Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

W dniu 11.03.2018 o 23:50, Kevin Kenny pisze: A fair number of users here - including me - render our own maps, and are giving feedback based on our own experience with trying to render them. I know that in discussions on 'tagging' I try to hide the fact that wanting to render something is

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: [in reply to my message:] >> I'm sure that this difficulty is part of what motivates the OSM-Carto >> group to be requesting that all ways that participate in admin >> boundaries be tagged with the "most important" boundary in

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On Monday 12 March 2018, Dave F wrote: > > > and it would not distinguish between the outer boundaries (towards > > the high seas) > > and the boundaries between two countries. > > Unsure what you mean. Could you elaborate, Example? > Sure: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/96104334 is an outer

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On 11/03/2018 09:51, Christoph Hormann wrote: * tagging the ways in addition to the relation is ok but not required. I agree with all your points except this. I think duplication is prone to error & should be discouraged. DaveF. ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On 10/03/2018 22:17, Christoph Hormann wrote: But as pointed out this will not be complete (though more complete than for land boundaries) I would much prefer to complete the addition of the unique tag 'maritime' than the duplicating 'admin_level' and it would not distinguish between the

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=runway - wiki fiddling

Something similar in concept to a river could be developed. A linear way for the the routing etc (waterway), and an area to indicate the outline of the runway/taxiways (riverbank). I always map them as closed polygons because: * It's more accurate * Runways aren't necessarily rectangular,

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On 3/12/2018 9:50 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: 3. The OSM community (as a whole) is blinded by the sound of term "tagging for rendering". I think it gave rendering pretty bad publicity, while in fact this is a tagging (!) problem

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=runway - wiki fiddling

They can now. They just can't be bothered. If a roundabout can be navigated, so can the boundary of an area. DaveF On 11/03/2018 22:45, Warin wrote: Eventually routers will have to deal with areas that are routable .. pedestrian areas , step areas as well as runways that are areas.

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: > 3. The OSM community (as a whole) is blinded by the sound of term > "tagging for rendering". I think it gave rendering pretty bad publicity, > while in fact this is a tagging (!) problem and is about making up false > data for

Re: [Tagging] aeroway=runway - wiki fiddling

On 3/10/2018 5:27 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Mar 9, 2018 03:49, "Austin Zhu" > wrote: Well, maybe there is someone who thinks mapping runway as area is wrong? I think that both way and area are OK, because the way element

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

sent from a phone > On 10. Mar 2018, at 11:16, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > In addition, the border ways can be other objects. Rivers are quite typical, > which are easily included in a border relation. Tagging all border properties > on the waterway leads to chaos. +1,

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

Thanks for writing this summary! It's short, but made me realize a few fundamental points: W dniu 11.03.2018 o 01:31, Matthijs Melissen pisze: > Just something I'd like to clarify: many of you seem to assume this > introduces a new tagging paradigm. The opposite is true: the proposal > uses a

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

Hi, On 10.03.2018 01:51, Matthijs Melissen wrote: > I would therefore suggest > to make sure admin_level tags are present on all > boundary=administrative ways. I can see how this makes rendering easier, but OSM isn't mainly a database for rendering. I don't see why a river that serves as an

Re: [Tagging] Tagging request: missing admin_level tags

On Sunday 11 March 2018, Matthijs Melissen wrote: > > Just something I'd like to clarify: many of you seem to assume this > introduces a new tagging paradigm. The opposite is true: the proposal > uses a tagging scheme that is already used in about 90 percent of the > countries, and the retagging