Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 11:56 PM Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > A collapsed cave on land is a sinkhole. Is that not appropriate? > The wiki for natural=sinkhole seems to imply it is for any type of sinkhole, however formed. But the wiki for sinkhole=* doesn't have anything that precisely matches

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

A collapsed cave on land is a sinkhole. Is that not appropriate? The natural=cliff idea is also sensible and correct for the edge of the hole Natural=arch on a node is a great idea for the natural bridge between the collapsed section and the open sea. There are plenty of similar features on

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 9:52 PM ael wrote: > > No. I am sure that I have seen a dedicated/specialist term for exactly > these features. Just can't recall the details ATM. As I mentioned in another part of this thread, I subsequently found that the correct term for one of these is a littoral

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 09:55:03PM +0200, bkil wrote: > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 10:27 PM OSMDoudou > <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > Maybe leverage the existing direction tag (fire_hydrant:opening:direction) ? > > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Is this name “Groble” the name of the land that surrounds the ponds, or is it the name of the water features only? I wouldn’t use locality for water areas. Multipolygon would not be ideal, because that would double-count the amount of water. If someone tries to analyze the number of lakes or

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 21:48, bkil wrote: > > I have a habit of extending and improving the wiki whenever I can. > However, I only do this when I am absolutely sure that I am not doing > any damage, for example by altering meaning. > > Retroactively clarifying an ambiguous,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 13:43, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Note that "customers can" does not mean "customers must". It may mean that > one may buy > > food and immediately leave or stay and eat at such place. > I’d say for takeaway=only you cannot stay and eat there, for

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

Re: never heard of a restaurant before that does not allow > taking away your food In the USA, most fancy, sit-down restaurants will not allow customers to order food “to-go” (American for takeaway). You have to sit down and eat the meal on the premises. But if you don’t eat it all, they will

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 08:32:56PM +0100, Paul Allen wrote: > On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 8:10 PM ael wrote: > > There are tags for caves in general and could be applied to a sea cave. > But the only way the > cave tags can be applied to a collapsed sea cave is to pretend the collapse > is a sink

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

That sounds like a reasonable idea - I see that it is widely used. Although it is unfortunate how much bulk it adds. Instead of fire_hydrant:opening=cw fire_hydrant:opening=ccw You need to type: fire_hydrant:opening:direction=clockwise fire_hydrant:opening:direction=anticlockwise Also, because

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

>> Indeed the wiki page describes places that should be tagged with >> takeaway=only: > I disagree with that. > > Note that "customers can" does not mean "customers must". It may mean that > one may buy > food and immediately leave or stay and eat at such place. > I understand this part of the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

place=locality and/or type=site I'm not sure it's necessary to create a value to repeat the type of object already present in osm. otherwise it would require a value for each type of object and a value for each type of possible combination between theose types. Le 07. 10. 18 à 18:07, Mateusz

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 8:10 PM ael wrote: > Is that the stream tagged with source = npe? Yep. Just because you can't see it from your armchair, doesn't mean that it > isn't there. Although I admit npe is often a bit approximate, and it may have dried up. > NPE is very approximate. And

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 06:11:38PM +0100, Paul Allen wrote: > I've encountered a feature called, in English, "Witch's Cauldron" (also > "Witches Cauldron" and "Witch's Pit") and > called, in Welsh, "Pwll y Wrach." It was mapped by somebody else around 4 > years ago and the mapping has > one

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 6:26 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > I would tag it as a waterway in tunnel (though I have no idea about a > suitable value) > For me, a tunnel is man-made, not natural. The tunnel=* I see in the wiki seem (at quick glance) to all be man-made. or as water area with

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I hoped to avoid that sidetrack. Question is the same, no matter whatever "and proper type" meanstype=site or type=multipolygon. 7. Oct 2018 18:31 by t...@fitchdesign.com : > Perhaps a site relation. :) > > > On October 7, 2018 9:07:48 AM PDT, Mateusz

Re: [Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

I would tag it as a waterway in tunnel (though I have no idea about a suitable value) oras water area with covered=yes and natural=bare_rock area mapped, both with a proper tags. It also sounds like it is a tourism=attraction . Sounds a bit similar to

[Tagging] Double, double, toil and trouble (how to map Witch's Cauldron?)

I've encountered a feature called, in English, "Witch's Cauldron" (also "Witches Cauldron" and "Witch's Pit") and called, in Welsh, "Pwll y Wrach." It was mapped by somebody else around 4 years ago and the mapping has one definite error and a couple of things that may be wrong. The problem is

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

This case sounds not so abusive of multipolygons. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Perhaps a site relation. :) On October 7, 2018 9:07:48 AM PDT, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >Lest say that we have ngroup of ponds called "Groble", with >- a water area called "Small Pond"- a water area called "Big Pond" >What is the best way to tag this? >First part for obvious: >- way with

[Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Lest say that we have ngroup of ponds called "Groble", with - a water area called "Small Pond"- a water area called "Big Pond" What is the best way to tag this? First part for obvious: - way with natural=water and name="Small Pond"- way with natural=water and name="Big Pond"- relation grouping

Re: [Tagging] relation site <> multipolygon

Thanks. I added it to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site#Examples 7. Oct 2018 17:23 by marc.ge...@gmail.com : > The relation is >

Re: [Tagging] relation site <> multipolygon

The relation is https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2721886 The historic place link only works if you manually select a base map from the menu. regards m. On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 2:47 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > I found (again) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site >

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

Le sam. 6 oct. 2018 à 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > It is not just the function. If you see a watch tower, you know it’s a > watch tower, there might be different types, in a prison, at a border etc. > but they are all watch towers. With this logic, all objects in OSM would be mapped

Re: [Tagging] My "weirdly unnatural aversion to relations"

2. Oct 2018 22:42 by t...@fitchdesign.com : > > There might be nodes marking locations of emergency equipment cache > locations. And, for an alpine/downhill ski area there one or more ski > lifts/aerial best mapped as ways. > > So how do you add single nodes or

Re: [Tagging] relation site <> multipolygon

I found (again) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site and I am trying to improve it. "multiple cave entrances of a single cave" sounds like a good example of a valid use but

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

Not sure it's a good idea to render it if no one really knows what it means :) Yves ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

7. Oct 2018 04:33 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com : > So this tag isn't very specific yet I used it because it was not specific for https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3033173319 It is selling only one

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

6. Oct 2018 22:04 by bkil.hu...@gmail.com : > Also, it is strange that takeaway is not mentioned on the wiki page of > drive_through. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drive_through > >

Re: [Tagging] Ignore roundabout flare in counting

5. Oct 2018 20:35 by f...@zz.de : > Is there tagging to let announcements ignore that flare? > Generally, we do not tag directly for renderer/router, but tag what exists there. As I see it all information is there and router should not count driveways on roundabout