Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

- I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
- some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to use
mapillary  so we need to have an alternative

 And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put
multiple images into one tag

Cheers
Thibault

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil  wrote:

> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or
> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in
>> ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the
>> node.
>> > A unique fountain deserves its own category
>>
>>
>> I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient.
>> Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides
>> and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
>>
>> On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the
>> outside and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and
>> you can’t do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city
>> gate seems overkill too in many cases).
>>
>> Cheers Martin
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or whatever
comes after OSM migrates away from that one?

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in
> ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the
> node.
> > A unique fountain deserves its own category
>
>
> I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient.
> Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides
> and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
>
> On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the outside
> and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and you can’t
> do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city gate seems
> overkill too in many cases).
>
> Cheers Martin
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging 
>  wrote:
> 
> Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in ‘Drinking 
> fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the node. 
> A unique fountain deserves its own category 


I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient. Of 
course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides and so 
on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.

On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the outside and 
one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and you can’t do it 
with the image tag (a category for every individual city gate seems overkill 
too in many cases).

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

CJ,
I didn't realize the accept header could work like that.
I think the system your propose is a good idea tbh.

Also, I wonder if it would be possible to host those on IPFS. (And make it
so that people who have spare bandwidth/storage can help host this image
repository)

Cheers,
Thibault

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 21:48, bkil  wrote:

> Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken
> links? (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago
> should clear up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they
> _should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality image is also
> available)
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:49 PM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 19:39, Mateusz Konieczny 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In practice you need horrific image quality,
>>> to the point of unasibility for deletion to
>>> succeed
>>>
>>
>> So maybe the chance of deletion is low enough that we can drop the
>> argument that "wikimedia might delete it" when discussing using
>> wikimedia images.
>>
>>>
>>> They have backlog of copyright violations,
>>> and tricky cases where legality is not clear.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, in that case we might need a bot that works in the other direction.
>> Not one that tells wikimedia we've used one of its images but one
>> that tells us that one of the wikimedia images we used has gone.
>>
>> People making backlog worse by making
>>> such "low quality, delete" would not be
>>> appreciated or encouraged there
>>>
>>
>> We don't appreciate or encourage people who make ill-judged
>> edits to the map, but it happens.
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken
links? (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago
should clear up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they
_should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality image is also
available)

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:49 PM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 19:39, Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> In practice you need horrific image quality,
>> to the point of unasibility for deletion to
>> succeed
>>
>
> So maybe the chance of deletion is low enough that we can drop the
> argument that "wikimedia might delete it" when discussing using
> wikimedia images.
>
>>
>> They have backlog of copyright violations,
>> and tricky cases where legality is not clear.
>>
>
> Ah, in that case we might need a bot that works in the other direction.
> Not one that tells wikimedia we've used one of its images but one
> that tells us that one of the wikimedia images we used has gone.
>
> People making backlog worse by making
>> such "low quality, delete" would not be
>> appreciated or encouraged there
>>
>
> We don't appreciate or encourage people who make ill-judged
> edits to the map, but it happens.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2020, at 14:44, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> 
> In my opinion the "naked " German Fahrradstrasse is equivalent to
> highway=service|residential
> vehicle=no
> foot=use_sidewalk  or sidewalk=separate if there is a separate sidewalk
> bicycle=designated
> maxspeed=30



this raises the question whether highway=residential with vehicle=no is still a 
residential road. you would not expect a residential road to exclude all kinds 
of vehicles, would you? It’s more like a highway=cycleway with width=5 and 
foot=yes (on the sidewalks).
In both cases you kind of loose the nuances.


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Cj Malone]

On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 09:58 +0200, Thibault Molleman wrote:
> That's a good idea actually!
> Although I guess there is a part of me that thinks that having just a
> simple image tag without any fancy stuff is still best for a primary
> image (so that apps that want to implement it don't need to start
> messing with this new format and can just load that simple url.

The beauty of HTTP Accept is that both the server and the client can
fall back gracefully.

If a client only supports receiving jpg images, the server would send
the primary image, if it only supports HTML it would send a HTML page
with the images embedded. If it supports our gallery format it would
get them all. One URL, multiple responses.

So if we had a POI with image=
https://image-host-1.example/images?id=123456 and you opened that in a
web browser (that wouldn't support a native gallery format) it would
send something like "Accept:
text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,image/webp,*/*;q=
0.8". The server knows that the browser doesn't support the gallery
format and prefers text/html application/xhtml+xml image/webp,
then application/xml, then anything else (*/*), in that order.
The server would respond with a HTML page that shows all the images.

