Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On 18 June 2018 at 09:18, Andrew Harvey  wrote:

>
> You can view notes on the OSM website, no need to go into the iD Editor.
> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes#Viewing_notes under Map
> Layers > Map Notes.
>
> I've closed that note last night so it might not show up, they show up
> green when resolved for a short time after, then they'll automatically
> disappear, all documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.
> org/wiki/Notes#Resolving_notes
>
> > Notes are marked as resolved, not removed or deleted, with the data
> being retained for future reference. However, once resolved notes have aged
> for a small while, they no longer appear on the map view. The data working
> group can hide notes so they won't appear at all, but this will be done for
> reasons outside normal editing and mapping; e.g., notes that are insulting
> to people, or that contain sensitive/confidential information.
>

Thanks Andrew, that explains it all beautifully - tried to search for
something like that myself but couldn't find anything - obviously searched
for teh wrong term?

Will go through & check Notes out to either fix them or resolve the
nonsense ones.

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Andrew Harvey]

On 18 June 2018 at 09:00, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>
> Yep, agree that looks like spam. Googling the company name brings back
> pretty well exactly that data & description, so it's one we could delete,
> but the problem is finding it?
>
> The location on the map is in the middle of the oval at Southport High
> School, but there's no nodes in the spot shown. The address listed would be
> across the road & up the hill a little bit, but once again, no node shown
> there either? I don't know if that business actually exists at that
> location (& it's a 45 minute drive away, so I'm not going up to check it!).
>
> How do we find the node with the spam data listed, or, as you say, has it
> possibly been listed as a note only, so how do we delete the note?
>

You can view notes on the OSM website, no need to go into the iD Editor.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes#Viewing_notes under Map
Layers > Map Notes.

I've closed that note last night so it might not show up, they show up
green when resolved for a short time after, then they'll automatically
disappear, all documented at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes#Resolving_notes

> Notes are marked as resolved, not removed or deleted, with the data being
retained for future reference. However, once resolved notes have aged for a
small while, they no longer appear on the map view. The data working group
can hide notes so they won't appear at all, but this will be done for
reasons outside normal editing and mapping; e.g., notes that are insulting
to people, or that contain sensitive/confidential information.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On 17 June 2018 at 18:39, Michael Reichert  wrote:

> Hi Graeme,
>
> Am 17.06.2018 um 08:24 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:
> >
> > Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's
> > nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
> > org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334
>
> The note looks like SEO spam but dumped into notes than into map objects
> (nodes and ways). You might try what geocoders of Google and other
> companies return as result for that address. Maybe it is exactly that
> location?
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>

Thanks Michael & Andrew

Yep, agree that looks like spam. Googling the company name brings back
pretty well exactly that data & description, so it's one we could delete,
but the problem is finding it?

The location on the map is in the middle of the oval at Southport High
School, but there's no nodes in the spot shown. The address listed would be
across the road & up the hill a little bit, but once again, no node shown
there either? I don't know if that business actually exists at that
location (& it's a 45 minute drive away, so I'm not going up to check it!).

How do we find the node with the spam data listed, or, as you say, has it
possibly been listed as a note only, so how do we delete the note?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On 17 June 2018 at 18:00, Anton Klim  wrote:

> Hi Graeme,
>
> Are you positive the notes were not there previously? Some of them are
> fairly old, and should’ve definitely been in the Notes layer of osm.org
> (which is optional).
> Notes can sometimes be placed by people thinking it’s a personal note only
> visible to themselves. They also won’t appear in iD/won’t actively
> highlight the feature they refer to, so some mind bending might be
> required. E.g the last one, I’m guessing no speed limit was set on the road
> when the note was added.
>
> Anton
>

Hi Anton

Quite definitely weren't visible as a couple of them appeared within a few
00 m's of my home location, which is something you definitely notice! When
I've just looked, the "Notes" layer is ticked which is why they're now
visible - don't know if I managed to tick it in error, or if an update of
some sort now set's it to visible as standard?

