Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > I know of a road built for coal trucks by the coal firm tagged as > 'unclassified' yet it is a 'private road' not used by cyclist nor > pedestrians. The road standard is probably above that of > 'unclassified'. It runs from a coal mine to a power plant

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

On 1/10/22 21:08, Timeo Gut wrote: On 30 Sep 2022, at 23:48, grin via Tagging wrote: Take a pretty common road type in Europe, which goes on the embankment of a river, which generally paved, narrow, legally open for walking and bicycling people, often part of the national/international bi

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Most of the highway objects along waterways around here (Po Valley, Northern Italy) that are not open to public motor traffic, and wide enough for dual-track vehicles, are, in my view correctly, tagged as highway=track. They are used for waterway maintenance and for agricultural purposes on the ad

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > On 1/10/22 20:25, stevea wrote: >> Makes sense to me, too, Greg. I don't know if it helps or hinders >> wider understanding, but I understand what Greg is saying here, and >> while his perspective is "Eastern USA" (and mine is "Western USA"), >> these don'

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

On 1/10/22 20:25, stevea wrote: Makes sense to me, too, Greg. I don't know if it helps or hinders wider understanding, but I understand what Greg is saying here, and while his perspective is "Eastern USA" (and mine is "Western USA"), these don't seem far apart or even different at all, and t

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

1 paź 2022, 18:30 od f...@zz.de: > For me the difference is > > service -> Private property > unclassified -> Public road > That is not viable as general rule. For example Poland has driveway leadingto abandoned railway station classifiedas a public road. Tagging it as highway=unclassified

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

stevea writes: > Ah, I thought of an exception: a service=alley is (usually, around > here, in California) a public way, but it IS more "service-" oriented, > like maybe it only gets used for rare, backyard-access by owners > (which would be exclusively private use), but maybe it DOES get used >

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Kevin Broderick writes: > Another exception in New England, particularly, is that some states > (especially New Hampshire and Vermont) have a non-trivial number of > driveways that are privately maintained but in whole or part legally public > right of ways. In some cases, three public right of

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

"Shawn K. Quinn" writes: > Related to this, I've been tagging the driveways inside apartment > complexes as service, but a lot of mappers tag them as > residential. These roads are more similar to shopping mall driveways > than the type of road I would normally tag as residential; also note > th

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

The description doesn't work as a definition: "Generally for access to a building, service station, beach, campsite, industrial estate, business park, etc. This is also commonly used for access to parking, driveways, and alleys." A dead-end public road to a facility (called "service road"?) sh

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Another exception in New England, particularly, is that some states (especially New Hampshire and Vermont) have a non-trivial number of driveways that are privately maintained but in whole or part legally public right of ways. In some cases, three public right of way continues past the maintained p

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Hola, On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 05:44:04PM +0200, grin via Tagging wrote: > > service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions > > There are some discrepancies between this page and > highway=unclassified, and the wording leaves a lot to interpretation > and opinions. > > This page suggests tha

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 1 Oct 2022, at 13:16, Timeo Gut wrote: > > On tbe other hand if it's frequently used by pedestrians and cyclists then > service doesn't seem right either. it is not uncommon in rural areas around here that hiking or cycling routes have some parts on highway=service,

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

> On 30 Sep 2022, at 23:48, grin via Tagging wrote: > > Take a pretty common road type in Europe, which goes on the embankment of a > river, which generally paved, narrow, legally open for walking and bicycling > people, often part of the national/international bicycle-road network, and > c

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

On 9/30/22 10:44, grin via Tagging wrote: Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service for "narrow paved roads w/ private motorc

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Ah, I thought of an exception: a service=alley is (usually, around here, in California) a public way, but it IS more "service-" oriented, like maybe it only gets used for rare, backyard-access by owners (which would be exclusively private use), but maybe it DOES get used for trash collection (w

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 1 Oct 2022, at 12:22, Greg Troxel wrote > > So I don't know about the OP's country's laws, but I would suggest > looking at legal definitions of roads, and tending to unclassified for > legal roads and service for things that are not legally roads, if that > makes sens

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Makes sense to me, too, Greg. I don't know if it helps or hinders wider understanding, but I understand what Greg is saying here, and while his perspective is "Eastern USA" (and mine is "Western USA"), these don't seem far apart or even different at all, and there may likely be a further possib

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Peter Elderson writes: > Unclassified, by definition, is a road on the traffic grid suitable > for motorised vehicles. It is not necessarily paved. Access > restrictions may apply, and usage may change in time, e.g the road > still connects, but is legally closed for cars except emergency > vehi

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Unclassified, by definition, is a road on the traffic grid suitable for motorised vehicles. It is not necessarily paved. Access restrictions may apply, and usage may change in time, e.g the road still connects, but is legally closed for cars except emergency vehicles and people who live along th

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 30 Sep 2022, at 17:48, grin via Tagging wrote: > > Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the > wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or > unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service

[Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

Hello, To open it for a larger audience please let me share my question from the osm wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:highway%3Dservice#service_vs._unclassified,_conflicting_definitions Quoting: - - - - - service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions There are some discr

[Tagging] Service road surface edits in the UK (was: Re: implied surface values?)

On 12/02/2020 11:51, ael wrote: +1. Some of the Amazon people do seem to be adding unnecessary and unsurveyed surface=asphalt tags to many roads in the UK which I find quite irritating. If anyone's adding surface=asphalt when it isn't I'd definitely raise that via a changeset discussion comm

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 7:50 AM Dave F via Tagging wrote: > Hi > > In the UK, Amazon Logistics are adding useful data from their GPS'd > delivery vehicles. Mainly highway=service as the last part of their > journey to a destination. > > However, one of their contributors removed service=driveway f

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

On 06/11/2019 18:04, Greg Troxel wrote: I think a shared driveway is still a driveway. This is the crux. The only distinguishing attribute from what we'd all tag as a driveway is that's it's shared. A driveway is designated as privately owned rather than by the local authority. It isn't defi

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

Dave F via Tagging writes: > In the UK, Amazon Logistics are adding useful data from their GPS'd > delivery vehicles. Mainly highway=service as the last part of their > journey to a destination. > > However, one of their contributors removed service=driveway from a > highway=service road. In the

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 09:41 -0700, brad wrote: > I live in a single family home with a shared driveway. The next > door > neighbor house is 7 meters from my house. The driveway is about 10 > meters shared, then it splits, about 10 meters to each garage.If > it > were mapped, I think it sho

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

I live in a single family home with a shared driveway.  The next door neighbor house is 7 meters from my house.  The driveway is about 10 meters shared, then it splits, about 10 meters to each garage.    If it were mapped, I think it should be tagged as driveway, but I don't think it's relevant

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

I’d like to add gated communities: these are completely private settlements, with restricted access, but there is still a road hierarchy that may merit more distinction than just service with and without a driveway qualifier (i.e. we’ll usually solve these with access restrictions). For me a dr

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 14:54, John Sturdy wrote: > I think of a driveway as typically leading to only one house, > Usually. There are exceptions, such as where there's a gateway to a drive that was originally for a single house but a new house was later built on the grounds. > and would genera

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

I think of a driveway as typically leading to only one house, and would generally call the shared ones something else, probably "service roads". I'd make an exception for the access to a pair of houses e.g. semi-detached, or adjacent but linked by their garages/carports. __John On Tue, Nov 5, 201

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

Sections of shared, non-public service road, are certainly a common feature of modern housing developments. I have considered them to be private driveways. Private does not require a sign, walk down any suburban street in Europe or North America and you will see hundreds of driveways, without s

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

Personally, I would only call the short bits of tarmac that spur off that service road as 'driveways' because they each go to a single house. I'm sure that there are examples of shared driveways in the UK but I would consider them rare. On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:52 PM Dave F via Tagging wrote: >

[Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

Hi In the UK, Amazon Logistics are adding useful data from their GPS'd delivery vehicles. Mainly highway=service as the last part of their journey to a destination. However, one of their contributors removed service=driveway from a highway=service road. In the changeset comments they said it

Re: [Tagging] service

No magic, the preset has curated values for the subtags (which is naturally possible in iD too) most of them have historically been gleaned from the wiki or from actual use.  The upside and the downside of this is that they are curated, so there is always a certain lag between a value being used in

Re: [Tagging] service

> On Jan 8, 2019, at 2:30 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > > Am 07.01.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Bryan Housel: >> ... >> On “both is OK”. the `service:vehicle` issue was because we can’t use the >> same key `service=*` to contain both things like `tyres` (a few thousands) >> and `driveway` (a few millions).

Re: [Tagging] service

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 12:40, Bryan Housel wrote: > > Yes, strong preference for `service:vehicle:*=yes/no` instead of > `service=*` > Fixed! Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tag

Re: [Tagging] service

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:22 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Hi Bryan > I've just created a new page for shop=caravan > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan > , which i copied from the > shop=car page. > > As such, it's also copied a

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

2018-02-27 13:33 GMT+01:00 Paul Allen : > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:11 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < > dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> craft is about a profession, so this is about the workplace of someone >> who has learnt printing as a profession >> > > There are two possibilities for a print

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

How does the tag shop=copyshop with service:print=yes/no and service:press=yes/no, service:self=yes/no etc. fits into this ? see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcopyshop, it's used about 14.500 times m. On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > 2018-02

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:11 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2018-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Fredrik : > > >> >> With craft=printer you mean a print shop? Posters, books, etc. >> > > no, craft is about a profession, so this is about the workplace of someone > who has l

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

2018-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Fredrik : > On 27/02/2018 09:42, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > IMHO this is not a good tag, because “printer” can mean a machine or a > person, and amenity doesn’t provide context. > > > > For the person/profession, “craft=printer” seems better, for the service > I’d us

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

On 27/02/2018 09:42, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > IMHO this is not a good tag, because “printer” can mean a machine or a > person, and amenity doesn’t provide context. > > For the person/profession, “craft=printer” seems better, for the service I’d > use shop=printing_service or sth. similar and

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

sent from a phone > On 24. Feb 2018, at 14:27, Johnparis wrote: > > To Thilo's questions: > > 1) amenity=printer is for an establishment that offers printing services. It > is not a shop that sells printers. IMHO this is not a good tag, because “printer” can mean a machine or a person, an

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

'Service' is not the best word, I think you want 'sells'. The primary thing most shops do is sell things. Example: a cafe 'sells' coffee, but might provide wifi as a 'service' to attract customers. sells:computers=yes sells:computer_parts=yes ? repairs:computers=yes (repairs may already exist

Re: [Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

eds to be split up in types of seafood or not, but time will show if people feel the need. But this might be solved by simply offering seafood:type=* (not to make a subtag for every type). In non-food cases, there will mainly be the offer of selling, renting, repairing and (spare) parts, so this c

[Tagging] "service" tags in general (for shops)

Hello all, instead of debating every single shop (details), I'm in favor of using a name scheme which applies to all (kind "grammar" for it). In the context of the printer_ink shop discussion I stumbled on the "service" tags of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcopyshop IMHO service

Re: [Tagging] service=access

sent from a phone > On 6. Aug 2017, at 06:49, Gerd Petermann > wrote: > > my understanding is that most hw=service are used to access a specific > man_made object, so this tag > seems to be superfluous to me. I would simply not use the service tag here. I agree, although I can imagine mapp

Re: [Tagging] service=access

gt;> specific man_made object, so this tag > >> seems to be superfluous to me. I would simply not use the > >> service tag here. > >> > >> Gerd > >> > >>

Re: [Tagging] service=access

specific man_made object, so this tag >> seems to be superfluous to me. I would simply not use the >> service tag here. >> >> Gerd >> ________ >> Von: Dave Swarthout >>

Re: [Tagging] service=access

tag here. > > Gerd > > Von: Dave Swarthout <mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>> > Gesendet: Samstag, 5. August 2017 23:02:18 > An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools > Betreff: [Tagg

Re: [Tagging] service=access

__ >> Von: Dave Swarthout >> Gesendet: Samstag, 5. August 2017 23:02:18 >> An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools >> Betreff: [Tagging] service=access >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm working on highway tagging in Alaska and am develo

Re: [Tagging] service=access

e Swarthout > Gesendet: Samstag, 5. August 2017 23:02:18 > An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools > Betreff: [Tagging] service=access > > Hi, > > I'm working on highway tagging in Alaska and am developing a preset to > automate the tagging of the many gravel se

Re: [Tagging] service=access

An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: [Tagging] service=access Hi, I'm working on highway tagging in Alaska and am developing a preset to automate the tagging of the many gravel service roads that are used to access the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAP). I have never used the se

[Tagging] service=access

Hi, I'm working on highway tagging in Alaska and am developing a preset to automate the tagging of the many gravel service roads that are used to access the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAP). I have never used the service=access tag and there is nothing in the Wiki about it but it would seem to be an id

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

At all - what's the matter with the already said "highway=service" only if you can not distinguish the service or if it is a "bigger" service road? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access (or other) for main ways on a parking lot

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 15:00:12 +0200 Tom Pfeifer wrote: > Mateusz Konieczny wrote on 2016/03/27 13:43: > >> As =main is occupied by railway mappers > > Is it even a problem for service=main to mean different thing on a > > railway and a road? > > Not a big problem if consumers can clearly disti

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access (or other) for main ways on a parking lot

Colin Smale wrote on 2016/03/27 13:29: Whatever service=* value is used, we should try to make sure it is related to the construction or topology of the road in some way, and not to the many purposes to which it may be put is the necessity of multiple values is to be avoided. A service road gi

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 13:08:12 +0200 Tom Pfeifer wrote: > As =main is occupied by railway mappers Is it even a problem for service=main to mean different thing on a railway and a road? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.op

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

Whatever service=* value is used, we should try to make sure it is related to the construction or topology of the road in some way, and not to the many purposes to which it may be put is the necessity of multiple values is to be avoided. A service road giving access to parking areas may also be use

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

Greg Troxel wrote on 2016/03/27 00:56: What I do is [...] * highway=service service=driveway ways connecting to the real roads and sort of going near where you are trying to go when you want to park in the parking lot (carpark), just enough to be connected, and trying to pick

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

> On Mar 26, 2016, at 4:56 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > Tom Pfeifer writes: > >> The qualifier service=parking_aisle was originally introduced [1] to >> structure car parks with a few main access ways and lots of small aisles, >> to avoid clutter in lower zoom levels. >> >> It is highly succ

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

Tom Pfeifer writes: > The qualifier service=parking_aisle was originally introduced [1] to > structure car parks with a few main access ways and lots of small aisles, > to avoid clutter in lower zoom levels. > > It is highly successful with over 2 Mio uses. > > The description says that, however

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

Am 26.03.2016 um 17:15 schrieb Tom Pfeifer : Thus I would like to use a different qualifier for those ways entering the lot and connecting the aisles, e.g. service=parking_access. This does not break any consumer, is not used so far (ok, once, exactly for the purpose), and also solves a recent q

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

Gets my vote. On 2016-03-26 17:15, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > The qualifier service=parking_aisle was originally introduced [1 [1]] to > structure car parks with a few main access ways and lots of small aisles, > to avoid clutter in lower zoom levels. > > It is highly successful with over 2 Mio uses.

