Agreed that is beyond being a curb, it is a wall of sorts.
For it to be a curb in my opinion, it should be passable by a fit
(non-disabled) person easily,
Once it becomes too tall to pass it is a wall
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, 01:17 Jarek Piórkowski, wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 19:46, Martin
sent from a phone
> On 30. Jul 2020, at 02:17, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> You have to consider the purpose of the tag. To a wheelchair user,
> there might not be a lot of practical difference between 25 and 10 cm,
> because both are impassable.
wheelchair users are not the only addressee
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 19:46, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>> On 30. Jul 2020, at 00:03, Clifford Snow wrote:
>> The wiki has a raised kerb as any kerb greater than 3cm in height. Your
>> definition of a regular kerb is one greater than or equal to 10cm
>
> when reading the term raised kerb I’d
Às 20:45 de 29/07/2020, Martin Koppenhoefer escreveu:
eg this is pretty raised
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/29/article-2380778-1B0CC26E05DC-458_634x386.jpg
Cheers Martin
lol
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
sent from a phone
> On 26. Jul 2020, at 23:58, ael wrote:
>
> Adding such source tags to a changeset seldom makes sense.
> Most of my changesets are a mixture of local knowledge, surveys, gps,
> photographic and video. I even occasionally use satellite imagery...
> So the source data needs to
sent from a phone
> On 29. Jul 2020, at 18:50, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>
> Do we really not have a way to tag *platforms*?
only for public transport, otherwise you could tag them with highway=pedestrian
and area=yes
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging
sent from a phone
> On 30. Jul 2020, at 00:03, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> The wiki has a raised kerb as any kerb greater than 3cm in height. Your
> definition of a regular kerb is one greater than or equal to 10cm
when reading the term raised kerb I’d rather think about something like
Cureently, the wiki say the admin_level=1 tag is for supernational border
like EU, but it have not be tagged as such in the OSM database itself.
Should it the tag be applied this way?
Also, another thing is taginfo seems to be showing a number of current use
of the tag admin_level=1 on different
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 11:57 AM Supaplex wrote:
> I started mapping detailed sidewalk information in my area, including
> crossing and kerb information. It seems that there is a lack of clarity in
> the differentiation between raised and regular ("normal", neither lowered
> nor raised) kerbs.
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 02:50, Matthew Woehlke
wrote:
>
> Do we really not have a way to tag *platforms*?
>
We do have man_made=platform https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/573403125,
but it doesn't render in any way :-(
Problem: what is "regular" ?
(and hence: what is "raised" and "lowered" ?)
See for example:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-standard-curb-height-in-the-United-States-and-how-is-that-height-decided-on
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 20:58, Supaplex wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I started mapping detailed
Hey all,
I started mapping detailed sidewalk information in my area, including
crossing and kerb information. It seems that there is a lack of clarity
in the differentiation between raised and regular ("normal", neither
lowered nor raised) kerbs. "kerb=regular" is already in use but is
On 29/07/2020 10.57, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 09:47, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
So... back to my *other* question: how should a raised wooden platform
on land be tagged? For example:
https://www.pitztal.com/sites/default/files/styles/adaptive/public/thumb_5101_lightbox.jpeg
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 09:47, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> So... back to my *other* question: how should a raised wooden platform
> on land be tagged? For example:
>
> https://www.pitztal.com/sites/default/files/styles/adaptive/public/thumb_5101_lightbox.jpeg
>
The problem is that someone actively mapping in a given area would be irritated
by completely
pointless checks and repeated checks of the same objects.
Jul 29, 2020, 12:34 by luke.mar...@viacesi.fr:
> Due to some concerns expressed in here (bloatness, discrepancies), I've been
> wondering...
On 28/07/2020 16.09, Paul Allen wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 20:44, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/651244930. This is a pier
with a platform on land that extends into the water. Carto cuts off the
part that is on land.
There is no part of a pier on land.
Due to some concerns expressed in here (bloatness, discrepancies), I've been
wondering...
Wouldn't it be enough to ask randomly about some properties to be checked?
For example, let's say I'm using SC to do some mapping, and from a 100 quests,
I get whatever proportions of maintenance quests
Jul 29, 2020, 02:39 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
> & for one that IMHO is quite correctly tagged as a pier over it's full length:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/18776776#map=17/-27.93856/153.43009
>
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/10370420-3x2-700x467.jpg
>
+1
See also (open licensed
18 matches
Mail list logo