With something that supported the gallery format to would send,
"Accept: application/gallery+json,image/*;q=0.9,text/html;q=0.8". Then
if the server understands the gallery format it would reply with all
the images and metadata. If the server didn't understand that mime type
it would respond with a image, or HTML.

This problem isn't just an OSM one, and this solution isn't really
related to OSM. But it does mean OSM isn't locked to a single image
provider like Wikimedia Commons.


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 19:39, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

>
> In practice you need horrific image quality,
> to the point of unasibility for deletion to
> succeed
>

So maybe the chance of deletion is low enough that we can drop the
argument that "wikimedia might delete it" when discussing using
wikimedia images.

>
> They have backlog of copyright violations,
> and tricky cases where legality is not clear.
>

Ah, in that case we might need a bot that works in the other direction.
Not one that tells wikimedia we've used one of its images but one
that tells us that one of the wikimedia images we used has gone.

People making backlog worse by making
> such "low quality, delete" would not be
> appreciated or encouraged there
>

We don't appreciate or encourage people who make ill-judged
edits to the map, but it happens.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

26 Aug 2020, 20:34 by pla16...@gmail.com:

> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 18:03, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> 
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>> Though note that in practice that it is fairly rare to delete things as out 
>> of scope.
>>
>
> That's true.  But the spectre of it happening is raised whenever people 
> mention
> using wikimedia images.
>
> What I could see happening is linking to a wikimedia image because that is
> the only one of the POI.  Later somebody uploads another image of the same
> POI taken from approximately the same angle and distance, but of much
> better quality.  Later still, somebody at wikimedia decides they don't
> need two almost identical images of the same thing, so deletes the
> lower-quality one.
>
> -- 
> Paul
>

In practice you need horrific image quality,
to the point of unasibility for deletion to 
succeed
Not just "clearly better".

They have backlog of copyright violations,
and tricky cases where legality is not clear.

People making backlog worse by making
such "low quality, delete" would not be
appreciated or encouraged there
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 18:03, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Though note that in practice that it is fairly rare to delete things as
> out of scope.
>

That's true.  But the spectre of it happening is raised whenever people
mention
using wikimedia images.

What I could see happening is linking to a wikimedia image because that is
the only one of the POI.  Later somebody uploads another image of the same
POI taken from approximately the same angle and distance, but of much
better quality.  Later still, somebody at wikimedia decides they don't
need two almost identical images of the same thing, so deletes the
lower-quality one.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Though note that in practice that it is fairly rare to delete things as out of 
scope.

It is typically done for people uploading their private images in attempt to use
Wikimedia Commons as free storage, or for hosting their advertisements
and for things like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Nopenis

See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2020/08
for things actually going for deletion (and even more obvious copyright 
violations
are speedily deleted)


Aug 26, 2020, 18:18 by pla16...@gmail.com:

>
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> 
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Summary#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose
>>
>> "hosts content that is useful for educational purposes.
>> This means content that could be used by Wikipedia,
>> other Wikimedia projects, or other projects that provide
>> knowledge, instruction or information.
>>
>
> I'd say OSM usage fits that definition.
>  
>
>> Files don't haveto be in use on any other project to be hosted 
>>
>> here, but they must have a reasonable potential use."
>>
>
> That is where, at the moment, the judgement call comes in.  If an
> image isn't used by any other wikiproject (which their bots would
> pick up) then somebody has to decide if it has reasonable potential
> use.  Whereas if there were a bot that somehow tagged images
> that were used on OSM it would be seen that they were being
> used by another informational project.  It still wouldn't be an
> absolute guarantee the image wouldn't be removed, but it
> makes it far less likely to be removed.  "I can't see any
> reason to keep that image" versus "I can't see any reason
> to keep that image other than it being used by OSM."
>
> -- 
> Paul
>
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

yeah, having a bot to automatically mark images that are being used in osm
sounds like a good solution tbh.

(next step would be to have a bot that automatically checks the Deletion
Request pages to see if any of the one being added there are osm linked
ones and make a copy to ipfs or something when that happens)

Cheers,
Thibault

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 18:20, Paul Allen  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Summary#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose
>>
>> "hosts content that is useful for educational purposes.
>> This means content that could be used by Wikipedia,
>> other Wikimedia projects, or other projects that provide
>> knowledge, instruction or information.
>>
>
> I'd say OSM usage fits that definition.
>
>
>> Files don't haveto be in use on any other project to be hosted
>>
> here, but they must have a reasonable potential use."
>>
>
> That is where, at the moment, the judgement call comes in.  If an
> image isn't used by any other wikiproject (which their bots would
> pick up) then somebody has to decide if it has reasonable potential
> use.  Whereas if there were a bot that somehow tagged images
> that were used on OSM it would be seen that they were being
> used by another informational project.  It still wouldn't be an
> absolute guarantee the image wouldn't be removed, but it
> makes it far less likely to be removed.  "I can't see any
> reason to keep that image" versus "I can't see any reason
> to keep that image other than it being used by OSM."
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 16:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Summary#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose
>
> "hosts content that is useful for educational purposes.
> This means content that could be used by Wikipedia,
> other Wikimedia projects, or other projects that provide
> knowledge, instruction or information.
>

I'd say OSM usage fits that definition.


> Files don't haveto be in use on any other project to be hosted
>
here, but they must have a reasonable potential use."
>

That is where, at the moment, the judgement call comes in.  If an
image isn't used by any other wikiproject (which their bots would
pick up) then somebody has to decide if it has reasonable potential
use.  Whereas if there were a bot that somehow tagged images
that were used on OSM it would be seen that they were being
used by another informational project.  It still wouldn't be an
absolute guarantee the image wouldn't be removed, but it
makes it far less likely to be removed.  "I can't see any
reason to keep that image" versus "I can't see any reason
to keep that image other than it being used by OSM."

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope/Summary#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose

"hosts content that is useful for educational purposes.
This means content that could be used by Wikipedia,
other Wikimedia projects, or other projects that provide
knowledge, instruction or information. Files don't have
to be in use on any other project to be hosted here, but
they must have a reasonable potential use."


Aug 26, 2020, 15:48 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:

> Does it being on osm have enough justification for them to keep it though?
> "it's not a wikimedia project, so it doesn't matter to us if it's linked on 
> osm or not"
>
>
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 15:39, Paul Allen <> pla16...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:06, Thibault Molleman <>> 
>> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from 
>>> Commons just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>>>
>>
>> The commons isn't quite that arbitrary.  They allow images which are of
>> interest, but "of interest" is rather arbitrary.  Generally, though, images
>> used by wikipedia itself are not candidates for deletion.
>>
>> So what is needed is a bot of some sort that trawls the OSM database (which
>> wikipedia has a copy of to create its own maps) to look for wikimedia_commons
>> tags and somehow flags relevant images as being used on OSM.
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>>  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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 14:52, Thibault Molleman 
wrote:

> Does it being on osm have enough justification for them to keep it though?
> "it's not a wikimedia project, so it doesn't matter to us if it's linked
> on osm or not"
>

They make use of OSM data to create their own maps, so there is reason to
hope they might view us more favourably.

Their rules for deletion basically amount to there being some interest in
the image, or that it serves some useful purpose.  Often a clear description
is all it takes to avoid deletion - a picture of a house without
description may
be deleted as there are many houses, but a picture of a house with a
description that identifies it (even if it's a boring house with no
special merit) that may be enough to prevent deletion.

I think it's worth asking them.  Somebody would then have to write a bot
that integrates with wikimedia (maybe putting images into a "Used on
OSM" category).  Would they see it as being worth the effort?  We won't
know unless we ask.

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

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 26/08/2020 07.12, pangoSE wrote:

I rest my case. Thanks for the examples. Could you help update the wikipage 
about POIs to reflect this?


By "the wikipage", do you mean 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Points_of_interest? It isn't 
immediately obvious where this information would be added there. (It 
seems it would at least need a new section, something like "how to add 
addresses to POIs"?)


Or were you thinking of some other page?

--
Matthew

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 12:17, Thibault Molleman 
wrote:

the main use case for having multiple images on one node was for example a
store, and you've just taken random images of the store (like you have on
Google maps and other map apps)

You may get pushback from the "OSM is not a gazetteer" crowd.  So let me
offer a reason they may accept.

I have sometimes found that inspection of several images from wikimedia
and/or geograph allows me to better armchair map something that isn't
entirely clear in aerial imagery.  It is useful to make those images known
to future mappers so they don't revert my changes based upon aerial
imagery alone.  I've also identified some objects based on these
images: Foobar is at roughly these co-ordinates, there's only one
object in aerial imagery that matches it, so that's Fubar (I
do a few other checks as well, but those images give me the
initial clue).

So having more than one image for a POI may be useful for us, as well as
for consumers.

Changeset source would be one mechanism but it probably also has the
255-char
limit.  Note=* is not a good way of doing it because of the 255-char limit.
How do we get around that pesky 255-character limit without resorting to
things like image_1=* or image:1=*?  Dare I suggest a relation?