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

sent from a phone > Am 26.03.2016 um 17:15 schrieb Tom Pfeifer : > > Thus I would like to use a different qualifier for those ways entering > the lot and connecting the aisles, e.g. service=parking_access. > > This does not break any consumer, is not used so far (ok, once, exactly for > the pu

[Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

The qualifier service=parking_aisle was originally introduced [1] to structure car parks with a few main access ways and lots of small aisles, to avoid clutter in lower zoom levels. It is highly successful with over 2 Mio uses. The description says that, however "The main way(s) on the parking l

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> In Japan and Korea, do you tend to have isolated farmhouses, each on its own > farm (the most common pattern in the USA), or do the farmers tend to settle > in villages, from which they travel out to their farms (the traditional > European format)? TL;DR: Japan once followed the European

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

In Japan and Korea, do you tend to have isolated farmhouses, each on its own farm (the most common pattern in the USA), or do the farmers tend to settle in villages, from which they travel out to their farms (the traditional European format)? Another pattern in the US, among small communities

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

I think Javbw and I are in agreement, but I don't think a subtag is required. Just highway=service (and no service=* tag). Andrew On 13 July 2015 at 10:22, Andrew Errington wrote: > This is the same in Korea. Tagging the roads based on their physical > characteristics (such as roadsign type,

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

This is the same in Korea. Tagging the roads based on their physical characteristics (such as roadsign type, and with or without centre lines) is an excellent way to avoid subjective judgements. Roads that go somewhere, but have no painted line, are unclassified. These roads we are talking about

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > agricultural traffic The farmers access their fields using small, yet common kei trucks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kei_truck ) that are used all over Japan in urban and rural envir

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > Maybe you have to raise your current unclassified roads to tertiary to make > room for these roads in question? Japan tagging rules (on the wiki) states only roads with a painted center line can be tagged tertiary. Japan has a

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > >> Am 11.07.2015 um 14:43 schrieb John Willis : >> >> I look forward to more feedback before drawing up a wiki page, but you can >> see my reasoning and 2 good examples below. This is something not co

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

sent from a phone > Am 12.07.2015 um 03:39 schrieb Andrew Errington : > > To me, the hierarchy is obvious: motorway, trunk, primary, secondary, > tertiary, unclassified, service, residential, track almost agree but would switch service and residential cheers Martin __

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

sent from a phone > Am 12.07.2015 um 02:07 schrieb johnw : > > Imagine you live on a farm and you’ve never seen a a big city's alley - how > would you explain why there is a narrow road next to the main road? my guess is that the reason for these roads is agricultural traffic (slow) that wo

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

sent from a phone > Am 11.07.2015 um 14:43 schrieb John Willis : > > Maybe this occurs in Europe too, "Europe" is big and diverse, it really depends on the country and place. There're huge differences regarding the road structure (and not only) between the German south west and the German n

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

sent from a phone > Am 11.07.2015 um 14:43 schrieb John Willis : > > I look forward to more feedback before drawing up a wiki page, but you can > see my reasoning and 2 good examples below. This is something not covered > well by track+grade1 IMO and below unclassified IMO. if they've conn

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 10:39 AM, Andrew Errington wrote: > > I think is is sufficient > to tag them with highway=service. Remember, service=* is simply > clarifying the kind of service road. yep, Just looking to document this use of highway=service > To me, the hierarchy is obvious: motorwa

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

I think an additional tag is not necessary. I think is is sufficient to tag them with highway=service. Remember, service=* is simply clarifying the kind of service road. They are definitely not tracks. I remember the discussion about clarifying track grade 1 and I thought it was stretching a po

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What you are trying to map is a landuse rather than the highways service? Imagine you live on a farm and you’ve never seen a a big city's alley - how would you explain why there is a narrow road next to the main road? the

Re: [Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

On 11/07/2015 10:43 PM, John Willis wrote: I want to make a new definition for the the service=subkey to better define highway=service when used to map the the odd public, maintained, paved, yet extremely narrow, meandering, and often parallel or inconvenient nature of a lot of rural roads in A

[Tagging] service=rural (Was Rural Alley?)

I want to make a new definition for the the service=subkey to better define highway=service when used to map the the odd public, maintained, paved, yet extremely narrow, meandering, and often parallel or inconvenient nature of a lot of rural roads in Asia that are used to access sections of farm

[Tagging] service=yard - changing definition on wiki from "marshaling yard" to "railway yard"

service=yard is widely considered as to be used to tag tracks in "complex series of railroad tracks for storing, sorting, or loading/unloading, railroad cars and/or locomotives". But Wiki currently defines service=yard to be used only for marshaling yards ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:s

Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 08:58:20AM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > EDIT: looking into this further, service=tyres|dealer|parts|repair, which > are the largest usage of the car repair-service tags (500-1800 uses, > depending), all have wiki redirects to the Russian shop=car page ( > http://wiki.opens

Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion

I see from the page history that I added service=* to the wiki page, but I'm sorry to say I cannot remember exactly why. :( While service=* is definitely in use with car repair shops, it does seem to create the possibility of confusion. I'd be happy to at least change the wording to indicate this,

Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion

2014-10-20 4:22 GMT+02:00 Jack Burke : > Is service a valid tag to use with shop=car_repair, and the wiki page for > service is deficient? Or is the wiki page for shop=car_repair in error? Maybe using the service namespace to create more specific tags would be more inline with the current tagg

Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion

johnw wrote on 20.10.2014 05:21: > On Oct 20, 2014, at 11:22 AM, Jack Burke wrote: >> However, on the wiki page for the service tag >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service >> it only mentions its use for highways, railways and waterways. > There are several other uses of the service ke

Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion

There are several other uses of the service key, like on waterway=canal + service=irrigation. So there must be other tags where the documentation exists for the other uses of the service tag only with the parent key. Javbw On Oct 20, 2014, at 11:22 AM, Jack Burke wrote: > Hello, all. > >

[Tagging] service= tag confusion

Hello, all. I'm a little confused over a wiki-documented use of the service= tag. On http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcar_repair it indicates that service= is a valid supplementary tag, with several specified values. However, on the wiki page for the service tag http://wiki.openstre

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On 06/07/2011 01:18, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: [off-list] Well, I'd certainly like to see you try and convince people that the hyphen in "drive-through" is actually a diacritic all along. ;-) [not off-list actually] And if you click on the hyphen link it clearly declares that it's a punct

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

2011/7/6 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> well, wikipedia also says that hyphens are sometimes used as diacritics: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diacritic >> >> ;-) > > [off-list] > > Well, I'd certainly like to see you try and convince people that the > hyphen in "drive-through" is actually a diacritic

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:47 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/4 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> I'm not advocating for wrong spelling, but I don't think hyphenation >> is part of spelling, but of grammar/syntax. Wikipedia says that >> "spelling is the writing of one or more words with letters and

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

Hi Eugene, thank you! cheers, Martin 2011/7/5 Eugene Alvin Villar : > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> Eugene, I ask you to revert the automated edits you have done in the >> past days concerning drive-throughs, e.g. >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/seav/edits

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

t; To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through? > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > Eugene, I ask you to revert the automated edits you have done in the > > past days co

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On 7/4/2011 8:13 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Eugene, I ask you to revert the automated edits you have done in the past days concerning drive-throughs, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/seav/edits?page=3 You obviously did not f

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Eugene, I ask you to revert the automated edits you have done in the > past days concerning drive-throughs, e.g. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/seav/edits?page=3 > > You obviously did not follow the > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

2011/7/4 SomeoneElse : > On 04/07/2011 17:14, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >> >> OK, I think we have provided ample arguments for both sides. Only >> three of us have debated this point in the last few hours and I'd >> really like to hear other people's thoughts on this so that we can >> gauge if the

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On 04/07/2011 17:14, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: OK, I think we have provided ample arguments for both sides. Only three of us have debated this point in the last few hours and I'd really like to hear other people's thoughts on this so that we can gauge if there's a consensus for whatever. Whate

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Anthony wrote: > > Still, it doesn't make sense that "some people incorrectly use > spaces > > instead of hyphens" implies that we should convert hyphens into > spaces > > (which then get converted into underscores).  If we're going t

  1   2   >