Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Lorenzo, if your project aims to track deforestation in a timespan, IMHO you had better to focus on trees only. Trying to guess which landuse is going to replace trees is hard. I'd start from an AOI entirely mapped with forest, wood or, in doubt, the generic landcover=trees all of which derived

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Suggesting forward and backward as tag values is a rather bad thing, as these are values for route relation roles. For example, if a physical way as part of a route relation is travelled along the direction of the osm way (as given by its node order) it may be assigned the role "forward" and this

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Hi, I’m answering but I’m having some problem in sending message, sorry. Il giorno 19 mar 2019, alle ore 15:01, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> ha scritto: On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 10:00, Lorenzo Stucchi mailto:lorenzostucch...@outlook.it>> wrote: Remember that all the ideas are related

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway={opposite, opposite_lane}?

OSM is a thing of beauty and a job forever. If the distant goal changed from sticking to ground truth, we may also accept fake islands and fantasy cities again, instead of consequently removing them. And no, even if I wanted to replace them all, I could not, for lack of resources and because of

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 10:00, Lorenzo Stucchi wrote: > > Remember that all the ideas are related to map in the Amazonian forest an > area where nothing is mapped and the map is empty. > The fact that nothing has yet been mapped there is not an excuse for inventing new tags when other tags

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

> "landcover = trees that is a tag for a wood where is not clear in which class > have to be considered the wood if natural or maintained by humans." Almost all woodland in the world have been modified by humans, even in the Amazon basin. I would recommend checking the existing areas of tagged

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Hi all, Thanks for the reply and for the constructive comments, we don’t want to vote something that no-one will accept, it's just a waste of time, for this reason, we start before to talk with all of you. Remember that all the ideas are related to map in the Amazonian forest an area where

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Le 19.03.19 à 10:05, marc marc a écrit : > Le 19.03.19 à 09:37, Markus a écrit : >> what about signed_direction=*? > > signed:forward|backward|both|none ? oups typo signed=forward|backward|both|none ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Le 19.03.19 à 09:37, Markus a écrit : > what about signed_direction=*? signed:forward|backward|both|none ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 09:32, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Mar 19, 2019, 8:29 AM by selfishseaho...@gmail.com: >> >> So why not correcting those 850 (6%) incorrect uses of >> cycleway*=opposite_lane instead of inventing a new tagging system for >> it? I've already corrected a few dozen, here's

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Thanks for the summary, s8evq! On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 at 08:55, s8evq wrote: > > - Not many are in favor of oneway=cw / oneway=ccw to indicate the actual > direction. This is currently in the wiki but is hardly in use (about 5 times > in total). I will go forward and remove this from the wiki.

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

In case that people map separate cycleways not as highway=cycleway but as a property of road you may in addition have cycleways on each side of the road. Each separate cycleway may be one way or not. Also, with sidewalks mapped as a property of road, not as a separate way: there may be in

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Mar 19, 2019, 8:29 AM by selfishseaho...@gmail.com: > On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 00:30, Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > >> >> On 19/03/19 10:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: >> >>> >>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 07:47, Markus <>>> selfishseaho...@gmail.com

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 09:14, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> Mar 19, 2019, 8:52 AM by selfishseaho...@gmail.com: >> >> By the way: aren't all contraflow cycle lanes located on the left side >> in countries with right-hand traffic or on the right side in countries >> with left-hand traffic? If so,

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Mar 19, 2019, 8:52 AM by selfishseaho...@gmail.com: > By the way: aren't all contraflow cycle lanes located on the left side > in countries with right-hand traffic or on the right side in countries > with left-hand traffic? If so, cycleway*=opposite_lane could simply be > replaced by

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Which situations can one theoretically have in a oneway street that allows contraflow for bicycles and moped/mofas? - no separate lanes (rather typical in Belgium) - separate lanes, one lane on each side, lanes are 1-way - separate lane only in contraflow direction, lane is oneway, (e.g. flow

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

By the way: aren't all contraflow cycle lanes located on the left side in countries with right-hand traffic or on the right side in countries with left-hand traffic? If so, cycleway*=opposite_lane could simply be replaced by cycleway:*=lane, as the direction of the cycle lane is already implied by

Re: [Tagging] Linear bike-share stations

Mar 19, 2019, 2:03 AM by bike...@gmail.com: > > My case for linear mapping is as follows: > > > 1) Many stations are very long and skinny, essentially running parallel > to other linear features like sidewalks. Some stations can be upwards of > 20 or 30 meters in length and no

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 00:30, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 19/03/19 10:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: >> >> On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 07:47, Markus wrote: >>> >>> Unfortunately, many tags are used wrongly (e.g. name, access tags, >>> grass, water park) – do you want to replace all of

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

I like the project to map deforestation over time, and I think OSM can be used. I also think OSM can profit from the data. However, as I have said before, OSM mappers have a different viewpoint: mapping whats's there now, as seen on the ground, as detailed as possible. And they have made a mess of