2015-03-04 14:04 GMT+01:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de:
I agree that we should use a subtag instead of adding this kind of
rarely-used information to the surface value. However, I would prefer to
use paving_stones:width (as it is unclear what dimension size refers to).
IMHO width is
square_paving_stones:width? According to wiki this is supposed to be
applied only to square paving stones.
2015-03-04 17:08 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2015-03-04 14:04 GMT+01:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de:
I agree that we should use a subtag instead of
Maybe:
paving_stone:area=42 cm
But what we really need is:
paving_stone:geometry=
paving_stone:concrete:grain_size=
paving_stone:spectral_reflectance_curves=
paving_stone:manufacturing_date=
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
2015-03-04 19:13 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
But what we really need is:
paving_stone:geometry=
paving_stone:concrete:grain_size=
paving_stone:spectral_reflectance_curves=
paving_stone:manufacturing_date=
+1
and paving_stone:bevel_variance
cheers,
Martin
But what we really need is:
paving_stone:geometry=
paving_stone:concrete:grain_size=
paving_stone:spectral_reflectance_curves=
paving_stone:manufacturing_date=
+1
Now we're getting somewhere. I think too that we need a way to tag how the
stone was formed, also color
On 5/03/2015 11:03 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
But what we really need is:
paving_stone:geometry=
paving_stone:concrete:grain_size=
paving_stone:spectral_reflectance_curves=
paving_stone:manufacturing_date=
+1
Now we're getting somewhere. I think too that we need a way to tag how
the stone
On Mar 5, 2015, at 9:20 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/03/2015 11:03 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
But what we really need is:
paving_stone:geometry=
paving_stone:concrete:grain_size=
paving_stone:spectral_reflectance_curves=
paving_stone:manufacturing_date=
+1
Now
2015-03-04 3:38 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com:
The whole idea of including a size for paving stones seems overkill to me
+1, although one has to acknowledge that paving_stones:30 is in the top 25
of values for surface: http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/surface#values
Thing is
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com
wrote:
The whole idea of including a size for paving stones seems overkill to me.
Although in places like Germany and Austria where they're running out of
things to map, it might be more attractive.
The really uncanny
On 04.03.2015 02:45, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
Please retag indeed!
paving_stones:size=20cm
I agree that we should use a subtag instead of adding this kind of
rarely-used information to the surface value. However, I would prefer to
use paving_stones:width (as it is unclear what dimension size
Wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface ) lists
paving_stones:30
and paving_stones:20 as good values for key surface, defined as
Square paving stones with 30cm/20cm sides.
I think it is a really bad idea, there is a really wide variety of sizes of
paving stones
and cobblestones, so
Please retag indeed!
paving_stones:size=20cm
Is a much better method for this kind of insane micromapping.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
The whole idea of including a size for paving stones seems overkill to me.
Although in places like Germany and Austria where they're running out of
things to map, it might be more attractive.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
Please retag indeed!
13 matches
Mail list logo
