Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Hi Matthew Woehlke skrev: (25 augusti 2020 15:25:19 CEST) >On 24/08/2020 16.25, pangoSE wrote: >> Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (24 augusti 2020 02:16:27 CEST) >>> Also useful when the POI is approximately placed (e.g. in a >>> neighbouring building, happens quite ofte

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (25 augusti 2020 09:18:08 CEST) > > >sent from a phone > >> On 25. Aug 2020, at 02:07, pangoSE wrote: >> >> What I mean is that its a bad idea to keep the exact same data in >multiple places and thinking about it postal addres

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Hi Andrew Harvey skrev: (25 augusti 2020 00:39:55 CEST) >On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 06:27, pangoSE wrote: > >> The POI IMO cannot logically have an adress itself, its a human >symbol for >> designating something of interest within a feature like a building, >park

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Hi Martin Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (24 augusti 2020 02:16:27 CEST) > > >sent from a phone > >> On 23. Aug 2020, at 23:20, pangoSE wrote: >> >> This collides with one feature one element does it not? > > >it does not. An address is not (necessarily

Re: [Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

Hi Cj Cj Malone skrev: (23 augusti 2020 23:56:33 CEST) >> Not exactly a very user-friendly system though, especially if you're >> only trying to review requested changes? >> >> & with somewhere between 300k - 600k changes sitting there to look >> at, I don't think the chances are all that high

Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

Hostile is biased and not verifyable and should be avoided IMO. /pangoSE ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (23 augusti 2020 19:15:04 CEST) > > >sent from a phone > >> On 23. Aug 2020, at 18:53, Thibault Molleman > wrote: >> >> Should that entrance node also have the >> addr:housenumber=15 >> tag or is it assumed based on it being placed on the building's way? > > >The

Re: [Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

Hi Shawn "Shawn K. Quinn" skrev: (23 augusti 2020 19:01:53 CEST) >On 8/22/20 23:53, pangoSE wrote: >> And we have no statistics or functionality to mark a changeser as >> revieed so nobody knows how many reviews are done and how many falls >> through the cracks.

Re: [Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

Hi "Jarek Piórkowski" skrev: (23 augusti 2020 00:41:40 CEST) >On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 18:12, Clifford Snow >wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 3:06 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: >>> Reading through it though, I noticed though that he used iD, & >ticked the box "I would like someone to review my

Re: [Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

1 by me-osm-tagg...@keepawayfromfire.co.uk: > >> On Sat, 2020-08-22 at 09:32 +0200, pangoSE wrote: >> >>> Building upon it can lead to strange things. E.g. >>> >https://www.nyteknik.se/popularteknik/mystisk-jatteskrapa-dok-upp-i-flygsimulator-6999771 >>>

Re: [Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

: (22 augusti 2020 10:51:10 CEST) >On Sat, 2020-08-22 at 09:32 +0200, pangoSE wrote: >> Building upon it can lead to strange things. E.g. >> >https://www.nyteknik.se/popularteknik/mystisk-jatteskrapa-dok-upp-i-flygsimulator-6999771 >> (building:levels=212 was entered e

[Tagging] Call for verification (Was: Re: [OSM-talk] VANDALISM !)

Hi 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk skrev: (22 augusti 2020 03:06:37 CEST) >  >Also there is no wiki on unverified edits. >  In OSM we don't yet have an established system for verification or accurate machine readable references for the data to my knowledge. This means the whole database is

Re: [Tagging] Have our tagging voting rules changed recently?

I agree. Colin Smale skrev: (4 augusti 2020 11:26:30 CEST) >On 2020-08-04 10:06, Andrew Harvey wrote: > >> I'd suggest that if you vote no, it will be helpful for the community >if you could elaborate on why you're voting no, without enforcing a >reason as mandatory. Is it because this feature

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Ground: natural=bare_soil)

Thanks for the heads up Joseph. I also read what Imagico wrote1 and voted no. I recommend others to do the same. Cheers pangoSE 1 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Proposed_features/Ground=253931=2016970=2016363 Joseph Eisenberg skrev: (3 augusti 2020 23:17:18 CEST

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

ppenhoefer skrev: (22 juli 2020 20:19:16 CEST) > > >sent from a phone > >> On 22. Jul 2020, at 17:10, pangoSE wrote: >> >> I suggest you add the guidepost to a node on the path instead. > > >I am mapping guideposts rather rarely, when I do it, I place them

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

. Maybe this can already be done with overpass. At least JOSM can download information along a way so it should be possible to implement. Cheers PangoSE Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (22 juli 2020 14:04:25 CEST) >Am Di., 21. Juli 2020 um 21:39 Uhr schrieb pangoSE >: > >> Andy Towns

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

Andy Townsend skrev: (21 juli 2020 13:31:45 CEST) >On 21/07/2020 12:04, Michal Fabík wrote: > >I've also been trying to add these (both guideposts and route markers) >to the relevant hiking route relation. That does not sound right to me. Why would you do that? A route relation is in my

Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of image tags suggestion

thanks for the constructive suggestions :) Den Thu, 25 Jun 2020 22:14:21 +0200 skrev Re: [Tagging] Automated edit of image tags suggestion: > sent from a phone > > > On 25. Jun 2020, at 19:59, pangoSE wrote: > > > > image=File:* -> commons_file=File:* image=Categor

[Tagging] Automated edit of image tags suggestion

Originalmeddelande Från: pangoSE Skickat: 25 juni 2020 19:49:58 CEST Till: tagg...@lists.openstreetmap.org Ämne: Automated edit of image tags suggestion Below is a copy of the text at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/pangoSE#Key:image Key:imageEdit

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

here http://blog.imagico.de/verifiability-and-the-wikipediarization-of-openstreetmap/. This is very different from a street name that appears on a sign IMO, which is verifiable and can be seen by anyone in the same spot. pangoSE On 2020-03-27 10:47, Simon Poole wrote: Just using the entry

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

Thank you very much for writing that post. I wholeheartedly agree with your arguments. On the basis of this it makes even more sense to sidestep the name issues and leave the battle to wikidatans. We just map what is on the ground and they fight over the rest with references, judgements of

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

On March 25, 2020 2:08:33 PM GMT+01:00, Paul Allen wrote: >On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 10:02, wrote: > >> Honestly I don't think it makes sense for OSM to have names at all on >> objects which has a Wikidata reference. >> > >Not all mappable objects have a Wikidata reference. Cities and big

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

On March 25, 2020 11:50:15 AM GMT+01:00, Phake Nick wrote: >在 2020年3月25日週三 18:34，Frederik Ramm 寫道： > >> Hi, >> >> On 25.03.20 11:19, Phake Nick wrote: >> > My guess is that about 5% of name:xx tags in OSM actually >represent a >> > unique name in its own right; all others are either

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

Hi Simon. Do you have a link? The Municipality I live in has sensible names in WD https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3240427 Does it matter to us in OSM if it "has the name"? I'm thinking that we outsource all the naming to WD to deal with and fight over. In OSM we could instead concentrate on

Re: [Tagging] Which languages are admissible for name:xx tags?

Honestly I don't think it makes sense for OSM to have names at all on objects which has a Wikidata reference. We are just too small a community to keep this updated and it has little value to duplicate to the efforts made by others. If any names I suggest we have a bot autoupdating all name

[Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

Hi IMO pond should not be mapped because it is not observable on the ground. How do you determine if it is "artificially created"/"man made"? See: A pond : a body of standing water, man-made in most cases, that is usually smaller than a lake.

Re: [Tagging] change bicycle_parking=floor to surface

On 2020-02-03 08:41, Warin wrote: On 3/2/20 6:32 pm, pang...@riseup.net wrote: Then the issue of securing the bicycle? bicycle_secure=lock,supervised,provided_lock,* Could you elaborate what each of these mean? I think bicycle_security is better I would like to improve on this key

Re: [Tagging] change bicycle_parking=floor to surface

> >I don't think the solution of using surface will do. > > >surface=paved says nothing about if the bicycle can be secured and what >too. > >Nor does it say anything about how the bike is held. > > >The bicycle_parking key is used for lots of things... > >buildings/sheds > >stands/racks > >A

Re: [Tagging] change bicycle_parking=floor to surface

I suggest we use additional tags to specify this more precisely. I think the lack of supports should be tagged supports=no or bicycle_support=no. Additionally lock_support=no or lock_stands=12. I'm not English so I don't know what would be the best word for these devices. In Danish they are

[Tagging] wikimedia_commons= and image= cleanup

alidator: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/18579 Regards pangoSE PS: IMO it is a good idea to clean this up to get an idea of how many of our features have some kind (and what kind) of image linked to them. I would like to see statistics about this that also tells me whether the wikidata i