that could reliably and correctly provide these informations in OSM,
and I would love to see if one day in the future this might be
implemented in OSM…
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org
As key:evacuation_route is currently almost exclusively used on
relations anyway, it might make more sense to deprecate this tag and
instead define a new value for route=* on type=route relations (and
than add all the refinements that you propose)…
--
Lukas Sommer
The wiki page for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele says it
has to be in meters, not in feets.
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
gt; The aim is not to forbid some values but to allow
> common editor to guide the user to avoid a very common error.
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Voting at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Language_information
is open.
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
to ask questions if things are unclear!
Best regards
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
better, more detailed, what
missing language information means for Unicode text strings, and how
an example use case could look like. However, it will take some time
until the new proposal will be ready…
2017-05-23 18:02 GMT, Lukas Sommer <sommer...@gmail.com>:
> There haven’t bee
There haven’t been further suggestionsn in the last time. So now
voting is open for “Language information for name” at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Language_information_for_name
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
This is still in RFC phase. Current state after discussion at the Wiki
talk page is using name:language (similiar structure like the yet
existing name:left and name:right) as key.
Lukas
2017-05-05 11:51 GMT, Lukas Sommer <sommer...@gmail.com>:
> Feature Proposal - RFC - Language in
are unclear!
Best regards
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
are messy. Unless the API starts validating
entries, entries will vary in format, even if we officially say that 46 C
is the official format. But software can parse and normalize numbers.
That said: temperature=___ is a problematic tag regardless of the
formatting of the data.
--
Lukas
It's not a contradiction, it's a proposal.
So please move it to the “Proposal/” namespace.
2015-04-03 8:01 GMT, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
The default unit is _not_ always “meters”. There are tags where the
default unit is “meters” (e. g. width) and there are others where the
default
, this seems to
be
the most pragmatic approach.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
-03 9:16 GMT, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
So please move it to the “Proposal/” namespace.
That's not possible for a working template,
Note the template is not USED,
And it should also not be used, because it’s just your personal
proposal for a discussion. So there is no need to have
of existing tags have a summary of the Map_Features/Units
embedded on their own pages.
That's a good thing for tl;dr readers.
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
the part about distances (and not the part about
weight). But dropping the rest of the content makes things confusing.
2015-04-03 9:25 GMT, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
I'd ask the following be excluded ?
cm (used in the clothing and foot ware trades ..not an OSM thing )
cubits
I don’t
%3Dconstruction
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
neighborhood:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ABarreled_fuel_shop.jpg
--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
So - I am against any of proposed changes.
+1
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hello.
In the discussion about the proposal about type=traffic_signals_group
it was suggested to use the term “set” instead of “group”. So I’ve
adapted the wiki page of the proposal and I’ve moved it to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/traffic_signals_set
--
Lukas Sommer
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
and broadleaved. Mappers are mapping
palms
very frequently, and having this key name I think would reduce confusion.
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
this? May be a different name for this 'group'? Such as ?
traffic signals set?
On 26/02/2015 8:59 AM, Lukas Sommer wrote:
Hello.
This is a request for comments for the proposal
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/traffic_signals_group
The original author is Sanderd17
Hello.
This is a request for comments for the proposal
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/traffic_signals_group
The original author is Sanderd17. With the consent of him, I did some
supplementing. Thanks to Sanerd17!
Unlike the proposal “Proposed features/Traffic Signals” of
, it is
often necessary in HOT aerial mapping when we have low-resolution
imagery to work from.
Agree. As for the Wiki editing, I too hope it doesn't lead to a storm.
--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
--
Lukas Sommer
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
here. Wouldn’t it be more useful to have to have the same rules
for _all_ values of the key “building=*”?
--
Lukas Sommer
PS: By the way: In the german wiki, most pages for the individual
values do _not_ allow usage on nodes.
___
Tagging mailing list
is only possible when you have the
agreement of all these who votes with “yes” so far. As in the meantime
more people have voted, that get’s complicate …
Best regards
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
I know that I’m a little late with this comment – I missed this while
reading the proposal. Sorry.
Maybe that’s something that can be changed in the prososal – if
current voters agree?
2015-02-09 17:29 GMT, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
I would strongly recommend to not use type
/listinfo/tagging
--
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
normal live.
So I think it’s important to have a clearly defined default unit, and
this default unit should be °C. Nevertheless, I think it is a good
idea to encourage people to tag “with” the unit.
