May 19, 2020, 13:41 by europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com:
> >Is it possible to use an API to add image tags to osm objects ?
> >Adding image tags to each of the objects would be the best solution.
>
Every single OSM edit is done via OSM API.
So, you can make OSM editor editing also
May 19, 2020, 12:01 by europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com:
> If I understand correctly, I can query the database for historic data states.
> For how long is the historic data maintained ?
>
In overpass? Forever, except data before license change.
In OSM? Forever, you can get also data before
May 19, 2020, 13:38 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 12:30, European Water Project <>
> europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>>
>> Agree this is a good solution ... and if I can automate a way to bulk
>> move the images to wikimedia commons, after manual
May 19, 2020, 10:08 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> We may take advantage that two nodes can't overlap on OSM
>
It is possible to have multiple nodes at exactly the same position.
Mappers will be confused, validator in JOSM will complain but
it is possible to do this.
May 19, 2020, 09:43 by europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com:
> How quickly do OSM node and ways numbers mutate ? What percentage should I
> expect to change each year.
>
No idea.
You can check this using
May 15, 2020, 08:28 by s8e...@runbox.com:
> On Fri, 15 May 2020 01:53:37 +0200 (CEST), Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>> Not sure is it the best place (someone again decided to go crazy with
>> templates), but
>> I made
>> https://wiki.openstreetm
May 15, 2020, 04:05 by bradha...@fastmail.com:
>
>
> On 5/14/20 5:53 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> May 15, 2020, 01:36 by >> jm...@gmx.com>> :
>>
>>> On 5/14/2020 12:07 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via
May 15, 2020, 01:36 by jm...@gmx.com:
> On 5/14/2020 12:07 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> May 14, 2020, 16:40 by >> jm...@gmx.com>> :
>>
>>> On 5/14/2020 10:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>
May 14, 2020, 16:40 by jm...@gmx.com:
> On 5/14/2020 10:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:48AM Steve Doerr <>>
>> doerr.step...@gmail.com>> >wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/05/2020 09:31, Jo wrote:
>>>
On Wed, May 13,
Obvious, route relations covers the same type of
objects that has different names, even in English.
In other languages you will get even more names,
but I will not start using
type=szlak_turystyczny relation type.
May 13, 2020, 18:17 by bradha...@fastmail.com:
> It isn't a route, except in
May 13, 2020, 17:43 by jm...@gmx.com:
>
> On 5/13/2020 10:12 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
>>
>> We've had relations for over a decade now, IIRC. It'stime to
>> stop treating this basic primitive asentity-non-grata. If tools
>> >> still>> can't deal with
May 13, 2020, 00:18 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
> One in particular, roads in remote areas - yes, it's a dirt road, connecting
> very small centres of population / remote "farms" (if it's still a "farm"
> when it's bigger in area than some countries > ‽> ) only, so it "can't" be
> important
>
Apr 30, 2020, 19:45 by miketh...@gmail.com:
> Hello,
>
> I have always been under the impression that the highway tag should be
> based off of function. Recently I have come across a number of cases
> where driveways and residential roads were tagged "highway=track"
> (perhaps because they
May 11, 2020, 13:43 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
> Am Mo., 11. Mai 2020 um 11:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> >:
>
>> May 11, 2020, 10:06 by >> dieterdre...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> On 11. May 202
May 11, 2020, 15:04 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> I would also advocate to focus on parts of tagging that
> are without known long-standing gridlock.
>
> Like contact:phone vs phone.
>
To clarify: I advocate avoiding known messes like
phone vs contact:phone - this one will not be ever
May 11, 2020, 03:47 by cjmal...@mail.com:
> On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 02:10 +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> And yet you, and others, keep saying it. "Deprecate" means "express
>> disapproval of." In the context of OSM, it means "phase out." That
>> is,
>> eradicate with the passage of time. It
May 11, 2020, 10:06 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>>
>> Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to
>> public parking then you also need to know to check for
>> access!=private.
>>
>
>
> this
May 11, 2020, 02:36 by cjmal...@mail.com:
> On Sun, 2020-05-10 at 23:07 +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> > and gradually deprecating the generic tags.
