Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
vegard a écrit : On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 06:40:59AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote: So personally I think duplicate keys would be the easiest and best way to tag such double-uses. Norbert Just make two different nodes, each located closest to the amenity concerned. There's nothing that makes it non-routable. It's just a Well - apart from the fact that it actually makes it difficult to render In many cases, the supermarket *is* the post-office, I agree fully with it. Here for example, at railways stations (let say middle class) you can buy train tickets (hopefully), but also book your travel or get some foreign money. At the same desk, deserved by the same person. I really have here 3 amenities as one point. The easy answer of some people map the world as it is... is here just too short. The fact that neither API 0.5 nor API 0.6 (will) support it is a good point for not using it. But not to forget to think about it ? Then in short, what is the process for API specifications inputs? :-) by the way: I just had a look at http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~kleptog/osm-0.5.dtd !ELEMENT node (tag*) !ATTLIST node id [...cut...] !ELEMENT tag EMPTY !ATTLIST tag k CDATA #REQUIRED !ATTLIST tag v CDATA #REQUIRED and from the current dtd definition, I could not see anything saying that it is forbidden to use twice the key amenity for a node or a way. Or did I missed something? best regards Pierre-André ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Norbert Wenzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shaun McDonald wrote: The problem with this is that none of the editors support having duplicate key values, even so the 0.5 API supports it. The 0.6 API will not support duplicate key values. I think the support of duplicate keys is a very much needed feature and I personally would drop it only, if there are really good reasons (e.g. breaking fast queries, etc.) to drop it. It would be possible to tag something like amenity=supermarket; post_office; but as stated in another discussion yesterday that would make searching for entries much more complicated. Just to name a few very common cases where duplicate keys would be necessary I'd like to point out the very common case of hotels also having a publicly available restaurant. Of course one could draw a building and drop all needed amenities inside, but I think that wouldn't be routable unless you add the addr: properties to every node inside that building. So personally I think duplicate keys would be the easiest and best way to tag such double-uses. Norbert Just make two different nodes, each located closest to the amenity concerned. There's nothing that makes it non-routable. It's just a point--the routers will get you as close to the point on the road as possible. The addr: property definitely isn't going to help in making it routable. Karl ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
Karl Newman wrote: Just make two different nodes, each located closest to the amenity concerned. There's nothing that makes it non-routable. It's just a point--the routers will get you as close to the point on the road as possible. The addr: property definitely isn't going to help in making it routable. You're right with the addr: property, that was not well thought from my side. But I'd nevertheless prefer the double amenities, just because the that's what those nodes are. One building or machine with multiple uses at the very same place. Norbert smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Norbert Wenzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Karl Newman wrote: Just make two different nodes, each located closest to the amenity concerned. There's nothing that makes it non-routable. It's just a point--the routers will get you as close to the point on the road as possible. The addr: property definitely isn't going to help in making it routable. You're right with the addr: property, that was not well thought from my side. But I'd nevertheless prefer the double amenities, just because the that's what those nodes are. One building or machine with multiple uses at the very same place. Norbert I understand your concern about overlapping icons, but in a device such as a GPS, it will be considered as two separate points of interest (POI), because it really is two different services (or amenities or whatever); they just happen to be at the same location. Karl ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Pierre-André Jacquod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, I have never seen a stamp vending machine without its post box. That is why I intended to mark these with something like: amenity=post_box vending_machine=yes Is there a (strange:-) country where both are disconnected? Here in the States, very rarely does an outdoor post box have a stamp vending machine attached. However, your proposal of adding vending_machine=yes makes sense especially if you added a type=postage or stamps tag. Cheers, Adam ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=vending_machine AND amenity=post_box: what about?
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 03:30:26PM -0400, Adam Schreiber wrote: On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Pierre-André Jacquod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, I have never seen a stamp vending machine without its post box. That is why I intended to mark these with something like: amenity=post_box vending_machine=yes Is there a (strange:-) country where both are disconnected? Here in the States, very rarely does an outdoor post box have a stamp vending machine attached. However, your proposal of adding vending_machine=yes makes sense especially if you added a type=postage or stamps tag. There will be a lot of such cases of things with dual use. I did send a mail about it a few days ago. There's: shop=supermarket with amenity=post_office shop=supermarket with amenity=pharmacy amenity=bank with amenity=atm (this is already made a special case for) and I'm sure the list is endless. I feel we need a generalized solution, and then come up with rendering as needed for the most used combinations? -- - Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