Lukas Sommer
2015-02-05 0:53 GMT+00:00 Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com:
For clarification
be better for traffic signal systems. Currently, I tend
to come up with a proposal for a relation for traffic signal system
names – which would not interfer with Lukas Schaus’ proposal. @Javbw
Do you have some feedback from the japanese community? What do they
think about the usage of a relation?
Lukas
I think this can be a useful new tag.
And I think it makes sense to define explicitly some things in the
documentation. Things like
– use always (or use never) “Saint”: “Saint Paul” vs “Paul”.
– write the name of the dedication always in the local language (Or
always in latin? Could become very
No! Flood prone means that they are expected to be flooded from time to
time. Nothing about the design.
So you would have to tag also each wadi, each river and each lake
because this area is covered with water? Maybe the terms “designed”
and “expected” are missleading. But the question is: How
.
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-20 4:09 GMT+00:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
I think using flood_prone on places designed to handle water (like a ford)
is incorrect. The sections of a freeway that are closed off during flooding
(a lane is closed because storm waters cannot properly drain away, or
cuttings
What you propose is an algorithm that does a sort of “guess”. For
doing some sort of guess, we don’t need to introduce a new relation.
That could be done also without a relation.
Introducing a new relation should lead to better data and more
well-structured information. There should be a certain
I’ll wait until monday with the change …
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-16 12:35 GMT+00:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
Am 16.01.2015 um 09:31 schrieb Martin Vonwald:
2015-01-15 22:12 GMT+01:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com
mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
Please, do not forget to mention
signposts for being confusing.
Thoughts?
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-11 15:48 GMT+00:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com:
2015-01-10 19:40 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
+1. Key:destination for the simple cases the the relation for the
complex cases seems fine for me.
I'll wait until
not a direct EU instituion – and also some
non-EU countries like Macedonia are members).
Cheers
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-15 10:08 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
Hi Friedrich,
Ok for the upper case.
I would prefer ref:eu:eic since I'm not sure entsoe isn't used in any
. If this is correct, the examples
with the yellow and white signposts on the wiki page are confusing
(tagging a motorway_link makes no sense here), and I would recommand
to remove these three examples.
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-10 17:40 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com:
I've asked this question
But we have also yet an existing tag water=pond for ponds. We would
have to change the defination for this tag from “a pond”
to “a pond – but not if this is a pond that serves for fishing” –
sounds complicate …
Lukas Sommer
2015-01-04 20:20 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
2015-01-04
related floods?
– Only supplementary tagging of highway=*? Or independent OSM elements
(areas)? Or both? Probably both makes sense.
Suggestions?
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
PS: About 57% of the key “flood_prone” is “flood_prone=yes”. About 42%
of the key “flood_prone” is “flood_prone=no”. About 80% of the
elements with the flood_prone key are in 15 km × 15 km area in
Jakarta.
Lukas Sommer
2014-12-28 20:32 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
Hello.
In OSM
Maybe we could use a key with a namespace: “power:usage=*” or something
else. Keeping is separate from the railway usage could give us more
clairity.
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-24 15:24 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
Hi Rainer and thank you.
I didn't spend time yet
for this.
cu
Lukas Sommer
2014-12-01 23:38 GMT+00:00 François Lacombe fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
Hi Lukas,
I don't like this : railway guys introduced usage without any namespace.
Why should power introduce one ?
usage=* is a common tag. The proposal isn't introducing power:location
instead
Or would it be better – if a consens is difficult – to wait until a general
resolution for the problem “one key with more than one value” has come up?
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-29 5:03 GMT+00:00 Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk:
On 29 Nov 2014 00:26, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com
: ask software to stop using the not-accepted solution.
Thoughts?
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-27 15:21 GMT+00:00 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Brian Quinion
openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote:
On 25 November 2014 at 13:30, althio forum althio.fo...@gmail.com
Okay, so I would place a hint at the corresponding wiki page …
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-23 18:46 GMT+00:00 Zecke z...@saeuferleber.de:
Am 23.11.2014 18:20, schrieb Lukas Sommer:
Would a feature proposal be a good way to get there?
No need to do so. The semi-colon is the accepted way
“alt_name_1=name1”+“alt_name_2=name2”.
However, the discussion didn’t lead to something “official”.
I think it could be useful to have a clear documentation on the wiki about
which solution is the preferred one.
Would a feature proposal be a good way to get there?
Lukas Sommer
PS: Me to, I would prefer
We have finally 12 votes: 11 times “yes” and 1 time “no”. I think this
could be considered as approved …
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-02 7:57 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
Hello.
After commenting period, now is starting the voting for the junction
(only) tagging at
https
Just as a reminder: Voting is still open at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-02 7:57 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
Hello.
After commenting period, now is starting the voting for the junction
(only
The proposal is only about allow “junction=yes” on areas. All other stuff
stays without changes.
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-11 12:08 GMT+00:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 11:08:56AM +, Lukas Sommer wrote:
Just as a reminder: Voting is still open at
https
this
as area.
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-11-11 13:51 GMT+00:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2014-11-11 14:45 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
The proposal is only about allow “junction=yes” on areas. All other stuff
stays without changes.
Would you mind explaining
Hello.
After commenting period, now is starting the voting for the junction (only)
tagging at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
for the simple sections and move the existing
nodes with junction=yes to highway=junction. However, I’m open for both
solutions…
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-10-21 16:00 GMT+00:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
Am 18.10.2014 08:45, schrieb Lukas Sommer:
Hello.
The combined proposal
://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions
which takes into account the comments which have been made during the
previous voting.
Best regards
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
Okay, we have 9 votes:
- 5 times approve
- 3 times oppose
- 1 time obstain
I suppose this is not enough?
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-28 14:48 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
Hello.
After discussion and some modifications of the proposal, here a request
for voting on “Tagging
I like this proposal.
I would add the requirement that the highways/railways/paths that go over a
bridge have to share a node with the outline area.
Lukas Sommer
2014-10-10 14:44 GMT+00:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
man_made=bridge as proposed on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org
Second sentence in the section Tagging - Bridges with one level:
Connect all OSM ways running over that bridge to the outline.
Sorry, I missed this.
Perfect!
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-10-13 10:34 GMT+00:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com:
Hi!
2014-10-13 12:12 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer
Hello all.
At
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions_or_traffic_signals_that_are_named
there is still a proposal for complex junctions and traffic signal systems
in voting process. Participation is appreciated ;-)
Regards
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-09
Oh, sorry, Pieren was faster… ;-)
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-30 12:34 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on the
same node, then the logical solution is junction:name=* and
traffic_signals:name=*. Or in different languages
What would also be no problem, because you can give an individual name=*
tag to each node with highway=traffic_signals and another name=* tag to the
area.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-30 18:56 GMT+00:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
Am 30.09.2014 14:34, schrieb Lukas Sommer:
If there is a need
Can you please provide examples how to draw area for more complicated
junctions?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions_or_traffic_signals_that_are_named
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-29 3:14 GMT+00:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com:
Not enough examples, I cannot
when we distinguish between th:junction_area and
kr:junction_area - because here we have two values for the same feature.
While the tagging has a certain focus on some asian countries, I would
prefer to keep this country-independent.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-29 21:37 GMT+00:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com
.
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Oh, sorry, I missed this:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions_or_traffic_signals_that_are_named
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-28 20:47 GMT+00:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
A link is missing.
2014-09-28 16:48 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer sommer
to the mapper to decide)
Example: If the main road is secondary, the frontage road must be one of
“tertiary” or “unclassified” or “residential”.
Could this be a useful guide?
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-23 7:23 GMT+00:00 Satoshi IIDA nyamp...@gmail.com:
If you got any communication loss during
There is not much documentation on the wiki. The only thing that I found
was a statement at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice that says that
highway=service is wrong, but everything else is okay.
highway=service service=alley sounds really good to me - parallel to
No tags on the shared nodes - just shared nodes.
What is IMHO a quite bad idea for two reasons:
– It’s unlikely that there will be software supporting features when there
is no tag.
– You would introduce a concurrent solution to a node
highway=traffic_signals. I do not think that it’s a good
So the nodes where the signals_area intersects the highways is where the
signals would normally be mapped for complex intersections?
Not exactly. It would be difficult to do so if you have really complex
junctions with really many individual traffic signals and you want to catch
all of them – a
with the walkways and other
pedestrian oriented ways, as the signal would be part of their routing as
well.
Here, I agree. I assumed that people would do so automatically, but I’ll
also add it on the wiki page.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-21 21:30 GMT+00:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com:
It should be pretty
to _not_ tag the individual traffic
signals for Japan.
