Re: [Tagging] Campaniles tagging

2018-03-12 7:54 GMT+01:00 Tomasz Wójcik : > Currently there are 2 tags for campaniles, which has no difference between > each other: > > * man_made=tower + tower:type=campanile > * man_made=campanile > > I think we should move "man_made=campanile" to "man_made=tower + >

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

2018-01-14 16:01 GMT+01:00 Matej Lieskovský : > Upon further analysis of empty relations, I suspect they will be far more > problematic than I expected. While it is on the wiki since 2010 and feels > like a powerful tool, it does not seem to be used (let alone

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

2018-01-15 11:07 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > On 14. Jan 2018, at 12:32, Matej Lieskovský > wrote: > > > > If you create a single empty relation with the details of the parking > zone rules, > > you can then tag every road with the id of

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

2018-01-14 15:05 GMT+01:00 Matej Lieskovský : > Citation provided: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation#Size > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Size > > Notice that the border relation you linked is already version 790 (and > borders change

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

2018-01-14 12:32 GMT+01:00 Matej Lieskovský : > Greetings, > > if you group all the streets in a single relation, the relation is likely > to be rather big. > This can be hard on the server. > You're saying that having a relation with 1000 objects in it is "hard on

Re: [Tagging] winter tyres

2017-11-16 13:55 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > I believe the question remains whether "winter_equipment" is sufficient or > if we want to distinguish. e.g. between winter tyres and snow chains or > spikes. There might also be different regulations for different kind

Re: [Tagging] tunnel=building_passage or covered=yes

Yes, an obvious one: a building_passage *goes through a building* :) Semantically it is quite important to distinguish between a colonnade/arcade and a building passage (BTW, also arcades and colonnades have their own tag). covered=yes just implies that the building is over the highway, but it

Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging

2015-05-15 1:27 GMT+02:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com: On 14/05/2015 11:55 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: amenity=pub is really just pub(=yes) etc. That is a better example .. to me a pub is a shop/building .. sells stuff and is a building. As are restaurants, petrol stations etc. No they're

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

2015-05-11 1:41 GMT+02:00 Andrew MacKinnon andrew...@gmail.com: How do you tag speed limits on curves and highway on/off ramps? At least in Ontario, these speed limits are advisory only and signed with a yellow sign (and sometimes on curves you will see a curve speed limit sign and a higher

Re: [Tagging] Tagging accepted payments at each toll lane

2015-03-03 19:07 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com: By the time you get to that level of tagging, why not micro map each lane? One of the reasons (not a good reason) is that when I and others did that we got bashed because of our pointlessly detailed representation, despite it

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

2015-01-26 15:28 GMT+01:00 Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com: On 26/01/2015 00:01, Simone Saviolo wrote: http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=patron_saint%3Ait%3D*+globalR I swear, I would think that there were more of these. patron_saint:it seems to be a common suggestion for this purpose

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

2015-01-27 11:25 GMT+01:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com: On 2015-01-27 09:51, Simone Saviolo wrote : 2015-01-26 15:28 GMT+01:00 Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com: On 26/01/2015 00:01, Simone Saviolo wrote: http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=patron_saint%3Ait%3D*+globalR I swear, I

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=patron_saint%3Ait%3D*+globalR I swear, I would think that there were more of these. patron_saint:it seems to be a common suggestion for this purpose in Italian discussions about churches, I really thought we had more of them. Anyway, as you can see there are a few

Re: [Tagging] Synonymous values in the shop key

2014-08-14 10:40 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, On 08/14/2014 08:09 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: shop=ice_cream (710, documented but difference between using amenity and shop keys is not documented) - amenity=ice_cream (4053) amenity=ice_cream sounds very strange to me.

