Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On Mar 7, 2017 03:47, "Volker Schmidt" wrote: This touches on a "conflict of interest" between two requirements: (1) OSM tagging practice is to map only physically separated ways as separate ways in OSM. (2) A routing algorithm needs to have information about legally separated ways, e.g. by a con

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 08.03.2017 00:01, Johan C wrote: >> >> make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should >> also be met > > > I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem with the node being at the > physical separation, in particular if t

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

A company that transports commercial packages and documents. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcourier Regards, Kelvin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi, frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power networks (among others, see wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dline In practice, a physical line/c

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

On 08.03.2017 15:18, François Lacombe wrote: frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power networks (among others, see wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:po

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On 08.03.2017 10:38, Marc Gemis wrote: On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem with the node being at the physical separation, in particular if the turn:lanes are tagged correctly. OsmAnd will give advance advice to turn and display the lane

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Tom Pfeifer > wrote: > > On 08.03.2017 00:01, Johan C wrote: > >> > >> make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should > >> also be met > > > > > > I don't think OsmAnd would have a proble

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi Tom, 2017-03-08 16:08 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer : > > The wiki documents for what particular tags are for. This tag is used > 826577 times, so this documentation is essential. > > Also, we normally do not delete wiki pages at all. The process would be to > discourage or deprecate the tag, however

[Tagging] simple 3D buildings, proposed redefinition of building:levels and building:min_level for building:part

I propose to deprecate the current definition of building:levels which is: OLD: - building:min_level is the amount of levels of the underneath building_part below the tagged building:part - building:levels=building:min_level + amount of levels for this part in favor of NEW: - building

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

At present we have many different approaches out in the field, which make life difficult to any routing software. I notice that we have another option, which I have not seen implemented in the database, i.e. to place the exit tag on the highway at the position of the last corresponding road sign

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

Navigation systems, including commercial ones, mostly count down to the LAST point - where the white triangle or lines make it illegal for you to transition. This is in line with the wiki and current OSM practice. Countdown signs on the approach to an exit however go to zero at the FIRST point you

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

I just took another look at several exits in Germany. As in the past I found out that the OSM standard is to have the motorway_junction to the link road before or at the legal point to transition. This is perfectly in line with the motorway_junction page, which states: 'Add a highway

Re: [Tagging] simple 3D buildings, proposed redefinition of building:levels

> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 08. März 2017 um 18:32 Uhr > Von: "Martin Koppenhoefer" > An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > Betreff: [Tagging] simple 3D buildings, proposed redefinition of > building:levels > > NEW: > > - building:min_level unchanged > > - building:levels=amount of

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

On 08-Mar-17 08:42 PM, muzirian wrote: A company that transports commercial packages and documents. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcourier What physical feature are you mapping? The description says "A company.." Companies are legal entities ... not physical features.

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

On 09-Mar-17 03:19 AM, François Lacombe wrote: Hi Tom, 2017-03-08 16:08 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer >: The wiki documents for what particular tags are for. This tag is used 826577 times, so this documentation is essential. Also, we normally do not delete

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

Are you trying to map the location of an office of a courier service? Couriers themselves are people, and by the nature of their business have no fixed location. On March 8, 2017 3:32:23 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: On 08-Mar-17 08:42 PM, muzirian wrote: A company that transports

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi François, Am 2017-03-08 um 15:18 schrieb François Lacombe: > frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power > networks (among others, see wiki > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) > > I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. > http://wiki.o

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi Warin, More than a guide, wiki sounds like a reference to me. Actually, editors presets, QA tools and consumers - all after contributors - will rely on it to define their behaviour and targets. Agree with you there are no rules, just material to discuss and important basis to built up on. Yes

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

At least some courier firms have offices where you can go to; send things - saves waiting for a courier to arrive at "some time" during the day. pick something up .. when you have not been home when the courier arrived (supposedly). On 09-Mar-17 08:56 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: Are you trying

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 10:33 +1100, Warin wrote: > At least some courier firms have offices where you can go to; > send things - saves waiting for a courier to arrive at "some time"  > during the day. > pick something up .. when you have not been home when the courier  > arrived (supposedly). True,

Re: [Tagging] simple 3D buildings, proposed redefinition of building:levels and building:min_level for building:part

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > there are only 33 991 objects with a building:min_level tag now > I'm not now commenting on whether the proposal is good or not, but other redefinition proposals have been shot down for numbers much less than the number given in the ar

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

> Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reichert a écrit : > > Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on > every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). > Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation binding the distribution network elements: th