>>
>> And there you go, wanting to get rid of phone=* and website=*.
>>
>
> I think I stand by that quote, but I'm happy to discus it. I'm not
>
May 9, 2020, 14:33 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 02:29, Paul Allen <> pla16...@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>
>
>> Motorcycle taxi is different from 4-wheeled taxi because they provide a
>> different experience with different speed, charge different fare, have
>> different
May 8, 2020, 19:23 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 08.05.20 à 19:06, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>> Your argument was like saying we should use a amenity=stop tag for all
>> bus stop, taxi stop, helicopter stop, and cruise ship stop because they
>> are just "services
>>
>
> public_transport=*
May 8, 2020, 18:06 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:06 AM Phake Nick wrote:
>
>> Given the proportion of opposing comment being raised, I would say "more
>> than what have been discussed", as barely anyone raised the point during the
>> discussion. The only two
Apr 28, 2020, 21:27 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Hello,
>
> Le 28.04.20 à 19:14, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
>
>> The original key amenity=* is a reasonable choice. This has been
>> confirmed with extensive usage of amenity=pharmacy by mappers and
>> database users:
>>
>
> egg & chiken issue
I created
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dhospital#Mapping_internal_hospital_structure
Extending, review etc is welcomed.
Apr 13, 2020, 11:27 by r...@technomancy.org:
> I think this is a case of “Things within other things”. How do we map that?
> For the enclosing hospital,
Apr 29, 2020, 21:37 by skqu...@rushpost.com:
> On 4/29/20 14:34, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
>
>> Here is a 360° picture of a square in Dakar:
>> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/jYNQFMwHiNEZRCnpi71heA - larger than a
>> street (it occupies a whole city block), used as a multipurpose common
>>
Apr 29, 2020, 21:37 by skqu...@rushpost.com:
> Why exactly was leisure=common deprecated? I used it quite a bit on
> OpenGeoFiction (which follows OSM's lead for the data model).
>
I updated https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dcommon
with arguments from
Mar 25, 2020, 10:26 by frede...@remote.org:
> A while ago we had a longer discussion about Esperanto names; in that
> discussion, it was questioned whether Esperanto could be in the name tag
> but nobody disputed that adding name:eo tags is ok, even though
> Esperanto is an invented (or
Mar 8, 2020, 02:41 by music.kash...@gmail.com:
> That would be tempting, because it would mean a lot less work for us in the
> short term. However, I'm afraid of ending up like PTv2 -
> 1. It 'does not deprecate the old tags', use of the new tags is 'recommended
> but not mandatory'...whatever
Mar 9, 2020, 12:28 by music.kash...@gmail.com:
> I don't understand why the critics of PTv2 seem to think stop positions are
> such a big deal - they are optional!
>
I dislike them, because many people are using them.
Also in places where using them adds no information whatsoever.
I also very
Mar 6, 2020, 15:22 by music.kash...@gmail.com:
>
> Thank you for sharing your thoughts
>
> 06-Mar-2020 17:40:23 Andrew Harvey :
>
>> I think including the actual route is useful and makes life easier for
>> downstream users (they don't need a routing engine to show the route), could
>> this
Mar 5, 2020, 01:30 by antoniomade...@gmx.com:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcross -> which seems
> to be used only for summit crosses
>
I modified wiki to be more clear that summit cross is just one of cases (but
even before
edit it was mentioning it only as an
Mar 1, 2020, 20:03 by vic...@tuxayo.net:
>
>
> On 20-02-25 15:33, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> In this case I would either remove url or change url to other valid
>> wdycf value. And I would probably request blocking such user by DWG.
>>
>
> We
28 Feb 2020, 23:51 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> Hi all,
>
> One simple question : according to you, what is the most suitable key to use
> to map pumps?
> A device intended to raise pressure level of any fluid.
>
Depends on a pump.
Some are not mappable (pump in small
private aquarium,
29 Feb 2020, 11:58 by r...@technomancy.org:
> Do yous think `map_source=openstreetmap` is a good tag?
