Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Am 18.02.2015 um 01:07 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: There is no building named abc shopping center - the complex's landuse is named that, and the buildings are the individual shops. its not the landuse which has the name, landuses are attributes, the shopping center is a shop (?) entity that is made up of the individual shops (plus common facilities like reception, parking, toilets, accesses etc., if any) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
I added a clarification to the limitations section, as after rereading the comments and the wiki page trying to understand Andreas' position, and realized that there was no talk of exceptions when the school or other small facility was considered as an amenity to the main religious complex. I never indented for a small school building in the center of a complex to have to be cut out of the landuse, and I hope I clarified that in the limitations section. Javbw On Feb 18, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 18.02.2015 um 00:12 schrieb Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: And if there is a amenity=school in the centre of a monastary I have to cut it out. Nice. you won't have to cut it out, you can have a big area amenity =monastery with overlapping smaller areas pow and school (given they'd be part of the monastery) 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Am 18.02.2015 um 00:12 schrieb Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: And if there is a amenity=school in the centre of a monastary I have to cut it out. Nice. you won't have to cut it out, you can have a big area amenity =monastery with overlapping smaller areas pow and school (given they'd be part of the monastery) cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. It is absurd to tag parking as amenity=place_of_worship or include it in this area - it is not a place of worship. Maybe landuse=religious has problems, but it is a better solution for cases like this. 2015-02-17 23:32 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: fly wrote on 2015-02-17 23:12: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. I have. The same is true for supermarket with there own area including parking. No problem to tag the whole area shop=supermarket. For buildings we have building=*. I have a problem with this method. DIY markets here do their trading within the building and fenced outdoor areas. That's the shop, within and without building. Together with facilities like car parks, often shared among shops, they form the landuse=retail. Maybe we just lack of a proper tag to describe the area but landuse=religious is a poor answer. Anyway, we probably need more of the primary tags anyway as people look at things from different perspectives and we already have the same scenario with landuse=forest vs natural=woods vs land_cover=tree. As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. it is probably for historic reasons that cemetery slipped into the landuse category. It would be logical to migrate it to amenities, such as graveyard. I understand landuse=cementry as a land use but not religious. Anyway we are using amenity=hospital for the whole area without any use of landuse. There are plenty of cemeteries that are dominated by a particular religion. The general problem I see is that people cite historic inconsistencies in the current tagging scheme as arguments against improvements. tom ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 18, 2015, at 8:12 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: If the facility is a stand-alone facility whose primary purpose is not as a place to worship - but merely operated by a religious entity - such as a school, hospital, etc, then it is tagged as it currently is. I fail to see how some grass or parking lot around the church is the primarty purpose of worship, but then the school or kindergarden next to it where you actually pray etc. is not. That's really great. So according to the Wiki now the parking lot of the school and kindergarden is landuse=religious (because they are also used by the churchgoers), but they aren't. LOL. And if there is a amenity=school in the centre of a monastary I have to cut it out. Nice. If it is a small facility on the grounds of a church, just tag the building. If it is a stand-alone facility, then tag it as a school. You wouldn't cut out a space in a shopping center and declare it landuse religious just because the spot is rented by a church. And you wouldn't cut the parking lot off the mall when mapping the malls landuse - why would you cut off the church's?? Are we talking about the same OSM? I'm really confused. Javbw __ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On 18/02/2015 11:07 AM, John Willis wrote: Religious landuse is not about saying that the ground is religious, any more than saying landuse=retail is land that is for sale - it is for the land dedicated to a facility where people worship - just as retail is where people sell, and residential is an area where people reside - but there still is a building called a house and a shop. Javbw There are cultures where an area of land is part of their belief system e.g. Australian Aborigines. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
The only thing I got from your talk was that you don't like manmade landuses, or every facility you have ever mapped is a single use, single purpose shop, always separated from the other - never in a shared space that is named something differently. If you have one named facility - a shopping center made of 4 different retail buildings, you can't put a supermarket tag on the area. There is no building named abc shopping center - the complex's landuse is named that, and the buildings are the individual shops. To get into the fact that it is leased and whatnot starts to get into ownership, and it is not very representative of the situation. In this way, the mall landuse is showing general purpose and use - commerce through sales - and the shops themselves contain name data and purpose of the individual buildings. If there was a small playground, or a building that was a church in the complex (they have a space in the mall or shopping center, which is common) then the building would have the POW tag, but the main purpose of the facility - a shopping center - is retail sales. If I have a giant church complex, using a real life example - a large church grounds, fenced off - maybe 4 acres. 1/3 of the grounds is parking. A very large 6 story tall chapel, visible from several kilometers away. It is the POW for the facility, but only takes up maybe 20% of the land. There is a small office adjacent, a large multipurpose meeting hall and kitchen, and a small 2 story building with 6 rooms - the lower floor is a preschool operated by the church, the other is for Sunday school, storage, and other meeting rooms. There is a small playground as well. There is a courtyard in the center, and a large lawn, and a communications tower disguised as a religious tower, since it is on a hill. That is a single place with a single sign out front - a single facility, hence a single landuse - and a vast majority of the people come to visit the chapel. The rest is supporting amenities for the worshippers at the church - but do you worship on a playground? In the parking lot? On the grass? No, you go to the chapel for services. Religious landuse is not about saying that the ground is religious, any more than saying landuse=retail is land that is for sale - it is for the land dedicated to a facility where people worship - just as retail is where people sell, and residential is an area where people reside - but there still is a building called a house and a shop. There ARE tiny shops, tiny churches, and whatnot that putting the POW tag on the land, or putting shop on the land would be acceptable - but that system doesn't scale *whatsoever* to handle large multipurpose or multi-user complexes - and the system of landuse for the land, and then building and amenity tags on the various disparate things inside the area was created and used extensively in OSM to deal with conveying this complexity properly - and fits with the continuing trend of micro-mapping in OSM. Javbw On Feb 18, 2015, at 7:12 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 17.02.2015 um 22:40 schrieb Tom Pfeifer: Andreas Goss wrote on 2015-02-17 22:02: If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. the tag is about land_use_, not land_ownership_ AFAIK we do not want to tag ownership in OSM. and religious is no land use, exactly. fly wrote on 2015-02-17 22:14: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. The same is true for supermarket with there own area including parking. No problem to tag the whole area shop=supermarket. For buildings we have building=*. Maybe we just lack of a proper tag to describe the area but landuse=religious is a poor answer. Anyway, we probably need more of the primary tags anyway as people look at things from different perspectives and we already have the same scenario with landuse=forest vs natural=woods vs land_cover=tree. As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. it is probably for historic reasons that cemetery slipped into the landuse category. It would be logical to migrate it to amenities, such as graveyard. I understand landuse=cementry as a land use but not religious. Anyway we are using amenity=hospital for the whole area without any use of landuse. Cheers ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Right- per the wiki: with few exceptions. The religious object is the ground. But that really applies to the other Millions of religious facilities with a building and a space around the worshipping facility. Javbw On Feb 18, 2015, at 9:19 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: On 18/02/2015 11:07 AM, John Willis wrote: Religious landuse is not about saying that the ground is religious, any more than saying landuse=retail is land that is for sale - it is for the land dedicated to a facility where people worship - just as retail is where people sell, and residential is an area where people reside - but there still is a building called a house and a shop. Javbw There are cultures where an area of land is part of their belief system e.g. Australian Aborigines. ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 18, 2015, at 9:50 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: Right- per the wiki: with few exceptions. The religious object is the ground. But that really applies to the other Correction : rarely Millions of religious facilities with a building and a space around the worshipping facility. Javbw Javbw Typing on my phone while grading papers is not conducive to proper spelling. On Feb 18, 2015, at 9:19 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: On 18/02/2015 11:07 AM, John Willis wrote: Religious landuse is not about saying that the ground is religious, any more than saying landuse=retail is land that is for sale - it is for the land dedicated to a facility where people worship - just as retail is where people sell, and residential is an area where people reside - but there still is a building called a house and a shop. Javbw There are cultures where an area of land is part of their belief system e.g. Australian Aborigines. ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
If the facility is a stand-alone facility whose primary purpose is not as a place to worship - but merely operated by a religious entity - such as a school, hospital, etc, then it is tagged as it currently is. I fail to see how some grass or parking lot around the church is the primarty purpose of worship, but then the school or kindergarden next to it where you actually pray etc. is not. That's really great. So according to the Wiki now the parking lot of the school and kindergarden is landuse=religious (because they are also used by the churchgoers), but they aren't. LOL. And if there is a amenity=school in the centre of a monastary I have to cut it out. Nice. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Excellent job. Thanks for all your hard work. On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:10 PM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: I added two sections to the wiki - Purpose and limitations to try to spell out what we talked about. I also wrote that POW on an area as a landuse for most uses will be superseded by landuse=religious, and the POW tag is very important as a tag for a building or physical object that resides inside the larger landuse. I gave an example as to why that is the case. Please let me know if that clarifies the landuse sufficiently. PS I want to use the same exact line of reasoning For landuse=civic (civic_admin, civic_service). Javbw On Feb 17, 2015, at 6:51 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2015, at 1:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-02-16 14:20 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? To map the _grounds_ of religious facilities where the predominant use is worship, and support facilities for the meeting and rituals and various things happen. OK, I think I finally understood the definition, and I agree that landuse=religious is a fine tag for these (e.g. including the parking of the church). IMHO the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreligious should be corrected to be as explicit as you have been here today. I'll try to update the wiki today (though I wasn't involved with this page's creation) and I'll ask for feedback here when I am done. The words ground of religious facilities and predominant use of worship are crucial here IMHO --- for instance a place where the politics or administration of a church are managed won't qualify under this definition (but should be tagged as commercial I guess, right? We could still add a religion tag there). Still there will be some strangeness in some cases, as we already have established landuse=cemetery, which might also qualify in some cases for landuse=religious. Although the churches in California I know of do not have a cemetery on the grounds, every single temple here in Japan does - even the ones in Tokyo, so finding a very old cemetery hemmed in by a 25 story building, a train line, a river, and residential housing (and still on the temple grounds) is common. There are stand-alone cemeteries as well, and most neighborhoods have little tiny 5x5m or so somewhat private cemeteries everywhere (every 2-300m or so) over all of Japan, so I am not saying they are all landuse=religious, but some larger ones on the temple grounds certainly are, and it is an amenity of the temple - it's a big deal/expense to have a family grave on the temple grounds. Can you have nested landuses? It is clearly part of the temple grounds, and clearly a cemetery. I would tag it that way, but I don't know if I'm breaking done rule by doing that. Javbw 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand Oh really? Is every Kindergarden run by the chruch in Bavaria now a landuse=religious? What about office building run by the church? What if they overlap with other landuses? If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Am 17.02.2015 um 22:02 schrieb Andreas Goss: Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand Oh really? Is every Kindergarden run by the chruch in Bavaria now a landuse=religious? What about office building run by the church? What if they overlap with other landuses? If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. cu fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Please read the wiki page, especially the section on limitations. If the facility is a stand-alone facility whose primary purpose is not as a place to worship - but merely operated by a religious entity - such as a school, hospital, etc, then it is tagged as it currently is. If the facility's main purpose is that of worship, and that facility happens to have - as an amenity to the larger facility - a day care, preschool, Sunday school, in a small room or building that is part of the larger complex for a church or other large religious facility where the primary purpose is the gathering of people to practice their religion/worship - then the religious landuse is used for that complex - and the POW tag is placed on the church building itself. Just as a Mall is landuse=retail and one of the tenants may be a church, a church grounds may have a small educational amenity, a shop for religious trinkets, a small office, a meeting hall, a boiler or other mechanical support, lawns, parking, playground, etc - all are amenities that support the visitors to the main worship building/object - and are all part of a single named landuse - but the POW is a single (usually) building. Being able to say this area is used for a religious worship facility and also say this is the exact spot of the place of worship is immensely useful. It also allows for mixed denominations, mixed religions, and different names to be applied to different POWs - while not implying that all the buildings and amenities onsite are actually POWs - there's no worshiping going on in the parking lot, in the boiler room, on the lawn - you go inside this particular building or go to this particular idol to do your worshipping. I hope this clarifies it for you. Javbw Sent from my iPhone On Feb 18, 2015, at 6:02 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand Oh really? Is every Kindergarden run by the chruch in Bavaria now a landuse=religious? What about office building run by the church? What if they overlap with other landuses? If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. __ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Andreas Goss wrote on 2015-02-17 22:02: If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. the tag is about land_use_, not land_ownership_ AFAIK we do not want to tag ownership in OSM. fly wrote on 2015-02-17 22:14: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. it is probably for historic reasons that cemetery slipped into the landuse category. It would be logical to migrate it to amenities, such as graveyard. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Am 17.02.2015 um 22:40 schrieb Tom Pfeifer: Andreas Goss wrote on 2015-02-17 22:02: If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. the tag is about land_use_, not land_ownership_ AFAIK we do not want to tag ownership in OSM. and religious is no land use, exactly. fly wrote on 2015-02-17 22:14: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. The same is true for supermarket with there own area including parking. No problem to tag the whole area shop=supermarket. For buildings we have building=*. Maybe we just lack of a proper tag to describe the area but landuse=religious is a poor answer. Anyway, we probably need more of the primary tags anyway as people look at things from different perspectives and we already have the same scenario with landuse=forest vs natural=woods vs land_cover=tree. As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. it is probably for historic reasons that cemetery slipped into the landuse category. It would be logical to migrate it to amenities, such as graveyard. I understand landuse=cementry as a land use but not religious. Anyway we are using amenity=hospital for the whole area without any use of landuse. Cheers ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
fly wrote on 2015-02-17 23:12: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. I have. The same is true for supermarket with there own area including parking. No problem to tag the whole area shop=supermarket. For buildings we have building=*. I have a problem with this method. DIY markets here do their trading within the building and fenced outdoor areas. That's the shop, within and without building. Together with facilities like car parks, often shared among shops, they form the landuse=retail. Maybe we just lack of a proper tag to describe the area but landuse=religious is a poor answer. Anyway, we probably need more of the primary tags anyway as people look at things from different perspectives and we already have the same scenario with landuse=forest vs natural=woods vs land_cover=tree. As far as I understand there can be only one landuse but neither the proposal nor the wiki page really faces the problem especially regarding deprecating other landuse like cemetery without offering a replacement. it is probably for historic reasons that cemetery slipped into the landuse category. It would be logical to migrate it to amenities, such as graveyard. I understand landuse=cementry as a land use but not religious. Anyway we are using amenity=hospital for the whole area without any use of landuse. There are plenty of cemeteries that are dominated by a particular religion. The general problem I see is that people cite historic inconsistencies in the current tagging scheme as arguments against improvements. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
I added two sections to the wiki - Purpose and limitations to try to spell out what we talked about. I also wrote that POW on an area as a landuse for most uses will be superseded by landuse=religious, and the POW tag is very important as a tag for a building or physical object that resides inside the larger landuse. I gave an example as to why that is the case. Please let me know if that clarifies the landuse sufficiently. PS I want to use the same exact line of reasoning For landuse=civic (civic_admin, civic_service). Javbw On Feb 17, 2015, at 6:51 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2015, at 1:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-02-16 14:20 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? To map the _grounds_ of religious facilities where the predominant use is worship, and support facilities for the meeting and rituals and various things happen. OK, I think I finally understood the definition, and I agree that landuse=religious is a fine tag for these (e.g. including the parking of the church). IMHO the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreligious should be corrected to be as explicit as you have been here today. I'll try to update the wiki today (though I wasn't involved with this page's creation) and I'll ask for feedback here when I am done. The words ground of religious facilities and predominant use of worship are crucial here IMHO --- for instance a place where the politics or administration of a church are managed won't qualify under this definition (but should be tagged as commercial I guess, right? We could still add a religion tag there). Still there will be some strangeness in some cases, as we already have established landuse=cemetery, which might also qualify in some cases for landuse=religious. Although the churches in California I know of do not have a cemetery on the grounds, every single temple here in Japan does - even the ones in Tokyo, so finding a very old cemetery hemmed in by a 25 story building, a train line, a river, and residential housing (and still on the temple grounds) is common. There are stand-alone cemeteries as well, and most neighborhoods have little tiny 5x5m or so somewhat private cemeteries everywhere (every 2-300m or so) over all of Japan, so I am not saying they are all landuse=religious, but some larger ones on the temple grounds certainly are, and it is an amenity of the temple - it's a big deal/expense to have a family grave on the temple grounds. Can you have nested landuses? It is clearly part of the temple grounds, and clearly a cemetery. I would tag it that way, but I don't know if I'm breaking done rule by doing that. Javbw 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
2015-02-16 14:20 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? To map the _grounds_ of religious facilities where the predominant use is worship, and support facilities for the meeting and rituals and various things happen. OK, I think I finally understood the definition, and I agree that landuse=religious is a fine tag for these (e.g. including the parking of the church). IMHO the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreligious should be corrected to be as explicit as you have been here today. The words ground of religious facilities and predominant use of worship are crucial here IMHO --- for instance a place where the politics or administration of a church are managed won't qualify under this definition (but should be tagged as commercial I guess, right? We could still add a religion tag there). Still there will be some strangeness in some cases, as we already have established landuse=cemetery, which might also qualify in some cases for landuse=religious. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 17, 2015, at 1:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-02-16 14:20 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? To map the _grounds_ of religious facilities where the predominant use is worship, and support facilities for the meeting and rituals and various things happen. OK, I think I finally understood the definition, and I agree that landuse=religious is a fine tag for these (e.g. including the parking of the church). IMHO the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreligious should be corrected to be as explicit as you have been here today. I'll try to update the wiki today (though I wasn't involved with this page's creation) and I'll ask for feedback here when I am done. The words ground of religious facilities and predominant use of worship are crucial here IMHO --- for instance a place where the politics or administration of a church are managed won't qualify under this definition (but should be tagged as commercial I guess, right? We could still add a religion tag there). Still there will be some strangeness in some cases, as we already have established landuse=cemetery, which might also qualify in some cases for landuse=religious. Although the churches in California I know of do not have a cemetery on the grounds, every single temple here in Japan does - even the ones in Tokyo, so finding a very old cemetery hemmed in by a 25 story building, a train line, a river, and residential housing (and still on the temple grounds) is common. There are stand-alone cemeteries as well, and most neighborhoods have little tiny 5x5m or so somewhat private cemeteries everywhere (every 2-300m or so) over all of Japan, so I am not saying they are all landuse=religious, but some larger ones on the temple grounds certainly are, and it is an amenity of the temple - it's a big deal/expense to have a family grave on the temple grounds. Can you have nested landuses? It is clearly part of the temple grounds, and clearly a cemetery. I would tag it that way, but I don't know if I'm breaking done rule by doing that. Javbw 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 16, 2015, at 7:56 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-02-15 13:44 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: Landuse=religious is a generic version of churchyard. I agree that a churchyard could have a dedicated tag like amenity=churchyard (similar to amenity=graveyard) or historic=churchyard. IMHO landuse shouldn't define a feature, but be used as an attribute (the usage of the land). It is the grounds used by the POW or building=church/temple/ whatever It's just a more religious agnostic term - as a Buddhist temple doesn't have church grounds, a church doesn't have mosque grounds. And neither of them are commercial or retail grounds. I can think of several large church complexes in California - a massive Mormon temple, a Presbyterian church ground a with a small preschool, a couple Catholic Churches, a Jehovah's Witness hall, a big mega-church hall, a cult-like church that meets in a house (registered as a church so it shows up in google maps as one), a mosque, a Greek Orthodox something church, a Jewish community center, and now about 100 Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines. let's take a look at the community center: do we want different landuse for a community center operated by a religious community compared to a profane one? (This is a question we have to ask ourselves in order to find tagging definitions, it is not a rhetorical question) You caught my error - I wanted throw the JCC on the list because I have been inside, but the better choice for inclusion would have been the synagogue (temple?) a few blocks away that is affiliated with it (I believe) But it is a good point to bring up, but because of my error, it is not an easy question. IMHO, if it's name is the Jewish community center, and its access restricted because it is for Jewish people and no one else - it is a religious facility imho, though not a POW. I visited most of these facilities as a repairman - I would not be welcome to wander in to this particular place. It is not in service of the local community - just as the Fellowship Hall at my parent's Presbyterian church is not a church and is used _exactly_ as a community center - but is operated for the benefit of the patrons of the church. But let's say that we do consider both sites - the massive JCC and the small fellowship hall a community center - Then: Landuse=religious + Building=yes Amenity=community_centre it seems straight forward to me now, but didn't envision the landuse=religious for this purpose. The main church in my example (which is the centerpiece of the complex, across the courtyard) would have the POW tag and building=church or whatnot. Shall we have different landuses for schools operated by a religious community compared to a government school? I think we have decided that the deciding factor for a schools primary tagging and repentant ion in OSM is if it is a school or not (k-12, higher Ed), and the rest goes under operator Just as a sidenote: if I were to tag all residential places in Rome which belong to the catholic church, 25% of Rome would be landuse=religious. If I tagged the land owned by the temple that operates my school, then the electrician shop and a cafe that were out front would be religious too, but they clearly are not. It was loaned to my friend a long time ago, and he built a bookstore and an office on the space. It is not part of the temple grounds. It is not part of the school. It is not part of the preschool. It was landuse=commercial when it was (in the end) the office of an electrical engineer. Recently the temple requested the land back. He moved and they bulldozed the building and are constructing a new wing to the private Buddhist high school they operate. Which would be school landuse or whatever. But the temple across the street - with the big Buddha worship hall, big bell, giant graveyard (yes, with a few samurai in it), and a tall wall around the whole mess - landuse=religious. So far I have simply added religion=christian, denomination=catholic to universities, schools and kindergardens operated by the catholic church, because they are mainly universities, schools and kindergardens, not religious places in my eyes. There are also banks operated by the church, is this religious landuse? This seems perfectly reasonable, because we have decided (and I agree) that the important sorting bit is the fact that it is a school, which is why I would do the same to the schools grounds of the private Buddhist high school. So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? To map the _grounds_ of religious facilities where the
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Am 16.02.2015 um 11:56 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: 2015-02-15 13:44 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: Landuse=religious is a generic version of churchyard. I agree that a churchyard could have a dedicated tag like amenity=churchyard (similar to amenity=graveyard) or historic=churchyard. IMHO landuse shouldn't define a feature, but be used as an attribute (the usage of the land). +1 I can think of several large church complexes in California - a massive Mormon temple, a Presbyterian church ground a with a small preschool, a couple Catholic Churches, a Jehovah's Witness hall, a big mega-church hall, a cult-like church that meets in a house (registered as a church so it shows up in google maps as one), a mosque, a Greek Orthodox something church, a Jewish community center, and now about 100 Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines. let's take a look at the community center: do we want different landuse for a community center operated by a religious community compared to a profane one? (This is a question we have to ask ourselves in order to find tagging definitions, it is not a rhetorical question). Shall we have different landuses for schools operated by a religious community compared to a government school? Just as a sidenote: if I were to tag all residential places in Rome which belong to the catholic church, 25% of Rome would be landuse=religious. So far I have simply added religion=christian, denomination=catholic to universities, schools and kindergardens operated by the catholic church, because they are mainly universities, schools and kindergardens, not religious places in my eyes. There are also banks operated by the church, is this religious landuse? So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? +1 I usually use amenity=place_of_worship for the whole area similar to amenity=school and amenity=hospital. Do not think landuse=religious is any landuse. The problem with the numbers are that a small number of users did introduce it and iD and JOSM way to early introduced presets for it, even when the tag was by far established and the discussion about it on this list was not finished, yet. cu fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
2015-02-15 13:44 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com: Landuse=religious is a generic version of churchyard. I agree that a churchyard could have a dedicated tag like amenity=churchyard (similar to amenity=graveyard) or historic=churchyard. IMHO landuse shouldn't define a feature, but be used as an attribute (the usage of the land). I can think of several large church complexes in California - a massive Mormon temple, a Presbyterian church ground a with a small preschool, a couple Catholic Churches, a Jehovah's Witness hall, a big mega-church hall, a cult-like church that meets in a house (registered as a church so it shows up in google maps as one), a mosque, a Greek Orthodox something church, a Jewish community center, and now about 100 Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines. let's take a look at the community center: do we want different landuse for a community center operated by a religious community compared to a profane one? (This is a question we have to ask ourselves in order to find tagging definitions, it is not a rhetorical question). Shall we have different landuses for schools operated by a religious community compared to a government school? Just as a sidenote: if I were to tag all residential places in Rome which belong to the catholic church, 25% of Rome would be landuse=religious. So far I have simply added religion=christian, denomination=catholic to universities, schools and kindergardens operated by the catholic church, because they are mainly universities, schools and kindergardens, not religious places in my eyes. There are also banks operated by the church, is this religious landuse? So far I have not experienced a problem with adding religion and denomination tags to features operated by a religious community and have continued to use the same landuse I'd use otherwise on the same kind of feature (if any). What would I gain by adding landuse=religious? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
SomeoneElse wrote on 2015-02-15 10:52: You can't always take taginfo numbers at face value. right. let's look closer. For example, in the UK much of the usage of landuse=religious was introduced by this changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25035328 14 I have counted in this CS. The query below returns 328 uses from UK+Ireland. Only 36 of them have been touched by the author of the CS mentioned. In total 50 users have used the tag in this area (76, 37, 36, 35, 18, 11,... times). http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/7G7 (processing with sort and uniq -c) Worldwide, the tag is used 2907 times by 417 different users. While still one user stands out with 1/3 of the edits, others follow with (105, 91, 84, 76, 73, 50, 43, ) and many many users with single-digit numbers, which is natural for the number of such facilities in the vicinity of a local mapper. Thus since its documentation had been translated to English it has found significant acceptance with 417 grassroot votes. The argument it would only be used by a handful of mappers is no longer valid. It's true however that there are also examples where local mappers have found landuse=religious useful: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33098290 That's just the area around a church building, but isn't really a churchyard as such. I find that landuse=churchyard vs. landuse=religious+religion=christian have the same meaning, with the advantage that the latter works multicultural. Such as you use PoW and not Church for the amenity tag. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On 15/02/2015 11:17, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I find that landuse=churchyard vs. landuse=religious+religion=christian have the same meaning, with the advantage that the latter works multicultural. No. If you read back up through this and previous threads, you'll see that landuse=religious simply has no meaning at all to many people, whereas landuse=churchyard (in the context of the British English language used in OSM) clearly has a well-defined meaning. Ask someone to describe a churchyard, and they'll be able to. Ask someone to describe a religious landuse and they probably won't be able to (but like I said and the example that I gave, there may well be places where it's still the best fit). As I said in the changeset discussion here http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25035328 If someone's surveyed a place and thinks that it is best tagged as landuse=churchyard then it is NOT an accepted style of mapping for someone to change that based on aerial imagery, simply based on discussions on the tagging list. We map what we see and what we know; the strength of Openstreetmap is its local mappers. For the avoidance of doubt, this doesn't mean that the area around a non-Christian place of worship should be tagged as a churchyard - local mappers should be allowed to pick the thing that best describes their local situation. Having never been to all of the different kinds places of worship on all continents I can't prescribe what that is, and if you haven't you shouldn't too. Best Regards, Andy Townsned ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Landuse=religious is a generic version of churchyard. I can think of several large church complexes in California - a massive Mormon temple, a Presbyterian church ground a with a small preschool, a couple Catholic Churches, a Jehovah's Witness hall, a big mega-church hall, a cult-like church that meets in a house (registered as a church so it shows up in google maps as one), a mosque, a Greek Orthodox something church, a Jewish community center, and now about 100 Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines. I personally visited them, not saw them from the road, I've been in them or on their grounds. And they are all exactly the same. Every single one. Boringly, excruciatingly, absolutely exactly the same. They all have big buildings, one or more main worship facility with ancillary supporting facilities, a few little buildings for various support or infrastructure reasons, a smattering of various amenities for patrons and guests, various religious statues/shrines/memorials scattered about their complex with gardens, playgrounds, grass and water features. If it's big enough, and the largest have some way of exchanging money for religious thinngamabobs and and they all sit on an easily defined landuse. There are many religious places where the landuse is uncertain - where there is a grey area on what part is a church and what part is a university or school or tire center or poodle grooming center, but most of them are generic, religious service centers - and easily mapped when viewed as such. Only the religion=* and their peculiar set of amenities sets them apart. -Javbw Sent from my iPhone On Feb 15, 2015, at 9:19 PM, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote: On 15/02/2015 11:17, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I find that landuse=churchyard vs. landuse=religious+religion=christian have the same meaning, with the advantage that the latter works multicultural. No. If you read back up through this and previous threads, you'll see that landuse=religious simply has no meaning at all to many people, whereas landuse=churchyard (in the context of the British English language used in OSM) clearly has a well-defined meaning. Ask someone to describe a churchyard, and they'll be able to. Ask someone to describe a religious landuse and they probably won't be able to (but like I said and the example that I gave, there may well be places where it's still the best fit). As I said in the changeset discussion here http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25035328 If someone's surveyed a place and thinks that it is best tagged as landuse=churchyard then it is NOT an accepted style of mapping for someone to change that based on aerial imagery, simply based on discussions on the tagging list. We map what we see and what we know; the strength of Openstreetmap is its local mappers. For the avoidance of doubt, this doesn't mean that the area around a non-Christian place of worship should be tagged as a churchyard - local mappers should be allowed to pick the thing that best describes their local situation. Having never been to all of the different kinds places of worship on all continents I can't prescribe what that is, and if you haven't you shouldn't too. Best Regards, Andy Townsned ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On 15/02/2015 01:24, Warin wrote: What 'landuse' would you say it is? It does not fit in any of the values given on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse There are over 2,900 tagged landuse=religious currently. as shown by the taginfo. You can't always take taginfo numbers at face value. For example, in the UK much of the usage of landuse=religious was introduced by this changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25035328 That includes many examples such as this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/242868714/history which was previously landuse=churchyard but was changed to the less descriptive landuse=religious. Now it may be that, following a visit, it was clear that for some reason a landuse=churchyard tag wasn't appropriate here, and it's possible (but unlikely) that there were visits to similar churchyards the length and breadth of the UK, but I somehow doubt it. I've now asked in a changeset discussion comment what the source of that change was. It's true however that there are also examples where local mappers have found landuse=religious useful: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33098290 That's just the area around a church building, but isn't really a churchyard as such. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:51 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com mailto:jan...@gmail.com: Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and so on. Then this was disputed +1, religious really isn't a _landuse_ in these cases, they seem perfect examples where a tag religion=* would do the trick and no new tag would be needed. I’m still not understanding the confusion around the tag. If I took out the word “religious” and “religious entity” out of the example and put in 'retail' and ‘mall owner’ - there would be no problem putting landuse=retail on the site of a mall - which is well defined and easily mapped - and tagging amenities of the ground - AKA parking, gardens, playground, buildings, sheds, etc. We can have churches tagged as a shop in a retail landuse - if there is a small shop stuck in the corner of a churchyard (and the churchyard is well defined), why is having the shop labeled remotely a problem? it’s simply part of the church facility grounds. While there are edge cases - usually where mapping the grounds are difficult - there are probably hundreds of thousands of religious facilities that have well defined and easily mapped grounds, which include amenities for use by the patrons, or even the public. Hospitals have easily defined grounds, and often have kids areas, shops - there are convenience stores in most large hospitals in Japan - but we would never exclude their presence from the hospital landuse. Similarly, Office buildings often have courtyards, outdoor speaking areas, and other large, not directly office related areas - but the 6 building campus at 1 infinite loop for Apple in Cupertino wouldn’t have only the 6 buildings tagged as commercial - the parking, courtyrd, the speaking area, the company store, and support facilities are all part of “Apple Campus 1” - a single commercial landuse. The landuse many religious places occupy is the grounds of the facility, and the shape and outline of the grounds are often well defined - and more importantly - well known to the people in the community. It is common to map temple grounds here in Japan - not only the buildings themselves, but the grounds they occupy, which is very easy to do with good imagery. The amenities - graveyards, gardens, parking, temples, belltowers, statures, and occasionally parks, playgrounds, and the home of the Monk(s) are considered to be “part of the temple facilities” Some may have daycare or preschool facilities - usually the larger, established “schools” then fall under the school landuse and the church is the operator - but the church itself takes up space - usually separate (and not necessarily adjacent) space - it is not a school. It is not a park. it is not a retail or commercial establishment. It is a religious facility. and as with any facility complex, there are amenities on the site of the facility. Why is having them included in a single “religious grounds” landuse not desired? Every basic landuse type needs a landuse tag. Having amenity define the landuse (as with hospital and school) was a mistake, but one that cannot be rectified now. Every major building complex type deserves a landuse tag - otherwise it is confusing as hell to beginning mappers - and makes creating future landuse tags harder - hospital is excluded - what about fire stations? police stations? Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand, simple to implement, and simple to parse when thinking of the facility as a single thing with many amenities - like a mall, office complex, or another large establishment that handles lots of visitors visitors and offers them amenities. Javbw.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On 14/02/2015 1:51 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com mailto:jan...@gmail.com: Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and so on. Then this was disputed +1, religious really isn't a _landuse_ in these cases, they seem perfect examples where a tag religion=* would do the trick and no new tag would be needed. cheers, Martin What 'landuse' would you say it is? It does not fit in any of the values given on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse There are over 2,900 tagged landuse=religious currently. as shown by the taginfo. This is more than the values 'churchyard', park, wasteland, harbour... so the mappers are using it. Probably because it make sense to them. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
+1 Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand, simple to implement, and simple to parse when thinking of the facility as a single thing with many amenities - like a mall, office complex, or another large establishment that handles lots of visitors visitors and offers them amenities. I like landuse=religious and use it frequently. In fact, I would use it more often except that we can't seem to come to an agreement about its validity. Here in Thailand practically every wat (temple) is surrounded by a wall and the area thus enclosed is easy to see in aerials and easy to tag. It makes perfect sense to tag such areas with a landuse, just as we do for a mall, commercial, industrial, or retail landuses. On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: On 14/02/2015 1:51 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com: Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and so on. Then this was disputed +1, religious really isn't a _landuse_ in these cases, they seem perfect examples where a tag religion=* would do the trick and no new tag would be needed. cheers, Martin What 'landuse' would you say it is? It does not fit in any of the values given on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse There are over 2,900 tagged landuse=religious currently. as shown by the taginfo. This is more than the values 'churchyard', park, wasteland, harbour... so the mappers are using it. Probably because it make sense to them. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com: Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and so on. Then this was disputed +1, religious really isn't a _landuse_ in these cases, they seem perfect examples where a tag religion=* would do the trick and no new tag would be needed. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I thought tat was a feature, to actually deprecate the landuse from the buildings, so we don't have the similar issue again of a building and area rendered the same. If -carto rendered landuse=religious, then the POW would be tagged on buildings, sitting on the landuse with hopefully a complimentary rendering. Having them render the same is a bug, or if POW is tagged on a non-building tag, it should render landuse=religious the exact same way. Javbw On Jan 5, 2015, at 12:07 AM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: amenity=place of worship that is not rendered as area is a bug Thanks for a report - it is now on bugtracker as https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1193 2015-01-04 15:20 GMT+01:00 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: Hi Now that the render amendments have come through, It seems the comment below is inaccurate. It's not being rendered at all. Was that the intention? I was unaware the grey render was considered as 'building', especially since adding building=yes changed the colour. Areas are mapped as religious that, as well a church building, include the likes of car parks, cemeteries, community halls etc. Maybe mapnik needs to show landuse=religious to compensate. Cheers Dave F. On 02/01/2015 15:17, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Dear all, In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 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 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Hi Now that the render amendments have come through, It seems the comment below is inaccurate. It's not being rendered at all. Was that the intention? I was unaware the grey render was considered as 'building', especially since adding building=yes changed the colour. Areas are mapped as religious that, as well a church building, include the likes of car parks, cemeteries, community halls etc. Maybe mapnik needs to show landuse=religious to compensate. Cheers Dave F. On 02/01/2015 15:17, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Dear all, In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
amenity=place of worship that is not rendered as area is a bug Thanks for a report - it is now on bugtracker as https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1193 2015-01-04 15:20 GMT+01:00 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: Hi Now that the render amendments have come through, It seems the comment below is inaccurate. It's not being rendered at all. Was that the intention? I was unaware the grey render was considered as 'building', especially since adding building=yes changed the colour. Areas are mapped as religious that, as well a church building, include the likes of car parks, cemeteries, community halls etc. Maybe mapnik needs to show landuse=religious to compensate. Cheers Dave F. On 02/01/2015 15:17, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Dear all, In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I think too that place of worship could follow the established practice for detailed mapping of schools ie: amenity for grounds building for buildings Which then as I said needs a multpolygon? No? I always thought you were not supposed to have landuse overlap. If the date user or renderer is smart enough smaller landuse/area/feature is rendered above larger one. Simple rule and avoids a lot of multipolygoning. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On 3/01/2015 4:56 PM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 04:45:24 +0100 From: Andreas Gossandi...@t-online.de To:tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag Message-ID:m87okr$iep$1...@ger.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I too don't know what it is to be used for. However Australian Aborigines have 'sacred sites' that could be tagged that way. Ayres Rock springs to mind. One scrared site was vandalised... the road that goes past it has been closed for at least 30 years. So the sites are important, but they may not want the public to know their location due to the possible vandalism. I've come across a site in India that was tagged for a church IIRC .. but no building was present. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Since when do we use ways for landuse=* ? Also I have not found a single one that is tagged like you say. They are all areas. Why multipolygons? Typical area with various church thingies (church, vicarage etc) is not requiring multypolygon - it is usually may be represented by a simple closed way. landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I'm supposed to tag this around every church? Well, have fun with those landuse multipolygons... __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
this is just a polygon around a church yard, with the rest of the buildings and amenities inside. EXCEPT it does NOT say church yard but religious landuse. So this is how I would use this tag: http://i.imgur.com/KZvkB3i.png __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I'm mapping in Thailand where the majority of temples sit inside a compound, typically enclosed by walls, inside of which are the main temple and any number of buildings. Monks' residences, guest facilities, food shops, all are enclosed by the walls. The enclosures are fairly obvious in the Bing aerial imaging and mappers frequently enclose the whole thing and then tag it. We seldom try to sketch the temple outline because the imagery here is not always clear enough. And there are so many of them, I often simply place a node on the main building and tag that. Based on my reading of the discussion on this list about landuse=religious, those enclosed areas fit that intended use perfectly. I have not started tagging anything as yet because I'm not sure it will make it through the rigorous discussions that ensued concerning its use. Cheers, AlaskaDave On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:41 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: On Jan 3, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: this is just a polygon around a church yard, with the rest of the buildings and amenities inside. EXCEPT it does NOT say church yard but religious landuse. So this is how I would use this tag: http://i.imgur.com/KZvkB3i.png that looks like a big polygon around the church grounds to me. Maybe a couple different ones for the differently named church grounds (as they all seem to have different labels). Javbw. __ 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 -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Jan 3, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: this is just a polygon around a church yard, with the rest of the buildings and amenities inside. EXCEPT it does NOT say church yard but religious landuse. So this is how I would use this tag: http://i.imgur.com/KZvkB3i.png that looks like a big polygon around the church grounds to me. Maybe a couple different ones for the differently named church grounds (as they all seem to have different labels). Javbw. __ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and so on. Then this was disputed, and if this was actually landuse=residential. Some said it should be used for the land around a church, similar to amenity=school around a building=school. There are parks around temples in Japan that are sacred and they are being tagged with it. Anyway, the tag is a bit vague, but I wouldn't say it's too problematic. 2015-01-03 12:02 GMT+01:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: On 3/01/2015 4:56 PM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 04:45:24 +0100 From: Andreas Gossandi...@t-online.de To:tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag Message-ID:m87okr$iep$1...@ger.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I too don't know what it is to be used for. However Australian Aborigines have 'sacred sites' that could be tagged that way. Ayres Rock springs to mind. One scrared site was vandalised... the road that goes past it has been closed for at least 30 years. So the sites are important, but they may not want the public to know their location due to the possible vandalism. I've come across a site in India that was tagged for a church IIRC .. but no building was present. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
The situation in India could mean that a congregation was meeting on that site, and planned to construct a building there, but had not yet done so. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On January 3, 2015 5:03:10 AM Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: On 3/01/2015 4:56 PM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 04:45:24 +0100 From: Andreas Gossandi...@t-online.de To:tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag Message-ID:m87okr$iep$1...@ger.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I too don't know what it is to be used for. However Australian Aborigines have 'sacred sites' that could be tagged that way. Ayres Rock springs to mind. One scrared site was vandalised... the road that goes past it has been closed for at least 30 years. So the sites are important, but they may not want the public to know their location due to the possible vandalism. I've come across a site in India that was tagged for a church IIRC .. but no building was present. ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I'm OK with this. Pretty rare to see indoor (or even specifically denominational!) PoWs at Boy Scout camps in the US from what I've seen. On Jan 2, 2015 9:45 AM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. Yes. But buildings that are PoW require a building tag. Seeto all buildings tagged with in the first post. 2015-01-02 16:42 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. E.g. the Lourdes grotto or perhaps modern versions of Stonehenge or ... In Christian religion there are several places with many small shrines, but the whole is a place of worship (sorry don't know the English word). The wiki page [1] states typical tags in this context are [list of buildings}, so it is not a requirement. regards m [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_worship On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
On Jan 4, 2015, at 1:38 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: The situation in India could mean that a congregation was meeting on that site, and planned to construct a building there, but had not yet done so. Eventually landuse=religious, unless you are a member of the congregation, and know that is where services are held, and that is the **main use of the use of the land** - the Land Use. Same edge case stuff from other landuses. What about the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of places of worship with a distinct, recognizable area around them that is “part of the church grounds” they’re simple to tag, and easy to understand. More edge cases that are solved by waiting until things are done: My company bought some land, put up a tent to sell widgets, and plans to construct a building to sell widgets. Eventually landuse=retail My company uses a lot to store metal bars, and plans to build a plant to produce metal bars. Eventually landuse=industrial My cousin bought some land, and plans to construct a house.Eventually landuse=residential Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
And since r7923 JOSM will complain about missing building tag for aeroway=terminal http://josm.openstreetmap.de/changeset/7923/josm - thanks to Don-vip 2015-01-02 16:43 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: Query to find aeroway=terminal without building tag: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Ne For place_of_worship it is more complicated, as some really are not buildings. 2015-01-02 16:17 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Jan 3, 2015 4:14 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: On Jan 3, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Why multipolygons? Typical area with various church thingies (church, vicarage etc) is not requiring multypolygon - it is usually may be represented by a simple closed way. +1 Yea, just as landuse=retail is around a 7/11, with the building=shop on the inside, along with the parking lot, signs, driveways, etc - this is just a polygon around a church yard, with the rest of the buildings and amenities inside. Not sure why a church / temple/ shrine/ mosque landuse would be drawn any differently than an office park or a retail shop. This could get interesting. St Matthew Lutheran in Beaverton, OR has a Les Schwab Tire Center on it's property. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Jan 3, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Since when do we use ways for landuse=* ? Also I have not found a single one that is tagged like you say. They are all areas. I think he means closed way = area, as landuse implies area=yes . Javbw Why multipolygons? Typical area with various church thingies (church, vicarage etc) is not requiring multypolygon - it is usually may be represented by a simple closed way. landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I'm supposed to tag this around every church? Well, have fun with those landuse multipolygons... __ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Saturday, January 3, 2015, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Not sure why a church / temple/ shrine/ mosque landuse would be drawn any differently than an office park or a retail shop. This could get interesting. St Matthew Lutheran in Beaverton, OR has a Les Schwab Tire Center on it's property. Makes sense if they're...holy rollers. rimshot Sorry, couldn't resist. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag
put up a tent to sell widgets qualifies as landuse=retail and uses a lot to store metal bars qualifies as landuse=industrial. There is no need to wait. 2015-01-04 0:27 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: On Jan 4, 2015, at 1:38 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: The situation in India could mean that a congregation was meeting on that site, and planned to construct a building there, but had not yet done so. Eventually landuse=religious, unless you are a member of the congregation, and know that is where services are held, and that is the **main use of the use of the land** - the Land Use. Same edge case stuff from other landuses. What about the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of places of worship with a distinct, recognizable area around them that is “part of the church grounds” they’re simple to tag, and easy to understand. More edge cases that are solved by waiting until things are done: My company bought some land, put up a tent to sell widgets, and plans to construct a building to sell widgets. Eventually landuse=retail My company uses a lot to store metal bars, and plans to build a plant to produce metal bars. Eventually landuse=industrial My cousin bought some land, and plans to construct a house.Eventually landuse=residential Javbw ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. Yes. But buildings that are PoW require a building tag. Seeto all buildings tagged with in the first post. 2015-01-02 16:42 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. E.g. the Lourdes grotto or perhaps modern versions of Stonehenge or ... In Christian religion there are several places with many small shrines, but the whole is a place of worship (sorry don't know the English word). The wiki page [1] states typical tags in this context are [list of buildings}, so it is not a requirement. regards m [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_worship On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. E.g. the Lourdes grotto or perhaps modern versions of Stonehenge or ... In Christian religion there are several places with many small shrines, but the whole is a place of worship (sorry don't know the English word). The wiki page [1] states typical tags in this context are [list of buildings}, so it is not a requirement. regards m [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_worship On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Whoa! There are about 44,000 wats (temples) in Thailand. Of the few thousand that are mapped most of those are mapped only as nodes. Are you saying those will all disappear on the OSM slippy maps? On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
+1, I made the same mistake On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com wrote: Ooops, I just re-read your post. I think I understand now. On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. Is it possible to create a Maproulette challenge to fix the soon to be mistagged objects before the next version of the osm carto style sheet goes live? Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Ooops, I just re-read your post. I think I understand now. On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. Is it possible to create a Maproulette challenge to fix the soon to be mistagged objects before the next version of the osm carto style sheet goes live? Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Query to find aeroway=terminal without building tag: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Ne For place_of_worship it is more complicated, as some really are not buildings. 2015-01-02 16:17 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. Is it possible to create a Maproulette challenge to fix the soon to be mistagged objects before the next version of the osm carto style sheet goes live? Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
parking areas, and in some cases even tennis and soccer pitches In this cases also amenity=place_of_worship probably is not necessary. It sounds like operator=*, owner=* and maybe landuse=religious would be a better solution. I am pretty sure that parkings are not used as place of worship. 2015-01-02 19:00 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: I had a look in Padova, and I noticed that most polygons tagged amenity=place_of_worship in that area are not actually buildings. They include the gardens, parking areas, and in some cases even tennis and soccer pitches that apparently are part of the church. In such cases, a building=yes tag is of course not necessary, and I think it would also be an improvement if such areas are not rendered as buildings. I went through about 120 objects in Padova in 10 minutes or so, so checking them can be done quite quickly. I think the quickest way to handle this is by installing the Todo plugin in JOSM, opening the Bing layer, and using the Export-JOSM option. Then you can add all churches to the Todo list. Go to the next one with the ] key. I'm not in charge of the release cycle, so I can't tell exactly when this will be rolled out, but I think the plan is to roll this out between now and a couple of days. I should also mention that the change will only influence the gray building-like rendering. The religion icon will stay in place independent of the absence or presence of a building tag. -- Matthijs On 2 January 2015 at 17:19, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: Matthijs, it looks that we will have a problem in Italy. I just ran your query on a 90kmx100km area around Padova and obtained about 1000 potential problems. Some of them are definitively churches. I have put the problem on the Italian mailing list. What's the time schedule for this new version of the carto style? Volker On 2 January 2015 at 17:03, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Same query for amenity=place_of_worship: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Nj Note that this contains false positives. Nodes have been excluded from this query. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
I had a look in Padova, and I noticed that most polygons tagged amenity=place_of_worship in that area are not actually buildings. They include the gardens, parking areas, and in some cases even tennis and soccer pitches that apparently are part of the church. In such cases, a building=yes tag is of course not necessary, and I think it would also be an improvement if such areas are not rendered as buildings. I went through about 120 objects in Padova in 10 minutes or so, so checking them can be done quite quickly. I think the quickest way to handle this is by installing the Todo plugin in JOSM, opening the Bing layer, and using the Export-JOSM option. Then you can add all churches to the Todo list. Go to the next one with the ] key. I'm not in charge of the release cycle, so I can't tell exactly when this will be rolled out, but I think the plan is to roll this out between now and a couple of days. I should also mention that the change will only influence the gray building-like rendering. The religion icon will stay in place independent of the absence or presence of a building tag. -- Matthijs On 2 January 2015 at 17:19, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: Matthijs, it looks that we will have a problem in Italy. I just ran your query on a 90kmx100km area around Padova and obtained about 1000 potential problems. Some of them are definitively churches. I have put the problem on the Italian mailing list. What's the time schedule for this new version of the carto style? Volker On 2 January 2015 at 17:03, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Same query for amenity=place_of_worship: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Nj Note that this contains false positives. Nodes have been excluded from this query. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Same query for amenity=place_of_worship: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Nj Note that this contains false positives. Nodes have been excluded from this query. -- Matthijs On 2 January 2015 at 15:43, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Query to find aeroway=terminal without building tag: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Ne For place_of_worship it is more complicated, as some really are not buildings. 2015-01-02 16:17 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: Dear all, In the next version of the openstreetmap-carto style sheet (the default rendering used on openstreetmap.org) there will be some changes that might highlight current tagging errors. In particular, areas tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal that do not have a building tag will be no longer rendered as a building. It is therefore suggested to explicitly add a building=yes tag (or a more specific building tag) to all buildings tagged with amenity=place_of_worship or aeroway=terminal. Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
According to OSM-talk message it will be rolled out soon. 2015-01-02 18:19 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com: Matthijs, it looks that we will have a problem in Italy. I just ran your query on a 90kmx100km area around Padova and obtained about 1000 potential problems. Some of them are definitively churches. I have put the problem on the Italian mailing list. What's the time schedule for this new version of the carto style? Volker On 2 January 2015 at 17:03, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Same query for amenity=place_of_worship: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Nj Note that this contains false positives. Nodes have been excluded from this query. -- Matthijs ___ 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] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On 2 January 2015 at 15:42, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: I don't agree that place_of_worship requires a building. E.g. the Lourdes grotto or perhaps modern versions of Stonehenge or ... In Christian religion there are several places with many small shrines, but the whole is a place of worship (sorry don't know the English word). Exactly, hence my last line: Objects tagged as such that are not buildings of course do not need to receive a building tag. If a place of worship is not a building (including places of worship that are only tagged as node) it does not need a building tag, but if a place of worship is a building, the building tag is required (to distinguish it from places of worship that are not buildings). -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Matthijs, it looks that we will have a problem in Italy. I just ran your query on a 90kmx100km area around Padova and obtained about 1000 potential problems. Some of them are definitively churches. I have put the problem on the Italian mailing list. What's the time schedule for this new version of the carto style? Volker On 2 January 2015 at 17:03, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Same query for amenity=place_of_worship: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Nj Note that this contains false positives. Nodes have been excluded from this query. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Le 2 janv. 2015 19:03, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl a écrit : [...] In such cases, a building=yes tag is of course not necessary, and I think it would also be an improvement if such areas are not rendered as buildings. I would rather suggestions building=church (or chapel) on appropriate polygons. Art. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
On Jan 3, 2015, at 3:18 AM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: parking areas, and in some cases even tennis and soccer pitches In this cases also amenity=place_of_worship probably is not necessary. It sounds like operator=*, owner=* and maybe landuse=religious would be a better solution. +1 The grounds covered by the grounds should be landuse=religious, to encompass everything that goes with the church. The Asakusa temple grounds in Tokyo are covered with shrines, temples, religious statues, and other religious items, as well as a garden, bathrooms, shops, and other strictly speaking non-religious things - but it is a distinct, recognizable, and known part of the temple grounds (not an ownership or legal thing, but visible thing). All that should be landuse=religious, and the individual religious temples should have the amenity tag added to them, espcially if they have a distinct name. Location name can go to the landuse, if, like asakusa, every single thing has a special, different name than the location. javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag
Why multipolygons? Typical area with various church thingies (church, vicarage etc) is not requiring multypolygon - it is usually may be represented by a simple closed way. 2015-01-03 4:45 GMT+01:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: landuse=religious Which still nobody knows what it is supposed to be used for... I'm supposed to tag this around every church? Well, have fun with those landuse multipolygons... __ 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