Re: [Tagging] Synonymous values in the shop key

2014-08-18 13:41 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I'm not sure what is a gelateria. Couldn't this be tagged simply with amenity=cafe + cuisine=ice_cream ? Pretty much the same way as a pub could be tagged amenity=restaurant + cuisine=burgers + alcohol=yes. Regards, Simone

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - cemetery=sector

2014-07-14 16:04 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: thank you for setting this up. There are some comments on the talk-page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Cemetery_sector Thanks! In my town, these got tagged as place=locality, and, while I

Re: [Tagging] Suggestions for the correct tagging of Field borders

2014-06-13 14:15 GMT+02:00 Simon Wüllhorst m...@simon-wuellhorst.de: Hello Guys, currently I’m tagging the country around my place (farmland, farmyards, meadow and so on). Farmlands are typically surrounded or seperated by small areas/borders of several vegetations (trees bushes, at least in

Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud

I reread this thread today, and what gave away the joke is that there is agreement. Most messages quote the previous one and comment Great! Also Merry Christmas, Simone 2014-04-02 2:38 GMT+02:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com: On 2014-04-01 19:08, Pierre Knobel wrote : Hi all,

Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway

2014-04-03 22:42 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Don't dismiss that argument so casually. The current rule is that the way below the bridge should not share a node with the bridge itself. the current idea that culverts float bellow roads without having anything common with them

Re: [Tagging] tag covered questions

2014/1/24 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com Am 24/gen/2014 um 07:46 schrieb Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: It's then only natural that they use tunnel=building_passage or even tunnel=yes when they map these, totally without any regard to whether some engineers or

Re: [Tagging] How to map an household goods store?

2013/9/16 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 05:47 +0200, Stefano Fraccaro wrote: I have some shops that sell only household goods like dishes, pots, coffee makers, blenders, oven thermometers, ... IMHO shop=supermarket and shop=general are non appropriate. Which is

Re: [Tagging] leisure=swimming_pool for the pool or the complex?

2013/7/22 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com After reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dswimming_pool I can't figure out. Is this tag for the actual wet area of a pool, or the fenced area of a pool facility? The page spends a lot of words about past controversy, but

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013/3/16 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk Absolutely wrong, obeying traffic rules is 100% the drivers responsibility. There already enough numpties on the road, without giving them another reason to blame the satnav. A satnav should only use the presence of give ways and stops to

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013/3/15 Pieren pier...@gmail.com It is for navigation. Imagine a corner right before an intersection: the navigator would warn you that you'll have to give way or to stop, and you'll prepare the corner accordingly. I don't know any commercial car navigation system that warns you about

[Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

Hi everyone! I noticed that the proposal for a give_way type relationship [1] has been in draft for nine solid years. It seems a great solution to the current limitations of highway=give_way and highway=stop, also because it reuses a tagging scheme that is widely accepted both by mappers and by

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013/3/14 Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net On 14/03/13 14:43, Simone Saviolo wrote: I noticed that the proposal for a give_way type relationship [1] has been in draft for nine solid years. It seems a great solution to the current limitations of highway=give_way and highway=stop, also because

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013/3/14 Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com I suppose the main downside is that it requires a relation. I've not mapped give-way relationships myself, but it would be good to map them, and the node method seems simpler and would involve less database bloat than adding a relation at,

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013/3/14 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net That's fiendishly clever given that OpenStreetMap didn't exist nine years ago... ^^ But, a silly question : where does it help to put so much efforts in tagging a give-way traffic

Re: [Tagging] Wikidata tag

I'm honestly appalled by some of the criticism here. I think this is a great proposal and will be very useful once both sides are solid, with WikiData hosting more and more information and OSM linking lots of objects to a WikiData node. As to the McDonalds/McDonalds Deutschland issue, think of a

Re: [Tagging] Wikidata tag

2013/2/27 Pieren pier...@gmail.com In my turn for questions, what are you doing if the wikidata is refering to McDonald's but the tag name or operator is telling Burger King ? This proposal improves data consistency and relationship between data. Are we really willing to reject it because

Re: [Tagging] Wikidata tag

2013/2/27 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: This proposal improves data consistency and relationship between data. Are we really willing to reject it because the data we put in may be wrong? No, Because it duplicates

Re: [Tagging] Wikidata tag

2013/2/27 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: Because it might create inconsistencies. Does not, as I pointed above. You don't use two tags at the same time for a single piece of information. At most, you use a second

Re: [Tagging] Wikidata tag

2013/2/27 Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de You call for editor support for a new external ID that's not controllable. You want it to be a replacement (well, you agree to keep the old tags, but your argumentation is that the old tags are not necessary any more with the existence of

Re: [Tagging] Landuse vs Place - conversation at talk-key-landuse in wiki

2013/2/15 Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com I would disagree that place=neighbourhood implies landuse=residential: I know of neighborhoods that are mostly industrial or commercial landuse. Brad +1. Simone ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Resorts

2013/2/1 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Дмитрий Киселев dmitry.v.kise...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't like leisure=resort because in such case we will have leisure inside leisure in case of swimmingpools or pitch inside resort. IMHO, that is of

Re: [Tagging] Follow-up on Time Domains

2013/1/23 Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: It shouldn't be too hard to make a JOSM add-on that converts 3 letters into 2. So that's no problem. You seem to be not seeing the point. Two letter days of the week (DOW)

Re: [Tagging] Names on relations and not component ways

2013/1/6 Werner Hoch werner...@gmx.de I am wondering what current best practice is. Should name be applied to both component ways and relation, or is application of name to relation sufficient. For waterways, adding one name to ways and all names to the relation is at least useful.

Re: [Tagging] agglomération

2012/11/23 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi The idea is that with a 30 driving rules list applying to an agglomération If it's just the traffic rules urban vs. rural, there's the tag (with 37 000+ uses) zone:traffic=**:rural zone:traffic=**:urban where ** is the two letter country

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: expanded address tags for US

2012/11/21 David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com Also, the street name in addresses doesn't always match the name of the street. For example, there are houses on Old Walker Road which retain Walker Rd addresses. And the name Lilly Chapel Opossum Run Road is so long, the local post office

Re: [Tagging] agglomération

2012/11/21 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com Hi, I wanted to map the agglomeration of my village and I am wondering again. [...] How do we tag agglomérations? Currently, with place=* and their relative info on a closed way. I have written a proposal which aims to change this

Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

2012/11/18 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk On Sun, 2012-11-18 at 21:26 +0100, Colin Smale wrote: Phil, there's a difference between routing calculation (which neither knows nor cares about road names, numbers, signposts etc) and how the result of the calculation is presented to the

Re: [Tagging] Places admin boundaries

2012/10/28 Alberto albertoferra...@fastwebnet.it 1) Polygon vs point for Populated urban areas (place=city, town...): Hello, we talked about this problem in Italian list [1]. We agreed that boundaries and places should not be confused because in general they refer to different things. We

Re: [Tagging] Enforcement of access rules

2012/10/24 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com How would I go about formalizing this proposal? Do I need to make a proposal page? I'm not trying to add a feature, just to expand on one. Since I've received no replies, I'll proceed to add the access value for the enforcement key

Re: [Tagging] Enforcement of access rules

2012/10/29 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com 2012/10/29 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: As to the enforcement_device tag, I guess I'll have to make a proposal? Have a look at this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:Surveillance It is already in use: http

[Tagging] Enforcement of access rules

I wish to map the cameras that my municipality is installing these days to enforce the access restriction in the ZTL ( = limited traffic area). I think the most appropriate structure to do this would be the enforcement relation [1], but none of the listed types of enforcement is up to the task. I

Re: [Tagging] Enforcement of access rules

2012/10/24 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2012/10/24 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: I wish to map the cameras that my municipality is installing these days to enforce the access restriction in the ZTL ( = limited traffic area). I think the most appropriate structure

Re: [Tagging] Enforcement of access rules

2012/10/24 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2012/10/24 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: I agree, but a speed camera is not actually a camera. -1, it is, and it is combined with a device to measure the speed of the vehicle. Ok, I see what you mean. Then I suggest

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

Ok, I'm done trying to nitpick. I too am now convinced that we should only have one website reference, be it a regular website or a Facebook page or a Twitter stream or whatever. Frederik and Peter, don't worry, I'm not trying to make OSM a marketing support. I am convinced that a website is an