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

Does it being on osm have enough justification for them to keep it though?
"it's not a wikimedia project, so it doesn't matter to us if it's linked on
osm or not"



On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 15:39, Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:06, Thibault Molleman <
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
>> Commons just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>>
>
> The commons isn't quite that arbitrary.  They allow images which are of
> interest, but "of interest" is rather arbitrary.  Generally, though, images
> used by wikipedia itself are not candidates for deletion.
>
> So what is needed is a bot of some sort that trawls the OSM database (which
> wikipedia has a copy of to create its own maps) to look for
> wikimedia_commons
> tags and somehow flags relevant images as being used on OSM.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:06, Thibault Molleman 
wrote:

> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
> Commons just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>

The commons isn't quite that arbitrary.  They allow images which are of
interest, but "of interest" is rather arbitrary.  Generally, though, images
used by wikipedia itself are not candidates for deletion.

So what is needed is a bot of some sort that trawls the OSM database (which
wikipedia has a copy of to create its own maps) to look for
wikimedia_commons
tags and somehow flags relevant images as being used on OSM.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Jake Edmonds via Tagging]

> The fact that the image is linked to an osm node is enough reason for the 
> image to be online.

Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in ‘Drinking 
fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the node. 
A unique fountain deserves its own category 

Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone

> On 26 Aug 2020, at 14:53, Thibault Molleman  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Can you link photos/deletion requests?
> Again, don't bother with that. I was 13, didn't know what I was doing, main 
> reason why they were deleted according to the deletion requests were because 
> they didn't have a license attached to them, so they didn't know if it was 
> even allowed on there. (wouldn't happen with todays upload wizard)
> 
>>  Assuming the drinking fountains are unique
> 
> I feel like it just shouldn't matter if they are unique. We shouldn't have to 
> justify why an image is important. 
> The fact that the image is linked to an osm node is enough reason for the 
> image to be online. But the problem is that Wikimedia wouldn't care for such 
> a reason.
> So that is the reason why I would always archive.org images I'd put on 
> Commons probably
> 
> Cheers,
> Thibault
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 14:45 Jake Edmonds via Tagging 
>>  wrote:
>> I feel like those examples (city gates and fountains) would be appropriate 
>> places to use a wikimedia category. 
>> 
>> Assuming the drinking fountains are unique, if not then do they need 
>> multiple photos? 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone
>> 
>> > On 26 Aug 2020, at 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer  
>> > wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > sent from a phone
>> > 
>> >> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:18, bkil  wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> there is usually no need for more than one image on a POI
>> > 
>> > 
>> > I have recently tagged some city gates and both sides would have been 
>> > interesting. The other kind of POI I am frequently taking photos are 
>> > fountains and drinking fountains, where indeed a single foto is completely 
>> > sufficient in almost all cases. It’s not generally answerable.
>> > 
>> > Cheers Martin 
>> > ___
>> > Tagging mailing list
>> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> ___
> 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] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Jo]

fietsstraat / rue cyclable are really 'a thing' in Belgium. Usually the
whole street is redesigned, it's not just a traffic sign on both ends. Red
asphalt, giant flower pots. Car drivers don't seem to realise that they are
not allowed to overtake cyclists in most of them though. So that's a bit
disappointing. They pass me by even when I'm going at 25km/h and they are
supposedly only allowed to go at 30km/h. I had no idea that their
'properties' were so different in The Netherlands and Germany.

I agree that their definitions should probably not be 'exported' to other
countries, until such time that something with the same semantics exists
there.

Polyglot

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 2:44 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> Yes, there is a legal difference
>
> *bicycle_road*
> A German "Fahrradstrasse" (which is the prototype on which this tag seems
> to be modeled) is a road exclusively  for bicycles in the sense that
> carries the the sign "Fahrradstrasse" without addition indicates that the
> carriageway of the road is reserved for bicycles, pedestrians, people on
> skayes, youn children on bicycles need to use the sidewalk (if available).
> lso an implied speed limit of 30km/h applies.
> In my opinion the "naked " German Fahrradstrasse is equivalent to
> highway=service|residential
> vehicle=no
> foot=use_sidewalk  or sidewalk=separate if there is a separate sidewalk
> bicycle=designated
> maxspeed=30
> So what do you "save" in tagging with bicycle_road=yes ?
> As far as I can see it replaces "vehicle=no" and "bicycle=designated" with
> "bicycle_road=yes"
> (the speed limit is not part of the the bicycle_road tag nor is there any
> indication about pedestrians)
>
> *cyclestreet*
> The prototype cycle street seems to be the Belgian "rue cyclable |
> fietsstraat" that describes a road that is not wide enough for creating
> separate cycle lanes or cycleways, hence the carriageway is shared between
> cyclists and motor vehicles. Motor vehicles are not allowed to overtake
> bicycles and there is an implicit speed limit of 30km/h
>
> Such a road would be equivalent to
> highway=service|residential
> foot=use_sidewalk  or sidewalk=separate if there is a separate sidewalk
> maxspeed=30
> overtaking:motorcar=no (this tagging is not defined in the wiki)
> What is the "saving" n using the cyclestreet=yes tagging?
> None, as both maxspeed and overtaking restriction are not part of the OSM
> tah cyclestreet=yes
>
> Basically I see no need for separate tags like bicycle_road and
> cyclestreet, as you can easily describe their properties with existing
> tags. Add to this the confusion between the two tags, and then add to the
> mix the myriad of variants on the subject in countries other than Germany
> and Belgium, respectively.
> These two tags should be discouraged.
> As that most likely is not possible, maybe we can at least discourage
> their "export" to other countries.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 08:51, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> I am curious is there any difference in practical use of this two tags.
>>
>> Aug 25, 2020, 12:13 by vosc...@gmail.com:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I have come across a new (to me) street sign In Italy:
>> https://italy-cycling-guide.info/tips-advice/riding-in-italy/
>> The road is a one-lane residential road on which bicycles and pedestrians
>> can circulate.
>> I don't know the legal status, however (I am inquiring).
>>
>> In that contest I have noticed that we have two wiki pages defining two
>> tags, which seem to be describing nearly the same concept:
>> bicycle_road 
>> created 14:54, 7 August 2010
>> 
>> ‎
>> cyclestreet
>> 
>> created 09:58, 9 May 2018
>> ‎
>>
>>
>> The main difference, as I understand it, is that the bicycle road is for
>> bicycles only, unless there are additional signs, whereas
>> on a cycle street "cars are also allowed. However, this car use is
>> limited by the character and layout of the cyclestreet"
>>
>> To make the confusion perfect, both wiki pages use the same (German) road
>> sign as illustration for the situation in Germany.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_244_-_Beginn_der_Fahrradstra%C3%9Fe,_StVO_1997.svg
>>
>> Taginfo:
>> bicycle_road=yes
>>  7906
>> cyclestreet=yes
>>  4076
>>
>> Volker
>> Padova, Italy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> 

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

Btw, I want to make it clear that I have nothing against the wikimedia
foundation. I think it's fair that they moderate like they do, because
their capacity isn't unlimited

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 14:51 Thibault Molleman 
wrote:

> Can you link photos/deletion requests?
>
> Again, don't bother with that. I was 13, didn't know what I was doing,
> main reason why they were deleted according to the deletion requests were
> because they didn't have a license attached to them, so they didn't know if
> it was even allowed on there. (wouldn't happen with todays upload wizard)
>
>  Assuming the drinking fountains are unique
>
>
> I feel like it just shouldn't matter if they are unique. We shouldn't have
> to justify why an image is important.
> The fact that the image is linked to an osm node is enough reason for the
> image to be online. But the problem is that Wikimedia wouldn't care for
> such a reason.
> So that is the reason why I would always archive.org images I'd put on
> Commons probably
>
> Cheers,
> Thibault
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 14:45 Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> I feel like those examples (city gates and fountains) would be
>> appropriate places to use a wikimedia category.
>>
>> Assuming the drinking fountains are unique, if not then do they need
>> multiple photos?
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone
>>
>> > On 26 Aug 2020, at 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > 
>> >
>> > sent from a phone
>> >
>> >> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:18, bkil  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> there is usually no need for more than one image on a POI
>> >
>> >
>> > I have recently tagged some city gates and both sides would have been
>> interesting. The other kind of POI I am frequently taking photos are
>> fountains and drinking fountains, where indeed a single foto is completely
>> sufficient in almost all cases. It’s not generally answerable.
>> >
>> > Cheers Martin
>> > ___
>> > Tagging mailing list
>> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

>
> Can you link photos/deletion requests?

Again, don't bother with that. I was 13, didn't know what I was doing, main
reason why they were deleted according to the deletion requests were
because they didn't have a license attached to them, so they didn't know if
it was even allowed on there. (wouldn't happen with todays upload wizard)

 Assuming the drinking fountains are unique


I feel like it just shouldn't matter if they are unique. We shouldn't have
to justify why an image is important.
The fact that the image is linked to an osm node is enough reason for the
image to be online. But the problem is that Wikimedia wouldn't care for
such a reason.
So that is the reason why I would always archive.org images I'd put on
Commons probably

Cheers,
Thibault

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 14:45 Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I feel like those examples (city gates and fountains) would be appropriate
> places to use a wikimedia category.
>
> Assuming the drinking fountains are unique, if not then do they need
> multiple photos?
>
>
> Thanks
> Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone
>
> > On 26 Aug 2020, at 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> > sent from a phone
> >
> >> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:18, bkil  wrote:
> >>
> >> there is usually no need for more than one image on a POI
> >
> >
> > I have recently tagged some city gates and both sides would have been
> interesting. The other kind of POI I am frequently taking photos are
> fountains and drinking fountains, where indeed a single foto is completely
> sufficient in almost all cases. It’s not generally answerable.
> >
> > Cheers Martin
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Jake Edmonds via Tagging]

I feel like those examples (city gates and fountains) would be appropriate 
places to use a wikimedia category. 

Assuming the drinking fountains are unique, if not then do they need multiple 
photos? 


Thanks
Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone

> On 26 Aug 2020, at 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> sent from a phone
> 
>> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:18, bkil  wrote:
>> 
>> there is usually no need for more than one image on a POI
> 
> 
> I have recently tagged some city gates and both sides would have been 
> interesting. The other kind of POI I am frequently taking photos are 
> fountains and drinking fountains, where indeed a single foto is completely 
> sufficient in almost all cases. It’s not generally answerable.
> 
> Cheers Martin 
> ___
> 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] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Volker Schmidt]

Yes, there is a legal difference

*bicycle_road*
A German "Fahrradstrasse" (which is the prototype on which this tag seems
to be modeled) is a road exclusively  for bicycles in the sense that
carries the the sign "Fahrradstrasse" without addition indicates that the
carriageway of the road is reserved for bicycles, pedestrians, people on
skayes, youn children on bicycles need to use the sidewalk (if available).
lso an implied speed limit of 30km/h applies.
In my opinion the "naked " German Fahrradstrasse is equivalent to
highway=service|residential
vehicle=no
foot=use_sidewalk  or sidewalk=separate if there is a separate sidewalk
bicycle=designated
maxspeed=30
So what do you "save" in tagging with bicycle_road=yes ?
As far as I can see it replaces "vehicle=no" and "bicycle=designated" with
"bicycle_road=yes"
(the speed limit is not part of the the bicycle_road tag nor is there any
indication about pedestrians)

*cyclestreet*
The prototype cycle street seems to be the Belgian "rue cyclable |
fietsstraat" that describes a road that is not wide enough for creating
separate cycle lanes or cycleways, hence the carriageway is shared between
cyclists and motor vehicles. Motor vehicles are not allowed to overtake
bicycles and there is an implicit speed limit of 30km/h

Such a road would be equivalent to
highway=service|residential
foot=use_sidewalk  or sidewalk=separate if there is a separate sidewalk
maxspeed=30
overtaking:motorcar=no (this tagging is not defined in the wiki)
What is the "saving" n using the cyclestreet=yes tagging?
None, as both maxspeed and overtaking restriction are not part of the OSM
tah cyclestreet=yes

Basically I see no need for separate tags like bicycle_road and
cyclestreet, as you can easily describe their properties with existing
tags. Add to this the confusion between the two tags, and then add to the
mix the myriad of variants on the subject in countries other than Germany
and Belgium, respectively.
These two tags should be discouraged.
As that most likely is not possible, maybe we can at least discourage their
"export" to other countries.



On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 08:51, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I am curious is there any difference in practical use of this two tags.
>
> Aug 25, 2020, 12:13 by vosc...@gmail.com:
>
> Hi,
> I have come across a new (to me) street sign In Italy:
> https://italy-cycling-guide.info/tips-advice/riding-in-italy/
> The road is a one-lane residential road on which bicycles and pedestrians
> can circulate.
> I don't know the legal status, however (I am inquiring).
>
> In that contest I have noticed that we have two wiki pages defining two
> tags, which seem to be describing nearly the same concept:
> bicycle_road 
> created 14:54, 7 August 2010
> 
> ‎
> cyclestreet
> 
> created 09:58, 9 May 2018
> ‎
>
>
> The main difference, as I understand it, is that the bicycle road is for
> bicycles only, unless there are additional signs, whereas
> on a cycle street "cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited
> by the character and layout of the cyclestreet"
>
> To make the confusion perfect, both wiki pages use the same (German) road
> sign as illustration for the situation in Germany.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_244_-_Beginn_der_Fahrradstra%C3%9Fe,_StVO_1997.svg
>
> Taginfo:
> bicycle_road=yes
>  7906
> cyclestreet=yes
>  4076
>
> Volker
> Padova, Italy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[joost schouppe]

> > So putting the Dutch and Belgian thing together but not the German, that
> doesn't make much sense.
>
>
> I read this as a suggestion for a third alternative tag?
>
>
N!

