In
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposed-edit-of-some-barrier-kerb-kerb-raised-nodes/98038
user @osmuser63783 proposes proposed automated edit:
--
If you’ve been reading my posts about kerb tagging (1, 2), then you already
know that StreetComplete places kerb=raised by itself on a
Apr 19, 2023, 00:14 by mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 17:08:39 +0200, Marc_marc wrote:
>
>> Le 18.04.23 à 16:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
>>
>>> Is tagging of fuel: assumed to be exhaustive?
>>>
>>
>> no, some contributors will fill in what they are
Specific cases have largely been stated, but I think it does bear repeating
that "semantics come from many different flavors of syntax."
Tags on a datum state (or should) "what is known." Sometimes it or wider data
as a whole yield an answer to your specific question. However, assuming beyond
Le 19.04.23 à 00:09, Matija Nalis a écrit :
With multi-tag standard it is unambiguous
only because we haven't invented the equivalent of =no
it would have been enough to do tag=diesel;-lpg
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 17:08:39 +0200, Marc_marc wrote:
> Le 18.04.23 à 16:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
>> Is tagging of fuel: assumed to be exhaustive?
>
> no, some contributors will fill in what they are interested in,
> others will fill in everything that is visible (and may not
>
Le 18.04.23 à 18:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
yes *:others=no but also *:*=only exist for that purpose
=only works only when you have station offering single fuel, right?
I have see (and maybe also use it mayself), a objet with 2 =only,
to describe that it's only what's
On 18/04/2023 17:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
Apr 18, 2023, 17:39 by p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
I have come across a few cases where a mapper has has blindly
answered no to a list of octane ratings that do not exist in the
country they are mapping in.
In the UK it is
Apr 18, 2023, 17:12 by marc_m...@mailo.com:
> Le 18.04.23 à 16:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
>
>> Is tagging of fuel: assumed to be exhaustive?
>>
>
> no, some contributors will fill in what they are interested in,
> others will fill in everything that is visible (and may not
>
Apr 18, 2023, 17:39 by p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
> I have come across a few cases where a mapper has has blindly answered no to
> a list of octane ratings that do not exist in the country they are mapping in.
>
> In the UK it is safe to assume every filling station sells Euro 95/E10 and
>
I have come across a few cases where a mapper has has blindly answered no to a
list of octane ratings that do not exist in the country they are mapping in.
In the UK it is safe to assume every filling station sells Euro 95/E10 and
diesel.
The interesting tag is whether it sells 98 or 99/E5.
Le 18.04.23 à 16:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :
Is tagging of fuel: assumed to be exhaustive?
no, some contributors will fill in what they are interested in,
others will fill in everything that is visible (and may not
be able to see the blue additive pump not visible from the car
For example amenity=fuel + fuel:octane_80=yes
Is it implying that it is sole type of fuel available?
Would it be mistake to tag
amenity=fuel + fuel:octane_80=yes
when also some other fuels are available?
It seems to be fine, is it right?
Is it possible to mark that fuel station
has solely
12 matches
Mail list logo
