Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:healthcare=vaccination_centre

Any more comments or concerns about the proposed tag healthcare =vaccination_centre ? I also considered amenity=vaccination_centre but I thought that healthcare=* would be

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

https://www.waterworld.com/home/article/16192273/introduction-to-wastewater-treatment-ponds#:~:text=The%20most%20often%20used%20ponds,and%20aerobic%20at%20the%20top.   >Thursday, December 17, 2020 1:15 PM -06:00 from Joseph Eisenberg >: >  >Re: "volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage"

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

As just posted on talk Thanks. Yes, it should have a definition. How about: A base is the (almost invariably) enclosed area where a military establishment is located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_base. It will include a variety of buildings, facilities etc in the area, & may be used by

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

So far the proposal lacks a definition of the new tag military=base The closest we get is "military=base for the area of each military establishment" but that makes it sound like almost any kind of landuse=military could have the military=base tag added. How should military=base be defined? --

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

The tag water_works=* is great for use with man_made=water_works - but that's for treating water before it is used, not for treatment of sewage, normally: "water works is a place where drinking water is found and applied to the local waterpipes network." But there is also

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

With respect to basins, my understanding is that some of these have water in them all of the time, some of them have water some of the time, and then there are some that are almost always dry, but become wet only rarely when they are needed (e.g. for stormwater handling) Mappers have used BOTH

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

Hi Joseph, Le jeu. 17 déc. 2020 à 20:16, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water > reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere? > We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases > This proposal is also getting close to voting. Precis: *deprecate*: - military

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 02:33, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key > has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways. > Here are some examples of tags as "waterway feature" + type=hazard

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

Re: "volume, elevation and sometimes particular usage" I don't think mappers can know the maximum volume or capacity of a water reservoir or water basin, unless it is written on a public sign somewhere? We can map the surface area, but knowing the average depth or maximum depth is quite

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

Hi all I'm ashamed to not have enough time to be involved in all discussions regarding reservoir, ponds, basins and so on... and thank you to make such a capital topic on the table I'd be happy with a tagging that separates the structure, the water body and purpose of a given feature. Have a

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

hazard=yes is neither banned nor discouraged. It was simply not included in the list of proposed approved tags due to objections raised during the RFC. The goal was to approve the hazard tagging that everyone agreed on. Since hazard=yes has some existing tagging (>600 uses), it would still be

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

I knew them as sewage treatment ponds, but apparently there's a name for them: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_stabilization_pond I feel like this a separate class of object that deserves its own tag, either within or separate from natural=water, or perhaps even subclassed as

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

On Thu, 2020-12-17 at 17:08 +, ael via Tagging wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the > > hazard key > > has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways. > > Not in my

[Tagging] Tagging sewage treatment basins

How should sewage treatment facilities be tagged, then? Isn't sewage 99% water? I think that most sewage treatment facilities in the USA include open settling basins and I would use landuse=basin or water=basin + natural=water for these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/420075503 -- Joseph

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep > rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers > are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging >

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

Using terms such as "on a rampage" and "gods know where else he is buldozzing" is inappropriate and does not contribute to this discussion. Such rhetoric will not convince other mappers to use a certain tagging method. This language does not promote an open and welcoming community. It does not

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:29:52AM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key > has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways. Not in my part of the world. Why try to restrict the scope artificially? Hazard in

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

2020-12-17, kt, 18:20 Joseph Eisenberg rašė: > That's not accurate, Tomas. Why? Mateusz without the end of discussion started, well continued editing the wiki (I had to correct some of his misinterpretations which have been discussed here), he also made some attempts in JOSM trac, these are

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

There are area hazards around, like shooting ranges, and high electric fields around radio transmitters, and more likely others. I am not insisting on using the hazard key - I only noted similarities. On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 17:33, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Another argument against use of

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways. Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers are

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

That's not accurate, Tomas. The Tag:water=reservoir page has been edited by 4 people this week, including ZeLonewolf, Warin61, Kjon and me (Jeisenbe): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Awater%3Dreservoir=revision=2073583=1860772 - Mateusz has not edited this page. The page

Re: [Tagging] cable:ferry

Maybe we might use “reaction” as a value for the ferry:cable key for those specific types of cable ferries, and keep the value “yes” for a generic/unspecified type of cable ferry, and change the wiki definition accordingly. Alberto

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė: > This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the > hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding hazard=rapids > although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are > not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might

Re: [Tagging] cable:ferry

What is missing in the route=ferry tagging is any way of indicating the ferry type and/or size in general. That would include a reaction ferry, amongst others On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 09:36, joost schouppe wrote: > Hi, > > This article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry >

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

Dec 17, 2020, 08:02 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > > >> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg >> wrote: >> >> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the >> natural=coastline) from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes >> is very

[Tagging] cable:ferry

Hi, This article https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry mentions ferry:cable=yes as a reaction ferry - a specific type of cable ferry. While the article has a picture of a non-reaction cable ferry, it offers no tagging suggestion for that. So I'm guessing that in practice, there