Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

Thanks Tijmin & Andrew - name deleted! :-) Thought it should have something to explain the open space between 2 houses: https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0775238,153.4261968,3a,75y,192.84h,72.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spFpy3s9A1cXKkiPow16w2Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656, but having now read the "No name" policy

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

I see that the suggestions about "free refills" are included here because there was some confusion about the use of "free_refill=yes" in central Europe. The English word "refill" implies that it is the second time something has been filled. Thus a customer may request that their glass be filled

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:51 PM Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > > Kevin Kenny: > >> >> Not all Interstates *ought* to be tagged as motorways. A case in point >> is Interstate 93 in Franconia Notch, New Hampshire, which *ought* >> to be a trunk (it's a two-lane road with a centre guard rail that was

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 13:30, Joseph Eisenberg > mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers > County, we could have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph Impossible in France, Urban maxspeed area isn't in

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

Jérôme, That email seems to be covering a lot of issues that the proposal is not trying solve, nor could it solve without first laying the foundation that it attempts to set. I’ll narrow in on the thoughts that are most pertinent. You stated; “In fact, this is a problem

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:34 PM Tobias Zwick wrote: > 2. US interstate in Montana (US-MT): > highway=motorway + source:maxspeed=US-MT:interstate >vs > highway=motorway + maxspeed:signed=no + ref~^I >(maybe ref-starts-with-"I" is not necessary because all interstates > are

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed

> [...] there are already 2 different schemas to fill the same thing, > why create a 3rd ? wouldn't it be more reasonable to use > maxspeed:type=default or =unsigned or =nosign for example ? Also a possibility. I used maxspeed:signed only in the example to make my point about separating the

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

How about when your Govt office is a single "shop" in a retail area? eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4221669587, which is a at the end of a shopping mall https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/235773662 Should we leave it as a shop, or re-tag that end of the retail building as civic_admin?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 07:24, Jonathon McClung wrote: Jonathon Good idea! One question though > We are talking about the increasingly common worldwide appearance of the > toll gantries on their own. Example pictures can be found here >

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

>> Anyway, for a beginner : is one key even better ? -> should we allow >> “maxspeed=no_sign” ? Or/and “maxspeed=default” ? > > Way too ambiguous to be remotely workable in North America. Is it? I think what djakk is arguing for, and me as well, is to separate the information stored in

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Kevin Kenny: > > Not all Interstates *ought* to be tagged as motorways. A case in point > is Interstate 93 in Franconia Notch, New Hampshire, which *ought* > to be a trunk (it's a two-lane road with a centre guard rail that was added > long after the initial construction.) > Amazing! I thought

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

See https://github.com/westnordost/countryboundaries It's per node. Size and supported admin levels depend on the data you stick in there. (Also, the faster the access should be, the bigger the file.) The default data is a geoJson file from the JOSM project which has all the countries, and

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed

Le 19. 09. 18 à 22:33, Tobias Zwick a écrit : > separate the information stored in "source:maxspeed": > > > 1. Information about whether there is a sign or not (=whether a > default speed applies or not) > > highway=motorway +

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 09:04, Daniel McCormick wrote: > > That is an interesting case of a toll gantry being on the bridge. I fear > though that adding that to the bridge that goes over the tolled highway > might cause there to be some confusion concerning which road is actually > tolled. This

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

I’d suggest keeping it simple by using existing tags when possible. If a cafe or shop gives out free water for customers, tag the shop or cafe with “drinking_water=customers”. If it’s for anyone, “drinking_water=yes” is currently used. I don’t see a need for a new tag “drinking_water=ask” If

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

rmail/tagging/attachments/20180919/77e0bdeb/attachment-0001.html> -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 17:04:12 +1000 From: Andrew Harvey To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Subject: Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream Message

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

This is France though. The abutters-key would only need to be used in the United States in order to infer the default speed limits as only there, a difference is made between residence districts and business districts. In France and/or the rest of the world, what about perhaps urban=yes/no?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

That is an interesting case of a toll gantry being on the bridge. I fear though that adding that to the bridge that goes over the tolled highway might cause there to be some confusion concerning which road is actually tolled. This is easily worked around though by just adding a node to the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

On 19.09.2018 19:31, Jonathon McClung wrote: The issue is mostly with how the current standard (as stated here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth ) impacts routing. This is said on the proposal page here

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

It’s not necessary to have a separate landuse area if the government office is in a single building or shop. In that case the overarching “landuse” is still retail or commercial. The new landuse=civic_admin is useful when there are multiple buildings and government offices in a larger area, such

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

> > I’m encouraged by this: > >”3. removes superfluous country ISO-code. Country boundaries information >is already available in the OSM > database, data users can just use a >(reverse) geocoder to find where a street is. >(I wrote Java library recently that does this offline in

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Yes Paul, I should not forget the beginners ... I am not a beginner anymore but I still found “source:maxspeed=“ for roads a little confusing, as we should use “source=“ only (?) on the metadata (on the changeset). Anyway, for a beginner : is one key even better ? -> should we allow

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 08:27 djakk djakk wrote: > By the way, we should de-correlate the legal status of an highway from the > highway tag : with the key highway:legal_type, values : business_area or > residential_area or an other local legal classification. A highway=tertiary > could also be

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Hi, tagging list I just join it. For your information there is part of proposed tagging schema in french subject discuss with @djakk.dj...@gmail.com https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-fr/2018-September/090189.html Values of legal type can be thinking in specific territory area and

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

Hello OSM Tagging List! Two weeks have come and gone and now the proposal for highway=toll_gantry is up for vote! Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Toll_Gantry and

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

In many countries in Europe, the "Welcome to XXX" sign as you enter a town/village has the effect of delineating the "built-up area" for traffic purposes and introduces a specific speed limit, without any numbers being mentioned. In the countries I know in Northern Europe it means "maxspeed=50

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:15 PM Tobias Zwick wrote: > a) source:maxspeed is still quite simple to use because a 1:1 > mapping is possible, e.g. source:maxspeed=DE:urban -> maxspeed=50 > In other words, it's a good start for getting away from explicitly > tagged speed limits and

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 9:40 AM, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > It’s not necessary to have a separate landuse area if the government office > is in a single building or shop. In that case the overarching “landuse” is > still retail or commercial. Do they sell "legislation" at a town hall?

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

nt was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180919/43b9cc74/attachment-0001.html> -- I think what you are mapping would more properly be called a storm sewer, not a pipeline.  I think of a pipeline as carrying contents under pressu

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 6:59 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > An example of an interstate I would call trunk would be I 70 between I 68 and > I 76, given that those two are the two closest junctions. Motorways should > terminate at an interchange with another motorway, not an at-grade >

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:31 PM Tod Fitch wrote: > > > On Sep 19, 2018, at 6:59 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > > > An example of an interstate I would call trunk would be I 70 between I > 68 and I 76, given that those two are the two closest junctions. Motorways > should terminate at an

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

Thanks everyone. Apologies in advance for the long reply. @Graeme I see you tagged the node with man_made=drain_outlet+substance=rainwater. In your example it makes sense to map the underground pipe because you know exactly where it is, but I'd hate for these to start rendering in the future and

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

Would you be willing to revive the proposal and get it voted? Once it is approved we can make a real wiki page for landuse=civic_admin and ask JOSM / ID folks about including it in presets. I agree that it is needed On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:59 AM John Willis wrote: > > > On Sep 20, 2018,

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:08 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Thinking about how this would apply to other waterways I've mapped, I >> currently map the streams or drains that pass under roads which rainwater >> passes through like below, these are quite similar but with a completely >> different

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Tod Fitch writes: >> On Sep 18, 2018, at 6:19 PM, Joseph Eisenberg >> wrote: >> >> So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we could >> have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph > > Except that more typically there will be different default speed > limits on

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:09 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > Tod Fitch writes: > > >> On Sep 18, 2018, at 6:19 PM, Joseph Eisenberg < > joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we > could have something like

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Philip Barnes writes: > And if the default actually applies, or has it been overriden by local > signage. > > I am not convinced that a default limit helps, if no speed limit has been > surveyed I would prefer that box not to be displayed in my app. > a. It will not give me wrong and possibly

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

This is an interesting idea (inspired by the ongoing discussion about mapping language borders?), but unfortunately it wouldn't work. Sorry for linking to this all the time but it is really necessary in order to understand the big picture: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Default_speed_limits

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

> (Incidentally, I think 7 of the 8 Australian states & territories have > the same limits?) Almost. Western Australia and Northern Territory has 110 km/h, Tasmania 100 km/h only on concrete or asphalt surface and 80 km/h otherwise; Northern Territory furthermore sets the speed limit within

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

This does not present a problem: > The first set Well, as you write yourself, they may be authorized to set own speed limits, but they need to signpost it. > The second So these are the type of regulations I mean with "default speed limits". > The third law As Martin Koppenhoefer stated on

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Colin Smale writes: > A "maximum" speed does not mean an "advised" speed. If you are driving > at an unsuitable speed, below the posted maximum, in Europe you will not > get a ticket for "speeding" as such but you may get one for "dangerous > driving" or something similar. The obligation to

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Hello ! There is also speed limit areas, a sign is posted at the entrance of the area. Imagine that a big part of Paris becomes a 30km/h area. Is it possible to create a big polygon tagged with maxspeed=30, each street inside inherits the maxspeed value of the big polygon ? (to escape the

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

I'd like to discuss three related proposals and two separate ones that can be confused with the others. In all the below cases, the availability is tied to the opening_hours of the containing POI. Five separate proposals could have been created, but I feel that the concepts and words describe

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:18 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > > Philip Barnes writes: > > > And if the default actually applies, or has it been overriden by local > signage. > > > > I am not convinced that a default limit helps, if no speed limit has > been surveyed I would prefer that box not to be

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

+1 On 9/18/18 11:47 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: I would accept civic_admin as well. Markus - do you want to revive the proposal? I'd like to see this become a approved tag. On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:15 PM OSMDoudou <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com

Re: [Tagging] Draft Proposal: Default Langauge Format

Hello ! I have in mind my trouble when driving back from Amsterdam toward France. I knew I had to pass through Lille but I did not see it on the directional signs. (No gps device back in the days ;-) ) I understood at last close to the border that the Rijsel I saw all the time on the signs means

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

By the way, we should de-correlate the legal status of an highway from the highway tag : with the key highway:legal_type, values : business_area or residential_area or an other local legal classification. A highway=tertiary could also be highway:legal_type=residential_area djakk Le mer. 19

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

I don't really understand the difference toll_both is a vending machine (or human) with lift gate barrier. It is just an other type of object because in other case you can set really the gantry as line and set on point type camera or other information object. camera as set in relation there is

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 10:22 djakk djakk wrote: > Yes Paul, I should not forget the beginners ... > > I am not a beginner anymore but I still found “source:maxspeed=“ for roads > a little confusing, as we should use “source=“ only (?) on the metadata (on > the changeset). > Specific keys that

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

The issue is mostly with how the current standard (as stated here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth ) impacts routing. This is said on the proposal page here "Many current routing softwares add a

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 18:04 +0200, Colin Smale wrote: > In many countries in Europe, the "Welcome to XXX" sign as you enter a > town/village has the effect of delineating the "built-up area" for > traffic purposes and introduces a specific speed limit, without any > numbers being mentioned. In the

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 13:54:47 +0200 Tobias Zwick wrote: > This does not present a problem: > > > The first set > > Well, as you write yourself, they may be authorized to set own speed > limits, but they need to signpost it. > > > The second > > So these are the type of regulations I mean

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 at 23:48, Clifford Snow wrote: > > I would accept civic_admin as well. > > Markus - do you want to revive the proposal? I'd like to see this become a > approved tag. I don't really have experience in this but i'll try. I'm just going to ask the author of the (draft) proposal

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > Would you be willing to revive the proposal and get it voted? SelfishSeahorse asked me if he could take over the proposal, and I agreed. There is not much else I can offer other than what I typed in the proposal, though a few

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

On 20/09/18 09:26, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 19.09.2018 19:31, Jonathon McClung wrote: The issue is mostly with how the current standard (as stated here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth ) impacts routing. This

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

This is a good argument against tagging an explicit maxspeed=X when there is actually no speed limit sign around (X is what the OSM mapper by his knowledge about the law thinks should be the default limit here). Unfortunately, this is still common practice because of the lack of a scheme for

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

What appears to be practice here, although I have only a few mapped examples, is to have office=government appear on the (multi)polygon representing the grounds, and not just on the building. I concede that if you have a single large campus with offices of many agencies, the subtags don't work, so

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Okay, so US-American legislation usually differs between "residential district" and "business district" for maxspeed defaults, as opposed to "built-up area" in most other countries. Actually, there is a tag to denote that a street is in a residential district or business district. It comes from

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 21:16 +0200, Tobias Zwick wrote: > This is a good argument against tagging an explicit maxspeed=X when > there is actually no speed limit sign around (X is what the OSM > mapper > by his knowledge about the law thinks should be the default limit > here). > > Unfortunately,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

In fact, this is a problem with software solution not a tag. the interpretation is a toll access need to wait a part of time. But if you have badge access you don't wait... and if there is lot of traffic you are depandent of traffic... waiting time is not for me an argument and a limitation caused

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : example : it looks like the countryside but legally it is inside the built up area : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Dybpz_fHGEmWdLjfG7OMvQ/photo There should be 2 tags : abutters=rural and highway:legal_type=built_up djakk Le

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

An other example : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/k43_fyX2AuL594qhVuSY7w/photo abutter=residential and highway:legal_type=rural Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 21:41, djakk djakk a écrit : > Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : > example : it looks like the countryside

Re: [Tagging] Draft Proposal: Default Langauge Format

Every street in Brussels HAS a name:fr tag. They also ALL have a name:nl tag. An IPA representation also needs information about the language it is for. A name, even spelled with the exact same characters will be pronounced differently by a French speaker compared to a Ducht speaker. Sometimes

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

A "maximum" speed does not mean an "advised" speed. If you are driving at an unsuitable speed, below the posted maximum, in Europe you will not get a ticket for "speeding" as such but you may get one for "dangerous driving" or something similar. The obligation to drive in a safe way overrides all

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

And if the default actually applies, or has it been overriden by local signage. I am not convinced that a default limit helps, if no speed limit has been surveyed I would prefer that box not to be displayed in my app. a. It will not give me wrong and possibly costly information. b. It makes it

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 08:01, Tod Fitch wrote: > > California, and I suspect most if not all other states, has a reasonable and > prudent clause in the speed statutes too. So depending on conditions, > especially weather conditions, theoretically you can get a speeding

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

Thanks Graeme. > I did this: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5213660838#map=19/-28.07783/153.42664 > for one stormwater drain nearby. > I don't quite understand the way extending to the north in your example tagged just man_made=yes and surface=grass, is that the underground pipe joining

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

> On Sep 18, 2018, at 6:19 PM, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we could > have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph Except that more typically there will be different default speed limits on each of the various OSM

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

I agree with https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5213660838 location=underground man_made=pipeline substance=rainwater I think it's okay to place this on a node if you don't know the location the pipeline goes underground, even if the tags were meant for ways. Personally I would just add a way a

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 03:19, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we could > have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph and if your app shows the wrong speed limit you simply have to check additionally all

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 13:30, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we > could have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph Just after crossing over the border into the state of Queensland, you have this sign:

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 13:04, Jonathon Rossi wrote: > I've come across the desire to map a stormwater outlet at the beginning of > a stream a few times now and have failed to find an appropriate tag to > place on the node. > Hi Jono I did this: