On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:08 PM Jarek Piórkowski
wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:55, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:51 PM Jarek Piórkowski
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:45, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:14 PM Yaro Shkvoret
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:55, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:51 PM Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:45, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:14 PM Yaro Shkvorets wrote:
>> >> That passage should be rewritten. That's certainly not the c
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:51 PM Jarek Piórkowski
wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:45, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:14 PM Yaro Shkvorets
> wrote:
> >> That passage should be rewritten. That's certainly not the common
> practice.
> >> I personally tag `highway=cycleway` whe
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:45, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:14 PM Yaro Shkvorets wrote:
>> That passage should be rewritten. That's certainly not the common practice.
>> I personally tag `highway=cycleway` where bikes significantly outnumber foot
>> traffic, `highway=footway` w
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:14 PM Yaro Shkvorets wrote:
> That passage should be rewritten. That's certainly not the common practice.
> I personally tag `highway=cycleway` where bikes significantly outnumber
> foot traffic, `highway=footway` where foot traffic significantly outnumbers
> bikes, `hig
That passage should be rewritten. That's certainly not the common practice.
I personally tag `highway=cycleway` where bikes significantly outnumber
foot traffic, `highway=footway` where foot traffic significantly outnumbers
bikes, `highway=path` for the rest.
If you need to explicitly disallow bike
On 1/28/2020 4:49 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
Be that as it may, there are a great many `highway=path` objects
where the intent was `combined foot- and cycleway`. The concept that a
`footway` is urban while a `path` represents something more like a
wilderness trail is a rather new one to me. (I'm no
On 28/01/2020 22:44, Dave F via Tagging wrote:
On 28/01/2020 21:23, Tomas Straupis wrote:
Yet for ten years ...
I think your mistaken ...
If it helps, someone on anther OSM list went through the previous times
this has been discussed and came up with
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pi
Healthcare is a 'new' key. Of course it is going to have less use than the
older tags.
It is not all about numbers, but also a logical system.
The key amenity is not that logical, it includes many different types of things.
Logically a road is an amenity yet OSM excludes them from the key amen
On 28/01/2020 21:23, Tomas Straupis wrote:
Yet for ten years or even more the logic was that...
Are there any reasons why this must change now? Any benefits?
I think your mistaken in your timeline. Cycleway & footway were around
before path was introduced to cover the misinterpretation
On 1/28/2020 4:23 PM, Tomas Straupis wrote:
> >Yet for ten years or even more the logic was that if the same way is
> > designated for both pedestrians and cyclists, it cannot be tagged with
> > highway=footway - as it is for cyclists as well, it cannot be tagged
> > with highway=cycleway becau
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 02:35, Jmapb wrote:
>
> At some point it appeared to me that iD was automatically adding the
> equivalent healthcare=* tags to some amenities -- but it may have
> actually been iD's "branding" bot that did that, matching amenities with
> certain names.
>
iD also brings up
On 1/28/2020 4:23 PM, Tomas Straupis wrote:
Yet for ten years or even more the logic was that if the same way is
designated for both pedestrians and cyclists, it cannot be tagged with
highway=footway - as it is for cyclists as well, it cannot be tagged
with highway=cycleway because it is for p
2020-01-28, an, 20:15 Jmapb rašė:
> Thanks for the background. Looks like Richard Fairhurst already reverted the
> "shared foot/bicycle must be path" assertion on the cycleway=* page. J
Yet for ten years or even more the logic was that if the same way is
designated for both pedestrians and cycl
On 26/01/2020 12:35, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Florimond Berthoux wrote:
>> How to map a continuous sidewalk or cycleway ?
>
> A couple of ideas were posted in connection with the London cycle
> infrastructure database:
>
> https://github.com/cyclestreets/tflcid-conversion/issues/30
> https://gi
On 24/01/2020 10:35, Peter Elderson wrote:
> highway=give_way would not map the situation, just the priority. Maybe
> it's just me, but I think highway=give_way is an unclear tag. Who gives
> way to who, in what direction?
I imagine that is why the wiki lists direction=forward|backward as a
usefu
Hi everyone,
I finally set the status to "voting" of the tax-free proposal. This ends
on 2020-02-15 (a bit more than two weeks).
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tax_free_shopping
Thanks for all the feedback and happy voting.
Hauke
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digi
We do now:
Le sam. 25 janv. 2020 à 23:51, Volker Schmidt a écrit :
> Florimond,
>
> already in your otherwise interesting map that you presented in
> Heidelberg, you do not consider all categories:
> 1) sidewalk
>
(cycleway on a sidewalk ? there is no specified tag for that afaik)
2) cycleway
>
On 1/27/2020 3:53 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
The same user also changed the Australian tagging guidelines without
discussion, which we didn't notice till last October:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-October/013009.html
and they were reverted. Didn't notice at the time th
On 1/28/2020 9:23 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
The pages are nearly identical.
Actually, the healthcare=pharmacy page was just made recently by
copying the amenity=pharmacy page. Before it was only documented
minimally at Key:healthcare
I believe the mappers who developed the healthcare=* schem
The pages are nearly identical.
Actually, the healthcare=pharmacy page was just made recently by copying
the amenity=pharmacy page. Before it was only documented minimally at
Key:healthcare
> Is the dispensing tag also suggested for the healthcare pharmacies?
>
__
There could be different kinds of pharmacy, e.g. with dispensing=yes and
no. Is the dispensing tag also suggested for the healthcare pharmacies?
Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/ta
Hello,
working on charging stations right now, I noticed that some way of tagging
is missing to determine whether the charging station has a cord or is just
a simple wall box and you have to bring your own.
I'd like to discuss it here:
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=775442#p77544
Le 28.01.20 à 13:45, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
> I think it would be reasonable to show healthcare=pharmacy,
> healthcare=hospital, healthcare=dentist and healthcare=doctor as
> discouraged and unnecessary in the wiki.
you take 2 tags out of their context, these 2 tags have their logic in
the hop
It came to my attention that healthcare=pharmacy is almost only used
in addition to the more common tag amenity=pharmacy:
99.7% of healthcare=pharmacy features are also tagged with
amenity=pharmacy:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=healthcare&value=pharmacy#combinations
The situation i
25 matches
Mail list logo
