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

Javbw, Thanks for the detailed discussion. I think I agree with you that "take-and-bake" places are a type of restaurant or fast-food; that's how they are being tagged in the USA. What do you think about the need for a shop=grocery tag for small shops in developing countries and specialty grocers

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

> On Oct 9, 2018, at 7:50 AM, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > shop=food > + cuisine=local/polish. -1 shop=food is called a market. we have that already. cuisine=* is for restaurants and other non-shop places. amenity=fast_food fast_food=take-n-bake (or whatever is decided:

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

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 10:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > " If you combine communications;observation, which would it render as?" > > It won't render at all, unless an individual renderer adds support for > this specific combination > Thanks Joseph So, if we use the existing rendered

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

" If you combine communications;observation, which would it render as?" It won't render at all, unless an individual renderer adds support for this specific combination On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 08:51, marc marc wrote: > >> I agree in

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

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 08:51, marc marc wrote: > I agree in principle, but I have a few questions. > > Le 09. 10. 18 à 00:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit : > > man_made=tower: a tall, slim, freestanding vertical structure > > with internal access > > if it matches the look, isn't that what would

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

Le mar. 9 oct. 2018 à 00:51, marc marc a écrit : > Le 09. 10. 18 à 00:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit : > > man_made=tower: a tall, slim, freestanding vertical structure > > with internal access > > if it matches the look, isn't that what would already be > described by the undocumented

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

In the USA there are shops that sell custom fresh pizzas, but they are uncooked. You take the prepared pizza home and cook it yourself. In the western USA, the chain is named “Papa Murphy’s Take And Bake Pizza” These have generally been tagged as restaurants or fastfood. In this case

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

I agree in principle, but I have a few questions. Le 09. 10. 18 à 00:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit : > man_made=tower: a tall, slim, freestanding vertical structure > with internal access if it matches the look, isn't that what would already be described by the undocumented building=tower ?

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

In British English usage, would shop=grocery be appropriate for small shops that sell mainly non-perishable food and groceries? In America we really would never call any shop a “food store” or “food shop.” On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:02 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > >

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

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 03:58, SelfishSeahorse wrote: > > There is a risk that towers and masts are defined differently in > English, but perhaps Martin's idea to combine the two definitions > would make sense nevertheless. > So, how about we clean up the various mixtures of definitions, &

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

W dniu 08.10.2018 o 23:00, Martin Koppenhoefer pisze: > +1 to a dedicated tag, e.g. deli=pierogi > Maybe you’d want to distinguish deli from ordinary pierogi though. > What about shop=food food=pierogi for the „usual“ pierogi shop? I have tagged similar shops. They sell typical Polish cuisine,

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

sent from a phone > On 8. Oct 2018, at 20:17, bkil wrote: > > How do you like this one? > shop=deli + cuisine=pierogi +1 to a dedicated tag, e.g. deli=pierogi Maybe you’d want to distinguish deli from ordinary pierogi though. What about shop=food food=pierogi for the „usual“ pierogi shop?

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

> On Oct 8, 2018, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > Group relations have been proposed > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation > ) in > the past. One has been used to group the Great

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

Group relations have been proposed ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation) in the past. One has been used to group the Great Lakes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1124369 I'm tempted to use type=group relations to group the Bisby Lakes,

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

How do you like this one? shop=deli + cuisine=pierogi On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 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 >

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

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 at 14:39, SelfishSeahorse wrote: > > That is, we have two contradictory definitions on the wiki: the > engineering definition according to which a tower is freestanding and > mast guyed, and the other definition according to which 'a tower is > accessible and provides

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 6:14 PM Rich wrote: > > 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 the primary usage for `direction`

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

Wow, that's another indirection I need to keep in my head (translating from the circular arrow), but it's a cool idea, none the less. :-) I'll try to invite other editors who use such tags to better understand their viewpoint. On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:14 AM Rich wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 07,

Re: [Tagging] building:min_level, building:max_level, min_level, max_level

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 17:39 Uhr schrieb Tobias Knerr : > These aren't intended as competing tags, but as complimentary tags. A > perfectly mapped building (indoor mapping + outdoor 3D modelling) should > currently use both sets of tags. The tags mentioned in A are used for > describing the

Re: [Tagging] building:min_level, building:max_level, min_level, max_level

On 08.10.2018 15:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Version A is used and defined here: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:min_level > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings > > Version B mentions the tags

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

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:55, SelfishSeahorse wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this map > > of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: > >

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

I'm not arguing about any particular tagging, but I would like to point the fact that the map you send uses different colours for Three Lakes and for the named lakes (Chloya and Twin Islands lakes). The lakes have blue labels denoting that the name is for a water body while the group of lakes is

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

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 13:57 Uhr schrieb SelfishSeahorse < selfishseaho...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this > map of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake:

[Tagging] building:min_level, building:max_level, min_level, max_level

I just noticed once again both tags are around: A) building:min_level building:max_level (is used but AFAIK not documented) and B) min_level max_level Version A is used and defined here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels

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

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this map > of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodensee#/media/File:Bodensee_satellit%2Btext.png > (or maybe

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

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 18:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > - way with natural=water and name="Small Pond" > - way with natural=water and name="Big Pond" > - relation grouping this ways with name="Groble" and proper type > > But how relation should be tagged? > > Tagging it natural=water seems

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

Am So., 7. Okt. 2018 um 15:45 Uhr schrieb François Lacombe < fl.infosrese...@gmail.com>: > > 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

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

Regarding the validity of the name Three Lakes, I think it's very clearly correct and as such, suitable for inclusion in OSM. There is a screenshot in my Dropbox and also this citation from the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, Orth (1963): Three Lakes: lakes, 4 mi. SW of Birch Creek (locality),

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

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 13:12 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this > map of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: >

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

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 12:24 Uhr schrieb Christoph Hormann : > > It is a good idea to keep in mind that we have a well established > tagging scheme for something quite similar, that is place=archipelago > and place=island. +1, hence the proposal of a proper tag for a group of lakes. >

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

It is a good idea to keep in mind that we have a well established tagging scheme for something quite similar, that is place=archipelago and place=island. This could serve you as a blueprint to select a suitable tagging in your case. Also keep in mind however that if you want to tag a name

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

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 11:49 Uhr schrieb Dave Swarthout < daveswarth...@gmail.com>: > So I retagged them this time assigning the name "Three Lakes" to the > relation containing the lakes and removing it from the individual lakes. I > checked back again today, after a few days had elapsed, and

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

The multiple water body situation arises frequently in my Alaska mapping. I have struggled over the years to tag them in such a manner that the names will render but without resorting to trickery to make that happen. A couple of years ago I happened on a group of three lakes, two of which

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

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 21:46, marc marc wrote: > > 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

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

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 19:28, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > I hoped to avoid that sidetrack. > > Question is the same, no matter whatever "and proper type" means > type=site or type=multipolygon. yes, we do not have a generic way of approaching this problem (and given how we