Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

>A track does have a different function, it can handle a 2 track vehicle, a >path can't. If there's something even remotely like that in the wiki, help or elsewhere, it needs to be reverted to what it has been from the beginning. all we can say is: A track can't be so narrow it can't handle a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag oneway restriction applying to pedestrians?

>(a path is too narrow for a motorcar, so That's a common misdescription. A track can't be so narrow a car wouldn't fit, but most built highway=path ways are wider than that. -- alv ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Public transport cards

Warin wrote: >Marc Gemis wrote: >> bus/bike/train routes. Something no PT provider can offer as they only > Never say never? > > A PT provider with multi modal planer - bus, train, light rail and ferry > for Sydney, Australia > > http://www.transportnsw.info/ Fwiw, we've had a country wide

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > if the forest and the hunting area are known under different names, under > which tag would you put which name? Two points for the whole discussion thread: 1) Forest areas (with the tag, that is) can be subdivided for various attributes, like

Re: [Tagging] Tagging an area for seasonal snowfall?

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:seasonal:snowfall:regaintime > > this looks like a completely useless tag to me, or at least misleading and > prone to guesswork and phantasy mapping. If I understand it right, the tag > tries to say something about the usage

Re: [Tagging] Path with permit required for bikes?

Richard Fairhurst wrote: > An important part of the Pacific Coast Bicycle Route now requires cyclists > to get a permit: > It's not quite 'bicycle=permissive' - that's generally used to imply that > bikes are allowed in by goodwill of the landowner but don't have to book, If we could stick to the

Re: [Tagging] natural=wood status=approved?

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 Warin wrote: > The wiki page for natural=wood has the status shown as 'approved'. > This was set to 'approved' on 20th May 2010. Many major basic tags were included in a list written in I-believe-it-was 2006, i.e. on the original Map Features page. The tag status templates,

Re: [Tagging] Removing name_1 and alt_name_1 from Wiki

On Wed, Mike N wrote: > On 1/20/2016 3:39 PM, Dominic Coletti wrote: >> I see 808,000 uses of name_1 and 65,000 of name_2. > Many of these are from the US TIGER import, and must not be automatically > removed. They would go into alt_name , etc based on local knowledge. I believe this is a good

Re: [Tagging] key:priority

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:priority > > Would there be any major objection to expanding the priority key to include > two way, multilane situations? Example would be a two way street that was > formerly a one-way street, and has

Re: [Tagging] time-conditioned turn restriction

Martijn van Exel wrote: > type=restriction;restriction=no_left_turn; no_left_turn:conditional=no @ > (Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00,16:00-19:00) > > Is this the preferred way? Should it be? type=restriction restriction:conditional=no_left_turn @ (Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00,16:00-19:00) There's also a mention of

Re: [Tagging] amenity=bicycle_repair_station

>> What ambiguity of repair_station would be cleared by tool_stand or >> tool_station ? > it is the word "station" that could be interpreted as a shop / service > station. "stand" does not bear this risk (for me). "tool_station" would be Additionally, "repair" does not state who does the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

johnw wrote: >> traffic_sign=changing >> or > >traffic_sign=variable > The matrix displays and variable signs are very different. > a matrix sign can become entirely different signs. They are also a source > for alerts and current info no matter the topic - whereas a variable sign > for the

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

André Pirard wrote:I think he is referring to the "do not enter" sign, a red circle with a horizontal white bar. >The rectangular F19 is disputably classified as "information" >The no-U-turn sign C33

Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line

David Marchal wrote: > I saw conflicting points of view regarding the difference between these two > ways for modelling aerial power lines: some say that it is the voltage which > matters, others say that it's the visibility difference that matters, others Hi. To properly understand this issue,

Re: [Tagging] Shop values review

Daniel Koć wrote: > discount > flooring > games > health_food > hobby > tiles At least these are probably or possibly locally referred to as they are tagged, Maybe someone can come up with fitting but more general values, if there are any. If a shop sells mostly only games, it's a shop selling

Re: [Tagging] Delete not marked walking routes?

Frederik Ramm wrote: > Our general rule is that things we map must be verifiable on the ground, > i.e. someone who goes there must be able to check that the feature does > indeed exist as described in OSM. This message isn't really contradicting what you wrote later in the message, but I have to

Re: [Tagging] barrier enforcing maxwidth

Colin Smale wrote: > Regarding maxwidth:physical, the examples in the wiki are actually from > Finland where they apparently have explicit signs for the physical width. Just for clarification: even here in Finland the signs are rare, and the only two examples I remember straight away on public

Re: [Tagging] Road classification

Andrew Errington wrote: > I think that for any particular country, the official classification > hierarchy should be mapped on to the OSM hierarchy. If this is not Countries are different in this regard. For example, here we use the official classification for all rural state operated roads, and

Re: [Tagging] Buildings mixing residential and commercial use

On Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I agree. There clearly are typologies with retail (and offices) in the ground > floor and residential (or offices) in the upper IMO an apartment building with shops on the first floor is still an apartment building. Even the description of building=apartments

Re: [Tagging] Describe explicitly that values of highway tag do not imply anything about road quality (except highway=motorway and highway=motorway_link)

Mateusz Konieczny wrote: quality. In area with poor infrastructure road forming main road network, of the highest importance in region should be tagged highway=trunk - no matter whatever is is high-quality asphalt road or unsurfaced tract unusable after major rains. I generally agree on all

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees definition

Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: landuse=residential + natural=grass combination instead, but those lawns do not strike me as natural. The grass is natural (plants), unless it's some sort of man made plastic artificial grass imitation). The key natural never was only about geographical features, nor

Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values

johnw wrote: Access=disabled would be good for this situation, but In this the disabled is a group, i.e. a mode of transport as the wiki page calls them, and should be in the key and not in the value; otherwise some areas would get access=disabled;seniors;pregnant , which is awkward. Also the

Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values

(btw. I don't see any problems with capacity:x=* tags, just the access=* values) John Willis wrote: access=customers Either access=destination or access=permissive, depending on local laws an practices. (or motor_vehicle=*) access=emergency rather access=no + emergency=yes a legally separated

Re: [Tagging] tagging large intersections cross-road sections

Florian Lohoff wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:51:08AM +0200, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Do we have better alternatives? Should we leave the snippet sections unnamed? I'd love routing people to speak up - I'd prefer to not name them and tag them according to be a crossing link. Three points here:

Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging

pmailkeey wrote: johnw wrote: Forest=natural ? isn’t that natural=wood? I don't know the difference between a wood and a forest! landuse=forest and natural=wood are a poor example for historical reasons, when some thought that natural=wood together with landuse=forest was redundant, when it's

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com wrote: Otherwise they make bad routing targets Complete addresses may indeed be unique, but the housenumber part can be and is in may countries the same for, for example all apartments in an apartment building. In other

Re: [Tagging] Airport power and USB stations

AYTOUN RALPH wrote: Then the next thing they will need to know is the type of socket so type=* (example ... plug_UK ; plug_EU ; USB123 ; USB_C) It is customary in osm to avoid type=*, except for relations. Type of what, i.e. power_socket=* or socket=plug_UK (or, rather, the better values

Re: [Tagging] AE and BE orthography in tagging

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: - railway=subway - not sure why this was chosen, underground seems a reasonable BE candidate while the metro term seems to be Paris-related in If my memory serves me right, I've read an ancient (in OSM context) discussion about it: most subway/underground/metro

[Tagging] new highway tag for small and informal footpaths; trail

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: (given that footway, cycleway and bridleway are all synonyms of highway=path designated=foo, dedicated=foo, official=foo, etc.). Ralf Kleineisel wrote: Footway on the other hand is for designated pedestrian ways, i.e. in many countries a blue sign with pedestrians

[Tagging] new highway tag for small and informal footpaths; trail

Ralf Kleineisel wrote: The wiki says: The example photos there support this. And the other pages say otherwise. As you say, example photos, not definition photos. The text and the pictures in the wiki have been changed to each and every direction so many times that none will be able to force

[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Tagging Scheme Recommendations: highway=path, footway, trail?

It's not detailled enough. A path is too narrow for a 4 wheels vehicle like a car but not for a 2 wheels vehicle like a moped or a motorbike (or no While that is often true, the criteria goes the other way: - if the way is too narrow to fit a car (hey, my summer car is only 1.48 m wide) or a