Sorry for the late feedback, Markus! Thanks for considering my thoughts.
> Wouldn't this mean that any footpath leading into a road would need to
be split for its last few metres, like the last 3 m of the path here?:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/413988097
I believe so, yes. While this
sent from a phone
> On 5. Dec 2019, at 21:41, Jan Michel wrote:
>
> Also, introducing another set of 7 tags for such a minor piece of information
> is (at least to me) an absolute overkill.
my suggestion if you want to map these in great detail would be mapping the
bathrooms (or other
Hi Sören
Multiple tags are only needed if each of them describes a different
property, which is not the case for changing_table:location. I don't
see a problem with adding two or more values separated by a semicolon
in this case. In the contrary: a value list is clearer and it seems
that it can
Hi,
I very much prefer the already accepted version. There is nothing wrong
with semicolon separated values. Searching for one key and splitting its
value is so much faster than searching with wildcards in a huge database
like ours.
Also, introducing another set of 7 tags for such a minor
I have closed the voting for the Access Aisle Proposal. [1]
Final results of the voting are: It was *approved* with 14 votes for, 2
votes against and 1 abstention with an 82% approval.
I will start integrating the proposal into the wiki as documented in
Proposal Process.[2] The iD developers
On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 at 10:10, Martin Scholtes
wrote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/park_drive
> Definition: Information that can be taken on this parking lot to form a
> carpool.
>
I would prefer the key to park_and_drive. It's longer, and more typing,
but better
Am 05.12.2019 um 12:41 schrieb Sören Reinecke via Tagging:
> Allows the tag the mapping of carpool meeting points?
The proposal aims at marking parking places where one could meet to
carpool or which explicitly provide for parking one's vehicle and
forming a carpool.
An example would be a car
Am I right in assuming that you support the proposal with the deviation
to only specify the values "designated" and "informal"?
Am 05.12.2019 um 12:13 schrieb Volker Schmidt:
> The only value of this key that is clear
> park_drive=designated (i.e. there are signs that allow only
> car-pooling
Hey all,
A new but small proposal to change the specification for subkey
`changing_table:location` because of a discussion yesterday about using
seperators in values. I totally agree that we should avoid using
seperators when possible.
Proposal:
> Forgive me, but this is my first time on that list.There's not much to know. Now the discussion part begins, be attentative. Usually the discussion ends after the two week period and then voting takes place.I do not quite understand the definition of your proposal. Allows the tag the mapping of
The only value of this key that is clear
park_drive=designated (i.e. there are signs that allow only car-pooling
parking)
Any other car park that does not have a short time limit can be used for
that purpose.
Local knowledge may be used to identify those for which
car_drive=informal
might be a
Hello,
I would like to inform you that I have made a suggestion about park and
drive. This resulted from a discussion in the OSM DE Telegram Chat.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/park_drive
Definition: Information that can be taken on this parking lot to form a
carpool.
I
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 01:31, Alessandro Sarretta
wrote:
>
> And in case on the left we have a shared cycle/foot lane?
>
> cycleway:left=lane
> pedestrian_lane=left
> segregated=no
>
> or
>
> cycleway:left=lane
> footway:left=lane
> segregated=no
>
> I think discussing of specific examples could
13 matches
Mail list logo
