Re: [Tagging] Vegan "cheese" shops

It's a bit runny... On 19/12/2019, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 18. Dec 2019, at 21:10, Philip Barnes wrote: >> >> Calling something that is not made from milk cheese is I think illegal in >> the UK. > > > what about “vegan milk” then? ;-) > > Cheers Martin >

Re: [Tagging] emergency=no on hospitals is ambiguous

We have a local hospital. It is tiny and has no emergency room. Andrew On 03/11/2019, Francesco Ansanelli wrote: > Hello list, > > I don't know is anybody wrote about this before, but I have noticed that > the emergency tag changes meaning on hospitals and the result is weird: > emergency tag

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

2/2019 19:15, Andrew Errington wrote: > > If there is no limit then omit the maxstay tag. No tag, no limit. > > Andrew > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 07:47 Tobias Knerr >> On 20.02.19 00:08, Warin wrote: >> > 24/7 is used for opening hours - so for consistency I would t

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

If there is no limit then omit the maxstay tag. No tag, no limit. Andrew On Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 07:47 Tobias Knerr On 20.02.19 00:08, Warin wrote: > > 24/7 is used for opening hours - so for consistency I would tend to go > > for that. > > Maxstay values are durations, opening_hours values (such

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 01:44 Colin Smale Lets be clear, the storage format can (and should) be decoupled from the > display format. What is stored in the database can easily (assuming it is > sufficiently standardised!!!) be translated for human consumption, and the > inverse can be done when

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

Already handled by ISO8601: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601#Durations I think any discussion of dates and times should start by asking if we could apply ISO8601 to the problem at hand. For example the other thread about start date variants. Andrew On Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 12:48 Warin

Re: [Tagging] name with name:en

I'd suggest leaving it alone. How do you know what language name=* is? How do you know that it is acceptable to display name=* when language "en" is requested? They may look identical, but if I request name:en then I'd like to see name:en if it's present. This problem comes up time and again, and

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

I have a feeling that "living street" is being interpreted as "a street that people live on", which really should be "residential". Perhaps you could ask the mapper for the reason behind the edits, and ask someone to translate the "living street" wiki page to indicate clearly what it means (in

Re: [Tagging] How might we best map emergency helicopter landing zones?

I tag them as aeroway=helipad, and it looks like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/35.2932/127.5317 There are a lot of them in the mountains of Korea. Usually marked out with a pattern of white stones embedded in the ground. Would like to know if there's a better way, or if doing it

Re: [Tagging] Multiple values for one key - the cuisine problem.

Surely this is a solved problem? Separate multiple values with a semicolon. And there is no need for a language code for this type of key. The values in the key should be translated by whatever application is using it before presenting it to the user. That's why cuisine=french is correct

Re: [Tagging] Layer and highway=steps

The direction of the way was discussed a long time ago. Consensus was that it should be 'up' based on the convention of architectural drawings. It seemed as good a reason as any. That's all I have, really. Andrew On 2 Jul 2016 20:48, "Bjoern Hassler" wrote: > Hi Volker,

Re: [Tagging] New tag

ref=* would be better, as it's already understood by a lot of other tools and renderers. Andrew On 30 Jun 2016 16:28, "Steve Doerr" wrote: > On 30/06/2016 05:27, Hans De Kryger wrote: > > How does everyone feel about (store_number=) for store numbers that > companies

Re: [Tagging] New tag

Use ref=* Would that work? Andrew On 30 June 2016 at 13:27, Hans De Kryger wrote: > How does everyone feel about (store_number=) for store numbers that > companies assign their stores? > > > *Regards,* > > *Hans* > > ___ >

Re: [Tagging] path=hiking in use

for hiking, but that is not an exclusive use. Andrew On 14 Feb 2016 17:29, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14/02/2016 6:38 PM, John Willis wrote: > >> >> Javbw >> >> On Feb 14, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Andrew Errington <erringt...@gmail.com> >>>

Re: [Tagging] path=hiking in use

Changing the tags because you don't like the rendering is not the right approach. It would be better to lobby for a change of rendering, or use a different renderer. I use highway=path for my hiking trails, then I make relations to record the popular, named hiking trails. Some parts of the

Re: [Tagging] path=hiking in use

o indicate that this is *not* a simple path: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale Or create a route which incorporates the segments of path you have created: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking Andrew On 14 Feb 2016 16:40, "John Willis" <jo...@mac.com> wrote: > > > Javbw > &

Re: [Tagging] Named junctions

Surely this is a rendering problem? In other words, if there are many named traffic lights within a certain distance of each other then only one symbol/name/whatever should be rendered? If the traffic lights are all tagged the same then it ought to be even easier. Adding an area with a tag is

Re: [Tagging] Named junctions

We already use junction=yes for named junctions. Why is another tag needed? On 06/11/2015, Gerd Petermann wrote: > wow, so the problem is much bigger than I expected. > > I still think that my suggestion might help to solve the problem. > > My understanding so

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 17 Oct 2015 06:00, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 17/10/2015 3:58 AM, John Eldredge wrote: >> >> I, too, would tend to interpret opening_hours=none as "never open". I think that opening_hours=unknown would be clearer. >> > > If I don't know something .. I don't tag it. > So I

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 17 Oct 2015 10:48, "Craig Wallace" wrote: > > On 2015-10-17 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: >> >> >> Agreed. Why would you add a tag when you don't know a value to assign? N >> >> >> In addition, concerning the signed:opening_hours=yes/no, there is no >> need to assign more

Re: [Tagging] barrier enforcing maxwidth

t; maxheight - this barrier seemed to be the same - if you are over max you > will hit and severely damage your vehecle on the barrier - not the bridge > or overpass or whatever. > > Javbw > > On Sep 8, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Andrew Errington <erringt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I

Re: [Tagging] barrier enforcing maxwidth

I don't think a new tag is warranted. maxwidth=* is fairly unequivocal. If map users or routers want to interpret it as "max width, but probably not really, there's probably a bit of extra space, I mean, who's going to be that petty" then that's not your problem. Since most roads do not have a

Re: [Tagging] Road classification

> From this it sounds like this tagging in OSM is relying too much on > official classification rather than on real road importance. > > I have always maintained that this is the right way to do it. Official classification is objective and easy to verify. "real road importance" is purely

Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal

On 26/08/2015, Richard ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:23:10PM +1000, Warin wrote: On 26/08/2015 8:20 AM, Paul Norman wrote: On 8/24/2015 3:35 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: That's not so bad in lua, but imagine writing ... and not disused=yes into every cartocss rule!

Re: [Tagging] Local highways classifications

I actually disagree with this criticism. I think it is appropriate to tag a road based on its real-life designated classification. My reason for saying this is because it is entirely objective. There have been similar discussions before which generally conclude with a recommendation to make

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

This is the same in Korea. Tagging the roads based on their physical characteristics (such as roadsign type, and with or without centre lines) is an excellent way to avoid subjective judgements. Roads that go somewhere, but have no painted line, are unclassified. These roads we are talking

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

I think Javbw and I are in agreement, but I don't think a subtag is required. Just highway=service (and no service=* tag). Andrew On 13 July 2015 at 10:22, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: This is the same in Korea. Tagging the roads based on their physical characteristics

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

I think an additional tag is not necessary. I think is is sufficient to tag them with highway=service. Remember, service=* is simply clarifying the kind of service road. They are definitely not tracks. I remember the discussion about clarifying track grade 1 and I thought it was stretching a

Re: [Tagging] Rural Alley?

Oh, and it's not really an alley, so I wouldn't tag it as such. A On 08/07/2015, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: We have something similar in Korea. I have been using (and recommending) highway=service. They're not really tracks, as they are proper roads, with a concrete

Re: [Tagging] Rural Alley?

I agree, but I based my choice on the description in the wiki. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice On 08/07/2015, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: On 7/8/2015 2:44 AM, Andrew Errington wrote: They're not really tracks, as they are proper roads, with a concrete or tarmac

Re: [Tagging] Rural Alley?

We have something similar in Korea. I have been using (and recommending) highway=service. They're not really tracks, as they are proper roads, with a concrete or tarmac surface, But, they don't really go anywhere. I change the tags when the road actually becomes a track (two lines of worn dirt

Re: [Tagging] Rural Alley?

I looked at that street view. To me, the way ahead (slightly to the left) is highway=track. The roads to the left, right and behind are highway=service. A On 8 July 2015 at 19:27, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: We have something similar in Korea. I have been using (and recommending)

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 05/06/2015, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position where you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one vehicle but has passing bays along it's length.

Re: [Tagging] Comms towers

According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcommunications_tower One does. On 29 May 2015 at 07:18, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: What's with Man_made=communications_tower tower:type=communications Does one tag towers with both ? -- Mike.

Re: [Tagging] Wiki: Key:level: proposed rewrite

On 25/05/2015, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: The floor level *order* will be clear from the ele(vation) tag, won't it. No. Since when has the ele=* tag been used for floors in a building? ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Wiki: Key:level: proposed rewrite

Yes, I object. level=* is an internal value. Its meaning is absolute, which is necessary because it is used worldwide. When the value is displayed, the displaying software should localise the result according to either the viewer's language, or viewer's location. Perhaps you are not aware that

Re: [Tagging] Wiki: Key:level: proposed rewrite

It's highly likely that the street level floor would be named 'Ground' - so if software needs to know this, that would be a good starting point. It could also be worked out by which highway meets the street. That's funny. In your previous example no floor is named 'Ground'.

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick - surface=bricks?

On Tuesday, 12 May 2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-05-12 7:05 GMT+02:00 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','erringt...@gmail.com');: Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to surface=bricks? Yes

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick - surface=bricks?

Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to surface=bricks? Yes. In English, brick can be an adjective as well as a noun. As an adjective, as it is here, it should have no s. On 12 May 2015 at 05:40, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: Neither is documented

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite

Hmm, lets experiment ... Node tourism = camp_site camp_site = standard name = Happy Jacks Node tourism = camp_site camp_pitch = yes ref = 42 addr:unit = 42 camp_pitch:picnic_table=yes Node What I don't see here is how to associate the pitches with Happy Jacks. I guess the

Re: [Tagging] Straw pole Temperature=objective default unit?

There is no regional default if the units are not specified. In the case of maxspeed it is always km/h if the units are not specified. If mph is intended then mph must be specified. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed So, for your example of temperature, if the units are not

Re: [Tagging] Straw pole Temperature=objective default unit?

On 9 April 2015 at 14:19, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: To be clear... IF the mapper enters, say, temperature=46 a) this is taken as 46 °C b) taken as 46 °C, except in regions where Fahrenheit is use then 46 °F (similar to default speeds taken as kmh or mph depending on region) c) an

Re: [Tagging] Straw pole Temperature=objective default unit?

On 9 April 2015 at 14:00, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: I would prefer a degree symbol. Otherwise you never can be sure that C is meant by a mapper from a F region. Do you mean that, or do you mean a unit symbol? i.e. do you mean the degree symbol (°) should be present, or do

Re: [Tagging] Straw pole Temperature=objective default unit?

I think if no unit is specified then it should be taken to mean Celsius worldwide. To define the unit explicitly use n[.n][C|F]. We should also state that the degree symbol is not required (and maybe that it should never be present). At least, that's my opinion. Andrew On 9 April 2015 at

Re: [Tagging] Fuel shops

I think they should remain as amenity=fuel (I have visited Thailand and I know what you mean). Local people will know what to expect, but for clarity perhaps subtags should be used to add detail and differentiate between a filling station and a lemonade stand selling fuel. On Thursday, 19 March

Re: [Tagging] Fuel shops

. The tag shop=gas with subtag would be better. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:46 AM Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','erringt...@gmail.com'); wrote: I think they should remain as amenity=fuel (I have visited Thailand and I know what you mean). Local people will know

Re: [Tagging] Spelling: vending=news_papers

On Sun, 22 Jun 2014 22:22:46 Andreas Goss wrote: I was fixing some stuff with http://keepright.at/ when I found an error showing a wrong spelling vending=newspapers and the right tag was vending=news_papers. Which confused me, because I was pretty sure that's the spelling I learned in English

Re: [Tagging] Structure on the end of tunnel to cover sun and avoid bright blindness

On Wed, 14 May 2014 18:33:43 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-05-14 7:17 GMT+02:00 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com: You could also refer to the Wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tunnel For covered passages which are open on one side, often found on mountain roads

Re: [Tagging] Structure on the end of tunnel to cover sun and avoid bright blindness

On Wed, 14 May 2014 05:13:20 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 13/mag/2014 um 20:30 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com: building=shade seems better this could be a idea if you map the structure itself, or maybe building=shading_structure you can also split the highway and

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:58:35 André Pirard wrote: The Osmand's (or its renderer's) bug looks much like this. To say it more precisely than it looks bad, It uses dotted lines for -1, -2 and probably below. There is no reason why. It should be corrected and not be worked around by changing all

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

on top of the dirt underneath it. On 21/04/2014, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: I am using OSMAND for navigation, so it's important to have clear maps. Now that I have downloaded the latest data for this area

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

As I said earlier, I fixed a lot of rivers and waterways nearby that were incorrectly tagged as layer=-1. I removed the layer tag (since it is not necessary on a river or stream) and checked all the bridges and tunnels in the area. Some bridges and tunnels did not have a layer tag, which is

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

I have discovered a bunch of rivers and streams with layer=-1 in my local area. In my opinion this is simply wrong, so I am removing the layer tag from the river and checking for objects which cross the river (to tag them with layer=1. Best wishes, Andrew On 02/04/2014, Bryce Nesbitt

Re: [Tagging] Study area

We have them here in Korea. Students pay per month and use the room to study in. The main reason they exist is because of the dense housing here it's sometimes hard for students to get a quiet place to study. The ones I am talking about are not really co-working space. They are for middle- and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - drinkable

Ah, the wheel has turned full circle. We had this same discussion a couple of years ago. IMHO potable is the right answer, but amazingly, although everyone who joined the discussion knew what it meant, they all thought it shouldn't be used in case someone didn't know. Best wishes, Andrew On

Re: [Tagging] Topographic place names

On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 19:26:55 Steve Bennett wrote: Hi all, My cycletouring map, http://cycletour.org, has been slowly morphing into a general topographic map[1]. One thing that's missing, though, is names for topographic features like mountain ranges, spurs, and general areas. Looking at

Re: [Tagging] Security Gate Post/Cabin

On 9 December 2013 15:55, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Pinkertons call this a Police Box, at least in the pacific northwestern US, and even prior to the recent Doctor Who fad. Recent? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?

On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:47:51 Dudley Ibbett wrote: From a tourists perspective it is quite important to know whether it is self catering accommodation or not. It is also important to know whether it is a single building unit (i.e. house,cottage,chalet) as opposed to a number of units in a

Re: [Tagging] Call for more feedbacks about emergency=aed or emergency=defibrillator

On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:06:52 Pieren wrote: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On the units I've seen in the wild the term aed or AED appears in nearly every case, but the word defibrillator is frequently absent. On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Andrew

Re: [Tagging] Call for more feedbacks about emergency=aed or emergency=defibrillator

On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 07:06:54 Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On the units I've seen in the wild the term aed or AED appears in nearly every case, but the word defibrillator is frequently absent. Yup, in Japan they are *everywhere*, with orange enclosures and big letters reading AED. Andrew

Re: [Tagging] Ace Hardware

Either they are associated with Ace Hardware, or they are not. If they are, then it's probably easiest to use brand=*. I doubt very much that they are a co-op. My suggestion: brand=Ace Hardware name=(the store name) operator=(the name of the owner) Best wishes, Andrew On 30 August 2013

Re: [Tagging] Hiking tracks as POIs in Brazil

I agree. I have mapped some hiking trails in Korea and noticed there is nothing specific to mark the start of a trail. I suppose it could be done programmatically. It is clear which node is the first one, so it could be rendered differently, with extra detail extracted from the tags on the

Re: [Tagging] Tagging camp sites within campground

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:19:48 Tod Fitch wrote: In the case I am looking at now there is no street number for the campground. At least there is no sign indicating one nor have I seen a street number on an any map. So I guess that addr:housenumber might work. But I imagine that there are

Re: [Tagging] pastry and confectionery

Why not record the URL of the store in website=*? That way people can visit the store's website and see for themselves what they sell. The benefit of this is that if the shop alters their range of goods you don't need to alter the tags. The store will update their website. So, all you need is

Re: [Tagging] pastry and confectionery

On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 17:42:32 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2013/6/7 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com Why not record the URL of the store in website=*? That way people can visit the store's website and see for themselves what they sell. of course you do this IF they have a website