>
Yes, though I think that posting
the same thread to tagging and talk ml
is a poor idea.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
Feb 28, 2020, 18:49 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> Am Fr., 28. Feb. 2020 um 18:43 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> >:
>
>> name and operator may be tagged
>> also on landuse
>>
>
>
> IMHO it do
name and operator may be tagged
also on landuse
28 Feb 2020, 18:40 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> Am Fr., 28. Feb. 2020 um 16:50 Uhr schrieb Захаренков Алексей <>
> a-z...@yandex.ru> >:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> My dictionary places 'student accommodation' into the series of synonyms
>> 'student
Feb 28, 2020, 10:57 by hol...@sozialhelden.de:
> Dear tagging-mailinglist,
>
> in the German user forum [1] and the talk mailinglist [2] we discussed how
> changing tables for adults could be mapped. One suggestion was
> changing_table:adult=yes/no. I learnt that for such a sub-category a
27 Feb 2020, 09:55 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
>
> If it was semantically important, we should be scanning for and flagging up
> waterways with out-of-order ways.> The fact that we are not, shows that the
> ordering of the ways is not essential for a correct geometrical
>
Feb 27, 2020, 00:22 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:
> Different tags are used for petroleum wells vs water wells because
> they look totally different and their function for the general map
> user is quite distinct. A water well might just be a covered hole, but
> if it is a bored (drilled)
Note that "adding no vote may
turn failing vote into a passing vote"
is a separate issue.
26 Feb 2020, 22:21 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 26. Feb 2020, at 09:15, Joseph Eisenberg
>> wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone else want to add their comments or votes there? This
Feb 25, 2020, 23:16 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 16:56, Martin Koppenhoefer <> dieterdre...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
>> generally, I thought that was agreed, we do not map events, but we do map
>> places where events take (regularly) place.
>>
>
> But I have seen
Feb 25, 2020, 07:51 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 25. Feb 2020, at 04:37, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
>>
>> Does OSM have a position on these tracking parameters, WT.mc_id, utm_*,
>> fbclid, etc? I couldn't find anything on the wiki.
>>
>
>
>
> I guess this should
Feb 25, 2020, 12:21 by frede...@remote.org:
> Hi,
>
> On 25.02.20 11:59, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>> Yes. And we don't even need to do that: we can verify it with about 30
>> seconds' Googling.
>>
>
> Ok ok you're right.
>
> The URL does contain a tracking token but it does not exclusively
Feb 25, 2020, 13:06 by j...@jonorossi.com:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 8:40 PM Victor/tuxayo <> vic...@tuxayo.net> > wrote:
>
>>
>> On 20-02-25 04:36, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
>> > Does OSM have a position on these tracking parameters, WT.mc_id, utm_*,
>> > fbclid, etc? I couldn't find anything
20 Feb 2020, 09:54 by vosc...@gmail.com:
> This tag is a tag with very strong local restriction: 2823 of a world total
> of 3166 are in the Polish city of Krakow.
>
And used by a single person (me).
> The vast majority of dual-carriageway roads elsewhere are not tagged in this
> way.
> This
20 Feb 2020, 13:02 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:
> But
> perhaps we will decided that database users should interpret the
> geometry and name=/ref= tags of parallel highway ways to add this
> information in post-processing. Does anyone know if that is feasible?
>
AFAIK no, I tried to do this
Feb 12, 2020, 12:51 by witwa...@disroot.org:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:14:54AM +, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, 11 February 2020, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>> > OK, you confirm that the "paved is implied" statement in the wiki page is
>> > to be read as "assuming we are in Germany
Rewritten to
"in many cases this can be successfully guessed from the way itself
(for highway=trunk to highway=residential in many regions "paved" is a safe
bet)"
Thanks for noticing and mentioning it here (but just editing would be OK).
Feb 11, 2020, 16:51 by vosc...@gmail.com:
> Do we have
Have you considered how other, more complex, situations would be tagged?
Would it be possible to tag this in consistent way?
Note also that "stopping=yes|no" is unclear and "parking:lane:both=no_stopping"
is
clear.
(note I have not checked whatever this tags are used as you say)
Feb 10, 2020,
Feb 7, 2020, 17:08 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 15:25, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>> Feb 7, 2020, 15:53 by >> pla16...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> Then we give up on entirely sens
Feb 7, 2020, 15:53 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> This list regularly suggests things like replacing landuse=grass with
> landcover=grass, and proposes that editors make the appropriate changes.
>
Vocal part of the list that seems minority to me.
> Then we give up on entirely sensible ideas because
Feb 7, 2020, 15:48 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 10:26, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>> it would make a lot of sense for OSM-Carto to stop indicating this is valid
>> tagging.
>>
>
> it would make more sense to
> 1) decide what a valid/ideal schema is.
> 2) decide what a
Feb 6, 2020, 10:14 by lionel.gi...@gmail.com:
> One problem with multipolygon relation is that by definition you can't put >
> node > it those and you can't put > contiguous buildings> either
>
Nodes are a problem.
Contiguous buildings are solvable, but it requires turning buildings into
Thanks for all comments! For now I created
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Duniversity#Complex_areas
to document complexity discovered during this discussion.
This way we can avoid remaking entire discussion next time and problem is at
least documented.
Feb 6, 2020, 11:34 by
5 Feb 2020, 21:06 by selfishseaho...@gmail.com:
> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 00:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> amenity=drinking_water is used for;
>>
>> streams that people drink from
>>
>> wells that people drink from
>>
>> taps that people drink from
>>
>> blubbers that people
I see no good reason to count explicit "abstain but have comments"
exactly like "vote against".
Feb 5, 2020, 14:58 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:
> Well, if we count all of those, it is 68% (13/19) which is less than
> the 74% cut-off.
>
> I don't think this should be considered "approved".
Are diapers actually recycled?
It sounds like waste collection point accepting this specific type of trash.
Feb 5, 2020, 13:22 by franci...@gmail.com:
> Dear List
>
>
> Can be the tag:
>
> recycling:diapers=yes/no
>
> Be accepted as allowed value and documented on wiki?
> It's already on use
4 Feb 2020, 17:30 by p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
> On Tuesday, 4 February 2020, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> Universities may have faculties, that often deserved to be mapped separately.
>>
>> For example university may take a large area, possibly disjointed
Universities may have faculties, that often deserved to be mapped separately.
For example university may take a large area, possibly disjointed area across
the city
but Faculty of dentistry, Faculty of forestry, Faculty of mathematics etc may be
possible to be mapped as an area/node.
Currently
30 Jan 2020, 10:02 by m_v...@cartong.org:
> We would like to propose a very generic tag this time to map the location of
> refugee camps. We propose to use the tag > place=refugee_site
>
> See the proposal wiki page : >
>
29 Jan 2020, 23:31 by doerr.step...@gmail.com:
> On 29/01/2020 16:12, Jmapb wrote:
>> IMO, unilaterally deprecating healthcare=clinic/dentist/doctor/hospital
>> on the healthcare=* page is a bit heavyhanded. These are part of a voted
>> and approved proposal.
>>
>
> Completely unacceptable if
amenity=shelter?
Jan 29, 2020, 20:20 by luke.mar...@viacesi.fr:
> I'm trying to tag a building which is a shelter with some vending machines,
> tables and benches.
> This type of building is called "salle hors sac" in french, and it seems that
> the english counterpart would be "picnic room".
Jan 29, 2020, 14:32 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com:
> history
>
I added history section to healthcare=hospital page intending to document and
explain
origin, history and controversy around this tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:healthcare%3Dhospital#Tag_history
Feel free to improve and
28 Jan 2020, 02:31 by g...@lexort.com:
> Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
>
>> Mateusz, offlist deliberately.
>>
>
> While we're at it, could the list admins fix the BROKEN REPLY-TO?
>
I would not consider it broken.
Offlist messages are a bit tricky, but still
possible and it is a really rare
27 Jan 2020, 20:07 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 19:02 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> >:
>
>>
>> (yes, I am aware about Crimea mess -
>> we should follow on the ground
>>
Tagging it as its own separate country
is certainly not ok and absurd.
For how it should be solved in my
opinion:we should follow on the ground rule
for tagging this.
