + operator=* OR for sites: landuse=residential + residential=university + operator=* Note that the same scheme seems to me to work well for building and for landuse. I thought this had been discussed on tagging recently, but I can't find it, all I can find is the RFC for amenity=dormitory, currently used 263 times. (I will add that dormitory is certainly a little odd from a British English point of view, notwithstanding the comments already made to the RFC.) That proposal now suggests amenity=student_accommodation, precisely because of the oddness involved with the term dormitory. Personally, I prefer using the amenity key rather than building or landuse. Landuse lacks the implication that this is one distinct facility, and building values are not supposed to represent usage, but how the building is built. +1 I tagged some student residences as tourism=guest_house previously, but they aren't buildings (some are apartments inside buildings, but owned by the local government agency for student services). Stefano ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-08 11:44 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: We could use a single polygon per terminal tagged as in the proposal (similar to other landuse types) if we need to go in detail. If needed using also multiple values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolon) If you read the page you will see that it pretty much says: DON'T USE SEMI-COLONS UNLESS THERE IS NOT OTHER OPTION. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolon#Better_alternatives Would for example work here. Hi Andreas, thanks, I added a notice under Tagging section ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport#Multiple_values_handling ) As general reminder, there's a week left to vote the proposals https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal Regards, Stefano ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-07 16:50 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: This proposal needs EXAMPLES, EXAMPLES and more EXAMPLES!!! Hi Andreas, thanks for the email.. I will try to follow your suggestion :-) I would like to see some examples that show everything in one picture: habour, ports, port authority boundary +names etc. Should also be of one which highlighs the differences (so not one with just 1 port and where port=habour) I'm happy if this is just a screenshot with some MS Paint (such a image will be needed for the Wiki Page later anyway) Okay, seems legit. From previous email I am wondering if my way is correct (I am using landuse=port to identify single terminals, and distinguish them with category). That table needs clean up. At lof of things make no sense as port (Syncrolift) others bascially mean the same (Ferry/Passenger). It is also missing things: http://goo.gl/pw5K0P, http://goo.gl/Xj7DIt I basically followed the category from IHO to stay if possible coherent with OpenSeaMap. Could you link where you've taken these lists? These features seem partially already defined in OSM (marina, dock) You also have to decide if you want main and sub categories. Like traiding or cargo port and container or bulk. Then you might want to use cargo:containers=yes instead of port:category=containers. Or you may want to put some of that information into the harbour or terminals. Uhm, could you please clarify this point? Thanks, Stefano __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-07 17:09 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-07-05 14:02 GMT+02:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: For port proposal and voting page see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport In this case there is hardly a definition, it is hidden under a differences between harbour and port but there is no clear definition and description how to structure such a facility in OSM. Please also consider extending the abbreviations like roro (roll-on_roll-off), bulk (bulk_terminal), etc. As I explained in the talk page previously, I would like to stay with roro as a value, because it's more common in the usage. Adding _terminal on some terms seem legit (container and bulk), but what about restricting the proposal to the values truly related to terminals instead of copying the IHO definition? (so we remove straddle_carrier and such) I am not sure that port is nice as landuse value (it is quite specific, even more when adding the subtag port:category), I would rather see these as man_made values. Usage of two classification systems (port:type and port:category), both with generic names, might also lead to confusion. I'd try to be more specific with the tag-denominators, e.g. the port:category (if I got it right you are proposing to split the port into several smaller areas, each with the tags landuse=port and port:category=* ?) could become distinct man_made (or amenity) tags like man_made=quarantine_station rather than landuse=port and port:category=quarantine. For intermodal terminal proposal and voting page see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal There is not definition whatsoever on this page, only a rationale and two links to external sites ( - http://www.intermodal-terminals.eu/content/e15/index_eng.html - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_freight_transport ) Links to external sites are bad as reference, because they might not be stable/permanent, i.e. they might change, get restructured, split, etc. Please copy the essence / relevant parts to your proposal so we have a definition in our wiki what this is about. Good point. Please add a definition what this tag should be used for, and what are the criteria for a intermodal terminal to be a