Re: [Tagging] How to map Hostile Architecture? e.g. benches you can't lie/sleep on?

I'd describe it as friendly to sitters. Having to sit on damp grass because all the benches are full of people sleeping on them is not friendly to me. On 28/02/19 17:37, Rory McCann wrote: Hi all, Is there a good way to tag "hostile architecture"? To take a common example: How should one

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On 26/02/19 10:59, Sergio Manzi wrote: +1 here too, and a little bit of the same concerns expressed by Andy (https://xkcd.com/927/) BTW, in the Italian mailing list there is currently a thread discussing if and how we should tag highways according to what are the official categories in the

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On 22/02/19 06:40, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 21.02.19 20:15, Andrew Errington wrote: If there is no limit then omit the maxstay tag. No tag, no limit. Personally, I would indeed not set a maxstay tag if there's no limit. However, even if we never want to tag maxstay=unlimited, such a value would

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On 21/02/19 07:38, Sergio Manzi wrote: One thing I'm quite sure, anyway, is that "unclassified" should mean just that: "/it doesn't fall in any other classification OR we don't know cr.p about it (we know there is a road there, but we don't know how it is)/". No. If you don't know any

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

OSM relies on the contributions of many people, most of them are not going to spend much time learn stuff - particular complicated stuff that they don't see in their day to day life. The complexity of things like the values of 'opening hours' mean it does not get used by many. OSM should

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On 20/02/19 10:32, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 23:16, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 19/02/19 22:03, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 03:48, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On 19/02/19 21:21, Tony Shield wrote: I'm not in favour of combining ditch and drain. My mind sees a ditch as a dug-out stream which may flow into a stream or flow into a drain, the drain being a much larger flow. I see drains as  having water flow several metres wide but a ditch as less

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On 19/02/19 20:40, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: Canals and ditches are artificial channels carrying naturual water this suggests there is 'unnatural' water... , so are the channels of a straightened river or stream. imho there is not difference between them. No difference to the water (natural

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On 19/02/19 22:03, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 03:48, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: Nothing I could see on the wiki for this. So some guidance would be good. Units. I added a maxstay a few weeks ago and I found info

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On 19/02/19 22:11, marc marc wrote: Le 19.02.19 à 04:47, Warin a écrit : For infinite maximum stay time; 24/7? unlimilted - ? no_limit? the first not-numérical value is "no" https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/maxstay=no that look like good (no maxstay = unlimited) I

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On 20/02/19 06:14, Fernando Trebien wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:59 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Only navigability is intermittent. I think Graeme is suggesting boat=intermittent motorboat=intermittent These

[Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

Nothing I could see on the wiki for this. So some guidance would be good. Units. On tag info there are values with no units... they could be hours, minute or days. I would suggest the default unit of hours. Abbreviations? h for hours m for minutes mos for months Notations? For infinite

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for depth

On 19/02/19 14:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:45, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as height. Makes sense - default as m's, but can be

[Tagging] units and notations for depth

The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as height. There are also problems with estimation and variability. Some are using the tilde mark '~' to indicate 'approximately'. Some are using '-' for between eg depth=0.5-0.7 for between 0.5 and 0.7. Any opposition or

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On 19/02/19 11:33, Fernando Trebien wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 7:08 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: With a range like that, that changes so frequently, I think you're stuck with =intermittent, maybe with a description= to say that water depth is constantly varying between 0.5 & 10m? ! It

[Tagging] Off topic - Re: Drain vs ditch

On 19/02/19 10:39, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 23:30, Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:23, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: According to a sketch in a comedy show from so long ago I can barely

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

On 16/02/19 19:54, Markus wrote: On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 00:59 Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Would =drugs also apply to sharps bins for needle disposal? I would think they should have their own tag? (or is there one already that I just didn't see?) I

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 113, Issue 63

On 15/02/19 00:36, Ulrich Lamm wrote: Am 14.02.2019 um 12:51 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org :  If you can justify it within your own tortured logic about copyright, you can even use the OSM database as a foundation for your efforts.

Re: [Tagging] transaction parameters for ATMs

On 14/02/19 17:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 14. Feb 2019, at 07:29, OSMDoudou <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: The minimum can also differ. Some banks allow their young customers to withdraw small amounts, like 5 EUR, whereas adults and even

Re: [Tagging] transaction parameters for ATMs

The maximum may also be limited by the card provider. Need some careful words on the proposal to say it is the limit of the ATM provider. On 14/02/19 13:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Withdrawals are not the only type of ATM transaction. So use withdraw_min=* withdraw_max=/* ??? /The

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

On 14/02/19 11:05, santamariense wrote: Why did you abandon this proposal (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_schedules/Timetable_relations)? It seems to have never been voted. And, I support it. The last edit on that proposals says 'Made this proposal

Re: [Tagging] tagging a public waste incinerator complex

On 13/02/19 20:16, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > tag it with man_made=incinerator +1 + another 1 Use the description key if you think there should be any explanation e.g. description= waste incinerator On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:27 PM Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Co-ordinate sets vs. background informations = ODbL vs. CC

On 11/02/19 23:46, Ulrich Lamm wrote: Am 08.02.2019 um 20:37 schrieb Ulrich Lamm: OSM is already used like a quallity product. We have to provide that quality, now, or we have to warn people that they should not use OSM until ten years later. If / As official databases provide their

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On 11/02/19 11:57, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:35, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:24, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: Many of them are more than just hedges. there are different kind of

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

On 11/02/19 07:31, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 10. Feb 2019, at 09:45, Markus wrote: According to the wiki, covered=no would signify that the storage tank isn't covered by something else, not that it isn't closed. Therefore my suggestion with open_top=yes (or maybe just

Re: [Tagging] Mountain Ranges

me ways as side ridges ... ??? I don't know. For me I'd just map the spine as a way. On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 8:25 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi, There appear to be 2 competing tags for use with mountain ranges. Neither

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

On 09/02/19 10:19, Clifford Snow wrote: I did create new thread about including other features in wastewater treatment facilities. Unfortunately I have been side track on other issues, not necessarily OSM issue, but life in general. I do plan to continue exploring how to tag the various

Re: [Tagging] Micronations

On 09/02/19 16:18, Mark Wagner wrote: On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 10:54:16 +1000 Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Does OSM recognise, & allow the mapping of, micronations as defined areas? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micronation Was looking for something completely different :-) & just found this

Re: [Tagging] "Map features" page language

On 09/02/19 12:09, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Just looking at the Map Features page & noticed that under Highway - Special Road Types https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Special_road_types the description for "Escape" has been changed to apparently Russian? I can't see how it's

[Tagging] Mountain Ranges

Hi, There appear to be 2 competing tags for use with mountain ranges. Neither have any wiki documentation! A) place=region, region=mountain_range Mostly relations with outer ways only. B) natural=mountain_range Again as relations - with outer ways and at least some with nodes

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 113, Issue 31 Co-ordinate sets vs. background informations

On 08/02/19 20:37, Ulrich Lamm wrote: Am 08.02.2019 um 00:44 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org>: Message: 2 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 10:01:28 +1100 From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> To:tagging

Re: [Tagging] Status values - was motorcycle:scale

On 08/02/19 10:09, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 22:50, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: depreciated - a tag that is being replaced with another tag or other tags. ITYM "deprecated" Opps unless you're saying th

Re: [Tagging] A general problem: Co-ordinate sets vs. background informations

I don't know what your trying to say here? This looks to me like either ; A) 'imported data cannot be changed'! The problem with that is the imported data may be wrong, inaccurate of simply old. B) 'imported data cannot be used' The problem here is that OSM looses a valuable and large data

[Tagging] Status values - was motorcycle:scale

On 08/02/19 08:57, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 23:59, Paul Allen > wrote: There's a hierarchy of tag acceptability based upon how much forethought has gone into it. Proposed and approved.  Proposed and rejected. Proposed and

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 08/02/19 01:02, Sergio Manzi wrote: I don't really know where I was at that times, mostly because I don't know when that times where, honestly. Should I feel ashamed? I wasn't criticizing the rationale for having a better wording for the status of that kind of "/debatable/" tags, but

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 06/02/19 07:59, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 20:50, Kevin Kenny > wrote: The tagging mailing list discusses six alternative ways to represent the proposed feature. Someone argues that betas don't actually exist. Someone else insists

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 06/02/19 07:23, Markus wrote: On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 20:20, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Indeed I believe we shouldn’t create feature pages for “in use” features until they become de-facto. I think this is sensible. A tag page with 'in use' status is confusing because it can give the

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 04/02/19 21:04, Hufkratzer wrote: Somewhere (I don't know where it was) I read that a new tag has to be used about 100 times before it can be documented on an a new wiki page in the key/tag namespace. 100 looks like an arbitrary number. Very easy to achieve with common things , like

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 04/02/19 18:51, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 04.02.19 00:07, Christoph Hormann wrote: Just to avoid misunderstandings - it is in principle completely all right to invent tags and document them on tag/key pages without creating a proposal. * invent keys - ok * document widely

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

On 04/02/19 09:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 3. Feb 2019, at 19:25, Stefano Maffulli wrote: Evaluating seismic quality of any structure needs to be done by professionals. this is still my criticism for the proposed tag as well: only a professional can reasonably

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 04/02/19 10:07, Christoph Hormann wrote: On Sunday 03 February 2019, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I noticed today that a wiki page for the rarely used key "motorcycle:scale" had been accidentally created as "Key:motorcycle:scale" thank you for this. You are known to put things polite, in all

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 25/01/19 00:39, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 23, 2019, 11:36 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 22:17, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: let me just repeat that ... "In OSM meaning of word used as k

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

On 03/02/19 13:13, marc marc wrote: Le 02.02.19 à 18:09, Stefano Maffulli a écrit : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/building:soft_storey Definition: a type of construction where any one floor is significantly more flexible (less stiff) than those above and below it if the

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 03/02/19 13:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 12:07, marc marc > wrote: I think it would be better to continue the current club=scout system and add precision with scouts=Scouts|Guiding|Patro|Chiro or any other tag to describe

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 02/02/19 19:21, s8evq wrote: Could we agree that club=youth does have a meaningful usage, despite what the wiki currently states? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:club +1 .. also the same comment on club=elderly. These clubs can have a variety of 'interests' to suit there age

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 03/02/19 10:54, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 at 22:57, Tom Pfeifer > wrote: A club, being an association between people, is not a geographical entity. Thus I prefer tagging the physical entity, which is the club home, with

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

It appears in the descriptions that a 'ditch' can be used as a 'drain'. So why have a tag 'drain'? The only differences I have between canal and the other things is large verse small and usefull quantity. Rather subjective, not a objective measurement. If the differences as so arbitrary why

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 01/02/19 11:28, Kevin Kenny wrote: I wonder whether we are arguing hypotheticals here. Well long tones (lt) helps explain short tons. Both lbs and kg appear in the data base .. so I'll add them. So do 'person', I assume for a lift/elevator. Add that too. There are some strange units

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 31/01/19 13:02, John Willis via Tagging wrote: On Jan 31, 2019, at 10:17 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: There are, or were 'cubs' for the younger people, 'rovers' for the older people, guides for the girls yea - Brownies, Wheb

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 31/01/19 11:33, John Willis via Tagging wrote: On Jan 31, 2019, at 8:15 AM, marc marc > wrote: Scouts and scout do maybe not have the same meaning in belgium. I understand club=scout (without a ending S and without an upercase) as the "generic" term for

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On 31/01/19 08:41, s8evq wrote: Hello everyone, I'm a relative new contributor and have a question about tagging "club=scout" and "club=youth". What about similar organisations than Scouts? This might not exists as much in other countries, but here in Belgium we have KSA, KLJ, Chiro and

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 31/01/19 07:20, Minh Nguyen wrote: On 2019-01-26 15:27, Warin wrote: The only problem is the 'ton'. I n the USA 2,000 pounds In the UK 2,240 pounds. Resolving this? units 'ton us' and 'ton uk' ??? I've been converting to pounds (lbs), which avoids this ambiguity with precise

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Large means? Small means? To me I'd use small = I can step over it, large means I cannot step over it .. so ~1.1 metres is the line between the two. On 30/01/19 19:56, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: Here is a summary of the discussion to check if there is a consensus. Current definitions of

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

enough to remember obsolete measurements: long tons are pointless, too similar to toes and not used on signs anywhere I know of, the abbreviation st can stand for a stone (6.3kg or 14lb). -- Andrew *From:* Warin <61sun

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 28/01/19 04:24, Sergio Manzi wrote: On 2019-01-27 17:53, OSMDoudou wrote: Indeed, it's very strange to require mappers do the maths when there is a notation to indicate the unit and let the renderers do the maths. Hi! Why do you talk about math? Do you expect renderers to automatically

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

On 27/01/19 19:51, OSMDoudou wrote: can only be used by cyclist The “access” tag allows to express this. If it is only used by cyclist ... what  do the cars on the street do? Turn around to find another route? As stated before ... The ways say what is on them. One way for the bicycles in

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

I have edited the units page to include the long ton. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units And edited the weight page to exclude the unit from the definition. And also mention the tonne (BE!). https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight It makes a few barleycorns of

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

The only problem is the 'ton'. I n the USA 2,000 pounds In the UK 2,240 pounds. Resolving this? units 'ton us' and 'ton uk' ??? Fortunately most of the rest of the work has gone metric. On 27/01/19 09:54, Warin wrote: On 26/01/19 19:55, Tobias Zwick wrote: Hey there, as I was illustrating

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 26/01/19 19:55, Tobias Zwick wrote: Hey there, as I was illustrating the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight article with some example signs and notes about pitfalls, I noticed that the wiki says here that the weight *must always* be defined in metric units. It is incorrect.

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Thread drift is common. If your on any internet forums you get used to it. Much like a talk in the pub, can go anywhere while your off getting the next round in, On 24/01/19 18:22, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 16:52, Marc Gemis > wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 12:50, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: “an isolated "village" with only a few hundred people in it, but which is the main centre for this area will be a town, & maybe even a city?” It’s not possible to have “town” level services with less than 1000 people. A town has a major market

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 12:16, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 10:19, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: > On 23. Jan 2019, at 22:35, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > According to the wiki, they're not > based on services either.

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 09:36, Paul Allen wrote: On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 22:17, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: let me just repeat that ... "In OSM meaning of word used as key frequently has nearly no relation with meaning of tag.&qu

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 09:12, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:54 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: The main OSM map renders grass, trees as solid colours, and residential areas too .. that is not good to me. Another example of the landuse/landcover confusion. We coul

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 09:06, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:36 PM Paul Allen wrote: Way back in the thread you wrote: OSM does not distinguish between the sizes of other thing other than by using the area or a closed way, or dimensional tags. That was Mateusz, not me! Hey .. it was

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 09:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 07:46, Paul Allen > wrote: If we ever decide on an appropriate tagging scheme (landuse=logging or landuse=forestry + forestry=logging or whatever) and it gets rendered in some way

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 24/01/19 01:34, althio wrote: I might be missing something in these threads, but I would expect... for managed forest areas with unknown or unspecified use: landuse=forestry Why not natural=wood? That does not exclude "managed". Other things may also be "managed" - swamps, lakes, heath

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 19:32, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 23, 2019, 9:10 AM by 61sundow...@gmail.com: How are areas zoned/set aside to produce timber from trees to be tagged? The trees are not always there - like crops on a farm field. Not using landuse=forest and not landuse=forestry.

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

d to me. m. On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 9:08 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Nice question Marc. What is this named area? Does it have some (taggable) function? Is it 'just' a location? place=location? On 23/01/19 18:55, Marc Gemis wrote: And where do you put the name of the for

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 18:42, Warin wrote: On 23/01/19 18:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Date: Jan 23, 2019, 8:31 AM From: 61sundow...@gmail.com To: matkoni...@tutanota.com Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map? On 23/01/19 17:52, Mateusz Konieczny

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

is part of the named area. But then I have an outer way with only a name tag. Is that correct ? m. On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 8:51 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: On 23/01/19 18:25, Peter Elderson wrote: The rendering itself is a github issue of course, but it shoud be based on cons

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 18:25, Peter Elderson wrote: The rendering itself is a github issue of course, but it shoud be based on consistent tagging, which is a tagging list concern. I slipped up in the contradicting paragraphs... I meant, an area landCOVER=grass within a landUSE=forest. Main point is,

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 18:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Date: Jan 23, 2019, 8:31 AM From: 61sundow...@gmail.com To: matkoni...@tutanota.com Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map? On 23/01/19 17:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 23, 2019, 4:49

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 07:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 21, 2019, 12:03 AM by 61sundow...@gmail.com: The end to this madness is for renders to recognise that the landuse=forest needs to be rendered differently from natural=wood. The essential difference between the two is that landuse must

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 07:31, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 21, 2019, 9:44 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 at 20:21, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: My problem with going to landuse=forestry with natural=wood...

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 23/01/19 11:52, Sergio Manzi wrote: Only about the cited point (/tagging natural forests as natural=wood/), I think a natural forest should be tagged as natural=forest (/quite logically, I would say.../), while natural=wood should be reserved for "small forests" (/which is one of the

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 22/01/19 04:29, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 7:45 AM Paul Allen wrote: What if we suggest in the wiki that where trees are used for actual forestry people are encouraged to dual-tag with landuse=forestry + natural=wood on the basis that with enough usage the carto group

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

get mapped. Only one instance in OSM so no wiki page for it. On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 1:34 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 21/01/19 10:17, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > The end to this madness is for renders to recognise that the

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

ble' for ant tree area.' even before we add other languages and cultures to the mix. On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:04 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 21/01/19 05:52, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 1:33 PM David M

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 21/01/19 05:52, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 1:33 PM David Marchal wrote: All is in the title: when hiking in a forest (I mean, an area considered as a forest by authorities), I often encounter other landcovers, like scrubs in recently teared down parcels, or scree in the

Re: [Tagging] Yay, new howto map for diabilities created in wiki

On 20/01/19 09:00, Richard wrote: Hi, renamed it to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_for_the_needs_of_people_with_disabilities hope it is not too offensive for now and can be renamed later. The map is of features ... not needs... ummm 'Mapping features that cater for people

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

: Someone recently suggested using natural=promontory for named points and promontories in land which do not qualify as a peak, eg the sharp end of a ridge. On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 12:15 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 13:06, Warin <

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

On 19/01/19 12:40, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 10:43, Kevin Kenny > wrote: On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 7:21 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick > Smaller features, such as ... > could all also be mapped as =cape We don't HAVE to have a tag

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

On 19/01/19 10:22, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 09:09, Markus > wrote: It certainly can be phrased better (this isn't my strong point), but i wanted to make it clear that a peninsula can also be part of a bigger peninsula.

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 18/01/19 11:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Created two further pages to (hopefully!) cover all options? :-) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmobile_home https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dmanufactured_home Together with some re-wording on the main page

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On 16/01/19 11:53, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 10:28, Dave Swarthout > wrote: Although the 1st definition sort of agrees with your usage, the common definition in the U.S. is closer to the other two. There are several other

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 16/01/19 09:34, Michael Patrick wrote: > What started the whole thing off was me wanting to map one of these Directly from the signs out front, and some assumptions: # Caravan retailing

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 15/01/19 23:53, Georg Feddern wrote: Am 15.01.2019 um 00:29 schrieb Dave Swarthout: Now, if we could only get rid of tourism_caravan_site and replace it with tourism=campground. Sigh. That'll never happen but it should. whoow - please do not stumble over the next misleading OSM-keys.

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

tended van conversions but cannot describe unpowered trailers or, in British vernacular, caravans. Where do we go from here? On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 6:43 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 14/01/19 09:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: W

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 14/01/19 09:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Wow, so much for me naively thinking that caravan was a universal word! Should know better by now :-) On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 at 21:58, Paul Allen > wrote: However, there does appear to be a better term.  From

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 13/01/19 20:04, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 13. Jan 2019, at 09:51, Dave Swarthout wrote: I have no personal knowledge of the word caravan. To me, it makes no sense at all to label anything having wheels as a caravan when everyone knows a caravan is a string of

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 13/01/19 19:06, Dave Swarthout wrote: >Possibly a separate page again for shop=motorhome? (I think that would be a good coverall term?) I would prefer that but it's an American term. We might as well just stay with caravan. Plus, I do think the tag you're proposing could, with enough

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair designated parking space tagging?

On 12/01/19 08:28, Xavier wrote: On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:41:13PM +0100, Richard wrote: looked at the possibilities, one problem: many parking places are fee=yes for normal users and fee=no for handicapped users. How can this be mapped? If you look into the proposal page from the parking

Re: [Tagging] Quick Building tracing question...

On 10/01/19 13:54, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 12:43, John Willis > wrote: I am tracing and repairing existing traces of warehouses in an industrial district. I've recently been doing the same, John. if I am mapping this kind of

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

On 10/01/19 10:13, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 07.01.19 16:12, Bryan Housel wrote: I encourage everyone to just disregard everything that’s on the wiki and go by what taginfo says as far as how the tags are used and what the accepted values are. The wiki is an invaluable source for understanding

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair designated parking space tagging?

On 09/01/19 21:06, althio wrote: On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 00:31, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: The page could be about those OSM tags that are relevant for Disabled features, how to map these things .. not about 'missing tags' nor "information relevant for disabled persons"

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

On 10/01/19 05:27, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 8, 2019, 10:33 PM by graemefi...@gmail.com: On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 23:36, Simon Poole mailto:si...@poole.ch>> wrote: I'm not convinced that we really want to model such a level of detail in the first place, Agree with you

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

I find using my own editor reduces the 'going back and forwards" on the new page. And I am more comfortable using it and storing it while I think on it before creating the new page. In general a couple of days between thought, creation and eventual creation is of benefit to my 'work'. On

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

On 08/01/19 02:53, Konrad Lischka wrote: Hello, the proper tagging of kindergarten grounds in Germany really makes me think. The problem: We have a lot of operators that are independent charitable entities (for example registered associations see

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On 07/01/19 22:19, Georg Feddern wrote: Am 07.01.2019 um 08:20 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick: & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-) Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I take that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it? May be not

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >