I am familiar with all of those materials. I agree that they are all different
(landscaping paper, farming plastic, weedblocker, tyvek house moisture
barrier). I use all of them at my house.
This is something different. Something very very thick (2-3mm!) , made with tar
or other marital that
I second - those keys should be cleaned up to be more consistent. My only
concern is that we overload the meaning of wikimedia_commons to mean both a
single image and a category, using namespace prefix as part of the value.
IMO it should be just the name of the file, without the namespace prefix.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 20:45, pangoSE wrote:
> I recently stumbled upon the tag wikimedia_commons see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikimedia_commons
>
> Its definition is: "links to related Wikimedia Commons' media of the
> feature "
>
Yep. That's correct, apart from the word
I recently stumbled upon the tag wikimedia_commons see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikimedia_commons
Its definition is: "links to related Wikimedia Commons' media of the
feature "
But, the only 2 examples contain no links (as in URL-links but instead
file- and category names):
On 1/20/20 5:00 AM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Sounds basically reasonable to me. The page does not make it clear
> if this is just a place you can put a hose in, or if the piping is
> pre-installed. What I'm talking about is a red 3 or 4" pipe that
> runs from under the middle
sent from a phone
> On 20. Jan 2020, at 16:34, marc marc wrote:
>
> but to switch to disused: if there's no water on the day of the survey,
> I think that's excessive.
for the drinking fountains in my area seeing there is no water does indeed
justify to put it on disused, while it’s in
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 15:05, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I agree that earthwork reinforcement may be out of scope here, but the
> term "surface" as you read it seems to comprise the first feet of earth,
> while I would read it as the surface in contact with air (no thickness,
> just a
Dear Marc/Martin,
Would it be possible to prepare a "best practice" proposal for how
fountains which are temporarily not working should be tagged ?
If so, how can I create the wiki template to be filled in - I am happy to
work on the first draft.
I am quite agnostic about which solution is
I'm using operation_status when I see a such one.
and I'm trying to survey again later to see if it was a temporary
problem or if it's disused:
but to switch to disused: if there's no water on the day of the survey,
I think that's excessive.
Le 20.01.20 à 15:59, European Water Project a écrit :
>
Hi Martin,
disused:amenity=drinking_water is very good.
Is this documented as best practice for drinking fountains which are not
running without explanation?
How do you document an out of ourder tagged fountain which was
"amenity=fountain && drinking_water=yes" ? disused:drinking_water=yes ?
Dear Florimond,
What seems preferable about drinking_water:free= is
that it is a tag that offers a complete response .
drinking_water:fee, necessitates a follow up qualification. If no, then for
whom if not for everyone ? If yes, then how much and is it the same fee for
customers and
Am Mo., 20. Jan. 2020 um 16:01 Uhr schrieb European Water Project <
europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com>:
> Wouldn't it make more sense for mappers to tag status=broken or status=out
> _of_order instead of deleting ?
>
personally I have changed them to "disused:amenity=drinking_water" (and
back
Am Mo., 20. Jan. 2020 um 15:09 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> If they're sub-surface, a mapper won't see them on a survey or aerial
> imagery. The
> OP appeared to be talking specifically of surface features for preventing
> weeds
> and/or erosion control, not reinforcement. Visible, therefore
Dear Martin,
Wouldn't it make more sense for mappers to tag status=broken or status=out_
of_order instead of deleting ?
best regards,
Stuart
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 15:53, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 03:16 Uhr schrieb Jarek Piórkowski <
> ja...@piorkowski.ca>:
>
>>
Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 03:16 Uhr schrieb Jarek Piórkowski <
ja...@piorkowski.ca>:
> Ah, good point! So I guess for a drinking fountain seasonal=yes is the
> most reasonable when I don't know the months when it's active (I'm in
> a climate that freezes, so they get shut down sometime before
Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 02:53 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> > seasonal=summer
>
> Well, this is the problem with the tag "seasonal" - it's not 100%
> clear if "seasonal=summer" means "this feature is only available in
> the summer" or "this feature is NOT
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 13:52, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
I don't find the surface tag compelling for this, because around here, most
> of them are below the surface (although not very deep). I would either see
> them as erosing control features or maybe ground reenforcement? (in any
> case these
even more related wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geotextile
Cheers
Martin
PS: just another example of the plurality of articles (and connected
wikidata objects) for (partially) "the same things"
___
Tagging mailing list
Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 23:11 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
> maybe surface=landscaping_fabric or =landscape_fabric ?
>
> Wikipedia has stub under the second title
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landscape_fabric
> not sure which name is better
>
here's an article
Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 23:11 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
> maybe surface=landscaping_fabric or =landscape_fabric ?
>
I don't find the surface tag compelling for this, because around here, most
of them are below the surface (although not very deep). I would either
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 13:05, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> I am not completely sure, but maybe "car" was chosen purposefully because
> this is not the same as a legal access restriction?
>
Possibly chosen to make a distinction between vehicles propelled by petrol
or
diesel and electric
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 12:40, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> are these 2 things both called "stove" in British English?
>
> Some would call both of those a stove. Some would call only one of those a
stove. Some would call neither of them a stove (one is a cooker, the other
a
wood burner).
Am Sa., 18. Jan. 2020 um 17:26 Uhr schrieb Lionel Giard <
lionel.gi...@gmail.com>:
> For motorcar vs car, it seems logical to update it to motorcar as it is
> the recommended way of tagging car access, as it is probably just an old
> wiki information on the amenity=charging_station.
>
I am not
Am Do., 16. Jan. 2020 um 01:38 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 00:26, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
>> British English speakers:
>>
>> If you are mapping a device which burns fuel or uses electricity to
>> cook food in a pot or pan, is this a "cooker" or a "stove" or
>> something
Am Sa., 18. Jan. 2020 um 17:36 Uhr schrieb Lionel Giard <
lionel.gi...@gmail.com>:
> I wasn't speaking about disabled only here, even if it must exist
> countries where disabled are marked but not enforced by law, but i don't
> know any example. But for other dedicated parking space like "parent"
25 matches
Mail list logo