(yes, I am aware about Crimea mess -
we should follow on the ground
situation also in that case)
27 Jan 2020, 18:07 by
27 Jan 2020, 11:43 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
> I wonder what is the current state of admin_level on ways
>
Personally I consider this to be a
pointless duplication of data.
I am not fan of requesting from mappers
doing work that is easy to automate.
> in particular with respect to osm-carto.
readability is a convenience,
>> but is not reflected in the data structure at all.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 15:31, Jarek Piórkowski <>> ja...@piorkowski.ca>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 a
Jan 24, 2020, 18:19 by vosc...@gmail.com:
> Human readability is a convenience, but is not reflected in the data
> structure at all.
>
I strongly disagree with this. Nearly all tags are human readable, with rare
exception
like extremely complicated opening hours or wikidata (where lack of human
Jan 24, 2020, 13:50 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 10:06, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>>
>> && Deleting a non-functioning fountain node, is discouraged
>> But in case of remo
Jan 24, 2020, 15:34 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 8:40 AM Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>> Reason for the lack of verifiability is that what an active volcano is
>> in almost all uses of this term does not depend on the current state of
>> the volcano but on its history -
There is some documentation
athttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dvolcano
Note that wiki is not binding and may be wrong.
Also, there are apparently multiple ways
to classify volcano activity
See for example https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_volcanoes
24 Jan
One of topics often appearing is mismatch between meaning of key
and key text.
Especially among newbies interested in discussions.
"why we use natural=water for man made canals?"
"why we tag man made beaches as natural=?"
"Lets migrate natural=water to landcover=water".
So far I was basically
23 Jan 2020, 19:14 by europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com:
> operation_status = XXX - for fountains which are not operational on a
> specific sighting
>
In such case I would add an OSM note
and ask for a resurvey.
And report issue to local government.
With this tag it is hard to guess
whatever it
23 Jan 2020, 22:49 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> a contributor spends time trying to find the meaning of these words and
> replaces the name with a modern version, absent both from the ground and>
> from use
>
Why someone would do this?
Such edits should be reverted.
Is it a theoretical
18 Jan 2020, 13:37 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com:
> Hi all,
>
> As we plan to start a new "Project of the month" in France to improve EV
> charging facilities mapping, a few questions raise regarding tagging of those
> amenities.
>
> We want to encourage people to use the established tagging and
17 Jan 2020, 13:19 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 17.01.20 à 02:49, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
>
I'm unsure why Carto ignores such a popular tagging scheme.
>>> Is it actually popular?
>>>
>>
>> The place to request changed to Openstreetmap-carto is
>>
ntry :)
>
> On 16.01.20 23:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>> I would consider explicit mention that typical shop should not be tagged
>> with
>> duty_free=no (only in cases where shop used to be or can be expected to
>> be duty free,
>> for example in an airpo
16 Jan 2020, 23:36 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
> On 17/1/20 2:48 am, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:55, Mateusz Konieczny <>>
>> matkoni...@tutanota.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 16 Jan 2020, 02:22 by &
16 Jan 2020, 21:21 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:57 AM John Willis via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>> So what would be a good surface=* be for it? Tarpaper sounds too close to
>> the roofing material, which could cause confusion.
>>
>
> I use one grade of the stuff for weed
I would consider explicit mention that typical shop should not be tagged with
duty_free=no (only in cases where shop used to be or can be expected to be duty
free,
for example in an airport it potentially makes sense to use that tag)
16 Jan 2020, 21:28 by m...@hauke-stieler.de:
> Hi,
>
> just
16 Jan 2020, 13:55 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> There is a small amount near my home, I’ll snap a picture of it.
>
That would help!
> It is not a “mappable” amount, but should give you an idea of what it is.
>
See micromapping, some map really tiny things :)
> It is somewhere between weed
16 Jan 2020, 14:43 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> I'm unsure why Carto ignores such a popular tagging scheme.
>
Is it actually popular?
And to answer the question:
(1) it duplicates (attempts to replace) an existing tagging scheme
(2) for building tagging it is not an improvement in any way
16 Jan 2020, 02:22 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
> On 16/1/20 12:08 pm, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 00:49, Joseph Eisenberg <>>
>> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I'm one of themaintainers of the Openstreetmap-carto style, but
>>> I
>>>
16 Jan 2020, 12:34 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> Using "building=* values describe how the building looks" is recording
> historical data. We don't do that in OSM
>
Using it to tag how it currently looks
is perfectly fine.
