Re: [Tagging] ****SPAM:6.1**** Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

On 29/11/2022 10:01, Minh Nguyen wrote: Vào lúc 23:01 2022-11-28, Martin Koppenhoefer đã viết: On 29 Nov 2022, at 00:52, Minh Nguyen wrote: Even if it weren't for iD's long-gone preset, I don't think an ostensibly global tag should be defined based on the narrow provisions of a specific

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Street parking revision

Thanks, that should make mapping street parking in my local area much easier and more consistent. Where parking=on_kerb or parking=half_on_kerb are used alongside a separately mapped sidewalk or cycle track, should there be a tag on that way as well? It could be useful to routers concerned

Re: [Tagging] Use of crossing:island where crossings and islands are mapped separately

ta to what appears to be an undiscussed and potentially misguided personal project. On 27/09/2022 07:42, Robert Skedgell wrote: Where there is a crossing with traffic islands, but the highways forming the crossings and crossing the islands are mapped separately, my assumption has been that cross

[Tagging] Use of crossing:island where crossings and islands are mapped separately

y|cycleway=traffic_island on the ways crossing the islands, possibly because JOSM and/or Osmose (incorrectly?) complain. Perhaps I should? -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Tagging] network tag on route relations

On 12/07/2020 22:50, Mike Thompson wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 10:49 AM Robert Skedgell <mailto:r...@hubris.org.uk>> wrote: > >> >> The very short NCN route 425 in south-east London is network=ncn because >> it's a Sustrans route. THe scope of th

Re: [Tagging] network tag on route relations

On 12/07/2020 15:48, Mike Thompson wrote: > Hello, > > According to the wiki[0], it seems that the network tag has different > meanings and possible values based upon if it is applied to a route > relation where route=road vs. route=bicycle/mtb/foot/etc. > > If I am understanding this correctly,

Re: [Tagging] Doorzone bicycle lanes

riction, where there is a usable lane at the times when parking is prohibited, but effectively no cycle lane when parking is permitted (sometimes with a doorzone risk on the carriageway). -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Tagging} no stopping, no parking

I am starting to tag parking:lane:*=* on a cycle route in London for which I have just uploaded Mapillary images. The potential risk of "dooring" and the hope that routing engines may in future be able to make use of this information. -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) On 10/02/2020 20:

Re: [Tagging] Continuous Sidewalk or Cycleway

https://www.enjoywalthamforest.co.uk/blended-cophenhagen-crossings/ -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Continuous Sidewalk or Cycleway

|backward as a useful combination, as it makes it unambiguous. -- Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Vegan "cheese" shops

On 18/12/2019 21:55, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 15:58, Robert Skedgell wrote: > >> I've just been to La Fauxmagerie in Shoreditch, London, a vegan "cheese" >> shop. > > shop=hipster > produce=bogus > It's in Shoreditch

Re: [Tagging] Vegan "cheese" shops

On 18/12/2019 16:24, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Wednesday, 18 December 2019, marc marc wrote: >> Le 18.12.19 à 16:58, Robert Skedgell a écrit : >>> I think creating shop=vegan_cheese might be excessively specialised. >>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6776593885

[Tagging] Vegan "cheese" shops

but could possibly be problematic in France. For the moment, I'm going to use shop=deli + diet:vegan=only as it also sells biscuits, etc. and I think creating shop=vegan_cheese might be excessively specialised. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6776593885 -- Robert Skedgell

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating mini_roundabout

Rule 188 of the Highway Code has: "Mini-roundabouts. Approach these in the same way as normal roundabouts. All vehicles MUST pass round the central markings except large vehicles which are physically incapable of doing so. Remember, there is less space to manoeuvre and less time to signal. Avoid

Re: [Tagging] swimming=* access tag

aged and permitted swimming area in Victoria Dock, London in this way <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/698565113>. > -------- > *De :* Robert Skedgell > *Envoyé :* mercredi 23 octobre 2019 12:01 > *À :* tagging@ope

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating mini_roundabout

On 23/10/2019 11:14, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:55:04AM +0200, Colin Smale wrote: >> I would suggest it is not necessary to replace the simple node with a >> circular way. I think it is perfectly acceptable if it is considered >> as a simple turn instead of negotiating a

[Tagging] swimming=* access tag

streetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:access#swimming.3D.2A> It would be useful to note areas of open water where swimming is either allowed or prohibited and this can be clearly determined fom signage at the site etc. and recorded using values of yes, no, customers and permissive. -- Robert Ske

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

On 17/10/2019 11:03, Paul Allen wrote: > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 10:46, Vɑdɪm > wrote: > > > I think it's no more vague than some many other tags in OSM. > > For example have a look at > > leisure=fishing > > > For most rivers in the UK, there are

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 16:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> On 26. Oct 2018, at 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote: >> >> An unmarked crossing may have no road markings or signs, but if there is >> tactile paving and/or a raised/lowered/flush kerb on the footway >> (sid

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 16:00, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote: >> On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote: >>> Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked >>> crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 15:39, SelfishSeahorse wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 16:14, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> we generally do not map road markings, we don’t map the divider lines between lanes, we don’t map diagonally striped areas where traffic can’t go, we don’t map stop lines, we don’t map any

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 14:49, marc marc wrote: > Le 26. 10. 18 à 10:27, Robert Skedgell a écrit : >> Do you have any UK examples of zebra crossings with traffic signals? > > https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/D8E > I dind't have any local knownledge of those but you can see that some > m

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

e I would need to set a node every meter on the road, tagging it > "unmarked crossing" because I can cross the road everywhere. > > And I hate it when the satnav announces a warning for the upcoming > crossing, and there comes nothing the requires extra attention. -- Robert Ske

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 10:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 11:21 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell > mailto:r...@hubris.org.uk>>: > > > I wonder if it's possible differentiate between a normal traffic signal > controlled crossing, an uncontrolled zeb

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 26/10/18 09:34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Fr., 26. Okt. 2018 um 10:28 Uhr schrieb Robert Skedgell > mailto:r...@hubris.org.uk>>: > > At a zebra crossing, vehicles must give precedence to pedestrians on the > crossing. No traffic signals are necessary to

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

On 25/10/18 22:39, marc marc wrote: > Hello, > > I have a big issue with crossing=zebra. > it prevent to fill in the other value for crossing like > crossing=traffic_signals crossing=uncontrolled > the wiki [1] said that crossing=zebra is a shortchut for > crossing=uncontrolled +

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign direction tagging..

=give_way is generally indicated by the transverse line marking (= = = =) on the carriageway, traffic_sign=GB:1003A. There is also the upright inverted red triangle traffic_sign=GB:602, which does not need to be present. Failure to comply with either is an offence. -- Robert Skedgell (

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign direction tagging..

arkings painted on the > road. As far as the law is concerned, that is also a traffic sign, diagram 1003A in TSRGD 2016 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made ). Failure to give way is a criminal offence contrary to s. 36 RTA 1988. > > Phil (trigpoint) >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a building constructed for a gastronomic purposes?

> restaurants and pubs. However a modern invention is the "gastro-pub" > where they consider their food to be of a particularly high standard, > not just standard pub food. For a gastro-pub, perhaps amenity=pub + food=yes + cuisine=gastropub (where no more specific cuisine=* would be m

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

On 20/09/2018 13:53, Warin wrote: >> FWIW, I worked in the highway construction business for 14 years in >> the US.  In the industry terminology where I was, a "pipeline" >> carrying wastewater to a treatment plant was termed a sanitary sewer, >> and a pipeline carrying stormwater (rainwater)