such. Same thing as before, I should add a description from those links. cheers, Martin Thanks, Stefano ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-07 17:47 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-07-07 17:21 GMT+02:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: As I explained in the talk page previously, I would like to stay with roro as a value, because it's more common in the usage. I still believe you should expand this. It might be more common for specialists to use the abbreviation, but in OSM most mappers won't be naval specialists and will have no clue what roro is about. It is a common requirement for osm tags to be explicit and to avoid abbreviations. A little survey with other mappers came up with alternatives to your proposal: - roll_on-roll_off - ROFTL Less characters like underscores and hyphens please (see sub(.*)station proposal).. :-) Also, for a non-naval specialist I believe that ferry and roro it's interchangeable.. cheers, Martin ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
Dear all, I edited the two proposals as required. Regarding the intermodal_terminal, I added a definition and some pictures. Considering the port proposal, I made more extensive changes to make it more similar to other tags, as suggested by Martin. Mainly the idea is to have categories in the port key (with a bonus port=cargo and removing the -unuseful?- values and the one already defined), then specifying in case of port=cargo the cargo handled (container terminals become landuse=port, port=cargo, cargo=container). Issues pending to be discussed: - Martin suggested to use man_made instead of landuse; - port:type is working as it is? (here I added that the value seaport is implicit, but the other are needed when necessary) - clarify the distinction in the difference with harbour. Let me know! Best regards, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-06 9:48 GMT+02:00 Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com: On 06/07/2014 08:24, nounours77 wrote: = So this would imply that port is a individual facility inside a harbour. In fact it is the other way round. A port my contain one or more harbours. (In turn, a harbour may contain zero or more docks and a dock may contain zero or more basins.) A port may also contain one or more terminals. In smaller ports, the port and harbour may be co-incident, hence the ambiguity between these terms. Thank you both for the comments. I based my proposal on IHO dictionary ( http://www.iho.int/iho_pubs/standard/S-32/S-32-eng.pdf ), seemed a bit strange to me also, but as I interpreted definition 3950 and 2184, harbour is meant as a geographical feature, whereas port is related to infrastructure, and per 3950 port is located in an harbour (see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbor ) Let me know how I can edit / disambiguate. ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
2014-07-06 12:48 GMT+02:00 Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com: On 06/07/2014 10:45, sabas88 wrote: Let me know how I can edit / disambiguate. The important distinction is that a port is an administrative boundary (which may have several disjunct areas) whereas harbours, terminals, docks, wharves, basins, quays, etc. are physical features. Since those latter features will be administered by the port authority, they should all be within the port boundary(s). Take this example, it identifies a container terminal http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2952205#map=17/44.10635/9.85686 In this case the harbour tag should enclose La Spezia harbour. In Genoa, landuse=harbour has been placed to represent a division used by port authority (Sampierdarena West / East) http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148700342 For area administered by the authority (so all the harbours / ports), I used a proper boundary from the official data http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2631548 It's correct my representation? Cheers, Stefano ___ 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] Feature Proposal - Voting - Port and terminals
Dear all, after almost six months from the original proposal, now I would like to ask you to vote these two new tags. Accepting the tag landuse=port would improve the detailed tagging of port areas, for example to tell apart container terminals (easily distinguishable from satellite imagery) from passenger terminals and so on. Alongside I ask you to vote the tag man_made=intermodal_terminal (areas where freight traffic is moved between different transport modes, for example from rail to trucks). For port proposal and voting page see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport For intermodal terminal proposal and voting page see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal Voting is starting today, and it will end Saturday 19 July at 12pm GMT. Thanks and best regards, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pipeline bridges