:)

Just saying that there's similar concepts that could have had the same main
tag (and different clarifying tags or country-based defaults explained on
the wiki)  or could have had different tags with exact implications; and
that we wound up with a random combination of the two.

As long as cyclestreet is clearly "marketed" as "a tag that has different
implications in different countries", then there really is no practical
issue. The weirdest thing to happen would be if now, say, Finland would use
bicycle_road for something really different than the German logic.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:18, bkil  wrote:
> 
> there is usually no need for more than one image on a POI


I have recently tagged some city gates and both sides would have been 
interesting. The other kind of POI I am frequently taking photos are fountains 
and drinking fountains, where indeed a single foto is completely sufficient in 
almost all cases. It’s not generally answerable.

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

Re: [Tagging] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2020, at 12:35, joost schouppe  wrote:
> 
> So putting the Dutch and Belgian thing together but not the German, that 
> doesn't make much sense.


I read this as a suggestion for a third alternative tag?

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Can you link photos/deletion requests?

Or talk page with deletion info? Maybe your country has no freedom of panorama
and large part of photo was with something copyrighted?

Or maybe there was no description?

When I asked about photos of bicycle parkings.
(such as 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stojaki_na_%C5%81obzowska_x_Biskupia.JPG
)
I got as reply:

"Reasonable quality photographs of identified places are
very unlikely to be considered not in scope"

"scope is very broadly defined. Reasonable quality photos
of public places are generally considered to be in scope.
So, please go ahead and upload those photos"

Aug 26, 2020, 11:04 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:

> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from Commons 
> just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
> Maybe a special example but still:
> Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a couple 
> photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their moderation 
> team. 
>
>
>> As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by doubling 
>> it:
>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>>>
> Ah interesting, somehow missed that.
> It's a solution, but still doesn't solve the problem of long urls clogging up 
> one tag.
> Definitely if you have long urls because of unique hash/id's
> (extreme example: IPFS urls: > 
> https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd?filename=IMG_20200727_172553.jpg>
>   )
>
> Cheers,
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:54, bkil <> bkil.hu > +> 
> a...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by doubling 
>> it:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman <>> 
>> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>> While I use the semicolon for some other tags already, the problem with 
>>> using it for something that has a URL. 
>>> Is that TECHNICALLYaccording to the specification, a URL can contain a 
>>> semicolon.
>>> So I feel like the use of a semicolon in a url based tag isn't a good 
>>> solution
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:44 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>>> 
>>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>>> > wrote:
>>>
 If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
 is standard.

 At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.


 Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by  thibaultmolle...@gmail.com :

> Hi,
>
> It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put multiple 
> images on one node/way/relation.
> Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
> Either via:
> `image=url1;url2;url3`
> or
> ```
> image=url1
> image:2=url2
> image:3=url3
> ```
> That later would allow for any application that currently uses images to 
> still continue to work perfectly.
>
> Curious to hear your thoughts
>
> Cheers,
> Thibault
>

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

>>> ___
>>>  Tagging mailing list
>>>  >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>>  >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> ___
>>  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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

Yeah, makes sense.


Having ipfs be a valid image/file tag in osm would be a nice addition
actually!

the main use case for having multiple images on one node was for example a
store, and you've just taken random images of the store (like you have on
Google maps and other map apps)


I do wonder if the average user is going to bother making me Wikimedia
account, figuring out how commons works, and then figuring out how to make
a gallery.
Wikimedia also seems to kind of force you to describe what each image is,
which I guess is isn't bad thing. (but I do think that a lot of images
don't need more context than just having them be on the node)

Cheers

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 12:38 bkil  wrote:

