Re: [Tagging] sub key for cycle ways

2014-11-03 Thread Hubert
Indeed, Point 2 is also a very widely given situation in Germany. Also in cases where there are dedicated left turn cycle lanes. (Between the left turn lane and the through lane for cars.). But the question is, whether we should abandon cycleway=* tagging on the main road in favor for, let us

Re: [Tagging] sub key for cycle ways

2014-11-03 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
IMHO cycleway=* should stay. cycleway:lanes= would be (is?) significantly more complex and it may be used in addition, not instead of cycleway=*. 2014-11-03 18:47 GMT+01:00 Hubert sg.fo...@gmx.de: Indeed, Point 2 is also a very widely given situation in Germany. Also in cases where there are

Re: [Tagging] sub key for cycle ways

2014-11-03 Thread fly
Am 02.11.2014 um 09:14 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: I'd argue that tracks are probably a distinct roadway anyway, given that they're bollard or curb separated and lane changes to the adjacent roadway is illegal. Yes, for me cycleway=track is equivalent of fixme=mark highway=cycleway near

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
So far we have discussed pros and cons of landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic} What about landuse=civil ? Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and in law as relating to private

Re: [Tagging] sub key for cycle ways

2014-11-03 Thread fly
Am 03.11.2014 um 18:56 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: IMHO cycleway=* should stay. +1 cycleway:lanes= would be (is?) significantly more complex and it may be used in addition, not instead of cycleway=*. so far, it is bicycle:lanes and no real lane-Tagging for the sidepath (cycleway=track +

[Tagging] path vs footway

2014-11-03 Thread Mike Thompson
I am editing trails in a US National Park of which I have first hand knowledge. Nearly all trails in this area have been tagged highway=footway although most of them are open equally to foot traffic and horse traffic. Any reason to leave them as footways? The wiki suggests that path is more

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread johnw
Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t. I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse - eg: we have residential/ retail/ industrial/ commericial - and hundreds of

Re: [Tagging] path vs footway

2014-11-03 Thread johnw
AFIK - footway and path are more toward the width, surface, smoothness, maintenance level, and expected use of the way. a sidewalk often gets tagged as footpath, as would be a concrete walkway in a garden. Paths are usually less maintained, less even, narrower, and lower grade surfaces.

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread Clifford Snow
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 4:02 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: Civic is what I suggested a few months ago. but where the line is drawn is up for debate: what is included in this catch-all, and what isn’t. I’ve tried arguing that each class should have their own catch-all landuse - eg: we have

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread johnw
and the line between public and private is not one OSM singles out very much (is is a public school vs a private school?), but things are separated by function. and the functions are of a civic government (pnsion offices, taxes, judicial, etc). I would use the word public or “government” but

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public} For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider. I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread johnw
Assembling a draft page. it is my first draft page, so my syntax is kinda crap. I will be working on the details of the proposal later today. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic Javbw On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote:

Re: [Tagging] path vs footway

2014-11-03 Thread Warin
On 4/11/2014 10:30 AM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Message: 6 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:14:11 +0900 From: johnw jo...@mac.com To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] path vs footway Message-ID:

[Tagging] Pathways with steep vertical slopes, accessed via climbing chains

2014-11-03 Thread johnw
Went hiking on mt Miyogi yesterday in Gunma, and like other steep mountain parks, sections of the trail were near vertical or completely vertical sections of trail that have to be climbed by chains and occasional footholds. the longest was over 30m. the shortest was about 4m.

Re: [Tagging] Pathways with steep vertical slopes, accessed via climbing chains

2014-11-03 Thread Mike Thompson
Is this the type of thing you are talking about: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/via_ferrata Mike On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:28 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: Went hiking on mt Miyogi yesterday in Gunma, and like other steep mountain parks, sections of the trail were near