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

2012/10/18 Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com opening hours and operators [...] are intrinsic properties of these amenities. Links to web pages *about* the amenity on third-party websites are not intrinsic properties. I think this is exactly what we disagree about. If I, the owner of a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/17 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi Only part 5 is relevant. Having just returned from my (mapping) trip, and having finally browsed through all these messages on this subjet, I don't think anybody mentioned it explicitly: You can't consider only part 5. I think he means that,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Johan C osm...@gmail.com I think there's some confusion here. Imagic's question was on a motorway example. Where did you get this from? Sure, he referred to a picture with the model of a motorway, but he esplicitly said consider only section 5. We're not talking about that section

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org I'd go with option b. Despite being a single way, you're committed to taking the ramp by that point (due to the double-white solid lines), making it functionally an extension of the ramp. The OP explicitly asks you to focus on section 5 alone, NOT

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl I don't understand why emergency vehicles are so important in this discussion. Because OSM publicly advertises the fact that its maps are being used in the Gaza's strip by emergency vehicles that would otherwise have no map? Just to name one. Also

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/15 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk The law varies from country to country. In the UK, it is legal to cross a solid white line to turn into a side road, or driveway. You can also cross one to overtake a slow moving vehicle, such as a cyclist or tractor. In France, where it is

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

2012/10/16 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl There's maybe a difference between the case of two lanes in the same direction, and two lanes in opposite directions. There's none. If a solid line is painted between lanes going in opposite directions, it's legally impossible to cross the line.

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

2012/10/12 Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com However, I personally don't think your example of putting the URLs to a place's webpage on foursquare, Google+, Yelp, TripAdvisor, etc. is the way to go. OSM is not a link directory so adding many such links on the OSM database doesn't seem

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

2012/10/12 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: I think that contact info of an amenity (allow me to group shops, restaurants, bars, and companies under that umbrella just for a minute) should be considered all of equal

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

2012/10/12 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: by that reasoning, we should remove all the bars, all the shops, all the restaurants, all the companies, all the fuel stations, all the parking information (a free parking

Re: [Tagging] name of river/admin area

2012/9/4 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl On 04/09/2012 15:30, Phil! Gold wrote: I fully agree that there's no way to set a global standard; it should be left to the locals, who know the features best. But how local is local? It's obvious that a single standard for the whole world is not

Re: [Tagging] Shark tagging

2012/8/2 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com 2012/8/2 Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: I took this photo of a building across the street. How do you propose I tag it? http://www.emacsen.net/shark-bldg.jpg I would suggest shark=great_white or simply shark=yes if you are not sure

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012/7/31 Apollinaris Schöll ascho...@gmail.com Instead of saying don't impose your views on others, you should provide an argument why the proposal is bad and ideally, propose alternative solution to the presented problem. This way, I can react with counter-argument, or admit that the

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012/8/1 Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de Am 01.08.2012 16:01, schrieb Simone Saviolo: Do you know how many editors are out there? and there are bots all kinds of scripts with API upload support ... Feel free to fix all of them. As far as I know not a single editor for mobile

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012/6/26 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com The Blue Flag is a voluntary eco-label awarded to 3849 beaches and marinas in 46 countries across Europe, South Africa, Morocco, Tunisia, New Zealand, Brazil, Canada and the Caribbean. More about it here: http://www.blueflag.org I suggest a

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012/6/26 Michael Krämer ohr...@googlemail.com Hello, 2012/6/26 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com I suggest a fee_blue_flag=yes tag which should be used in combination with leisure=beach_resort or leisure=marina. This could be useful for easy searching of well equipped, maintained and clean

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012/6/26 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com 2012/6/26 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com However, as far as I know, the Blue Flag is awarded on a Commune basis, so I don't think it would be ok to tag a marina or a beach resort. For example, in Italy, Varazze is traditionally a Blue Flag

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012/6/26 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com 2012/6/26 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: Yes, actually every beach is marked with the blue flag. However, it is not relative to a single resort. Also, signs usually say Varazze Bandiera Blu d'Europa without referring specifically

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

2012/6/6 Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de For highway=pedestrian, at platforms and many other things we allow to add area=yes to a feature to turn a circular way (ring) to a circular area (filled area, polygon). If - and that's in fact more or less the result of the discussions we had

Re: [Tagging] Alternative names in local language

2012/5/22 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com Ho guardato come lo fanno a Bolzano-Bozen. Un esempio name http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name?uselang=en = Via Argentieri - Silbergasse name:de = Silbergasse name:it = Via Argentieri Da notare che i nomi italiani in Alto Adige spesso

Re: [Tagging] Extension of the payment:* keys

2012/4/11 p...@trigpoint.me.uk: You also need: payment:debit_cards for shops such as aldi and lidl. Would you mind to clarify that? Debit cards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debit_card) are accepted in most shops, not only Lidl. I'm not sure I understood what you meant. Thanks, Simone

Re: [Tagging] Turn Restriction usage

2012/4/11 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: In one case there is a road where a two way section comes to a divider and becomes two one way sections for a while. The suggested route came along one of the one way sections, then turned about 340 degrees to go down the other side of the road. It

Re: [Tagging] Turn Restriction usage

2012/4/11 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: No.  The router should know not to do this. Likewise as below the router should not make u turns at traffic lights. Based on what? How does the router know that the two ways are two carriageways of a single road? Couldn't they be a straight road,

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 1/17/2012 11:18 AM, Anthony wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com  wrote: On 1/17/2012 10:32 AM, Anthony wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com  wrote: A

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

Allow me to remind another advantage of a detailed landuse mapping. I've mapped cultivated land lot by lot around Vercelli. Not only this allows to detail the crop types (rather than saying that between Chivasso and Pavia it's mostly rice), but it also makes it possible to make precise and

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 1/17/2012 6:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/1/17 Maarten Deenmd...@xs4all.nl: On 2012-01-16 23:27, Robin Paulson wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=-36.878407lon=174.741523zoom=19 the landuse polygon has an orange

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 1/17/2012 8:10 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: I find it useless to map such wide areas as landuses. There's no point in tagging a whole village's area as landuse=residential, and there's no point in making a sixty-km-wide polygon to indicate

Re: [Tagging] psv (was Re: access=no (was Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)))

2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: On 1/17/2012 8:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: psv=yes (or bus=yes) This has been bugging me for a while - why do we group buses and taxis? Is this a common grouping in the UK? I don't know about other places, but at least in Italy it's

Re: [Tagging] psv (was Re: access=no (was Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)))

2012/1/17 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 08:34:48AM -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 1/17/2012 8:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: psv=yes (or bus=yes) This has been bugging me for a while - why do we group buses and taxis? Is this a common grouping in the UK?

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

2012/1/17 Jo winfi...@gmail.com: For what it's worth. When I start rendering/printing maps based on OSM, I think it's extremely ugly if the landuse is not 'connected' to the roads, i.e. that the landuse uses separate parallel ways with a small space in between for its definition. I also

Re: [Tagging] Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)

2012/1/13 Ben Johnson tangarar...@gmail.com: Okay that explains it very well. I have a friend with a farm who explained a little to me and the obligation makes perfect sense. But would you tag such ways as private or just leave them as default access?  Farms aside, I struggle to think of

Re: [Tagging] Amenity parking

2012/1/11 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2012/1/11 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com: I will gladly change my amenity=parking to what ever you decide. Does access=private work? The parking lots aren't private it's just that you can't park there. access=private doesn't say that

Re: [Tagging] Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)

2012/1/11 Ben Johnson tangarar...@gmail.com: For a public access pool (eg run by a local government authority, or even a private operator who's main business is the swimming pool) usually charge an entry fee and have opening hours, so i'd use [access=permissive] - likewise for tennis clubs

Re: [Tagging] Wide steps

2011/10/7 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com On 07/10/2011 18:13, Peter Wendorff wrote: I'm not sure, but perhaps the area:highway-proposal [1] is useful here. There are already numerous highway areas for things like market places and piazzas, but it's done as highway=x;area=yes, not

Re: [Tagging] Wide steps

2011/10/7 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com Any suggestions as to how to represent some steps... These steps aren't that unusual I guess, but they aren't a staircase. They form the edges of a piazza-like platform, running most of the way around it. There are only 4 steps, but they are

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Roundabouts and routing

2011/9/9 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2011/9/9 Graham Stewart (GrahamS) gra...@dalmuti.net: David Earl wrote: The reason I needed such a tag was to avoid one way arrows cluttering up the map on those little Y-shaped approaches to roundabouts This seems like a bad approach

Re: [Tagging] landuse=residential and named residential areas which belong together (neighbourhoods/subdivisions?)

2011/8/29 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com We have been recently discussing on the German ML about landuse=residential. In Germany many mappers were mapping subdivisions / neighbourhoods [1] with landuse=residential. This led to very rough landuse information, because in order to

Re: [Tagging] Translating tags into the database itself ?

2011/8/18 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: +1. It's not a Latin name, but the scientific name itself. Okay for latin ... but OSM shouldn't be reserved for experts imo. I'm afraid that this sub-tag will need

Re: [Tagging] Translating tags into the database itself ?

2011/8/18 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: surface=paved is just as precise as species=Juglans regia. It's up to the consumers to adapt it to their audience. Also, I'd expect that a Frenchmen understands

Re: [Tagging] Relations (was directions)

2011/8/10 Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: if we make a system that any newcomer can use completely without even having to dwelve into the details, then we're basically dumbing it down and limiting its

Re: [Tagging] Relations (was directions)

2011/8/10 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de Simone Saviolo wrote: Ok, but there are use cases where simple things don't suffice. In the case at hand, for example, using something like direction=forward doesn't work in all the use cases. And using direction=angle in degrees is in no way

Re: [Tagging] Relations (was directions)

2011/8/9 Pieren pier...@gmail.com On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.comwrote: A big +1. I'm afraid that people promoting relations (once they understand the concept, they want to use it everywhere) are not the one editing often the map data ... -1. I use them

Re: [Tagging] Relations (was directions)

2011/8/9 Mike N nice...@att.net On 8/9/2011 10:44 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: Relations make the map hard to work with. Agree - one of the barriers to entry by new mappers is the complexity. We need to do everything possible to keep it simple and usable. And not just by creating

Re: [Tagging] Entrance and exit roads for parking lots: `service=?`

2011/8/7 Mike N nice...@att.net On 8/7/2011 4:17 PM, Gioele Barabucci wrote: I found some instances of driveway leading to a parking lot and similar sentences. Is is OK, from a linguistic point of view, to identify these roads as driveways? I agree that having the parking lot entrance

Re: [Tagging] highway=unclassified

2011/7/27 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com I wonder if this definition which was formerly part of the description for highway=unclassified is still valid: Unclassified roads typically form the lowest form of the interconnecting grid network. It was removed here (Tidying up the

Re: [Tagging] highway=unclassified

2011/7/27 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2011/7/27 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: IMHO, it's a sentence that is both unclear and wrong. Interconnecting grid network has no significance: if it wasn't interconnecting it wouldn't be a network, and a grid network

Re: [Tagging] highway=unclassified

2011/7/27 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2011/7/27 Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com: Of course, the roads are interconnecting, otherwise it wouldn't be a network. I thought this was a common term in English, but as I am not a native speaker I might be wrong Neither

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway

2011/5/11 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: If you follow the convention that each way should be drawn along the center of the real-world feature, then the width of e.g. a sidewalk can still be determined at any point along the road from just the single outline

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway

2011/5/12 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de Am 12.05.2011 um 10:50 schrieb Tobias Knerr: Sorry for my previous unfinished mail, I didn't want to send it. To summarize what I intended to say: * I assume that most road shapes are adequately described with just a single outline area for

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway

2011/5/11 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com On 5/11/2011 10:47 AM, Flaimo wrote: you misread that. because if its imprecise definition, there are still heated discussions on how detailed landuses should be mapped. some leave out the areas of the streets, some don't. all i wanted to state

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - area:highway

2011/5/11 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com On 5/11/2011 11:15 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: 2011/5/11 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com mailto:nerou...@gmail.com On 5/11/2011 10:47 AM, Flaimo wrote: you misread that. because if its imprecise definition

Re: [Tagging] Vote / Opinion poll about history=event

2011/5/5 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com On 6 May 2011 01:09, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: Unless you are in New Zealand, you're unlikely to tag the same thing: It's being used for a Maori fortress, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81_%28M%C4%81ori%29 That seems

  1   2   >