Good point. Landcover seems to be the closest it can be.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 2018-01-12 14:52, Jo wrote:
> You are right in that we shouldn't base any of our mapping on what is
> visible on Google Streetview. Which is why I was suggesting that
> somebody go check it out locally. I've been looking at Belgian aerial
> imagery we are allowed to use, taken over several years
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 19:56:39 +0100
"OSMDoudou" <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote:
> landuse=retail
landuse=retail should include also shop buildings (it include all area
used for retail, not areas used for retail purposes that were not
tagged using other tags)
I sometimes use surface=* as a stand-alone tag for areas with an unclear
or uninteresting purpose. Doing so captures the physical reality on the
ground pretty well in my opinion.
From this point of view, the area in question is already tagged
correctly. Maybe we can find out what it's being used f
Don't worry about local knowledge, I'm local mapper and will survey the place.
I found a dozen of similar or slightly different cases in the area, and the
problem is not about verify things, but about *what* to verify.
The goal of using street view images is not to map based on that, but to
dis
On 12/01/2018 14:06, marc marc wrote:
from aerial imagery and existing tag : landcover=gravel :)
Which to be clear is a pretty rare tag -
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landcover=gravel - 431 uses
worldwide.
Best Regards,
Andy
___
Taggi
from aerial imagery and existing tag : landcover=gravel :)
Le 12. 01. 18 à 14:52, Jo a écrit :
> You are right in that we shouldn't base any of our mapping on what is
> visible on Google Streetview. Which is why I was suggesting that
> somebody go check it out locally. I've been looking at Belgi
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 00:05:09 +0100
"OSMDoudou" <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote:
> How would you tag it ?
I also sometimes look through suspicious objects - and in cases like
this I sometimes
- open notes so local mappers are able to respond (now or in a future)
- ask in a ch
You are right in that we shouldn't base any of our mapping on what is
visible on Google Streetview. Which is why I was suggesting that somebody
go check it out locally. I've been looking at Belgian aerial imagery we are
allowed to use, taken over several years. But nothing useful can be seen on
the
Please notice that, for doing something similar to what you do here
(reading a lot of maps and aerial imaginery, being only one of them [3]
google maps) I was forced to erase my edition and do it again.
Just to warn you.
El 12/1/2018 8:30, "Jo" escribió:
> It definitely doesn't look like a publi
It definitely doesn't look like a public parking lot. It would be good if
someone local could resurvey if the shop is still in that house.
Jo
2018-01-12 5:19 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis :
> is there street view imagery ? do you have local knowledge ?
>
> If not, you might consider not fixing it. Yes it
is there street view imagery ? do you have local knowledge ?
If not, you might consider not fixing it. Yes it will be a useless
polygon in the database, but isn't that better than changing it e.g.
to a parking lot while it is a private property ?
just my .5 cents
m.
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:0
On 12 January 2018 at 09:16, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> If you go a bit further up the Street, which changes to a different view
> (from Oct 2014 to July 2017), it looks like it may be a car park?
>
> https://www.google.be/maps/@50.4535258,3.928354,3a,51.9y,
> 155.23h,84.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s
There are traffic signs facing the area, and parking bumpers on it; is it
not a gravel-surfaced parking field?
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> If you go a bit further up the Street, which changes to a different view
> (from Oct 2014 to July 2017), it looks like it ma
If you go a bit further up the Street, which changes to a different view
(from Oct 2014 to July 2017), it looks like it may be a car park?
https://www.google.be/maps/@50.4535258,3.928354,3a,51.9y,155.23h,84.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQ5cOI_Z-Dre0c2Tjp5k5jQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The silver car is certai
Le 12. 01. 18 à 00:05, OSMDoudou a écrit :
> How would you tag it ?
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/223853253
> [3] https://goo.gl/maps/yhA3rx2WVhM2
landcover=gravel
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.
Hello,
Osmose is complaining an area is mapped but not further specified: [1] and
[2]
Here is how the place looks like: [3]
I was thinking it's a side walk, but they're not to be mapped as area [4]
and the place doesn't really look like a square or plaza [5] nor like a
parking.
How would you ta
17 matches
Mail list logo
