Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am So., 11. Nov. 2018 um 22:54 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen : > I have to say I far prefer the editors in things like WordPress and > Drupal. View source means HTML > source and the visual editors seem (to me) better designed. > I agree that in an attempt to simplify html editing by introducing a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

11. Nov 2018 02:40 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > I've been a programmer in my earlier life so I'm not a newbie when it comes > to looking at and interpreting code but the markup language for the Wiki is, > IMHO, simply horrible.  Yes, it can rival and win

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 at 22:16, Paul Allen wrote: > > It's vile. There are cheat sheets, but it's still vile. However, there's > also a visual editor. Which > isn't vile, but is somewhat sub-optimal (I usually end up editing the > source despite it being vile). > Got a link to them, Paul? >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 08:40:44AM +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote: > Yes, the Wiki is far from perfect. That's a big reason we have these > endless debates. But how should we go about fixing it? An additional issue > for me is the difficulty of adding information to the Wiki. I've been a >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Le 11. 11. 18 à 13:15, Paul Allen a écrit : > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 1:42 AM Dave Swarthout wrote: >> I've been a programmer in my earlier life so I'm not a newbie when >> it comes to looking at and interpreting code but the markup language >> for the Wiki is, IMHO, simply horrible. >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 1:42 AM Dave Swarthout wrote: > Mateusz, > > I've been a programmer in my earlier life so I'm not a newbie when it > comes to looking at and interpreting code but the markup language for the > Wiki is, IMHO, simply horrible. > It's vile. There are cheat sheets, but

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Mateusz, The problem is how to get enough agreement and understanding to correct the Wiki. You can see how difficult that would be when even the regular contributors to the tagging list can't agree on what's correct. Imagine how overwhelmed new mappers must feel when they work on their first

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

8. Nov 2018 02:59 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > Another part of the problem is the Wiki that we treat as our bible. I  am not sure whatever anyone present on this mailing list is doing this.In case that someone is doing it: remember that WIki is missing plenty

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I think it gets easier when you think of a relation as a data structure that allows to combine links to other objects with tags. That's what it is, nothing more. Only the tags give a hint about the meaning of this combination, and one always has to bear in mind that different mappers might see

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Martin said: " tags on the way apply to the way, those on the relation to tag relation as a whole. There is no general inheritance from the relation to its members." When I made my statement about inheritance I tried to choose my words carefully. I said that those tags only _implicitly_ apply to

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:26:49PM -0600, Gerd Petermann wrote: > Hi all, > > after reading the last comments in this thread I tried again to convince > Dave that the rather special rules for multipolygon relations cannot be used > for all types of relations, esp. not those with route=pipeline

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:38 AM Dave Swarthout wrote: > Also agreed. > I'm not saying anything about the route tag. We're talking about tags > other than route or type, which actually set up the relation. The > additional tags that describe the route or multipolygon either go on the > relation or

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

sent from a phone > On 8. Nov 2018, at 02:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > To my way of thinking, a tag in the relation implicitly applies to every > member of the relation. It's not "visible" to us mappers but it's there > nonetheless tags on the way apply to the way, those on the relation

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Also agreed. I'm not saying anything about the route tag. We're talking about tags other than route or type, which actually set up the relation. The additional tags that describe the route or multipolygon either go on the relation or the ways depending on their scope, but not both. On Thu, Nov 8,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I totally agree, Andy. So yes, if someone has tagged the relation with an operator and in reality, there are different operators (or none) for some parts of the route, those parts should have tags to indicate the change. My illustrative case involves a pipeline that (AFAIK) has only one operator

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

And route=foot does not mean al the components are footpaths. Op do 8 nov. 2018 om 11:05 schreef Andy Townsend : > On 08/11/2018 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > To my way of thinking, a tag in the relation implicitly applies to > > every member of the relation. > > No. Think of a long-distance

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On 08/11/2018 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: To my way of thinking, a tag in the relation implicitly applies to every member of the relation. No.  Think of a long-distance footpath - that may have an operator, or it may have tags that apply specifically to the footpath route. It may also run

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Yves, " mapping a way is simpler than a relation for most." I totally understand that. In fact, in the first of those references, the opening statement is " Usually the pipeline is mapped just with simple ways".I think that's a valid approach for short pipelines but this thing is huge. Whoever