For example - church used nowadays
as museum, clearly constructed as a
15 Jan 2020, 21:58 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> Currently, the best you can do is use the deprecated disused=yes for physical
> objects to get the desired behaviour with standard carto. There is no
> guarantee
> that other renderers will honour that. There is no guarantee that standard
> carto
>
14 Jan 2020, 18:59 by a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
> no easily-found documntation for this common use case?
>
BTW, thanks for reporting the issue. I was unaware that
wiki pages for this specific values would be useful.
I also created family of pages for
15 Jan 2020, 14:10 by ajt1...@gmail.com:
> On 15/01/2020 12:03, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>>
>> 15 Jan 2020, 12:57 by >> marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>> :
>>
>>> I'm very unhappywith that.
>>>
>>>
>>
14 Jan 2020, 18:59 by a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
> JOSM warns me that "building=disuse" is deprecated, but doesn't tell
> me what to use instead.
>
> On the wiki, nether [[Key:building=disused]] nor
> [[Tag:building=disused]] exist
>
It exists now.
> and [[Key:building]] says nothing aout
> how
15 Jan 2020, 12:57 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 15.01.20 à 12:49, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
>
>> Anyone with opinion on that topic is welcomed to comment in this
>> discussion on the OSM Wiki.
>>
>
> I'm very unhappy with that.
> some tools use wiki a
14 Jan 2020, 19:42 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 1:22 PM Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Yes, I'm aware there are other cartos that may handle things differently.
>> But the
>> standard carto is the one we use to check what we've done.
>>
>
> Whenever I raise a point like
PangoSE started "Transition to use data items when this can be done without
loosing information"
discussion at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Transition_to_use_data_items_when_this_can_be_done_without_loosing_information
I propose describing distance_from_road tag, defined as
"distance in meters from nearest road" as a misguided idea that should not
be used.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:distance_from_road was recently
created by PangoSE and claims
"Useful for indicating the distance to nearest road
15 Jan 2020, 09:51 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
> Like in "they may not legally walk in the oneway direction"? Which
> jurisdiction is this?
> In the jurisdictions I am aware of, in absence of a pavement you have to walk
> on the road / carriageway. You may not do so only if there are signs that
14 Jan 2020, 20:02 by selfishseaho...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 19:44, Kevin Kenny <> kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> Actually, i never use disused: on businesses because it feels wrong;
>
It is OK for shops that are closed, but where their signage still remains.
> either i remove
15 Jan 2020, 05:15 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
> If you tag 'disused=yes' ... how is that rendered?
>
It depends on what author of map style wanted.
For example it is unlikely to be supported in OSM Carto, as this style
is already rendering many different things and distinctions.
> And that
There are some special traffic signals near me
- usually flashing yellow, that has no meaning
- turning red in case of an incoming
special vehicle
Special vehicle may be
(1) emergency vehicle leaving fire department
in this case it gets activated probably once or
twice a day
(2) tram on a
13 Jan 2020, 14:04 by europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com:
> Hello,
>
BTW, thanks for consulting with
us how to tag this feature!___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
oneway:foot=-1 would still work
(Like oneway=-1 is very rarely needed
for traffic allowed only in direction
opposite to way direction)
13 Jan 2020, 15:43 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:21 AM Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Not very intuitive but, perhaps in rare cases,
13 Jan 2020, 10:42 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
>
> How about free_water=yes if it is available to anybody, and
> free_water=customers if it is only available to paying customers?
>
>
+1
And free_water=no for explicit tagging of not providing a free water.
> I assume this could actually apply to
12 Jan 2020, 00:28 by ja...@piorkowski.ca:
> On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 11:57, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>> Am Sa., 11. Jan. 2020 um 17:17 Uhr schrieb Jarek Piórkowski
>> :
>>
>>> I imagine that virtually all real-world pedestrian ways that are
>>> one-way for pedestrians would be on
601 - 700 of 1866 matches
Mail list logo
