Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values
I agree with François and Marc. Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 13:28, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Unfortunately not everyone uses the same units... heights are in meters, > feet .. depending on where you come from or what activity you follow. > You're right, but as OSM is an international database, standardizing data (meaning units too) is a must. Just like phone numbers where although local residents usually don't use ITU prefixes (+XX), phones numbers should be entered with those prefixes to ensure valid usage for consumers. Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 21:21, Paul Allen a écrit : > If you're navigating somewhere unfamiliar to you and GPS isn't giving you > an > accurate signal, what you're interested in is what signs actually *say.* > Because > when you're in confusing territory a speed sign, or a bridge clearance, or > whatever > may be a significant clue. Knowing that the speed limit is 40.2336 km/h > doesn't tell > you to look for a sign saying 25 mph. > Most GPS/routing applications (including OSMAnd, Google maps) already convert maxspeeds to user's prefered unit. I do not remember ever seeing a fractional legal speed, so by rounding the value you can obtain the sign value with good confidence. Another thought : Even if maxspeed=* on highway=* could be in kph, traffic_signs could still be mapped with local, explicit or implicit units. That would solve both problem. Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 22:22, Tobias Knerr a écrit : > I currently prefer explicit units in the database because they document > the mapper's intent and avoid ambiguity. > > Defaults aren't always obvious. For example, people mapping pipelines > have documented millimetres as the default for diameter=*, but it seems > tree mappers haven't gotten the memo and (reasonably) assume it's > defaulting to metres like height=*, width=* or circumference=*. > An unit selector can be implemented in editors quite easily. StreetComplete already does work with different units for example. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values
On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 22:33:10 +0200 François Lacombe wrote: > Well okay > Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : > [Maxspeed>25] ? > Which situation do we want to optimize for? The rare case, or the common case? It's common to want to document legal restrictions such as "speed limit 25 miles per hour", "no trucks over 2.5 meters tall", or "maximum weight 3500 kilograms". It's rare to want to query ranges of speeds, heights, or weights, particularly without regard to the units in use in a given country. We should make it easy for people to enter and interpret these legal restrictions, and if it means query software gets a bit more complicated, so be it. For every person who wants to find roads worldwide with speed limits greater than 25 km/h, there are probably a thousand who don't want to deal with making sure the rounding is correct when displaying US speed limits in miles per hour. -- Mark ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=clearing
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 3:31 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the basic tag is trying to show that the surrounding area (usually > trees) stops around this area. So why not tag the trees as a multipoygon > and use these tagged clearings are inners? It would render unlike the > 'clearing' and convey the information. > I'd say your analysis is correct and to go for it. A multipolygon with inners describes what is on the ground better and actually renders. It also makes it easier for somebody to later come along and map the inner in more detail (whether the cleared area is a meadow, or scrub, or whatever). My guess is that whoever came up with clearing hoped that it would render as such and, when it didn't, hoped that one day it would render as such. So if whoever mapped it ever notices what you did, they'll learn how to do it right the next time. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=clearing
On 28 July 2018 at 20:39, Paul Allen wrote: > > I'd say your analysis is correct and to go for it. A multipolygon with > inners describes what is on the ground better and > actually renders. It also makes it easier for somebody to later come > along and map the inner in more detail (whether > the cleared area is a meadow, or scrub, or whatever). > > My guess is that whoever came up with clearing hoped that it would render > as such and, when it didn't, hoped that one > day it would render as such. So if whoever mapped it ever notices what > you did, they'll learn how to do it right the next > time. > The problem with that of course, as Warin mentioned, is what would it hypothetically render as - grass / sand / rock / scrub etc etc? Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