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Dave, Not that what you say doesn't make sense, cause it does. However I just think that the wiki is not the bible (it's a wiki), secondly OSM is not that square as it is made to be edited by hand. Keep it simple here just means that mapping a way is simpler than a relation for most. Yves

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

To my way of thinking, a tag in the relation implicitly applies to every member of the relation. It's not "visible" to us mappers but it's there nonetheless. It's my belief that tagging every way with the identical tags present on the relation is to ensure that the object will render. If our

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:07 PM Yves wrote: > Agreed with Martin here, I would be amazed that the name of a pipeline > would contradict the name of one of its section being something else than a > pipeline. > >> I'm not super familiar with them compared to railroads, but similar naming

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Agreed with Martin here, I would be amazed that the name of a pipeline would contradict the name of one of its section being something else than a pipeline. Dave, you missed a very important rule: Keep it simple. On roads (routes for cars), a pretty common thing) ref=xxx can be found on ways in

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mi., 7. Nov. 2018 um 16:40 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > 7. Nov 2018 08:27 by daveswarth...@gmail.com: > In the case of the pipeline, tags like man_made=pipeline, substance=oil, > operator, Wikipedia and Wikidata tags, belong in the relation. > > > For the record:

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mi., 7. Nov. 2018 um 14:58 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny < kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>: > A multipolygon is nothing more > nor less than an area feature with any topology more complex than a > simple closed way. +1, plus in some cases even a simple closed way as only member of a multipolygon

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

7. Nov 2018 08:27 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > I provided two examples from the Wiki and a part of a response earlier in > this thread from Kevin Kenny to support my argument that state that > individual ways in a multipolygon I have no idea why advice

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On 11/7/18 2:27 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: I provided two examples from the Wiki and a part of a response earlier in this thread from Kevin Kenny to support my argument that state that individual ways in a multipolygon or relation should not be tagged unless their characteristics require it. 

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Thanks, I added it to my styles and promise to try it soon. Dave On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 4:12 PM Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Dave, > reg. a rule for mkgmap: A simple approach would be to add a rule in the > relation style so that the tag man_made=pipeline is added

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Dave, reg. a rule for mkgmap: A simple approach would be to add a rule in the relation style so that the tag man_made=pipeline is added to all way members of the relation which don't already have a man_made tag: #pipelines type=route & route=pipeline { apply way { add

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

PS: Gerd and I are not at war here. We just don't agree on the correct way to proceed. In fact, I have had lots of help from him when developing maps for my Garmin and will need his help in the future, no doubt. Maybe to convince him to write the code in mkgmap to better "see inside" relations to

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

It's true. Gerd and I have gone round and .around on this topic. Gerd has tried to convince me that I should not remove any tags of the ways contained in the existing Alaska pipeline relation and I'm convinced that the only tags that belong on those ways are the ones that make that particular way

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Hi all, after reading the last comments in this thread I tried again to convince Dave that the rather special rules for multipolygon relations cannot be used for all types of relations, esp. not those with route=pipeline and that he should not remove tags like man_made=pipeline from ways of such

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

sent from a phone > On 4. Nov 2018, at 11:35, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 4. Nov 2018 06:36 by daveswarth...@gmail.com: > I realize it can be done this way but it's a ton of work (quote: not very > easy) compared to making one simple edit to tag the entire collection of ways. > > > I

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Let me try to clarify what I'm saying again. Gerd writes: If we follow Daves idea one might create a relation combining a few things that have the same tag, e.g. all building=residential in a town, name it something like "residential buildings" and finally remove the tags from those buildings. I

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

4. Nov 2018 06:36 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > I realize it can be done this way but it's a ton of work (quote: not very > easy) compared to making one simple edit to tag the entire collection of > ways. I would not call clicking three or four times "ton of

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

4. Nov 2018 10:14 by gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com : > So, if one starts to remove tags from members because the relation repeats > the tag he has to make sure that this is a well established method. Not sure > if this is the case for pipelines? >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

If we follow Daves idea one might create a relation combining a few things that have the same tag, e.g. all building=residential in a town, name it something like "residential buildings" and finally remove the tags from those buildings. I hope nobody thinks this would be a good idea. Reg. the TAP

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Mateusz wrote: "Both methods are not very easy but are necessary very rarely and it allows to avoid problematic "half of tags is here, half in this relation" that is highly problematic for mappers" I realize it can be done this way but it's a ton of work (quote: not very easy) compared to making

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

3. Nov 2018 14:43 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > (> BOLD TEXT> is my addition) This is exactly what I've been saying> . > Member ways should be untagged unless they have a separate meaning on their > own. > > There you have it. It's a logical system of tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I probably should make a clarification about what I mean about "logically belonging" to the relation. On a road route, it wouldn't make sense to put 'lanes=2' or 'surface=concrete' on a road route, even if all the component ways happen to have that characteristic. There's nothing to keep the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 9:45 AM Dave Swarthout wrote: > (*BOLD TEXT* is my addition) This is exactly what I've been saying*. > Member ways should be untagged unless they have a separate meaning on their > own. * > > There you have it. It's a logical system of tagging and makes perfect > sense

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I've been saying that I believe tagging that applies to an entire relation should be placed ONLY on the relation and NOT on the individual ways, UNLESS, there is some characteristic of the way that requires different tagging. I gave examples using the Trans Alaska Pipeline but this reasoning

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

3. Nov 2018 11:30 by davefoxfa...@btinternet.com : > Duplication of data leads to confusion, wasted time & errors. > Please refrain from mapping in this way. Please refrain from demanding that other stop mapping in way that is commonly accepted.

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

3. Nov 2018 00:00 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : > To make matters worse, let's just say you misspelled the Wikipedia tag value. > You meant to write "wikipedia=en:Trans-Alaska Pipeline System" but forgot to > include the "en:" prefix. Back you go to your editor,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Hi On 02/11/2018 01:43, Allan Mustard wrote: I don't see a problem with duplicating a tag in both the relation and sections of the object.  In my case I have been mapping the national highway network of Turkmenistan the last few months.  I have created relations so that all segments belong

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I prefer to have common tags on the relation. That said, in JOSM you can select the relation members and then easily add, update or delete a tag from all members of the relation. Cheers! > On Nov 2, 2018, at 4:00 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > Of course. The Trans Alaska Pipeline is as good

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Of course. The Trans Alaska Pipeline is as good an example as any. It is a man_made oil pipeline that stretches 1300 km across the entire state of Alaska. The relation contains 280 members. The reason there are so many members is because the pipeline way has been split into many individual pieces,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

2. Nov 2018 01:04 by daveswarth...@gmail.com : >  The only tags that should appear on the ways themselves are attributes of > those ways, for example, location=overground or location=underground, and > tags for bridge and layer. Everything else, Wikidata,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Allan, I'm not about to remove any tags from the highways in Turkmenistan. This isn't about an edit war. It's about trying to do things in the most efficient way possible. Using your highway as an example, let's say it has dozens of segments, each tagged with ref and other items as you indicated.

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I don't see a problem with duplicating a tag in both the relation and sections of the object.  In my case I have been mapping the national highway network of Turkmenistan the last few months.  I have created relations so that all segments belong to one or more highways (P-1 from Ashgabat to

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Putting aside the discussion about type for a moment, this topic relates to a discussion I'm having with a user about tags and multipolygons, specifically where the tags go, so I believe it fits into this discussion. I removed the tags from the ways for a section of the Trans Alaska Pipeline (TAP)

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

> > why not a multipolygon? I agree that you don’t need additional tags for a > group relation, just type=group, a name and the members, but for a site you > would need something that describes the site, a tag for a group of water > areas, so as long as all the members are areas (or parts), a

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

sent from a phone > On 12. Oct 2018, at 09:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Why not bet both ways? > Make both a site and a group relation. why not a multipolygon? I agree that you don’t need additional tags for a group relation, just type=group, a name and the members, but

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On 12/10/18 12:57, Dave Swarthout wrote: What I'm learning by reading this thread over again is that there is a lot of confusion about relations in the context I'm interested in. Group or site, whether one or the other will render or, more importantly for me at least, is whether the object

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

What I'm learning by reading this thread over again is that there is a lot of confusion about relations in the context I'm interested in. Group or site, whether one or the other will render or, more importantly for me at least, is whether the object will be findable in a Nominatim search. I would

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 21:16, Tod Fitch wrote: > > I had not noticed the existence of the group relation before. Seems to me > that it and the controversial site relation have some overlap. For the > examples I can think of where I think the site relation works it seems like > the group

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

> On Oct 8, 2018, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > Group relations have been proposed > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation > ) in > the past. One has been used to group the Great

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Group relations have been proposed ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Group_Relation) in the past. One has been used to group the Great Lakes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1124369 I'm tempted to use type=group relations to group the Bisby Lakes,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:55, SelfishSeahorse wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this map > > of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: > >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I'm not arguing about any particular tagging, but I would like to point the fact that the map you send uses different colours for Three Lakes and for the named lakes (Chloya and Twin Islands lakes). The lakes have blue labels denoting that the name is for a water body while the group of lakes is

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 13:57 Uhr schrieb SelfishSeahorse < selfishseaho...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this > map of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake:

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 13:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this map > of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodensee#/media/File:Bodensee_satellit%2Btext.png > (or maybe

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

On Sun, 7 Oct 2018 at 18:08, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > - way with natural=water and name="Small Pond" > - way with natural=water and name="Big Pond" > - relation grouping this ways with name="Groble" and proper type > > But how relation should be tagged? > > Tagging it natural=water seems

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Regarding the validity of the name Three Lakes, I think it's very clearly correct and as such, suitable for inclusion in OSM. There is a screenshot in my Dropbox and also this citation from the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, Orth (1963): Three Lakes: lakes, 4 mi. SW of Birch Creek (locality),

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 13:12 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > A very similar problem are parts of lakes by the way, e.g. look at this > map of the lake of Constance, showing names for parts of the lake: >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 12:24 Uhr schrieb Christoph Hormann : > > It is a good idea to keep in mind that we have a well established > tagging scheme for something quite similar, that is place=archipelago > and place=island. +1, hence the proposal of a proper tag for a group of lakes. >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

It is a good idea to keep in mind that we have a well established tagging scheme for something quite similar, that is place=archipelago and place=island. This could serve you as a blueprint to select a suitable tagging in your case. Also keep in mind however that if you want to tag a name

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Am Mo., 8. Okt. 2018 um 11:49 Uhr schrieb Dave Swarthout < daveswarth...@gmail.com>: > So I retagged them this time assigning the name "Three Lakes" to the > relation containing the lakes and removing it from the individual lakes. I > checked back again today, after a few days had elapsed, and

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

The multiple water body situation arises frequently in my Alaska mapping. I have struggled over the years to tag them in such a manner that the names will render but without resorting to trickery to make that happen. A couple of years ago I happened on a group of three lakes, two of which

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 21:46, marc marc wrote: > > I'm not sure it's necessary to create a value to repeat the type of > object already present in osm. otherwise it would require a value for > each type of object and a value for each type of possible combination > between

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2018, at 19:28, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > I hoped to avoid that sidetrack. > > Question is the same, no matter whatever "and proper type" means > type=site or type=multipolygon. yes, we do not have a generic way of approaching this problem (and given how we

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Is this name “Groble” the name of the land that surrounds the ponds, or is it the name of the water features only? I wouldn’t use locality for water areas. Multipolygon would not be ideal, because that would double-count the amount of water. If someone tries to analyze the number of lakes or

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

place=locality and/or type=site I'm not sure it's necessary to create a value to repeat the type of object already present in osm. otherwise it would require a value for each type of object and a value for each type of possible combination between theose types. Le 07. 10. 18 à 18:07, Mateusz

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I hoped to avoid that sidetrack. Question is the same, no matter whatever "and proper type" meanstype=site or type=multipolygon. 7. Oct 2018 18:31 by t...@fitchdesign.com : > Perhaps a site relation. :) > > > On October 7, 2018 9:07:48 AM PDT, Mateusz

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

This case sounds not so abusive of multipolygons. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Perhaps a site relation. :) On October 7, 2018 9:07:48 AM PDT, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >Lest say that we have ngroup of ponds called "Groble", with >- a water area called "Small Pond"- a water area called "Big Pond" >What is the best way to tag this? >First part for obvious: >- way with

[Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Lest say that we have ngroup of ponds called "Groble", with - a water area called "Small Pond"- a water area called "Big Pond" What is the best way to tag this? First part for obvious: - way with natural=water and name="Small Pond"- way with natural=water and name="Big Pond"- relation grouping