Re: [Tagging] RENDER
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:36 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, this sentence is misunderstood, and by many repliers apparently. It means that once Mapnik uses a (defined) rendering you cannot change it (RENDER is ignored). The main idea behind RENDER is not coloring objects, and I agree it shouldn't, but showing them. And the renderer can do that with any single color they like. Basically, all renderers already decide what they print or not. Adding a flag saying hey don't forget my feature will not change this principle. Also with your tag, the same feature may or may not be displayed on the map, depending if you added your RENDER tag or not. Your proposal have no chance to be adopted for these reasons. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] RENDER
André I think you missed a major thing about cartography (and topography). As OSM contributors, we're not cartographers but topographers... we record topographic data. Then cartographers use that data, make choices to have some objets of THEIR choice visible on the map THEY are making with the data we collected. These choices are made with contraints: scale (no bus_stop at zoom 6), map use (trucks don't care about bicycle parkings). These choices are not done at the data level, but at the stylesheet level. If you're not happy of the cartographer's choices... become a cartographer yourself ! OSM gives you that freedom as anybody can use the same data, and the same tool to do the map matching our choices by designing their own stylesheet. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cartographer https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/topographer I'm on both sides... topographer as OSM contributor, and cartographer make maps with OSM data. As a cartographer, I will not use such a tag which does not give me control anymore on what appears or not on the map I'm making. 2014-08-26 12:16 GMT+02:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:36 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, this sentence is misunderstood, and by many repliers apparently. It means that once Mapnik uses a (defined) rendering you cannot change it (RENDER is ignored). The main idea behind RENDER is not coloring objects, and I agree it shouldn't, but showing them. And the renderer can do that with any single color they like. Basically, all renderers already decide what they print or not. Adding a flag saying hey don't forget my feature will not change this principle. Also with your tag, the same feature may or may not be displayed on the map, depending if you added your RENDER tag or not. Your proposal have no chance to be adopted for these reasons. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Religious landuse
Hi, How did this topic turn out in the end? The wiki page Tag:landuse=religious [1] was translated to yet another language (japanese), and this tag is getting more uses (most likely due to being included as a preset in JOSM[2]), so I assume it's becoming de facto I'm not against landuse=religious, but I'm not satisfied with it's current description: The area surrounding a amenity=place_of_worship used for religious purposes I believe a tag such as landuse=religious is inevitably going to be used as indicating any kind of religious activity, not necessarily with amenity=place_of_worship. Also, I believe amenity=place_of_worship is enough for indicating the religious area in most cases. Cheers, John [1]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Alanduse%3Dreligious [2]: http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/10262 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse
John Packer wrote, on 2014-08-26 16:57: I'm not against landuse=religious, but I'm not satisfied with it's current description: The area surrounding a amenity=place_of_worship used for religious purposes I believe a tag such as landuse=religious is inevitably going to be used as indicating any kind of religious activity, not necessarily with amenity=place_of_worship. Also, I believe amenity=place_of_worship is enough for indicating the religious area in most cases. Certainly the definition can be refined. I think it is important to be able to distinguish between * the place where actual acts of worshipping happen, such as weekly/daily congregations in churches/mosques/temples, or people praying in front of wayside shrines [amenity=place_of_worship], * and areas where priests are educated, live on church property next to the building, where church tax is counted and members are administered, where bell towers stand, etc. [landuse=religious] Further those churches/mosques/temples are often architecturally significant buildings that need to be distinguished from surrounding land even if it is owned by the church. This is recognised currently by strong dark rendering on the main map. Another aspect is that nowadays often churches are no longer used for religious purposes, but still being [building=church] architecture-wise, and could be re-activated if needed. Thus the comparison with [amenity=school], that can be easily expanded to the whole campus, fails for [amenity=place_of_worship]. Thus, an active church building should be tagged [amenity=place_of_worship] [building=church] [religion=*] and surrounded by [landuse=religious] [religion=*] while in church building out-of-religion would be, for example [amenity=theatre] [building=church] [theatre:genre=chamber_music] To conclude, [amenity=place_of_worship] should not be expanded to the full campus, and [landuse=religious] is a suitable, multicultural tag for this land, comparable to [landuse=retail] or [landuse=commercial] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: Thus the comparison with [amenity=school], that can be easily expanded to the whole campus, fails for [amenity=place_of_worship]. Thus, an active church building should be tagged [amenity=place_of_worship] [building=church] [religion=*] and surrounded by [landuse=religious] [religion=*] I'm not following you here. Active or not doesn't change the fact that now we have two different ways for tagging an amenity and its surrounding area when we compare with school, hospital, university or wahteveramenityyoulike. We don't need a landuse=school because the amenity=school is already covering the area, not the individual buildings. We have to follow the same logic for all features. The problem is that amenity=place_of_worship rendering is for a building on the main map style. This could be fixed by using a differente style/colour/transparency if the tag amenity=place_of_worship is combined or not with a tag building=*. It's extremely sad and dangerous to create a precedent now just because we have a rendering issue for one of the amenity keys. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Map Features template
I'm not sure that's the right mailing list for talking about this, but it's probably the closest Am I the only one that dislikes the Map Features templates on the wiki? (example: [1]) I think they make it harder to edit the wiki. People can find it hard to find out how to edit the template. Also, it uses this ugly and highly redundant syntax not used anywhere else. It should eventually become a relic of the past, and be changed for some kind of smart page that reads a list of tags classified into sections and queries the metadata from their tag pages (avoiding any duplication of information). I wasn't complaining because I am not willing to learn how to program the wiki to do that, but it seems lately there is a trend to create these templates and replace them on some pages. Some people like these templates because it seems they can make new tag values appear in non-english pages by adding them in the english page. But this new value appears in english, so in my opinion it kinda defeats the purpose of the non-english page... Cheers, John [1]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:contact ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Contact-Tag for Webcam
Hi, there exists a tagging for webcams in the contact-namespace (contact:webcam=*)[http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact:webcam]. I don't understand, why a webcam is a communication channel. Andreas -- sorry for my bad english... Andreas Neumann http://map4Jena.de http://Stadtplan-Ilmenau.de signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: Thus the comparison with [amenity=school], that can be easily expanded to the whole campus, fails for [amenity=place_of_worship]. To conclude, [amenity=place_of_worship] should not be expanded to the full campus, and [landuse=religious] is a suitable, multicultural tag for this land, comparable to [landuse=retail] or [landuse=commercial] [...] Thus amenity=place_of_worship is perfectly tailored to this particular building and its meaning should not be expanded to something it was not defined for initially. Keep in mind it is already used 611000 times, only 1/3 of them has a building tag, but quite certainly 90% of them are buildings. This completely ignores the current practice all over the world (especially in Asia) where the landuse is already tagged with amenity=place_of_worship. Some examples: Buddhist temples in Tokyo, Japan: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gi Catholic churches in Manila, Philippines: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gj Buddhist, Hindu, Methodist, and Muslim places of worship in Singapore: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gk Buddhist temples in Beijing, China: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gl Hindu temples and Christian churches in Bangalore, India: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gm Buddhist temples in Bangkok, Thailand: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/4gn I would like to see how you came up with the 90% of them are buildings statistic. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Contact-Tag for Webcam
Il giorno 26/ago/2014, alle ore 19:44, Andreas Neumann andr-neum...@gmx.net ha scritto: I don't understand, why a webcam is a communication channel. I agree ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Contact-Tag for Webcam
On 08/26/2014 05:51 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Il giorno 26/ago/2014, alle ore 19:44, Andreas Neumann andr-neum...@gmx.net ha scritto: I don't understand, why a webcam is a communication channel. I agree ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging It is a communication channel, but only one-way. The image seen by the camera is communicated to whomever is watching it at its destination, or whomever may watch the recorded image later. -- 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. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Contact-Tag for Webcam
Il giorno 27/ago/2014, alle ore 01:37, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com ha scritto: It is a communication channel, but only one-way. The image seen by the camera is communicated to whomever is watching it at its destination, or whomever may watch the recorded image later. Agreed, but the tag prefix in discussion here is contact, to be used for channels/means to contact the feature, while a webcam is working the other way round, it communicates from the feature to the audience. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
