Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

The tagging looks right,  but until the renderers pick up the oneway tag it doesn't seem hopeful. Changing the name is not right, and bicycle=permissive is not right either.   foot=discouraged would make sense, maybe the apps will pick that up? On 9/8/23 11:02, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: I

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a point-of-interest sign

Sorry for my email noise, I misread the email & my comment wasn't necessary On 12/30/22 02:03, Volker Schmidt wrote: Thanks, Brad. It is a pass, as there are two identical signs in opposite directions, 175 meters apart. The pass may have a name, after all, which is on another sign. Anyw

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

+1 If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to put it on the local way too, that's the name of the trail. Brad On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote: I've heard the assertion that a way has no name but the route that passes over it does many times.  While this is true

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a point-of-interest sign

I think you should check your data.   Looking at USGS topo, that point does look very close to the continental divide. Usually, but I suppose not always,  when you go over the divide you are going over a pass.  This one seems to be fairly flat so perhaps never got named. I don't use mapillary,

Re: [Tagging] incline=up_and_down

Any good cycling router needs to use a digital elevation model in it's algorithm, or use elevation tied to the paths somehow (such as with a gpx track).   These odd OSM tags are a sideshow. On 9/26/22 03:16, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: 26 wrz 2022, 09:02 od o...@tobias-knerr.de:

Re: [Tagging] OHV greater than 50 inches (wide)

For your example, I would just tag it as motor_vehicle=yes.    From what I've seen, If OHV's >50" are legal, pretty much any motor vehicle is legal. On 9/1/20 2:30 PM, Mike Thompson wrote: In specifying access constraints for the roads it manages, the US Forest service makes a distinction

Re: [Tagging] FWD: Re: narrow=yes, vs lanes=1, vs width

On 7/27/20 11:19 AM, Rob Savoye wrote: On 7/27/20 11:00 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: I'd go with highway=track and tracktype=*, surface=* and smoothness=* tags as necessary.  Given how inconsistent the 3 and especially 4 digit US forest service roads tend to be, I'd expect tracktype and smoothness

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Ground)

Has as an example been found yet?   There are areas that are void of vegetation for most of the year, or even years, that change with the right amount of rain. On 7/13/20 3:47 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Many desert climates can be mapped as natural=sand (for dunes and other areas of sand),

Re: [Tagging] Path or track with many fallen trees

Usually this time of year there are many trees down from the winter, and trail users or the forest service will eventually get around to clearing them.   If there aren't enough motivated users, and/or the FS has abandoned it,  one of Andrews ideas is probably appropriate. On 6/25/20 6:56 PM,

Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

On 6/9/20 7:27 PM, Warin wrote: To me in OSM a 'path' has always been too narrow for a motor car (4WD or not) to pass. If it is wide enough for a car then it is not a 'path' in OSM so they must be tagged in some other way. Descriptions of 'path': On 10/6/20 5:53 am, brad wrote: "If a

Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

at 1:55 PM brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmail.com>> wrote: > > It already says this: > "Some highway=track are used for various leisure activities - hiking, cycling, or as jeep/ATV trails. " > on the track wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%

Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

It already says this: "Some highway =track are used for various leisure activities - hiking, cycling, or as jeep/ATV trails. " on the track wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack I propose changing the path page from

Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

I think if it's wide enough for a normal motor vehicle and is open for that, even if only service & emergency, it should not be =path.   track or service On 6/9/20 8:42 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: If the way is used by "law enforcement, emergency, and maintenance staff" motor vehicles then I'd

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

I think it would be absurd to try to tag dangerous wildlife areas. It would just be an enormous region for rattlesnakes and mountain lions in the US.  Same for grizzlys up north or snakes in the south.   We have signs warning of rodents carrying plague around here, should we tag that too? On

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

On 5/31/20 3:34 AM, Daniel Westergren wrote: Ok, I took the liberty of drafting a proposal for a general description of how to map pathways (that is, all highways that are not for motor-vechicles). See

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On 5/26/20 8:26 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:59 AM Andrew Harvey wrote: From what I can tell, the ask is a tag for a specific type of way which the person needs experience or preparedness before undertaking. But I'm lost and still not completely understanding what

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

Since the name effects how the tag is used, the name is not irrelevant On 5/26/20 4:57 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: Exactly the name of any tag in OSM is completely irrelevant, it's as you say how it's used and documented which matters. The iD editor chooses to localise and abstract away the

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

I meant in my area On 5/25/20 3:47 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: May 25, 2020, 20:34 by bradha...@fastmail.com: 'm not sure anyone maps sidewalks. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.24167/21.01532=N https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/footway=sidewalk (only part of

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

I think I agree with what Kevin is saying, but I confess I'm not sure what the problem is.   In my area, even looking at a nearby big city,  most of the 'paths' are dirt trails.   There are some cycleways too.   I'm not sure anyone maps sidewalks. I think the fundamental problem is the original

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On 5/23/20 5:59 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 5:42 PM John Willis via Tagging wrote: =path is such a horrible catch-all tag and one that is extremely entrenched - I am surprised no one has implemented a path=trail subtag, similar to sidewalk, so we can separate all the

Re: [Tagging] track vs footway, cycleway, bridleway or path

Perhaps highway=service? I don't agree with calling a 2 track/road a path and I don't think that common usage, or the wiki says this either. /"This //tag //represents //*roads for mostly agricultural use*//, //*forest tracks*//etc.; often unpaved

Re: [Tagging] relations & paths

e,_one_OSM_element ? No.  The route traverses the way, it's not the way. Okay. But surely this doesn't mean that every named footway or path should be part of a route relation. The bike trail that brad linked to, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/663

Re: [Tagging] relations & paths

It isn't a route, except in OSM, it's just a trail. On 5/13/20 9:09 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 9:23 AM brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmail.com>> wrote: It isn't part of a route, it's the whole route.  I think that's a difference without a distinction in

Re: [Tagging] relations & paths

It isn't part of a route, it's the whole route. On 5/12/20 8:58 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:37 PM brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmail.com>> wrote: OK, but it seems redundant to me.   A trail/path get tagged as a path. There's a trailhead and a sign

Re: [Tagging] relations & paths

OK, but it seems redundant to me.   A trail/path get tagged as a path.  There's a trailhead and a sign, it gets a tagged with a name.   Why does it need to be a route also? On 5/12/20 11:43 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:03 PM Peter Elderson wrote: My view is that a route

Re: [Tagging] relations & paths

as being 'wrong'? On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:17 PM brad wrote: I see a lot of relations, type:route, which are only short trails/paths. This is wrong isn't it? Do you suppose that folks are doing this to get better rendering? Brad ___ Tagging mailing

[Tagging] relations & paths

I see a lot of relations, type:route, which are only short trails/paths.   This is wrong isn't it?   Do you suppose that folks are doing this to get better rendering? Brad ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] Is there any tagging scheme for carillons already?

Paul, this thread is not trying to convince you to go tag carillions. It's to figure out how to tag them, for people that *do *want to tag them and would find that useful. If it's not your thing that's fine, just sit this one out. Cheers, Brad On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:28 PM Paul Allen wrote

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

use it for all trails too, not just IMBA signed trails, or bike park trails.      I agree with everything that user Opadeira is proposing and I'll add some comments to the wiki talk page. On 4/22/20 7:12 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 03:03, brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmail.

Re: [Tagging] Definition and usage of Key:mtb:scale:imba?

I've never seen an official IMBA rating on a sign. I see both mtb:scale and mtb:scale:imba both used.   The wiki for mtb:scale doesn't make sense.   It's either skewed for extremely extreme riding or they don't understand gradient.   It says that for mtb:scale=1, gradient<40%.   This is

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

I don't think we want or need an mtb= tag. Even though we don't need a path=mtb tag, I'd be OK with it.  It would be a shortcut instead of adding some of the other tags.  I don't think routers for cycle touring should rely on this though. I live in a popular mtb location (Colorado, USA), and I

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

for a skinny tired road bike. I'm not screwing up routing, the router should not assume that a path is paved unless it says it is, or is tagged as cycleway. On 4/2/20 2:58 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: brad wrote: The proper tag is highway=path, foot=yes, horse=yes, bike=yes. That's an utterly

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 1:32 PM, Dave F wrote: On 02/04/2020 20:02, brad wrote: No need for sympathy, I strongly agree with what you're saying. I think it's unfortunate that we even have the cycleway and footway tags, but they need to be treated as special cases of highway=path, Are you also suggesting