Guessed the speed limit ones were related to no / wrong limits so wasn't
worried about them - I copied a wrong link showing what I was talking
about.

If they're not in iD, how do you fix them? I've resolved a couple & they're
now showing as green ticks rather than red exclamation marks, but how do
you make them disappear? Or is that something that only the originator can
do?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

[Andrew Harvey]

If the consensus is to change it to emergency=lifeguard + lifeguard=*, then
I think this needs to be changed in:

1. The wiki
2. Put forward a proposal to do a mechanical edit to change the existing
tags
3. Carry out that mechanical edit
4. Add the preset in iD

I don't think it's far to the people who put the effort in to do a great
job on the wiki documentation and those who've been mapping to that
accepted tagging per the wiki, to change (4) without us first/while doing
1,2,3.

I think only then we can propose to osm-carto for this to be rendered on
the default OSM basemap.

On 17 June 2018 at 16:38, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:

> So, after a few days thought, can we say that we've resolved to work on
> asking for emergency=lifeguard to be rendered, which would then go down to
> lifeguard=base etc?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> On 12 June 2018 at 07:43, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11 June 2018 at 17:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/06/18 15:39, osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au wrote:
>>>
>>> *From:* Andrew Harvey 
>>> 
>>> *Sent:* Monday, 11 June 2018 15:31
>>> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
>>>  
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Also, water_rescue_station is probably identical to lifeguard_base
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Agree based on the description given at https://wiki.openstreetmap.
>>> org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dwater_rescue_station it sounds like
>>> lifeguard_base.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just based on the tag name I thought it meant something like
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_guard. The wikipedia page seems to
>>> indicate coast_guard is a common term internationally (even though many of
>>> the agencies worldwide aren't known as the "Coast Guard", it seems like
>>> it's common enough for emergency=coast_guard.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That was my first thought too, but then I looked at the description on
>>> the wiki and it very much sounds like a life guard base and not a coast
>>> guard station.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I wonder if any of the current water_rescue_station's are really coast
>>> guards?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That’s certainly possible. If the decision is made to merge these keys,
>>> they will probably all need to be manually checked.
>>>
>>>
>>> Err not in the uk ... coast guard is not military.
>>>
>>> See
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Her_Majesty%27s_Coastguard
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_National_Lifeboat_Institution
>>>
>>>
>>> In Australia that are volunteers that do marine rescue e.g.
>>>
>>> http://marinerescueqld.org.au/
>>>
>>>
>>> None of these fit in to the beach lifeguard situation.
>>>
>>> I have no idea what the though was behind the OSM water rescue station .
>>> I think that is just confusing.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>>
>> Agree with you that "Coast Guard" is not a one-size-fits-all term.
>>
>> There is amenity=rescue_station https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/T
>> ag:amenity%3Drescue_station, which, to my mind should actually also be
>> an emergency= listing?
>>
>> Looking at that, it appears that the whole emergency= area has been going
>> to be cleaned up https://wiki.openstreetmap.
>> org/wiki/WikiProject_Emergency_Cleanup - for the last 4 years!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Dave F]

As I've said before, Notes was a good idea, poorly implemented.
Users should be able to delete them. I've never quite understood the 
reluctance to allow that. New users are able to delete OSM data on 
they're first edit, but Notes have to be protected for some reason. I 
get bored of 'The party's here' ones - even if they're resolved the URL 
is still current, so doesn't deter people from using it in such a manner.


DaveF.

On 17/06/2018 09:39, Michael Reichert wrote:

Hi Graeme,

Am 17.06.2018 um 08:24 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:

Sorry, copied mixed info

This bit should show

Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's
nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334

The note looks like SEO spam but dumped into notes than into map objects
(nodes and ways). You might try what geocoders of Google and other
companies return as result for that address. Maybe it is exactly that
location?

Best regards

Michael



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Andrew Harvey]

Agreed, SEO spam and per the consensus in the talk-au thread at
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2018-May/011839.html we
should delete any OSM edits or notes which meet the criteria as spammers
seemingly following the same recipe book without engaging with us.

On 17 June 2018 at 18:39, Michael Reichert  wrote:

> Hi Graeme,
>
> Am 17.06.2018 um 08:24 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:
> > Sorry, copied mixed info
> >
> > This bit should show
> >
> > Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's
> > nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
> > org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334
>
> The note looks like SEO spam but dumped into notes than into map objects
> (nodes and ways). You might try what geocoders of Google and other
> companies return as result for that address. Maybe it is exactly that
> location?
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
> --
> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
> ausgenommen)
> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Andrew Harvey]

Agreed with others that for things like bus shelters, they aren't really
buildings, so don't think iD should automatically add building=*.

I've been wondering how to tag a rock overhang in OSM, and just found it,
amenity=shelter + shelter_type=rock_shelter, quite valuable if your out in
the wilderness and it starts storming, definitely not a building or
anything man_made.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[marc marc]

Le 17. 06. 18 à 08:42, Shawn K. Quinn a écrit :
> On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Bryan Housel wrote:
>> Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?
> 
> If this is for bus stop/transit shelters, it would imply 
> building=roof at minimum.

some bus shelters are limited to a plastic plate,
it would be wrong to have a tag building on them.
while others are real little buildings without doors
on those, a mapper can voluntarily and consciously add a tag building.

I see no added value if iD auto-add a building tag.
in some case, it 'll be wrong.
the meaning of a self-added tag without the user's request will be a 
meaningless, the only thing we could say is "the user used iD",
this is already implicit with the tag created_by=iD

Regards,
Marc
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Graeme,

Am 17.06.2018 um 08:24 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:
> Sorry, copied mixed info
> 
> This bit should show
> 
> Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's
> nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
> org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334

The note looks like SEO spam but dumped into notes than into map objects
(nodes and ways). You might try what geocoders of Google and other
companies return as result for that address. Maybe it is exactly that
location?

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Bryan,

Am 17.06.2018 um 06:45 schrieb Bryan Housel:
> Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?
> 
> The osm wiki page does not suggest `building=*` as a “tag to use in 
> combination”
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=shelter 
> 
> 
> But most other features which are closed-way structures need the `building=*` 
> tag.  I know it’s a tag used by 3D mapping.  It seems like for consistency, 
> we should add an explicit `building=*` tag.
> 
> Asking for https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5084 
> 

Please keep in mind that there are not only shelters in the countryside
and the mountains but also at thousands of bus stops. While shelters for
hiking usually look like small buildings, shelters at bus stops don't.

The following three are no buildings from my point of view because they
have one wall only. Either the two other walls do not fully stretch from
the ground to the roof or the shelter itself can be removed easily.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=49.08680549357706=9.078079866007897=17=90pd5WuYg8zOk_L8dxLFFQ=photo

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=49.08985722389377=9.07931005221235=17=oXQHKqb3Lc3Ae9IXj-5PHw=photo

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=49.10616167487336=9.121348618135698=17=8xUGL_VKp45sOfd9VW7dUw=photo

There is building=roof but I would not use it for such shelters. They
are not treated as buildings by the cadastre, why should I do? (If they
are larger and have no walls, they

I think that nobody of us knows the whole world and that's why I ask you
not to decide on the default values of the whole world. If local mappers
think that a shelter is a building, they will tag it as such. If they
think that it does not qualify to be a building, they will not add the tag.

Adding missing default tags is easier for data consumers than removing
potentially wrong and superfluous default tags.

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Jo]

most have 4 glass walls. The smaller type in the other picture is more
recent. Not much shelter from the elements in those. I guess that one could
be building=roof, but it wouldn't be much of a shelter without any roof at
all, so I took that as implied.

I have not seen many bus shelters mapped as buildings.

Jo

Op zo 17 jun. 2018 om 08:43 schreef Shawn K. Quinn :

> On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Bryan Housel wrote:
> > Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?
>
> If this is for bus stop/transit shelters, it would imply building=roof
> at minimum. The shelters here usually have three walls (sometimes only
> one wall) with the fourth side being open to the street, plus a canopy
> to protect from rain.
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
> http://www.rantroulette.com
> http://www.skqrecordquest.com
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Anton Klim]

Hi Graeme,

Are you positive the notes were not there previously? Some of them are fairly 
old, and should’ve definitely been in the Notes layer of osm.org (which is 
optional).
Notes can sometimes be placed by people thinking it’s a personal note only 
visible to themselves. They also won’t appear in iD/won’t actively highlight 
the feature they refer to, so some mind bending might be required. E.g the last 
one, I’m guessing no speed limit was set on the road when the note was added. 

Anton

> 17 июня 2018 г., в 9:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
> написал(а):
> 
> Sorry, copied mixed info
> 
> This bit should show
> 
> Others are showing as a note apparently at a location 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's 
> nothing there to fix 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Graeme
> 
>> On 17 June 2018 at 16:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>> G'day all
>> 
>> Just mentioned this on Bryan's iD thread, but he knows nothing about it.
>> 
>> This last week, I've seen "Unresolved note" markers suddenly appear all over 
>> the place - I've seen them in Europe, US & here in Australia where I know 
>> for a fcat that they definitely weren't showing ~a week ago?
>> 
>> eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/-27.8696/153.1784=N
>> 
>> Some seem to be problem / error reports from maps.me, but others don't 
>> appear to make much sense at all eg 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/968837#map=17/-28.12680/153.48452=N
>> 
>> Others are showing as a note apparently at a location 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1278528#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334=N,
>>  but then it appears there's nothing there to fix 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334
>> 
>> Anybody got any ideas about what they're all about & what we're supposed to 
>> do about them?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Graeme
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Johnparis]

Agree with the notion that building is implied. In France, public transit
shelters are often included in the cadastral information, and they wind up
being tagged as  building=yes + wall=no (through the import) or as
building=roof (after verification).

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:wall=no

I can imagine a shelter that's not a building (a partial cave, for
instance), but you are asking about implied values. I would say
amenity=shelter + building=no would need to be specified.

John


On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 8:42 AM, Shawn K. Quinn 
wrote:

> On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Bryan Housel wrote:
> > Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?
>
> If this is for bus stop/transit shelters, it would imply building=roof
> at minimum. The shelters here usually have three walls (sometimes only
> one wall) with the fourth side being open to the street, plus a canopy
> to protect from rain.
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
> http://www.rantroulette.com
> http://www.skqrecordquest.com
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 06/16/2018 11:45 PM, Bryan Housel wrote:
> Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?

If this is for bus stop/transit shelters, it would imply building=roof
at minimum. The shelters here usually have three walls (sometimes only
one wall) with the fourth side being open to the street, plus a canopy
to protect from rain.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

So, after a few days thought, can we say that we've resolved to work on
asking for emergency=lifeguard to be rendered, which would then go down to
lifeguard=base etc?


Thanks

Graeme

On 12 June 2018 at 07:43, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:

