On 19 March 2015 at 21:46, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
The existence of a roof does not identify
a 'regular filling station' to me.
amenity=fuel
pumps=8
vs.
amenity=fuel
pumps=0
?
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote:
I use Stack Exchange a lot and it's great, very well designed for its
purpose. BUT Stack Exchange is not designed for community decision
making. There are tools/forums that are actually designed for that
purpose.
Also I
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
If you do require a larger volume of fuel .. I think those low volume places
would direct you to a high volume place, and be able to provide enough fuel
to get there.
If you speak their language :-).
The bottled fuel is
Bryce, I think this proposal is far to complicated to be developed on a
mailing list. And probably on a Forum. Is it time your bare bones plan
move to a wiki page, perhaps as a Best Practice document ?
Then we can concentrate on each section, bit by bit and massage it into
something great. I do
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
amenity=fuel
fuel=bottled
Which would render indistinguishable from a full service fuel station.
fuel=bottled in addition would create some confusion if the fuel was in a
drum with a pump.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:14 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net
wrote:
Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting
every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so because its
some minor change, unless someone trawls through the history, hard to
see
On 20/03/2015 9:30 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On 19 March 2015 at 21:46, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
The existence of a roof does not identify
a 'regular filling station' to me.
amenity=fuel
pumps=8
vs.
amenity=fuel
pumps=0
?
Humm pump is used
On 20/03/2015 9:01 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On 19 March 2015 at 09:18, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com wrote:
Here in Thailand, and especially in rural areas, there are hundreds of shops
that sell motor fuel in small quantities.
amenity=fuel
fuel=bottled
The key fuel= is used to
On Mar 19, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote:
I am wondering: If so many people think that forum is better, and if OSM
actually provides a forum (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/), how comes that we have this discussion?
Why
I'm starting to think a Forum is a good idea. But Stack Exchange is a
bigger decision, I have not used it, who has ?
I have :) Also participated in the proposal phase for a couple of sites.
I am wondering: If so many people think that forum is better, and if OSM
actually provides a forum
On 20/03/2015 9:39 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Andy Mabbett
a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
amenity=fuel
fuel=bottled
Which would render indistinguishable from a full service fuel station.
fuel=bottled in addition would
On 20/03/2015 9:42 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:14 PM, David Bannon
dban...@internode.on.net mailto:dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
Now, 'horizontal lines', an innovation. Do you see people re-voting
every time there is a horizontal line ? I may fail to do so
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
An proposer is bound to find one other person to make the tag 'valid'
under this idea. I think that is a bad idea ... may become divided into
groups that promote each others tags?
Community pressure would quickly come to
I don't see where all the confusion comes from. I chose shop=fuel for the
exact reason of avoiding confusion with full-service filling stations,
which is the primary reason for wanting a new tag in the first place. We
want to avoid using amenity=fuel for this type of shop. I have designed a
custom
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-03-19 0:56 GMT+01:00 David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net:
* Once on the wiki, instead of a formal vote period, users (eg) click a
like or dislike button and aggregate score is shown. For some time
2015-03-19 0:56 GMT+01:00 David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net:
* Once on the wiki, instead of a formal vote period, users (eg) click a
like or dislike button and aggregate score is shown. For some time
(?). Obviously they can also edit content to say why.
I believe the current requirement
Think StackExchange.
Nice. But practicable ?
Why not?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2015-03-18 23:56 GMT+00:00 David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net:
Kotya, in no way was I criticising the leadership you have shown in this
matter !
Its just that I preferred Dan's approach. Key IMHO is -
* A proposal gets to wiki in much the same manner as now.
* Once on the wiki, instead
2015-03-18 21:05 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com:
Do we have abstention possible at all? The voting system currently only
implements yes and no:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Vote.
If we had abstention, I would have rather counted it as non-supporting. A
On 18/03/2015, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:00 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why should the page be converted to a feature page ?
Because I would mark a proposal page as such in some place. Otherwise a
stable 10 year-old feature
I think they should remain as amenity=fuel (I have visited Thailand and I
know what you mean). Local people will know what to expect, but for
clarity perhaps subtags should be used to add detail and differentiate
between a filling station and a lemonade stand selling fuel.
On Thursday, 19 March
On 18/03/2015, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:00 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why should the page be converted to a feature page ?
Because I would mark a proposal page as such in some place. Otherwise a
stable 10 year-old feature
On 18/03/2015, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
No, I'm sorry but I don't see how an interested party can be expected to
objectively determine what the discussion concluded.
[...]
No, sorry, but a vote and an outcome may offend some politically correct
members but it is necessary.
Good idea to have such a tag, should include diesel for cars, kerosine for
heating and propane/butane for cooking that are sold in the same way. I
Kenya we have been in areas far away from regular filling stations; there
people are selling diesel from drums.
I think shop=fuel is dangerous as it
In Benin (Africa) these shops exist also – mostly only a table with
some big bottles with fuel.
2015-03-19 9:18 GMT, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com:
I want to float an idea to get your reactions. Here in Thailand, and
especially in rural areas, there are hundreds of shops that sell
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 10:24 +0100, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 18/03/2015, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
No, I'm sorry but I don't see how an interested party can be expected to
objectively determine what the discussion concluded.
[...]
No, sorry, but a vote and an outcome
Dear all,
We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic
opposition.
I will do it in the wiki now. If you feel I haven't taken something
critically important into account and this change is for the worse, not
better, please roll back.
The discussions on the more global change
I want to float an idea to get your reactions. Here in Thailand, and
especially in rural areas, there are hundreds of shops that sell motor fuel
in small quantities. Most of the population drive motorbikes which are used
for every sort of transport imaginable. They have a tiny petrol tank,
perhaps
OK, I see the difference between our approaches. I still don't see the
problem though:
If you convert that to a Key:Smoothness page, the wiki becomes
completely disconnected from the db.
Sorry, I don't understand it. Do you mean the OSM database? How is it
connected now and why will a change
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 11:30 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
I believe the current requirement to add a reason for a
dislike is important and should not be dropped by
substituting it with a simple click
2015-03-19 11:37 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com:
Dear all,
We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic
opposition.
I will do it in the wiki now.
FWIW, I didn't even count 8 positive votes that you said would be required
when cast unanimously, but at
I didn't mean to break the rules :) I thought I did count 8 +1's, plus the
discussion shifted to other topics, so no strong opposition was expressed.
If Pieren and you really see more harm than improvement in what I've done,
please feel free to roll back.
I have a general impression that
Martin,
Though Bryce introduced the abstain option with a nice pictogram :) I
don't remember seeing it used in any proposals. Therefore currently there
is no mathematical difference. Therefore I suggest that you just change the
rule from 74 % approval to not more than 25 % objection. Since we are
2015-03-19 12:00 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com:
I didn't mean to break the rules :) I thought I did count 8 +1's, plus the
discussion shifted to other topics, so no strong opposition was expressed.
Yes, I didn't presume you had been acting in bad faith, just some
I would prefer a different tag as I would not like the lemonade table to be
rendered in the same way as a regular filling station. The tag shop=gas
with subtag would be better.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:46 AM Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think they should remain as
OK, is it fair to say any non specific vote, one that is neither a clear
yes nor a clear no is 'informal', not counted. Such a vote was cast with
the intention of it adding to neither yes nor no so we should observe
the voter's wish.
Note their opinion but not count an uncountable vote ?
David
Same definition. Total agreement.
On 20/03/2015 12:58 PM, fly wrote:
No one out there interested in this ?
Any comments, please.
cu
Am 14.03.2015 um 18:47 schrieb fly:
For years the definitions about role forward/backward are completely
different on the wiki page about route=road [1]
I have a similar issue in Japan. Japan uses kerosene for portable heaters in
the winter, and there is no real fuel delivery (to a consumer), such as heating
oil in the Eastern US. Everyone in Japan has use use plastic 5Gal/18-20L tanks
carried in the car and kept outside the house for filling
No one out there interested in this ?
Any comments, please.
cu
Am 14.03.2015 um 18:47 schrieb fly:
For years the definitions about role forward/backward are completely
different on the wiki page about route=road [1] versus the page about
route relations (type=route) [2].
While all other
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 08:46 +1100, Warin wrote:
I've come across regular filling stations without a roof.
Indeed, absolutely no reason a full service or pump based fuel
supplier must have a roof.
Usually an office (or shipping container) nearby but pumps out in the
open is very common.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:40 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
If the DIY kerosene stands were tagged as gas stations, there would be
thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of gas stations across Japan that are
not gas stations. So I agree we should use shop=fuel.
Great input, up to the
On 20/03/2015 11:18 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com
mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
An proposer is bound to find one other person to make the tag
'valid' under this idea. I think that is a bad idea ... may become
divided
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 15:26 +1100, Warin wrote:
if stinker proposals are promoted to Active, with lots of negative
votes.
How is it determined that it is a majority view? Vote? .. back to
square one.
Possibly, but probably not in most cases. I doubt too many people on
this list would be
Maybe amenity=fuel_stand?
Then we can tag it onto existing shops (like a DIY store) or micromap it onto
gas stations.
As long as distribution is non-traditional, a shop selling fuel oil and
cordwood for heating is fine with me (I have to read up on fuel= tagging )
I know there are shops and
One thing I'll say for Forums, at least the format will be consistent.
With our List users all using different email clients, with top posters,
bottom posters, middle posters, some (me) who like to thin down a
message when replying and some who like the message to just get
bigger
I'm
You could set all the fuel types to no (fuel:*=no), or add a new one
(fuel:motorbike=yes). Or add motorbike=fuel.
Except there isn't anything like motorbile fuel.
Keeping it as amenity=fuel means all mapping tools and search tools
continue to work.
Which is exactly the problem. Now your
It is expected that most renderers only look at the namespace tag, not at
the attributes. How do we ensure that I don't end up at a bottle store
while I expect a decent filling station. I am afraid that we pollute the
amenity=fuel tag if we use it for fuel out of a drum as well? We really
should
On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
+1 on the change to a 75% threshold for voting. Negativity indicates the
proposal needs work.
Those with trouble scanning mailing lists should look into threading
options for their mail
client, or read discussions
In American ideom, gas is often a contraction of gasoline, which the British
call petrol. Given differing terminology, and that such shops may sell propane
and diesel fuel as well as gasoline/petrol, shop=fuel is probably the best
solution.
On March 19, 2015 8:21:36 AM CDT, Janko Mihelić
2015-03-19 13:46 GMT+01:00 Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com:
I would prefer a different tag as I would not like the lemonade table to
be rendered in the same way as a regular filling station. The tag shop=gas
with subtag would be better.
I like shop, but gas is an aggregate state of
On 19.03.2015 20:31, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
However I can see nothing wrong with amenity=fuel, that is what it is in that
part of the world . What turns amenity=fuel into a regular filling station is
the building=roof.
There is a huge difference. You'll notice that if you end up with
On Thu Mar 19 12:46:02 2015 GMT, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
I would prefer a different tag as I would not like the lemonade table to be
rendered in the same way as a regular filling station. The tag shop=gas
with subtag would be better.
I would expect shop=gas to sell bottled gas for camping
Gas
But, it *is* a fuel amenity. It's down to the individual what picture they
have in their mind. Additional tags would clarify this, but I don't think
alternative tags are needed.
You could set all the fuel types to no (fuel:*=no), or add a new one
(fuel:motorbike=yes). Or add motorbike=fuel.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com
wrote:
Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search,
Jan, I wonder if you've ever had a question, googled for an answer and
landed in a forum thread with 50+ pages with 10 posts per page.
Personally, I
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:49:26PM +, Malcolm Herring wrote:
On 18/03/2015 11:58, Richard Z. wrote:
so should for example the OpenSeaMap tagging for bridges become
deprecated?
Not deprecated, but considered on a case-by-case basis. It is a question of
whether important navigation
2015-03-19 17:51 GMT+01:00 Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com:
It is expected that most renderers only look at the namespace tag, not at
the attributes. How do we ensure that I don't end up at a bottle store
while I expect a decent filling station. I am afraid that we pollute the
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote:
My issue with email lists is that for most emails I delete after reading.
If at some time later, I come across a tagging situation that I recall
being previously discussed I need to go into the mail archives at
amenity=bottled_motor_fuel
phone= (because many have mobile phones)
name= (name of individual proprietor)
It has the same fuzzy border as supermarket vs. convenience.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
+1
The last thin I want is to count on a regular filling station and to and up
at a bottle store with my 4WD. A that will happen if the type of store is
an attribute, as map makers will show them the same. So please make it a
different value for the tag, not fuel.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:11 PM
Jan van Bekkum wrote
It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and
vote
compared to the number of mappers.
I will only talk for myself : I'm very interested in the outcome of this
specific discussion about tag proposals, and I did my best to make my way
thru the 6
Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was
proposed earlier).
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:32 PM sly (sylvain letuffe) lis...@letuffe.org
wrote:
Jan van Bekkum wrote
It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and
vote
compared to the number of
On 19/03/2015 17:41, Richard Z. wrote:
do you have any background info regarding the many
obstacle nodes which are present in German waterways?
I don't. I found a key:obstacle page in the Wiki that associates it
OpenSeaMap - I don't know why the authors thought that. Those authors
are
Hi,
I can't find in the wiki how to correctly tag an historical tower,
usually used as a defensive building. In that place there has never been
a castle nor was part of a castle. You can find images of the specimens
I doubt at [1] and [2].
I'm thinking to use man_made=tower historic=yes,
While the wiki vote process is controversial, it has *tremendous importance*
as wiki opinion flows directly into editing tools such as iD and Taginfo.
This is a proposed new method of managing tag pages. It mashes up the
schemes from Kotya, Moltonel, Hoess, and others. In this scheme there are
Am 19.03.2015 21:15, schrieb Jaume Figueras i Jové:
Hi,
I can't find in the wiki how to correctly tag an historical tower,
usually used as a defensive building. In that place there has never
been a castle nor was part of a castle. You can find images of the
specimens I doubt at [1] and [2].
On 20/03/2015 4:45 AM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com
mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com wrote:
Also, if I need or want to resurrect the thread, that it typically
trivial on a forum as you just post a reply. But if I’ve pulled up
On 19 March 2015 at 09:18, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com wrote:
Here in Thailand, and especially in rural areas, there are hundreds of shops
that sell motor fuel in small quantities.
amenity=fuel
fuel=bottled
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
+1 on the change to a 75% threshold for voting. Negativity indicates the
proposal needs work.
Those with trouble scanning mailing lists should look into threading
options for their mail
client, or read discussions on threaded archive servers.
___
On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was
proposed earlier).
Then you'll have 4 sub-forums and a wiki.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
I see no problem with amenity or shop as long as the description on the
wiki is well done. It is an amenity no doubt but we need proper subtags
for the vehicles and the amount.
shop=fuel was mentioned on a different thread about companies which fill
up your private diesel or gas tanks for
Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search,
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:26 PM Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote:
On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was
proposed earlier).
Then you'll have 4
2015-03-19 17:12 GMT+01:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
brand=none or
no_brand=yes to proper mark the independence.
some independent petrol stations are organized in associations and use
these as their brand, see e.g. here:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesverband_freier_Tankstellen
not
72 matches
Mail list logo