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 10:56 AM, Dave F via Tagging wrote: And here we go again... If a way is designated for riding a bicycle then it's a cycleway, irrelevant of severity or conditions. The trouble with this is that very few trails are 'designated' for riding a bicycle.  They are legal for bikes,

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 10:02 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 11:54 AM Greg Troxel wrote: However, around me there is a convention that any dirt/unimproved/in-the-woods sort of thing is path, and in-town/paved/manicured sorts of are highway=footway. I started tagging trails as 'path' - and

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On 4/2/20 4:33 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: There is another aspect: The wiki page highway=cycleway states also " Tagging a way with highway =cycleway implies that the route is designated for bicycles." This means it implies, at least in Italy

Re: [Tagging] landuse meadow getting the right description emphases

On 3/15/20 6:31 PM, Warin wrote: On 16/3/20 11:02 am, brad wrote: Perhaps we should deprecate landuse=meadow I think there could be a distinction between a meadow (something that may have more 'other stuff' than grass), and grassland. What 'other stuff'? Grass covers a lot more than

Re: [Tagging] landuse meadow getting the right description emphases

On 3/15/20 3:14 PM, Warin wrote: On 16/3/20 6:01 am, brad wrote: On 3/14/20 9:47 PM, Warin wrote: Hi, The present description of landuse=meadow is; An area of meadow or pasture: land primarily vegetated by grass and other non-woody plants, mainly used for hay or grazing. That places

Re: [Tagging] landuse meadow getting the right description emphases

On 3/14/20 9:47 PM, Warin wrote: Hi, The present description of landuse=meadow is; An area of meadow or pasture: land primarily vegetated by grass and other non-woody plants, mainly used for hay or grazing. That places the land cover before the land use. The emphases should be on the land use,

Re: [Tagging] Cooker or Stove in the kitchen?

For American English,   I think the common usage is still stove for a one piece unit.   Cooktop/oven for separate units, but I think stove/oven might be common also. On 1/15/20 9:20 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 10:26, Joseph Eisenberg

Re: [Tagging] recreational vs functional routes

On 1/12/20 4:23 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Paris is the capital of France because it has all the main government facilities: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and most ministries. Routes that are mapped in Openstreetmap need to be signed or marked in a visible way. Otherwise

Re: [Tagging] hiking and foot route relations - is there any consistent difference?

and are wearing lighter footwear. This seems all too typical for OSM.    Redundant tags, and over specify things. Brad On 1/11/20 9:08 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 10:03 AM Joseph Eisenberg wrote: To clarify, I don't see any problem with the existence of multiple tags

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

It isn't limited to that. On 12/7/19 4:49 PM, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 07.12.2019 um 18:59 schrieb brad: We already have park_ride tag.   I don't see the new tag adding anything? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:park%20ride?uselang=en-US https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/133916328

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 12/6/19 7:59 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Thu, Dec 5, 2019, 04:09 Martin Scholtes > wrote: Hello, I would like to inform you that I have made a suggestion about park and drive. This resulted from a discussion in the OSM DE Telegram Chat.

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

I live in a single family home with a shared driveway.  The next door neighbor house is 7 meters from my house.  The driveway is about 10 meters shared, then it splits, about 10 meters to each garage.    If it were mapped, I think it should be tagged as driveway, but I don't think it's

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

I'm in favor of being flexible for cycling routes.   A good example is the great divide mtb route in Canada & US.   It is probably not signed very well, if at all.   It was created by a non-profit & I don't think it is an official government route.   It is used by quite a few people, both on

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Campsite properties

I think it's valid tag for a campsite,   It's not much different than any other self service coin operated laundry. On 9/17/19 4:27 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 17. Sep 2019, at 08:29, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I didn't think shop=laundry would work for a laundry room

Re: [Tagging] roads with many names

So is F street, or 1st street a name or a ref? On 8/18/19 10:27 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: It looks like "CR 2" is a "ref" rather than a name, and so is FS 729.2B. A ref=, short for "reference number" (or more properly "reference alphanumeric string") is a set of letters and numbers that

Re: [Tagging] Road hierarchy

R - unclassified A - unclassified B - track C - residential On 8/4/19 3:46 AM, Tomas Straupis wrote: All right, let's make it more detailed and more extended. R R RAAA R A R R R R Now A and C are ways leading into the inner territory of residential building(s). But A has

Re: [Tagging] Charging stations: socket::output -- which format for the value?

On 7/30/19 2:59 AM, Warin wrote: On 30/07/19 12:38, brad wrote: I don't have an opinion about kw or w, but if the value is only a number, then to prevent confusion and reduce mistagging the key should specify, output-kw=22 . OSM typically places unit after the value. For examples see https

Re: [Tagging] Charging stations: socket::output -- which format for the value?

I don't have an opinion about kw or w, but if the value is only a number, then to prevent confusion and reduce mistagging the key should specify, output-kw=22 . On 7/29/19 5:00 AM, dktue wrote: I'd vote for kW aswell (and a value of "22" then), since we're not always using SI and not always

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

I'm not sure what you mean by misleading.    The image I linked on jul 6 could be tagged as grade3 , It's mostly solid.    Is that misleading?    But you need 4 wheel drive, or an off road capable motorcycle to drive it.     Also look at the photos on the smoothness page.   None of them are

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

objective, so it should be mentioned,but I believe it is already suggested on most of the minor highway, path and track pages. On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 10:24 AM brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmail.com>> wrote: Do we have close to a consensus that tracktype is not globally

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

Do we have close to a consensus that tracktype is not globally useful? The Key:highway wiki page and map_features could be changed from "To describe the quality of a track, see tracktype =*.: to "To describe the quality of a track, use

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

It's a typical mtn road, used mostly for recreation today, track is appropriate. On 7/7/19 2:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 7. Jul 2019, at 01:51, brad wrote: It is still used for a couple of mines (worked by 1 or 2 people), but mostly recreational use

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

umpy, it’s probably passable by any vehicke with sufficient clearance and tire size, even when wet, unlike a track of unimproved clay, silt or loam which requires 4wd or is simply impassable when it rains? But I’m not an expert on 4wd. On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 8:58 AM brad <mailto:bradha...@fastmai

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

seen rocky soil. Brad On 7/3/19 2:09 AM, Mark Wagner wrote: Option 3 won't work. Locally, tracks come in two basic types: 1) A logging road created by a work crew with a bulldozer. Cut down any trees, scrape off any remaining vegetation, level the road side-to-side, and call it done. These r

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

Here's one, https://www.dropbox.com/s/agj4njek1r35vnz/2018-10-03-13.06.54r.jpg?dl=0 Maybe gets some maintenance every 10 or 20 years or so.  It is probably never soft, so it doesn't fit any tracktype definition. It is still used for a couple of  mines (worked by 1 or 2 people), but mostly

[Tagging] track smoothness/quality

A pretty standard nomenclature on maps in the US for unpaved roads is Improved Road Unsurfaced Road (High Clearance) Four Wheel Drive Other variations exist , but not too dissimilar. Pretty simple and anyone who spends time in the mountains or forest gets a feel for what it means and has an idea

Re: [Tagging] Tag for Cornices?

worldwide. Brad Colorado, USA On 5/11/19 6:59 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Another user asked about a tag for a snow cornice, a cliff-like or overhanging snow and ice feature that often forms along a ridge in winter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_cornice "There doesn't appear to be a way t

[Tagging] tracktype=*;*;*

I'm seeing some tracks with multiple tracktype's like this: Way 364707088 [highway=track,  name=FR 514, tracktype=grade2;grade1;grade3] Is this generally accepted practice? If so, why? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Waterway tributary role

Seems like this is essentially replaced by the destination key? On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 4:24 PM marc marc wrote: > Le 11.04.19 à 12:48, Eugene Podshivalov a écrit : > > > I could not find any reference on the wiki. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Frodrigo/Relation:Waterway >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Runway Holding Positions

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 2:14 PM Steven Estes wrote: > Sorry, I was confused. It looks the tag format would be > aeroway=holding_position:type=runway. > I think you have a typo here, in practice this would be two separate key/value tags: aeroway=holding_position and

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Feature Proposal - Voting - Dog poop area (dog_toilet)

Just an FYI, pet/service animal "relief areas" are now required in US airports of a certain size. That's probably why the four places tagged amenity=pet_relief_area are in US airports. See http://petfriendlytravel.com/airports On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 4:08 AM, José G Moya Y. wrote: > Thank you!

Re: [Tagging] Outdoor tribunes/ seating steps

The tags amenity=theatre, theatre:type=amphi is used for this: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/theatre%3Atype=amphi Kind of clunky, but at least doesn't assume it's a building. On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Tomasz Wójcik wrote: > I think there is a problem with outdoor

Re: [Tagging] Tagging fraction house numbers?

I found it hard to pull out usage of "1/2" through taginfo, but was able to search for usage of the UTF-8 version (½): https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=%C2%BD#values It's used very few times (~200) and many are by the same user, which seems like more argument against using UTF-8. On

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for an American Wild & Scenic river

"Wild and Scenic River" is specifically mentioned on the wiki as boundary=protected_area, protect_class=5. Look at the table for nature-protected areas <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Nature-protected-areas>, and scroll down to the US secti

Re: [Tagging] Unofficial name change of "Lake Calhoun" in Minneapolis, Minnesota

(name:oj) names for some physical features in Minnesota. Cheers, Brad (aka neuhausr) On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Clifford Snow <cliff...@snowandsnow.us> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Tom Hardy <rhardy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Huh. That one flew right

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

on the four map layers on osm.org, a Fort Montgomery label appears 0, 1, or 2 times. So tag for what it is, not for rendering. Brad On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < > dieterdre...@g

Re: [Tagging] Snowmobile routes

es belonging to > local clubs. The underlying GIS data that were used for that map are free > for us to use, but I do NOT propose an import because they don't meet my > standards of data quality. Just to begin with, they are digitized at an > inappropriately small scale. > > On Mon, Se

Re: [Tagging] Snowmobile routes

It may not be "officially recognized" but route=snowmobile is used some [0], and IMHO makes a lot more sense than route=road! [0] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=snowmobile On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > I thought sure that I had

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Tijmen Stam wrote: > On 2016-06-11 23:11, Tijmen Stam wrote: >> >> On 11-06-16 04:16, James Mast wrote: >>> I've been using the "turn:lanes:*=none;slight_right" & "slight_left;none" tags to indicate which side a new lane has been

Re: [Tagging] Model railroad exhibition/show

Subtagging tourism=attraction seems reasonable to me, such as tourism=attraction, attraction=model_railway There is a bit of usage of club=model_railway http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=model_railway#values On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Tijmen Stam wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging airport approach aid systems

igationaid. Any input there or on the tagging list is welcome! Thanks, Brad (neuhausr) On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:45 AM, David Marchal <pene...@live.fr> wrote: > Hello, there. > > I'm trying to map some approach aid systems on a local airport, but I have > trouble choosing the cor

Re: [Tagging] How to tag cricket nets?

There is a different approach that some have taken to use the sport as the key and indicate it is a practice area via the value, for example: golf=driving_range (sometimes on its own, sometimes with sport=golf, leisure=golf_course and/or leisure=pitch) [0] [1] baseball=batting_cage (usually with

Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Richard ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:09:56PM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag

Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?

If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag seems redundant. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bryan Housel br...@7thposition.com wrote: Isn’t that exactly the situation that

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

expectations of what goods they would find at a bakery. On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-05-11 17:10 GMT+02:00 Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com: In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better tagged as bakery

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better tagged as bakery. Even if they only sell pastries (ie no bread), they do have to bake them, right? :) On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of historic=monument

is defined on that page An object, especially large and made of stone, built to remember and show respect to a person or group of people I don't especially care where the line is, but if people are concerned about mistagging then this should be clarified. Thanks, Brad

Re: [Tagging] Tag: shop: hifi

of a shop=electronics (side note: looking at a random assortment in the UK, I do see some hifi that might be mistagged--for example, I'd expect HMV to be tagged as shop=music not shop=hifi?) Cheers, Brad On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 7:10 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, Somewhere

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite

+1 on addr:unit or ref over addr:housenumber. I think ref makes more sense than addr:unit on remote/isolated pitches (ie hike-in sites, not drive-in). In addition, I've seen cases where individual pitches are named instead of numbered. It's not mentioned, but to clarify, I'm assuming that would

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting Shooting Range

Usually we have names for the area where things take place (pitch, track, pool) and the sport (sport=*) A range is one of those places. Usually there are no mixed ranges (archery and rifles, etc) are separate So leisure=range + sport=archery for an archery range or sport=shooting for a

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting Shooting Range

I get your, er, point, although I don't think you would want to randomly wander into a batting cage or hockey rink in the middle of practice either. :) The bigger issue is there are over 1300 sport=archery tags, and both on the wiki and in actual usage, leisure=pitch (or sports_centre) is what's

Re: [Tagging] waterway=lock_gate - is it only for nodes?

We always recommend that all natural and cultural features are tagged as per OSM Wiki only add Seamark tags where there is a non-coincident definition and the nautical definition is of special navigational importance. Locks their gates do not fall into that category so we do not

Re: [Tagging] waterway=lock_gate - is it only for nodes?

For boat navigation purposes this should be crosslinked: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap/Gates Isn't it the other way around? That is, the people who tagged seagate:category:gate=lock (24 objects) should be making sure to also tag waterway=lock_gate (15K objects), not vice

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Reception Desk

I'm wondering, there seems to be potential overlap with tourism=information. From what is written on the reception desk page, it seems like the main difference is that the tag reception_desk also controls access to a site, and a reception desk which only gives information may as well be tagged

Re: [Tagging] Canopy radius for natural=tree

diameter crown also doesn't appear to be vernacular English, unfortunately. Crown diameter or crown spread seem to be more widely used. For example, see http://www.treeterms.co.uk/definitions/crown-diameter, and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_crown_measurement#Crown_Spread_Methodologies On

Re: [Tagging] Practice pitch?

=baseball too, then one query could get baseball diamonds as well as batting cages. Cheers, Brad On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:24 AM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: Here is the location of the batting cage business I started mapping (they have a small cafe inside of the main building) Across the big

Re: [Tagging] tag for portages?

Thanks for the feedback! portage=* was my initial instinct, but I was starting to second guess after finding the other tags. Cheers, Brad On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: This seems like a good place for highway=path + portage=yes Because

Re: [Tagging] tag for portages?

on the highway ? Cheers fly Am 22.02.2015 um 15:25 schrieb Brad Neuhauser: Thanks for the feedback! portage=* was my initial instinct, but I was starting to second guess after finding the other tags. Cheers, Brad On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote

[Tagging] tag for portages?

object) http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/canoe=portage Cheers, Brad ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] ?=maze

The maze/labyrinth distinction is there. When I hear of modern labyrinths, it's usually in the context of religious/spiritual uses (since there's only one way, it lends itself to a walking meditation). Mazes are generally like a recreational puzzle, where you're trying to find your way. Whether

Re: [Tagging] length=

Quick note: for milestones, the tag used is distance, not length. There's a wiki page with all unit tags if you're into that sort of thing: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Michał Brzozowski www.ha...@gmail.com wrote: Just FYI, at OSM-PL

Re: [Tagging] Adding water=fishpond to the wiki

Have you looked at what tagging people are using (if any) within landuse=aquaculture and/or landuse=fishfarm areas? On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-01-04 20:25 GMT+01:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com: But we have also yet an existing tag

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag

On Saturday, January 3, 2015, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Not sure why a church / temple/ shrine/ mosque landuse would be drawn any differently than an office park or a retail shop. This could get interesting. St Matthew Lutheran in Beaverton, OR has a Les Schwab Tire Center

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

appropriate, for example because there's no educational component. I think staffed child care at malls (or at Ikea) would be a case where this would apply. Brad ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*

Sorry, the German examples don't mean much to me. Do the examples below show what you're proposing? name=Chicago, admin_title=city, admin_level... name=California, admin_title=state, admin_level On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: This is about a new

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

I think this appears to be the reference Richard mentioned: http://www.iho-ohi.net/iho_pubs/standard/S-23/S23_1953.pdf On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:51 AM, Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 08:41:18AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote: Could we try an example to see whether

Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=mall versus shop=shopping_centre

I agree with Matthjis--I don't see much of a clearly defined and widely agreed on difference between the two. Given that, and the small usage of shopping_centre, I agree with should deprecate shopping_centre. Cheers, Brad On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote

  1   2   >