>
>
> On 11 June 2018 at 17:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/06/18 15:39, osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au wrote:
>>
>> *From:* Andrew Harvey 
>> 
>> *Sent:* Monday, 11 June 2018 15:31
>> *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
>>  
>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard
>>
>>
>>
>> > Also, water_rescue_station is probably identical to lifeguard_base
>>
>>
>>
>> Agree based on the description given at https://wiki.openstreetmap.
>> org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dwater_rescue_station it sounds like
>> lifeguard_base.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just based on the tag name I thought it meant something like
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_guard. The wikipedia page seems to
>> indicate coast_guard is a common term internationally (even though many of
>> the agencies worldwide aren't known as the "Coast Guard", it seems like
>> it's common enough for emergency=coast_guard.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That was my first thought too, but then I looked at the description on
>> the wiki and it very much sounds like a life guard base and not a coast
>> guard station.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I wonder if any of the current water_rescue_station's are really coast
>> guards?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That’s certainly possible. If the decision is made to merge these keys,
>> they will probably all need to be manually checked.
>>
>>
>> Err not in the uk ... coast guard is not military.
>>
>> See
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Her_Majesty%27s_Coastguard
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_National_Lifeboat_Institution
>>
>>
>> In Australia that are volunteers that do marine rescue e.g.
>>
>> http://marinerescueqld.org.au/
>>
>>
>> None of these fit in to the beach lifeguard situation.
>>
>> I have no idea what the though was behind the OSM water rescue station .
>> I think that is just confusing.
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
> Agree with you that "Coast Guard" is not a one-size-fits-all term.
>
> There is amenity=rescue_station https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/
> Tag:amenity%3Drescue_station, which, to my mind should actually also be
> an emergency= listing?
>
> Looking at that, it appears that the whole emergency= area has been going
> to be cleaned up https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_
> Emergency_Cleanup - for the last 4 years!
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

[Jo]

I tag bus stop shelters with amenity=shelter,
shelter_type=public_transport. In Belgium they are constructions with glass
'walls' and a metal roof. I don't consider them as buildings though.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/polyglotopenstreetmap?lat=50.8884666=4.7537767=17=6BcoR8U--jKnsHJUsDTk4g=photo

some are smaller:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/polyglotopenstreetmap?lat=50.8872816667=4.7474284=17=1BF1bW6NzDMmG_wCU7v4Tg=photo=0.514565120648143=0.41978226626934106=0

I do use JOSM's buldings-tools plugin to draw them. Really convenient to
draw rectangular closed ways with the right tags on them, straight away.

Polyglot

Op zo 17 jun. 2018 om 06:46 schreef Bryan Housel :

> Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`?
>
> The osm wiki page does not suggest `building=*` as a “tag to use in
> combination”
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=shelter
>
> But most other features which are closed-way structures need the
> `building=*` tag.  I know it’s a tag used by 3D mapping.  It seems like for
> consistency, we should add an explicit `building=*` tag.
>
> Asking for https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5084
>
> thanks Bryan
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Sorry, copied mixed info

This bit should show

Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's
nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334

Thanks

Graeme

On 17 June 2018 at 16:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:

> G'day all
>
> Just mentioned this on Bryan's iD thread, but he knows nothing about it.
>
> This last week, I've seen "Unresolved note" markers suddenly appear all
> over the place - I've seen them in Europe, US & here in Australia where I
> know for a fcat that they definitely weren't showing ~a week ago?
>
> eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/-27.8696/153.1784=N
>
> Some seem to be problem / error reports from maps.me, but others don't
> appear to make much sense at all eg https://www.openstreetmap.
> org/note/968837#map=17/-28.12680/153.48452=N
>
> Others are showing as a note apparently at a location https://www.
> openstreetmap.org/note/1278528#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334=N, but
> then it appears there's nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap.
> org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334
>
> Anybody got any ideas about what they're all about & what we're supposed
> to do about them?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Unresolved notes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

G'day all

Just mentioned this on Bryan's iD thread, but he knows nothing about it.

This last week, I've seen "Unresolved note" markers suddenly appear all
over the place - I've seen them in Europe, US & here in Australia where I
know for a fcat that they definitely weren't showing ~a week ago?

eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/-27.8696/153.1784=N

Some seem to be problem / error reports from maps.me, but others don't
appear to make much sense at all eg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/968837#map=17/-28.12680/153.48452=N

Others are showing as a note apparently at a location
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1278528#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334=N,
but then it appears there's nothing there to fix
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/-27.96197/153.40334

Anybody got any ideas about what they're all about & what we're supposed to
do about them?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging