Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Simon Poole]

If you scroll down you will notice that there was never a sloped_kerb
proposal as the page is actually the proposal for amenity=sloped_curb
which was marked as inactive here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/sloped_kerb=670959
(which is understandable given that proposing it as a value of amenity
was questionable even at that time and only has 63 uses in total).

In any case it didn't seem to have any bearing on the use of sloped_curb
and curb keys which seem to be completely undocumented, but are at least
in use (see my original posting).

Simon
 
Am 07.03.2016 um 19:39 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
> On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole  wrote:
>> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
>> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
>> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
>> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
>> preferred tagging is.
> I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour 
> of:
>
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb
>
> I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
> same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
> whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
> /type/ of dropped kerb it is.
>
> I would prefer, say:
>
> kerb=dropped
> dropped-kerb=rolled
>
> instead of, say:
>
> kerb=rolled
>
> since the former allows the use of:
>
>  kerb=dropped
>
> alone.
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Andy Mabbett]

Today:

   
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/sloped_kerb=1279361=1215962

On 7 March 2016 at 19:48, Simon Poole  wrote:
> Recently I believe in this case was 2010 .
>
> Simon
>
> Am 07.03.2016 um 19:39 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
>> On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole  wrote:
>>> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
>>> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
>>> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
>>> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
>>> preferred tagging is.
>> I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour 
>> of:
>>
>>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb
>>
>> I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
>> same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
>> whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
>> /type/ of dropped kerb it is.
>>
>> I would prefer, say:
>>
>> kerb=dropped
>> dropped-kerb=rolled
>>
>> instead of, say:
>>
>> kerb=rolled
>>
>> since the former allows the use of:
>>
>>  kerb=dropped
>>
>> alone.
>>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Simon Poole]

Recently I believe in this case was 2010 .

Simon

Am 07.03.2016 um 19:39 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
> On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole  wrote:
>> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
>> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
>> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
>> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
>> preferred tagging is.
> I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour 
> of:
>
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb
>
> I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
> same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
> whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
> /type/ of dropped kerb it is.
>
> I would prefer, say:
>
> kerb=dropped
> dropped-kerb=rolled
>
> instead of, say:
>
> kerb=rolled
>
> since the former allows the use of:
>
>  kerb=dropped
>
> alone.
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Andy Mabbett]

On 2 March 2016 at 16:42, Simon Poole  wrote:
> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
> preferred tagging is.

I notice that two pages have recently been marked as "deprecated", in favour of:

   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:kerb

I find the latter unhelpful; it assumes that all wheelchairs are the
same, and seems to leave no way to say that a kerb is "dropped" (using
whatever term may be preferred), if the editor does not know which
/type/ of dropped kerb it is.

I would prefer, say:

kerb=dropped
dropped-kerb=rolled

instead of, say:

kerb=rolled

since the former allows the use of:

 kerb=dropped

alone.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Tobias Knerr]

On 02.03.2016 17:42, Simon Poole wrote:
> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't 
> say anything about the other variant because of the lacking 
> documentation, I don't really care either way, it would simply
> make easier if we could come to some consensus on what the actual 
> current state is and what the preferred tagging is.

For what it's worth, I think the proposal is the closest thing to a
preferred tagging there is. It might need some updates such as
:left/:right prefixes to become compatible with current tagging
styles, but the key and values themselves are mostly solid.

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-03-03 12:24 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :

> My question was solely if there is some consensus that the kerb proposal
> is actually how it should be tagged now or if it is truly defunct and the
> original tagging scheme should continued to be used (as iD does).



I'm in favour of the kerb=* scheme and propose to add "sloped" as a
suggested value.

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Simon Poole]

As pointed in my first mail out the issue is deprecating an existing
scheme in the wiki without replacing it with something else that is
either recognized as "how we do it now" or "approved" (the issue is not
that there is yet another scheme bit rotting in proposal state).

My question was solely if there is some consensus that the kerb proposal
is actually how it should be tagged now or if it is truly defunct and
the original tagging scheme should continued to be used (as iD does).

Simon

Am 03.03.2016 um 11:58 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
> 2016-03-03 11:43 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole  >:
>
> The problem is "we" didn't. As already pointed out, there is only
> a proposal that has been bit-rotting for multiple years (it
> probably, when used on a crossing node, should have kerb:right and
> kerb:left variants for the asymmetric cases, but that is the only
> thing I see that might be improved). There's not even a JOSM
> preset for it. 
>
>
>
>
> What is wrong with the proposal ("bitrotting")? The tag it documents
> are used 24.000+ times. I agree with the addition of direction
> dependent tags for asymetric situations, you should put this on the
> discussion page, maybe in this paragraph:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/kerb#Kerb_direction
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-03-03 11:43 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :

> The problem is "we" didn't. As already pointed out, there is only a
> proposal that has been bit-rotting for multiple years (it probably, when
> used on a crossing node, should have kerb:right and kerb:left variants for
> the asymmetric cases, but that is the only thing I see that might be
> improved). There's not even a JOSM preset for it.




What is wrong with the proposal ("bitrotting")? The tag it documents are
used 24.000+ times. I agree with the addition of direction dependent tags
for asymetric situations, you should put this on the discussion page, maybe
in this paragraph:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/kerb#Kerb_direction

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

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Simon Poole]

Am 03.03.2016 um 11:23 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>
> 2016-03-02 17:42 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole  >:
>
> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
> anything about the other variant because of the lacking
> documentation, I
> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and
> what the
> preferred tagging is.
>
>
>
> I do care: prefer "kerb" for consistency, as this is Imperial style.
> We already had changed the "curb" to "kerb" many years ago, and IMHO
> there's no gain in re-introducing the yankee curb.

The problem is "we" didn't. As already pointed out, there is only a
proposal that has been bit-rotting for multiple years (it probably, when
used on a crossing node, should have kerb:right and kerb:left variants
for the asymmetric cases, but that is the only thing I see that might be
improved). There's not even a JOSM preset for it.

Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-03-02 17:42 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole :

> While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
> anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
> don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
> come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
> preferred tagging is.
>


I do care: prefer "kerb" for consistency, as this is Imperial style.
We already had changed the "curb" to "kerb" many years ago, and IMHO
there's no gain in re-introducing the yankee curb.

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

[Tagging] sloped_curb, kerb and god knows what left in limbo ......

[Simon Poole]

Accidentally I noticed today that iD was suggesting a sloped_curb tag
for crossings, it piqued my curiosity a bit and it seems that we have
the situation now, that we have two different tagging systems in
moderate use (~20'000 occurrences of slopped_curb and  kerb each). But
no documentation for the one
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/dropped_kerb is
what you get redirected to for slopped_curb but the page does not have
any useful content and indication of which values should be used) and a
long abandoned proposal for the other
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/kerb

While the abandoned proposal seems to be more complete and I can't say
anything about the other variant because of the lacking documentation, I
don't really care either way, it would simply make easier if we could
come to some consensus on what the actual current state is and what the
preferred tagging is.


Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging