Thanks for the update of the wiki. I added one of my photos.
Best regards,
Martin
2013/2/26 Alberto albertoferra...@fastwebnet.it:
To Martin Vonwald.
I've added field_shelter here [1].
Can you upload a picture for it? I haven't one and I don't want to upload a
copyrighted picture.
[1]
Thank you for your photo. I've also updated the animal page [1] and I reused
your photo.
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Animal
Bye
Alberto
Thanks for the update of the wiki. I added one of my photos.
Best regards,
Martin
___
Tagging
To Martin Vonwald.
I've added field_shelter here [1].
Can you upload a picture for it? I haven't one and I don't want to upload a
copyrighted picture.
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shelter_type
Thank you
Alberto - Viking81
___
Tagging
Hi!
I guess too less people care about those. So simply use it and
document how you use it in the wiki.
regards,
Martin
2013/2/23 Alberto albertoferra...@fastwebnet.it:
Some time has passed but nothing has been changed on the Wiki.
So about amenity=shelter + shelter_type=field_shelter + (if
Some time has passed but nothing has been changed on the Wiki.
So about amenity=shelter + shelter_type=field_shelter + (if necessary)
access=private, should I create a proposal page and vote it to change [1]
and [2] or should I simply update these pages according to what we discussed
here?
[1]
Are they not stables? Am not sure about amenity, that implies public use.
I would suggest building = stable.
Phil
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 06/02/2013 7:03 Martin Vonwald (imagic) wrote:
Hi,
Are there any arguments against using amenity=shelter +
shelter_type=field_shelter for field
No, they are definitively not stables. Differently to a stable the
horse can go in and out as it pleases. They are usually placed in the
field as protection from bad weather. An example of a field shelter
can be seen here: [1] You definitively don't call them stables ;-)
Martin
[1]
Sorry, but the picture is not a stable. It is, in the UK, a field shelter.
The other problem with mapping some of these is they are often designed to be
mobile to get round planning rules. The image is a mobile version. There have
been previous discussions on this, so you might want to
2013/2/6 Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com:
The other problem with mapping some of these is they are often designed to
be mobile to get round planning rules.
Correct!
I'm not sure I'd map this mobile type as it will probably/should move in the
next year!
I only think about field
I would go for building=shelter rather than amenity.
Amenity would imply it is available for anyone passing with a horse to take
shelter.
Phil
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 06/02/2013 9:00 Martin Vonwald wrote:
No, they are definitively not stables. Differently to a stable the
horse can go
2013/2/6 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
I would go for building=shelter rather than amenity.
Amenity would imply it is available for anyone passing with a horse to take
shelter.
Actually if amenity is not a good choice I would rather go for
animal=shelter instead of building=shelter.
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
2013/2/6 Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com:
The other problem with mapping some of these is they are often designed to
be mobile to get round planning rules.
Correct!
I'm not sure I'd map this mobile type as it
2013/2/6 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
I would go for building=shelter rather than amenity.
Amenity would imply it is available for anyone passing with a horse to take
shelter.
I think this would put more implication into amenity than what it
practically has in OSM (see e.g.
2013/2/6 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
So trying to remove ambiguity as much as possible you could tag this:
building=field_shelter (or building=roof, layer=1)
amenity=shelter
shelter_type=field_shelter
Except for the building, that was my first idea. In my opinion it
would fit
-1 for tagging it as amenity=shelter.
We also don't do that with carports, garden sheds or dog houses.
The object tagged amenity=shelter should imho be intended and usable for
sheltering humans against bad weather and be freely accessible.
-Martin
2013/2/6 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com
2013/2/6 Martin Simon grenzde...@gmail.com:
-1 for tagging it as amenity=shelter.
We also don't do that with carports, garden sheds or dog houses.
The object tagged amenity=shelter should imho be intended and usable for
sheltering humans against bad weather and be freely accessible.
Agree to
I'm against animal=shelter. As emerged in previous discussions, an animal is
not a shelter.
It exists amenity=animal_shelter [1] for large structures with a staff that
takes care of animals and that eventually heals them.
On taginfo already exists animal=shelter, and in many cases it has been used
Makes sense. So we're back to amenity.
Something like amenity=shelter + shelter_type=field_shelter + (if
necessary) access=private should cover it.
Martin
2013/2/6 Alberto albertoferra...@fastwebnet.it:
I'm against animal=shelter. As emerged in previous discussions, an animal is
not a
Hi,
Are there any arguments against using amenity=shelter +
shelter_type=field_shelter for field shelters (see [1]) for horses?
From the wiki:
The amenity=shelter tag marks all sorts of small shelters to protect against
bad weather conditions.
Sounds good to me.
Regards,
Martin
[1]
19 matches
Mail list logo