As described in the proposal, the area is simply drawn around the
approximative area that is affected by the traffic signals. It encloses
everything, but shares nodes only with the incoming and outgoing highways.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-20 16:45
Differentiated tagging is needed for differentiated rendering. junction
vs Signal. a single signal icon needs to be rendered in Japan for
intersections.
But that is yet working perfectly with the current tagging!
In Korea, we have yet thousands of nodes with junction=yes and name=*, and
Again, I do not see the point in introducing here a new tag. Using the
existing junction=yes in Korea and the existing highway=traffic_signals in
Japan – just not only on nodes but extending it also also on closed ways
(=areas) – should be fine.
Okay, here I have to correct myself. It may be
not traffic_signals=* which seems to have either another meaning
– highway=traffic_signal_system_area (quite long)?
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-19 18:27 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
Again, I do not see the point in introducing here a new tag. Using the
existing junction=yes in Korea
,
which can be practical. Means:
Korea:
– simple: junction=yes
– complex: junction=junction_area
Japan:
– simple: highway=traffic_signals
– complex: highway=traffic_signals_area
I’ve updated the proposal page on the wiki.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-19 18:32 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com
So far, highway=traffic_signal is only defined for nodes and there are
only few ways and fewer relations.
Correct.
Also in favour of separation I would prefer to use junction=* with
name=* and only highway=traffic_signal with name if it is only a single
light (e.g. the case with a named
=traffic_signals would also be problematic because in Japan you
can have named traffic signals on straight road, for pedestrian crossing
, and there is not any road junction.
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-18 19:31 GMT+00:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
Am 18.09.2014 21:29, schrieb fly:
Am
Would it not be more straight forward to use junction=traffic_signal in
Japan and only use highway=traffic_signal for the real lights ?
Hm, I’m not sure. It could separete clearly the individual traffic signals
from the traffic signal system/the covered area. The downside would be that
we
how do you tag a named junction with a traffic signal ?
highway=traffic_signal + junction=yes + name=* means that name is
for the junction or for the traffic signals ?
For the junction!
For a named junction with a (not named) traffic signal: junction=yes +
highway=traffic_signals. (Quite
Okay, I’ve tried to update the old wiki pages (multilanguage names etc.)
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-15 10:47 GMT+00:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
Missed that in August. Great to see it is being discussed at any level.
On Sep 14, 2014, at 12:21 AM, Satoshi IIDA nyamp...@gmail.com wrote:
wow!
https
Okay, I’ve tried to work out more in detail idea 4. Please considere
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions_or_traffic_signals_that_are_named
and make comments.
Lukas Sommer
2014-09-02 4:50 GMT+00:00 Satoshi IIDA nyamp...@gmail.com:
Hello from
would
volonteer to do so.)
Lukas
Lukas Sommer
2014-08-30 2:33 GMT+00:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
On 29.08.2014 21:16, Paul Johnson wrote:
Destinations are supposed to be relations, and the members are pretty
that this is very time-consuming ;-)
Best regards
Lukas Sommer
2014-08-25 15:21 GMT+00:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch:
Am 25.08.2014 16:46, schrieb fly:
.
Did you have a look at the three existing proposals about complex
junctions ?
..
IMHO one of the nice aspects
. Particularly if you are mapping in one of the concerned
countries please participate at the discussion at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Tagging_for_complex_junctions_or_traffic_signals_that_are_named
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging
a clean and reliable tagging
here, which is suitable for rendering and turn-to-turn navigation?
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
is difficult for turn-to-turn navigation
software. So, how can we solve this?
Lukas Sommer
2014-07-24 15:29 GMT+00:00 Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr:
Have you looked at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Ajunction
*junction*=yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction
the “name” tag in the relation and the nodes where the
ways cross as members in the relation.
– Could we maybe simply draw an area around the junction, sharing nodes
with the incoming/outgoing ways? Less clean than a relation, but easier to
use.
Lukas Sommer
2014-07-24 16:07 GMT+00:00 Dan S
Thanks for the clarification!
2014-06-30 9:11 GMT, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2014-06-29 19:11 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:
How do I tag correct a Hamburger roundabout/throughabout/cut-through (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Hamburger_roundabout
where appropriate).
Am I right?
Lukas Sommer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
91 matches
Mail list logo