On Tue, 12 May 2020 23:53:52 +0800
Phake Nick wrote:
> Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi
> and motorcycle taxi.
Are there any differences that can't be explained by the fact that a
motorcycle taxi uses a motorcycle to carry the passengers?
For example, in the
On 13/5/20 9:28 am, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 13. May 2020, at 00:27, Tod Fitch wrote:
Checking taginfo it seems hazard=* [1] is in use. Why not go with it?
[1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/hazard
there is also documentation.
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:37 PM brad wrote:
> OK, but it seems redundant to me. A trail/path get tagged as a path.
> There's a trailhead and a sign, it gets a tagged with a name. Why does
> it need to be a route also?
>
Same reason all 0.11 miles of I 95 in Washington DC is part of a route.
OK, but it seems redundant to me. A trail/path get tagged as a path.
There's a trailhead and a sign, it gets a tagged with a name. Why does
it need to be a route also?
On 5/12/20 11:43 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:03 PM Peter Elderson wrote:
My view is that a route
dog=yes|no|leashed already exists for a totally different semantic (letting dog
owners know if their pet is allowed).
If this goes forward I would prefer reversing thing and make it hazard=dog.
That would also allow other types of hazards to be mapped.
Checking taginfo it seems hazard=* [1] is
May 13, 2020, 00:18 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
> One in particular, roads in remote areas - yes, it's a dirt road, connecting
> very small centres of population / remote "farms" (if it's still a "farm"
> when it's bigger in area than some countries > ‽> ) only, so it "can't" be
> important
>
sent from a phone
> On 13. May 2020, at 00:27, Tod Fitch wrote:
>
> Checking taginfo it seems hazard=* [1] is in use. Why not go with it?
>
> [1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/hazard
there is also documentation.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 20:36, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 5/12/20 11:42 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Yes. Users are the ultimate measure of quality, yet they are most often
> absent from our discussions.
>From comments on the "contact point" thread
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 20:43, Sören
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dog_hazard
Dangerous area with dogs.
Please discuss on the page. I will respond to emails, but I rarely check, and
it may take a bit to get back with you.
-- Floridaeditor
___
Tagging mailing list
Apr 30, 2020, 19:45 by miketh...@gmail.com:
> Hello,
>
> I have always been under the impression that the highway tag should be
> based off of function. Recently I have come across a number of cases
> where driveways and residential roads were tagged "highway=track"
> (perhaps because they
Le 12 mai 2020 19:02:24 GMT+02:00, Peter Elderson a écrit
:
>My view is that a route should have an indication on the ground. A
>sign, a
>trailhead, something. No verifiable indication whatsoever, then it's
>not a
>route.
>
>The length or the number of ways in the route does not make a
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:03 PM Peter Elderson wrote:
> My view is that a route should have an indication on the ground. A sign, a
> trailhead, something. No verifiable indication whatsoever, then it's not a
> route.
>
> The length or the number of ways in the route does not make a difference
My view is that a route should have an indication on the ground. A sign, a
trailhead, something. No verifiable indication whatsoever, then it's not a
route.
The length or the number of ways in the route does not make a difference to
me.
Best,
Peter Elderson
Op di 12 mei 2020 om 18:28 schreef
We had a pretty lengthy discussion last October subject:'Cycling
relation misuse' . I got the impression that a route should be more
than just a short trail.
Are you saying that every trail should be route?
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6632400
My subject line should have
Am Di., 12. Mai 2020 um 18:02 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :
>
> Bottom line: more we look into this taxi business more interesting and
> confusing it gets.
>
IMHO it is not very confusing. There are taxis, and there are various other
kind of individual and mass transportation and leisure rides
In this context:
I have just realised that at Venice Aiport there are (at least) the
following services and corresponding counters and stop positions.
busses to various destinations. They depart from a bus-stop area, but have
different counters according to the bus company
water busses (separate
Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi and
motorcycle taxi.
在 2020年5月11日週一 16:04，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> Le 10.05.20 à 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> > imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the
> > airport and instead of a taxi
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:59 AM stevea wrote:
> > We in the Massachusetts local community want to have admin_level 6
> > relations for these boundaries, and I personally consider deleting them
> > to be vandalism.
>
> Then let's hear from them and their rather precisely-described to-become
>
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 14:01, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> if they expect both to have the same main tag, yes. After a while when
> they have had their unpleasant experience and keep using crowd sourced
> maps, they will be more cautious, I agree.
>
Or, after they have had an unpleasant
sent from a phone
> On 12. May 2020, at 02:37, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> In short, is this tag "tagging for the tourist"? Those in the know
> will know to check if it's a motorcycle taxi or a car taxi stand.
if they expect both to have the same main tag, yes. After a while when they
have
On 2020-05-12 12:58, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 11:43, Sören alias Valor Naram
> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I am a "data customer", see https://babykarte.OpenStreetMap.de . That's why
>> I initiated this discussion because this is important for me. But mappers
>> are not
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 11:43, Sören alias Valor Naram
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I am a "data customer", see https://babykarte.OpenStreetMap.de . That's
> why I initiated this discussion because this is important for me. But
> mappers are not listening to data customers
Why do you think that other
sent from a phone
> On 12. May 2020, at 06:24, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> Waymarked Trails associates waymarks only with routes, and assumes
> that any waymarked route, from local to international, will have a
> route relation describing it.
>
> Is there a reason that you see route relations for
Hey,I am a "data customer", see https://babykarte.OpenStreetMap.de . That's why I initiated this discussion because this is important for me. But mappers are not listening to data customers and think they know how a database works (only few of them know that and those come from a technical
On 5/12/20 11:42 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I love the fact that we are now 50 messages into discussing, for the second
time, a change that would be made ostensibly for the benefit of data
consumers, and yet no one has asked any actual data consumers.
Yes. Users are the ultimate measure of
On 11/05/2020 10:29, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
On 5/10/20 7:36 PM, Cj Malone wrote:
I think I stand by that quote, but I'm happy to discus it. I'm not
arguing that over night we should stop people using the phone tag.
Currently phone has at least 2 uses. A contact number and an incoming
number for
I love the fact that we are now 50 messages into discussing, for the second
time, a change that would be made ostensibly for the benefit of data
consumers, and yet no one has asked any actual data consumers.
https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Golgafrinchan_Ark_Fleet_Ship_B
Richard
--
Sent
Can you give an example where you think it's wrong?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 12 mei 2020 om 04:17 schreef brad :
> I see a lot of relations, type:route, which are only short
> trails/paths. This is wrong isn't it? Do you suppose that folks are
> doing this to get better rendering?
> Brad
28 matches
Mail list logo
