[Tagging] Changing amenity=bear_box to amenity=bear_cache

2023-06-19 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
Based on a discussion that was had on the discussion page[0] of tag:amenity=bear_box, I am proposing a change of this tag from amenity=bear_box to amenity=bear_cache with an additional tag of bear_cache:type=* to better clarify what type of bear cache is here. The term "bear cache" seems to be

Re: [Tagging] coastline v. water

2020-11-21 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
t their edges - see > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel#How_to_Map > and > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel > - most of the "creek" features along the Bay are tidal channels. > > -- Jose

Re: [Tagging] coastline v. water

2020-11-19 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, November 18th, 2020 at 11:34 PM, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > This was fascinating reading.  I do agree that we ought to have a definition > for what gets tagged natural=coastline, and I think it's fine if that > definition has some

Re: [Tagging] coastline v. water

2020-11-19 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, November 18th, 2020 at 5:04 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > Eric H. Christensen via Tagging tagging@openstreetmap.org hat am 18.11.2020 > > 21:19 geschrieben: > > > [...] > > First: the matter has been discussed at l

Re: [Tagging] coastline v. water

2020-11-18 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, November 18th, 2020 at 3:31 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Consider that the natural=coastline is defined as representing the mean high > water springs line, that is, the line of the highest tides. If the line on an > open ocean beach is at the

[Tagging] coastline v. water

2020-11-18 Thread Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
After a few days of much work, a recent collaborative project to turn the Chesapeake Bay from a nothing space outlined by natural=coastline to what we considered to be a more accurate relation of natural=water, we've received some negative feedback. The difference of opinion seems to lie in

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Evacuation Routes

2018-08-24 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 9, 2018 11:57 AM, Eric H. Christensen wrote: > I'm opening up my Evacuation Routes proposal[0] for voting. I think we've had > two good sessions of discussions for ironing out the bugs and it'

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Evacuation Routes

2018-08-09 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 I'm opening up my Evacuation Routes proposal[0] for voting. I think we've had two good sessions of discussions for ironing out the bugs and it's time to get this thing out the door! [0]

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Evacuation Route

2018-08-07 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 -‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 7, 2018 11:27 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > On 6. Aug 2018, at 06:30, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: > > And it might be better to place it directly in the emergency key? > > Say

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Evacuation Route

2018-08-06 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 6, 2018 2:02 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/08/18 15:27, Eric H. Christensen wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Evacuation Route

2018-08-05 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 6, 2018 12:30 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'd think this should be a relation - not a way. > At the moment the proposals says it is only a way. > > And it might be better to place it

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Evacuation Route

2018-08-05 Thread Eric H. Christensen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Last year I made a feature proposal[0] last year regarding evacuation routes. There were a couple of recommended changes to the RFC[1] and while I agreed with them I 1) failed to make them and 2) got side tracked on a couple of other

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-17 Thread Eric H. Christensen
On August 17, 2017 11:38:10 AM EDT, Richard Welty wrote: >On 8/17/17 10:25 AM, Eric Christensen wrote: >> >> That's not really what's being discussed here. A non-pressurized >> hydrant wouldn't be attached to a tank at all. It would require a >fire >> engine to suck the