If we consider aqueducts http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/176520234#map=18/44.45802/8.97848 http://www.acquedottogenova.altervista.org/images/01-primo%20itinerario/46_sifone%20geirato.jpg http://www.oruko.altervista.org/images/curiosita-ponti/11b-sifone%20geirato.jpg Otherwise here's a bridge/gas pipeline https://www.google.com/maps/@44.434533,8.961157,3a,49.2y,174h,90.72t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1suvazafJHL3TJQ8kTGRRVwQ!2e0?hl=en On OSM it's not tagged as pipeline http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5625784 Regards, Stefano 2014-06-19 10:33 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com: This one of my pipeline bridges: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/132791265 https://www.google.com/maps/@45.292027,11.927267,3a,75y,153.47h,91.57t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr2gRzPpcw10yML5dM5LgXQ!2e0 You see it from miles away. On 19 June 2014 06:47, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I'm going to dispute that claim and back it up with a recent news article and aerial view... can't recall if it's mapped in OSM yet, it's close enough to Lewis Avenue that I honestly didn't notice it driving until I got detoured around it earlier this month. http://www.newson6.com/story/25713388/interstate-244-near-lewis-shut-down http://maps.google.com/?q=36.160647,-95.957975hl=engl=us On Jun 18, 2014 5:13 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I expect that it would be [man_made=pipeline, location=overground, bridge=yes, layer=*]. +1 -1 I would expect bridge=yes to be combined with highways only. Here nobody can walk/drive on the pipe. We don't call it a bridge. location=overground is enough. Pieren ___ 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
On 11 May 2014 06:32, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: Hm I've looked up a few other cities (Hamburg, Munich, Cologne, Lyon, Marseille, Rotterdam, Zurich, Manchester, Birmingham, Salzburg, Aarhus) and they do not have an admin_level tag on the place=* node. At the same time, I found some other cities that do: Paris [1], Kopenhagen [2], Barcelona [3], Madrid [4], Brussels [5], Amsterdam [6], Bern [7], Vienna [8], Rome [9], Milan [10]: In Italy we use capital=* with the corresponding (minimum) admin level, so Rome has capital=2 and so on.. Regards, Stefano [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17807753 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13707878 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/152364165 [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21068295 [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 [6] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/268396336 [7] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18477455 [8] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17328659 [9] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/72959652 [10] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/62505581 I see an approximate pattern: capital cities tend to have an admin_level tag, others tend not to have it. Maybe it's something in use for backward compatibility, such as an with and old renderer that uses it instead of the capital tag to render a label at lower zoom levels. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Berlin Honestly looks like and error nobody has noticed yet. I mean admin_level=2 ? Berlin is a city state which might justify =4, but unless we somehow tag capitals like this I don't see the reasoning behind this tag in the first place. Andi __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ 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] Study area
2014-02-27 10:37 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com: @Stephan: I like the coworking_space idea. It certainly fits the practice at Punspace. IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key. @Stefano: Why do you think we should not use the amenity key? Because it's overcrowded and office should suit better, as coworking are basically and most of the time offices ... :-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Study area
2014-02-27 12:06 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:56 AM, sabas88 saba...@gmail.com wrote: Because it's overcrowded Today, it's less than shop ... and office should suit better, as coworking are basically and most of the time offices ... :-) I dont think office fits here, for something open to all publics in a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office' everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the 'office' key ;-) I agree it's not the case of Dave's issue, but afaik coworkings are places who sell office space (http://genova.talentgarden.org/#gallery this is the one I tagged as office=coworking, because it defines as such) What about community_centre? Pieren ___ 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] Study area
2014-02-27 8:45 GMT+01:00 Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de: On 27.02.2014 01:48, Dave Swarthout wrote: @Martin, I'm not sure about the status of the books but that's not the prominent feature of this place. I will go back for more details later but it is definitely not a library. @Stephan - neither Punspace or Guru's Box are tagged. I brought that fact up during the meeting we had there and nobody had any ideas. Punspace is similar to the place I'm reporting here except it is not free and available for short term rental only. a while ago it was suggested to use office=coworking for coworking places. with fee=yes/no you could also distinguish the free and paid ones. In the co-working thread is sounded like office is the better key and should be preferred over amenity. Still in February a wiki page for the amenity key was created. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dcoworking_space Well, it wasn't approved so it should be moved to Proposed_Features space.. IMO if we have the opportunity we shouldn't use amenity key. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013- November/015668.html Taginfo: Count Key Value 48 amenity coworking_space 15 office coworking 6 office coworking_space 2 amenity coworking_place Stephan Regards, Stefano ___ 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] Help me locate this tag checking website.
