Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

> for straight embankments, cuttings, slopes, if they are done with an area > that shares nodes, then I don’t think you need a relation. Agreed. You can map the area of the cutting or embankment as a new tag like man_made=embankment_area or similar, and the area would include the same nodes as

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

I use “unmarked crossing” for all connections of sidewalks where they dead-end and have to be connected into the road. could be useful there too. there is is no “sideway_link” or similar “footway routing link” to use, so unmarked crossing works really well, espcially considering it is where

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

for straight embankments, cuttings, slopes, if they are done with an area that shares nodes, then I don’t think you need a relation. if they are jsut two lines that happen to be near each other, and do not share nodes, you might need a relation to associate them. also, if a levee is made of

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

> On Nov 16, 2019, at 7:50 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > > A complicated scheme dreamt up here isn't going to get taken up by anyone. I took these 3 pictures yesterday while out cycling: https://imgur.com/gallery/Wqc5Ems The largest of the 8 levees I rode

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 at 19:23, Marc Gemis wrote: > > AFAIK, VW does not sell lorries/hgv/trucks. Their commercial vehicles > are pick ups and vans (caddy/transporter/crafter) The largest, has a > GVW of 5t. > > Which tags do we have to use in case the shop only sells those vehicles? It seems we

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 at 17:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > Generally, if this was agreed, wouldn’t we have to split every footway that > connects to a road for its last 2 or so meters, because that’s actually the > road (in a model that takes the extension of the ways into account)? That's a

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

Interesting. I've watched a fair amount of British media coverage about the horrific human trafficking a couple of weeks back and noticed the repeated use of lorry. In this Sky News segment they say vehicle (comprising of tractor and container) and lorry, but they aren't saying truck once.

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

sent from a phone >> On 17. Nov 2019, at 19:23, Marc Gemis wrote: > AFAIK, VW does not sell lorries/hgv/trucks. Their commercial vehicles > are pick ups and vans (caddy/transporter/crafter) The largest, has a > GVW of 5t. you may be right, actually brand=volkswagen commercial vehicles;volvo

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:17:41PM +0900, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > The “reply-to” email address might be being secretly changed by some mail > clients - when I choose “reply” to Peter’s mail, it chooses the tagging > group. When I choose reply to Martin’s, it chooses Martin. This is

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 06:54:52PM +0900, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2019, at 6:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > > wrote: > > A relation seems easier to evaluate and explicit, while a spatial query > > heuristic will inevitably fail in some cases > > > I think there is a need

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 06:21:13PM +0900, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > Still looking for feedback on the idea, Specifically: my idea.. > - lower base way or area sharing nodes with the top line in embankment / > cutting, etc? way instead of area. Simpler to do and more flexible. Also I

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

17 Nov 2019, 12:03 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 16. Nov 2019, at 23:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> >> I would use something like >> shop=car car=truck >> > > > I had considered this, but shop=car says it is for automobiles, and trucks > aren’t automobiles >

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

VW Group has controlling stakes in MAN and Scania, maybe that's what he meant? On 17.11.19 19:21, Marc Gemis wrote: AFAIK, VW does not sell lorries/hgv/trucks. Their commercial vehicles are pick ups and vans (caddy/transporter/crafter) The largest, has a GVW of 5t. Which tags do we have to

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

AFAIK, VW does not sell lorries/hgv/trucks. Their commercial vehicles are pick ups and vans (caddy/transporter/crafter) The largest, has a GVW of 5t. Which tags do we have to use in case the shop only sells those vehicles? regards m. On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 12:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

sent from a phone > On 16. Nov 2019, at 11:25, Markus wrote: > > I use highway=footway + footway=link connect steps and sidewalks to a > road, in order to retain the real length and geometry of the steps or > sidewalks and to indicate that these aren't steps or a sidewalk > anymore, but part

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

I have now changed this back to shop=truck, seems the most convincing of all options, and the most frequently used specific tag Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

sent from a phone > On 16. Nov 2019, at 23:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > I would use something like > shop=car car=truck I had considered this, but shop=car says it is for automobiles, and trucks aren’t automobiles > > Similarly I recently used > shop=furniture furniture=office >