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'averaged' paths in rural Mali

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:31:06 Pieren wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: How about drawing a single 'representative' way as you have been doing, and adding width=100? ?? and why not 500... Because the OP stated the extent of the parallel

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'averaged' paths in rural Mali

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:05:37 Pieren wrote: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: +1 to not add width=100 to one single generalized way, that would mean something very different. -1 Saying this road is 100m wide is a joke when you are in the

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'averaged' paths in rural Mali

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 01:46:43 william skora wrote: Hey everyone, As you may know, HOT is currently mapping infrastructure in Mali. In flat rual areas, there are some 'highways' (unpaved ground) that are very close to each other (up to ~100 meters ) that all lead to the same villages or

Re: [Tagging] Is the difference between power station and sub station clear?

On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:40:05 François Lacombe wrote: Ok, I agree with you about substation vs sub_station. Consensus seems to emerge from this discussion, I would edit the wiki like polderrunner explained. * Deprecation (not removal) of power=station, power=substation (and all other

Re: [Tagging] Follow-up on Time Domains

On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 06:36:57 Serge Wroclawski wrote: there have been some minor additions resulting in an updated spec. The one comment I have is that I'm not at all used to seeing two letter days of the week. I've always seen them as Mon, Tue, Wed, Thur, Fri, Sat, Sun. This is obviously

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - age groups in schools

2012/11/26 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: In the UK public schools are expensive fee paying private schools, such as Eaton, Harrow etc. thanks for clarification, for those interested in further info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_(United_Kingdom) The state_school

Re: [Tagging] Tag ref on motorway_link

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 24, 2012 12:25 AM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: this is why i don't put New York State Reference Route numbers

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Obstacle

I second the name hazard. This covers obstacles and dangerous areas. Any hazard can be shown as a simple icon by any software. Specific hazards can be parsed from the values and shown with a specific icon if necessary. If a landslide blocks the road, then just break the way. Routing software

[Tagging] Hiking trail marker

Hello, How should I tag this? It is a trail marker on a hiking trail in Korea. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Geochang_scribe#What.27s_this.3F There are several of them, at various points on each trail. The purpose is to indicate where you are on the trail, and also when requesting

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (amenity=kennel)

On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 18:00:19 Martin Vonwald wrote: 2012/9/13 te...@free.fr: Thank you for your proposal. Couldn't we have some more general tagging for this purpose? Such facilities can generally keep other kinds of animals (like SPA, Société Protectrice des Animaux in France) so why

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - key:branch

Hello everyone, This is my first proposal for a key that I feel is missing. I have searched, but I couldn't find anything to suggest it has been rejected before, but I could be wrong. You will find the details here, but is basically a place to put the branch name for an

Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of company name change

On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 18:32:32 Pieren wrote: On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Jaakko Helleranta.com You might want to move the old name to, well, old_name=* .. because many may well search for that even years after the name change. And if the tag old_name is already present with a previous

Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of company name change

On Mon, 03 Sep 2012 22:06:21 Johan Jönsson wrote: Andrew Errington erringtona@... writes: Thanks everyone for the tips. I'm sure it's all stores: http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/article.aspx? aid=2954734cloc=joongangdaily|home|newslist2 On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 2

[Tagging] Automated edit of company name change

Hello everyone, Here in Korea a chain of convenience stores has changed its name from FamilyMart to CU. All of the stores have had their signage and livery removed and replaced with new signage and livery. What is the best way to perform essentially a country-wide search-and-replace for

Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of company name change

. Upload. I probably shouldn't have told you that. It's a bit too easy to mess things up... Richard On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everyone, Here in Korea a chain of convenience stores has changed its name from FamilyMart to CU. All

Re: [Tagging] Ford = depreciated?

I remember this happening, and it seemed like a Good Thing at the time, although I had only mapped one ford. It was suggested that highway=ford should be deprecated and replaced with ford=yes. So ford itself is not lost, it has moved from a value to become a key. I like this approach. Do you

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 07:31:40 John Sturdy wrote: snip i.e. London may be London to an English person and Londres to a French person, but Stourport-on-Severn is Stourport-on-Severn to both of them (just picking a smallish town randomly; no potential slur intended). And a lot of names in OSM are

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:48:37 John Sturdy wrote: [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Names_localization +1, generally; but I'm not keen on deprecating the bare name=* tag, because for many (perhaps most) named features, there is only one name. For example, a minor

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:45:03 Ronnie Soak wrote: snip I do understand 'potable' and I believe others can do too. You either use translated presets or need to look it up in the wiki/taginfo anyway. I also expect anyone smart enough to use an osm editor can also use a translation tool. BUT: I

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:21:34 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: The general tag for a source of drinkable water is amenity=drinking_water. But in some cases you will want to subtag an existing OSM-object (like an amenity=fountain) with the info that the water is drinkable. Apparently our free

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:46 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/7/12 Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com Can we introduce potable=yes/no and migrate both of those tags to it over time? I don't know if this is for consideration, but the word potable is not very known outside

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 13.07.2012 02:12, Andrew Errington wrote: I expect that trunk road, roundabout, shelter and archaeological site are not well known in all languages, however, the language of OSM is English and potable has a very

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:32:59 Colin Smale wrote: On 06/06/2012 09:13, Martin Vonwald wrote: If you want to specify the dimension of the mini-roundabout I think it would be sufficient to specify the width of the approaching roads. Martin How about diameter=15 on the mini-roundabout node?

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 21:21:56 Philip Barnes wrote: Diameter is more universally understood by the layman than radius. You and I both seem to understand it. Let's not underestimate the ability of someone we haven't met. Radius is normally only used by engineers, scientists and

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 21:25:08 Tobias Johansson wrote: Concerning diameter/radius. What if the mini-roundabout isn't round? It is. It is a perfect circle on a frictionless plane. But if it's not, use the minor radius, then calculations can be done for the worst case (large vehicle, smallest

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 22:06:10 Philip Barnes wrote: Mini roundabouts are normally too small to be anything but round. I realise that we would use decimal s rather than fractions. But in most cases a guestimate of diameter in metres will do. Most will be either 1, 2 or 3 metres, using radius

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

I propose that the radius would be from the centre of the mini-roundabout to the centreline of the road around it. And to the previous poster who said that diameter would be better as it is hard to estimate the centre, I agree in general, but in this case we specify precisely where the centre is

[Tagging] Light-rail station

Hi all, This light-rail station is above ground near an airport in South Korea. http://osm.org/go/546KGWeqC--?m I originally mapped the light rail (two tracks) and added a node at each station point (so, two nodes per station, one in each direction). A new mapper has done a nice job of the

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

On Fri, 18 May 2012 18:06:54 Richard Fairhurst wrote: Andrew Errington wrote: It's easy to edit the wiki. It's easy for Potlatch and JOSM developers to edit the software to do the Right Thing. How do we make this happen? I like your it's easy statement, and look forward to you publishing

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

On Fri, 18 May 2012 16:38:09 Martin Vonwald wrote: Do you have any suggestion how to change the presets for mini-roundabouts? The term mini-roundabout is very misleading so we need some very good, crystal clear and short description for it. Any idea is very welcomed! I think the term

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: Otherwise we can pontificate all we want on the mailing list but people who are not familiar with the concept of a real mini-roundabout WILL still use this tag for small roundabouts with non-traversable centers. That's

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

So, I know what a mini-roundabout is, and you know what a mini-roundabout is, and we are in agreement. You have also identified specific problems with the editing software that guides people to the wrong conclusion if they don't know what a mini-roundabout is. It's easy to edit the wiki. It's

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:29:52 Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Before that I added a point in the Open issues section about lanes=1.5 and modified the note at the end of the section Narrow road. As So, today I got a chance to revisit an unpaved residential road I've tagged as lanes=1.5 in the distant

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:29:52 Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Before that I added a point in the Open issues section about lanes=1.5 and modified the note at the end of the section Narrow road. As So, today I got a chance to revisit an unpaved residential road I've tagged as lanes=1.5 in the distant

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

I'm quite happy with lanes=n where n is an integer. I am very happy to assume that a one-way road without lanes=* has only one lane. I am also happy to assume that a not-one-way road without lanes=* has two lanes (one in each direction). I am extremely happy to see a width=* tag that I can

  1   2   >