2014-02-21 20:43 GMT+01:00 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: Hi I'm unable to remember the name or find the location of a tag checking web page. It was a slippy map of mapnik rendering that had a single line text box into which you could type a key, value or both after a search would display an icon at the location of each occurrence. These icons were user selectable from a pull down list. Anybody recognise it Is it still in existence? http://osm.dumoulin63.net/xapiviewer/ This can be done also with overpass-turbo and a bit of work.. Cheers Dave F. Cheers, Stefano --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ 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] How to tag a public works facility ?
2014-02-19 17:32 GMT+01:00 Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com: Any reasons not to use landuse=depot? Besides the sparsity of its wiki page... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Ddepot 428 instances in taginfo +1 But using depot:type=* instead of type=* (as I suggested in http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/RFC-Classification-for-ports-and-inland-terminals-td5792661.html) 2014-02-19 16:27 GMT+00:00 Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com: For what it is worth, in the area I live in such facilities seem to be called corporate yards. Since industrial=depot seems to have only one use at present and does not fit exactly. At least it does not fit in my mind. Perhaps it could be tagged as landuse=industrial, industrial=corporate_yard with operator=City of and maybe name=XXX Corporate Yard -Tod On Feb 19, 2014, at 3:37 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: Pieren wrote: It's a small area with several buildings where the municipality is storing vehicles and the maintenance and repair services. I've gone with landuse=industrial, industrial=depot for these in the past: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/254083705 (although arguably the name on that should actually be operator) Someone suggests to use amenity=public_building but it's deprecated now in the wiki... Whoever edited the wiki clearly failed to communicate with all the editor authors since amenity=public_building is a default in P2 (not that it's relevant in this case, since what you're describing isn't just a building. Cheers, Andy ___ 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to tag a public works facility ?
2014-02-19 18:20 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: Btw, use simply depot=* instead of depot:type=*. I don't understand this recent trend to add a :type suffix in subtags. It was not the case in the past (e.g. building=*, wood=*, traffic_signals=*, etc, etc, etc) Simply because there's an overlap between the common use of type=container (as in waste container) and the type=container of the depot proposal (as in shipping container). IMO I had to clarify the tag... Pieren Regards, Stefano ___ 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] [RFC] Classification for ports and inland terminals
Dear all, after the discussion regarding the seamark tagging I wanted to start some proposals to have a consensus on a general way of tagging marine facilities (and hopefully get them rendered to solve incorrect tagging for the renderer :-) [1]). With this proposal I wanted to give a unique tag to describe ports, in the IHO meaning. I am proposing a landuse=port which should be used for harbour parts like terminals (container, bulk,...) and it's compatible with the OpenSeaMap tag. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport A latere I created two proposals for tags that I am using: - a port_authority value for boundaries ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boundary%3Dport_authority ) - a tag for intermodal terminals ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal) Concluding, I was considering to revive the Depot proposal[2] with the depot:type key to use for container depots tagging[3]. Hoping to get feedback, regards, Stefano [0] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013-December/015923.html [1] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/300 [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Depot [3] http://www.doorncontainers.nl/images/overview.jpg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tag for co-working spaces
2013/11/25 Severin MENARD severin.men...@gmail.com Hi, Seems this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking does not exist yet. Here is the taginfo situation http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=working_space#values What about a office=co_working_space or office=co-working_space? Hi, I'd prefer something like office=coworking, which is used http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=coworking#values (the amenity tag shoudn't be used imho) Sincerely, Severin Regards, Stefano ___ 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] Pre-proposal: Newsagent / Kiosk / Tobacco / TIcket shop
2013/11/3 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2013/11/3 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl Do these kind of shops also exist in other countries, and how are they referred to? Which of the products that I listed do they sell? There is surely some overlap between countries, but there are also country specific specialties. A shop which sells this kind of stuff in Germany could also be a petrol station. In Italy a shop=tobacco might also sell salt (traditionally salt was a state monopoly), but won't sell books generally. Bus tickets will mostly be sold, concert tickets I'm not sure, but they will also do some kind of banking operations (you can pay e.g. your rent or your electricity bill there). As for postal stamps I wouldn't count on them, they might have some of the most used fractions, but very often they'd say they've run out. They also won't sell magazines or newspapers by default, but there are some (combined shops) that do. Often they are inside a bar and will therefor sell coffee, liquors, sandwiches, etc. Besides from these tobacco - bars a tobacco shop won't offer drinks. Lotto is a different issue, in Germany the common couple is a newspaper agent offering wasting your money on lottery. Given that already inside a certain country there are huge differences between these kind of shops. I'd think it is almost impossible to do it on an international level. E.g. some shop=tobacco are specialized in tobacco and offer a huge selection of cigars, pipes and pipe tobacco, cigarette rolling tobacco etc., while others not even offer rolling tobacco but only a small selection of cigarettes and maybe one or two common cigar types. I won't deduct from the shop type what exactly is the offering, either we had to make specific subtypes (e.g. tobacco bar, tobacco + newspapers, even tobacco and pastry/bread) or express this with additional attributes in the form of sell:tobacco=yes, sell:icecream=yes, lotto=yes (or sells for grammatical reasons, but the sell:* form seems more common currently). In conclusion to your original question I'd say that this is not one kind of shop, but there are different kind of shops in different countries, offering overlapping goods and services. I'm adding some things here.. We could use vending=* as for vending machines. I'm mapping as kiosk when there's more items from the list, shop=tobacco when it's a proper tabacchino or tabaccaio (outside has a black and white sign with the reference code from the Italian Monopoli), shop=newsagent when sells exclusively newspapers and magazines or it's a standalone kiosk with mostly newspapers for tickets I'd like something like office=tickets (so we'll catch also the place vending tickets outside a museum). In Italy through lotto (only the most recent machines) you could pay bills, taxes and other services. cheers, Martin Bye, Stefano ___ 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] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?
2013/10/17 Pieren pier...@gmail.com Could someone explain the difference between tourism=guest_house and tourism=bed_and_breakfast ? Both are suggested here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house but only guest_house is really documented in the wiki. In taginfo, we find 527 tourism=bed_and_breakfast and 32382 tourism=guest_house (accidentally, taginfo says Guest house and BedBreakfast for tourism=guest_house) I'm asking because in France we do have a diffence when guests are in an independent building (gîte [1]), usually for at least a week or a week-end, or just special bedrooms (bedbreakfast) as guests in private homes. So, I'm looking if we could reuse the two existing tags or if I should create a sub-tag like tourism=guest_house + guest_house=bed_and_breakfast or guest_house=whatever_in_an_independent_building We discussed once on #osm-talk when I asked more or less the same question... The distinction between bb and guest house is related to the law in your country, generally bb need to have max x rooms for guests, otherwise they are guest houses (I try to use guest_house now also when the name is Bed Breakfast Mickey Mouse but the legal status defines it as guest_house) Pieren Regards, Stefano [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%AEte ___ 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] Ferry frequency
Duration is also important and currently used by OSRM (although not on relations yet), like http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/176323421 Cheers, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Intermodal transport
Hello, I would like to start a discussion related to intermodal transport and its facilities, and I drafted a page[0] with some links in it. A tagging system should be proposed also considering the maritime tagging (OpenSeaMap), or extending it to deal with inland facilities. As an example, I saw harbour:LOCODE[1] key, but I preferred to use a (imho more general) ref:LOCODE[2], as the older discussion didn't came to results. See [3] Regards, Stefano [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:harbour:LOCODE [2] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ref%3ALOCODE [3] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openseamap.maps/261 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Luncheon Vouchers
Hello, I wanted to add information on some restaurants / bars to indicate if they accept luncheon vouchers (meal vouchers), but I didn't find anything. These vouchers are given by work employers to be used for lunch payments. I was looking at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Payment which I think it's the best namespace to use, I was wondering how to extend it. For info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meal_voucher Needs to be described: - if accepted paper ticket or/and electronic ticket - what kind of voucher is accepted (luncheon voucher, ticket restaurant): usually only some brands are accepted. Regards, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] water parks and swimming pools
There's also an attraction=water_slide[0], it isn't rendered in the current stylesheet but it's the correct tag to use :) I'm respondible for some swimming pools multipolygons, the explaination is that in water parks there are these big water areas in which you can walk or swim, but there are some 'islands' inside. Here's an example http://osm.org/go/xT3TtKM0f-- Cheers, Stefano [0]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:attraction ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Ferry lines, ways or relations?
This discussion already took place some months ago.. Since then I saw a lot of changes after I edited initially some Italian lines.. 2012/9/5 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com I opened an issue on OSRM-s Github page: https://github.com/DennisOSRM/Project-OSRM/issues/402 https://github.com/DennisOSRM/Project-OSRM/issues/291 Janko Cheers, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock
2012/7/2 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc This is an old proposal that have been discussed before. It seem to be in use according to tag watch, so I have been urged to make this official. There are also similar tags in use and others proposed but that doesn´t mean this one could be approved. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/bare_rock There are some proposals, it's not a very clear situation (bare_rock, rock, bedrock), no way to tag the typology of the rock.. I tagged bare_rock both with natural and landcover key to be sure... I'd opt for landcover system. Regards, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Wholesale, key without proposal?
Hi, I saw this [0] page which describes a feature with ~30 uses, created on June 20th. Some months ago, I made this[1] proposal for a new shop value, which has now 80 occurrences. Should I mark one of the two pages in some way? What's the correct one? Regards, Stefano [0]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wholesale [1]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/cash_and_carry ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Ferry routes, what's the correct approach?
Hi, I started discussing in the local list about the approach in tagging ferry routes. The wiki page [0] seems a little bit unclear, leaving two approaches: -normal way between harbours -relation like a normal road. I tried to follow the relation approach like I saw in other seas, but I cannot understand why routing on these ferries is so difficult. For instance in some cases the router suggest to change ferry in the middle of the sea, or suggest a route which minimises the sea crossing: between two harbours with a direct line, it goes through land till it find another route. So, my question is: it's fault of the tagging or the routing? What's the correct way of tagging? Regards, Stefano [0]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Ferry routes, what's the correct approach?
2012/6/3 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk [cut] Dover-Calais does seem to work well, you may get some ideas there. http://map.project-osrm.org/xR Thanks, seems similar to how I made the routes in Genoa, we'll see at the next OSRM update how it behaves... I don't understand why way 14271003 (the main route) isn't splitted at node 136942316, the backwards bit is only from that node to the pier, isn't it? Phil ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Soccer variants
Hi all, I made a proposal for a new soccer=* tag to describe which variant is played on a field. Currently there isn't a way to tell if a soccer field is regular-sized (on which it's played the regular soccer) or it's a simple field traced in a church backyard for example. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Soccer Regards, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Count of urinals
2012/5/26 Shu Higashi s_hig...@mua.biglobe.ne.jp Hi, I was asked by a woman if she can map the count of urinals (or something other appropriate name in english?) in a toilet. Because it is very important for women to count their waiting time. So I'd like to propose a tag to count the urials. For example: amenity=toilets urinals:female=4 May I add this combination to the wiki page? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Toilets I see that the keys (f.e. male/female) are used only for toilets.. Can we discuss about transformation in something with namespaces like toilet:* for those keys? I see also this extension[0]. If you want to start tagging count we could think something like toilet:seated:count=* and so on... To distinguish between man and woman toilet:male:seated:count=* is good? Though it's dificult for men to map :) Shu Higashi Stefano [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:amenity%3Dtoilets#By_type_.28squat_vs._seated.3B_urinals.3B_flushing_mechanism.29 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Geology and landcover - Building an extension
2012/5/23 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2012/5/23 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com: What about building a proposal to extend landcover=* tag to meet FAO's system? I think if you wanted to implement the FAO system you would need more than one additional tag, so I suggest to make up a whole new proposal to do this. Maybe you should also check if the FAO system is available (copyright/licensing). Besides these problems I am in favour of the FAO system, it seems well thought out. Regarding the software, here [0] states the non-commercial clause. Should this proposal require prior authorization by FAO offices? [0]http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/y7220e/y7220e00.htm cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer
2012/4/10 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com I am coming back to a topic we had some time ago: sidewalks. According to this page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dsidewalk sidewalks should be tagged with highway=footway footway=sidewalk While I agree that for complex situations it is helpful to have dedicated geometry in OSM, I fail to understand why this should be tagged highway=*. Usually a distinct highway should be drawn only in the case of a separated carriageway. You can add only a tag on the existing highway. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk cheers, Martin Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] gym as an amenity value
Il giorno 10/mar/2012 06:49, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us ha scritto: To me fitness centers are more related to health than leisure. I'd prefer to use the tag amenity instead. Thoughts? I feel like I'm in prison when I go to the gym[0]… Clifford Stefano [0] wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Prison ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tag approval process or its absence (was: Voting for Relation type=waterway)
2012/2/21 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org I don't think that a tagging style that works best in Europe will automatically also be the one that works best in South America. Any attempt to force everyone to use the same style will automatically make the map *less* good in some places. I think that it is one of the great strengths of OSM that we can allow people to map what is good for them locally, and we should not throw that away just because some programmer somewhere finds it easier to roll out his iPhone app if tags are synchronized the world over! And if there's three or four different tagging schemes for the same thing in the same country? Changing in quantity, genre or spelling for instance. Bye Frederik ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging of ele / elevation data e.g. in the context of towers
2012/2/20 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com On the German ML we are currently discussing how to applicate ele to towers (and similar situations). There is consensus that the key height is describing the height of the structure from the ground to the top. There is also consensus to tag elevation data in WGS84 (so that numbers in local systems would typically have to be converted before you can enter them). There are 2 alternatives: a) ele is the elevation of the ground around/below the tower (in the case of a mountain summit it would be the elevation of the mountain, not the tower). +1 I believe ele=* should be applied only to the terrain, and height would be the physical distance between the point at ele=* elevation and the one at ele+height elevation. b) ele is the elevation of the highest point at the tagged spot, i.e. the top of the tower -1 Comments welcome. The idea is to clarify this aspect on the wiki page for the key ele. For istance if there would ever be a DEM compatible with OSM licenses, I think it would be imported in ele=* tags. cheers, Martin cheers, Stefano. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tag approval process or its absence (was: Voting for Relation type=waterway)
That's some kind of consideration, like the one I proposed some time ago, about building a clean tagging scheme, but has led to a discussion about another topic and died. My +1 will always go to cleaning. Cheers, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] When should a name:* translation be used?
2012/1/30 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com It is quite frequent that the names of the more famous places get translated into different languages. I don't speak Vietnamese, but this looks like nothing particularily strange to me. If you need a reason to keep it: I guess the Vietnamese speaking people will find it useful ;-) The question is how far we go. Should every Main Street be translated into hundreds of languages? Every Main St is a famous road? :) Regarding roads I couldn't say many examples of roads with a translated name (of course a literal translation is possible but it's not very useful if that translation isn't established), perhaps the Champs Elysèes in Paris. It's more common for other toponyms like cities (Genova/Genes/Genoa/Genua for instance). And if I guessed correctly one could see the local name and the translated name on the map (an Italian user built a map in his regional language based on this idea). Stefano PS I didn't see a translation in italian for Orange County, perhaps vietnamese people refer to the county with a translated name :) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Public airport multipolygon?
2012/1/30 Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com I guess you can't, at least not now. That's one issue with the free-form tagging system we use. Sooner or later we'll have to develop a process to deprecate tags, change tags, etc. Perhaps we should start a separate thread and discuss how this process could work. +1 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Health and other stories
2012/1/11 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org I find it a bit harsh that you complain about amenity=dentist when others languish in an amenity=prison. I laughed hard, I didn't noticed it :D 2012/1/11 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com nobody stops you from using other keys then amenity, some people already do it, look here: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/healthcare#values http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/health_facility%3Atype#values http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/healthcare%3Aspeciality#values Yes Martin, they are using either approved but contested proposals or user defined values. My idea was to discuss a possible project made of different proposal covering each its area (health, education,...) which would give a more rational set of keys to use :) I know only few tags and for others I rely upon Josm menu and on wiki. Take the examples of dentist and prison, they aren't pleasant (http://www.wordreference.com/definition/amenity) :) This work would be also helpful for whom develop applications (example: Josm, Vespucci, Osmtracker, Maperitive) struggling with different dialects of tagging :) Cheers, Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Health and other stories
2012/1/11 Michael Krämer ohr...@googlemail.com To be honest I haven't really thought about the difference between until this thread came up... That's a problem for various non-native speakers (me included eheh) This should be an opportunity to make some changes in syntax and semantics [1] of OSM. We should start a wiki entry to organize the ideas in a collaborative Project (The Plan?) which will become the reccomendation from the final approval on and a suggestion to migrate existing data :) (the automation should be leaved to whom messes with [local] data) My proposal: -main page: description, aim, index and discussion for general ideas; -subpages: one for each category or area of interest (primary features [2] gives a good approximation of what I mean) Also, this will promote also thinking on how would be simplified tagging particular features (comes in mind also the cultural/heritage theme, from archaeology to museums, a main key culture=*?). Discussion should be focused also on the best word to use, as John pointed out, and here the main work should be made by native speakers :) Stefano [1]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Semantics [2]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Amenity parking
2012/1/11 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com I tag all parking spaces as amenity=parking, even though you have to rent a place by the month. I'm guessing this is wrong? But this is how most people do it. I'd like a subkey for the landuse=road :P ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Health and other stories
Hi list, I want to suggest a topic of discussion not often considered: planning a more rational tagging system to be applied onto the existing data and for the future. (OK, it's flame time! :D) For instance the discussion could start with a simple case: healthcare. Now the health facilities are tagged in amenity (when I go to the dentist I'm not happy as I would be in a bar!), but (in my dream world :) ) they should deserve a seperate key: I found two proposals, one contested [1] and one in RFC status [2] (but I somewhat dislike it at a first glance). Same discussion could be started on education, culture and so on. Perhaps the amenity key is abused as a POI collector, but in my humble opinion, there should be more categories (or, if you like, subcategories as amenity=health, health=* but it's less effective). (Un)Occupy the Amenity key! Regards, Stefano PS This email seems ironic, but I would seriously like to promote discussion on this topic. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Healthcare [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] additional barrier type?
2011/12/1 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net while out mapping today, i encountered a barrier type that doesn't have a suitable tag in the wiki: barrier=guardrail in the specific case, a road leading to an abandoned bridge has had a guardrail barrier placed across the road to keep vehicular traffic from approaching the bridge. this tag would be suitable for both nodes (single points on ways where they are blocked) and ways. unless there's a british term for the same thing that's preferable i'm inclined to just add it. thoughts? richard __**_ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/tagginghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Hi, there's already in this approved proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/New_barrier_types Stefano ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=cash_and_carry
Hi there, I made a proposal for a cash and carry shop tag. Cash and carry are big wholesale dealers ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash_and_carry_%28wholesale%29) You can find the proposal page here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Dcash_and_carry Stefano sarchittuorg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