> > [...] Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. [...]
> > File in use in another Wikimedia project [...] [OR]
> > File in use on Commons only: An otherwise non-educational file does not
> acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page
> or in a category on Commons, nor solely because it is in use on a user page
> (the "User:" namespace), but by custom the uploading of small numbers of
> images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is
> allowed. Files relating to projects or events of the Wikimedia community,
> such as user meetings, are also allowed.
> > [...] For example, the fact that an unused blurred photograph could
> theoretically be used to illustrate an article on "Common mistakes in
> photography" does not mean that we should keep all blurred photographs. The
> fact that an unused snapshot of your friend could theoretically be used to
> illustrate an article on "Photographic portraiture" does not mean that we
> should keep all photographs of unknown people. The fact that an unused
> pornographic image could theoretically be used to illustrate an article on
> pornography does not mean that we should keep low quality pornographic
> images (see also Censorship).
> > [...] Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an
> educational purpose:
> > Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself
> and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are
> plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose,
> such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational
> even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere.
>
> Via:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Contributing_your_own_work
>
> Some other technology (like IPFS) may also be sufficient for such party
> photos and the mentioned Flickr also has a creative commons & public domain
> sharing option that allows reuse for stock footage.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Flickr
>
> Also about uploading your party pictures as a child: you may not have
> received the informed consent of all models portrayed on the picture (i.e.,
> your family and other customers) that you have uploaded. For example in
> many countries, you must sign individual waivers if you want to publish the
> photographs that include identifiable humans. This is especially true with
> Commons, because the purpose of uploading is to contribute the content in a
> manner which allows other contributors to edit, remix and reuse your
> photographs in ways that you or your models did not anticipate.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebrity_privacy#Right_of_publicity
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:54 AM Thibault Molleman <
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ah ok, I had a bunch of my images deleted that I uploaded when i was a
>> kid (maybe not the smartest thing to do at the time.)
>> They were birthday photos and put them up cause figured it could work as
>> stock photos (remember one site actually using one of them) and they got
>> deleted a couple years ago.
>> (looking back on the deletion requests. Turns out they were just unsure
>> what the license was. (fair enough, uploaded them when I was 12 or
>> something, so probably didn't really know what I was doing).
>>
>> Guess wikimedia commons galleries are a good solution then.
>> Maybe it should be made more clear on the wiki that this is the thing you
>> should do if you want to upload multiple images
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Thibault
>>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 11:30, Andy Mabbett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:04, Thibault Molleman
>>>  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
>>> Commons
>>> > just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>>>
>>> That is not a valid reason for deletion from Wikimedia Commons.
>>>
>>> Commons' scope is far wider than just hosting images for Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> > Maybe a special 

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

[pangoSE]

Hi

Matthew Woehlke  skrev: (25 augusti 2020 15:25:19 
CEST)
>On 24/08/2020 16.25, pangoSE wrote:
>> Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (24 augusti 2020 02:16:27 CEST)
>>> Also useful when the POI is approximately placed (e.g. in a
>>> neighbouring building, happens quite often, at least as long as most
>>> POIs are not yet mapped)
>> 
>> Really? Can you link to an example?  I have never come across a POI
>> that needed a special address. I would rather map to he entry in the
>> that case and put the address there.
>
>Just about any strip mall. For example, 42.8625, -73.7831. I can give
>at 
>least three other examples within 1000 *feet*; in a few miles, probably
>
>a dozen or more.
>
>Mapping stores in such cases practically requires mapping the *insides*
>
>of the buildings. It's much more typical to drop a POI in about the 
>right place (either the middle of the store, or the entrance to the 
>store). Yet, these *do* have distinct addresses.
>
>The same can easily happen with multi-unit dwellings.
>
>Also, mailboxes have addresses, but are unlikely to be mapped as ways 
>due to their size.
>
>> The POI IMO cannot logically have an address itself, its a human 
>> symbol for designating something of interest within a feature like a 
>> building, park or whatever.
>
>...or its a somewhat abstracted representation of a building because no
>
>one has yet made the effort to map the building more precisely. BTW, 
>it's not that unusual for detached houses to be mapped as POIs, 
>especially when addresses are imported from GIS data that gives them 
>only as points. Yes, in an ideal world everything of this nature would 
>be mapped as a way, but that isn't always practical.
>
>> When the Swedish geosurvey sometime soon release all public adresses
>> for free we will have to merge them all with the buildings where
>> possible.
>...And what will you do if there is no building, and it isn't obvious 
>how to add one (e.g. strip malls)? Not import that address at all?
>
>> thinking about it postal addresses follows land plots and legal
>boundaries and not POIs.
>
>Actually, AFAIK this is only partly true. Yes, the address "123 Cherry 
>Lane" follows a plot, but I'm not aware of anything preventing me from 
>erecting three structures on that plot and designating them "unit 1", 
>"unit 3.14" and "unit gamma". This would be unusual on a residential 
>plot, but not at all (well, sans my intentionally bizarre numbering)
>for 
>a commercial building.

I rest my case. Thanks for the examples. Could you help update the wikipage 
about POIs to reflect this?

Cheers 

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

> [...] Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. [...]
> File in use in another Wikimedia project [...] [OR]
> File in use on Commons only: An otherwise non-educational file does not
acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page
or in a category on Commons, nor solely because it is in use on a user page
(the "User:" namespace), but by custom the uploading of small numbers of
images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is
allowed. Files relating to projects or events of the Wikimedia community,
such as user meetings, are also allowed.
> [...] For example, the fact that an unused blurred photograph could
theoretically be used to illustrate an article on "Common mistakes in
photography" does not mean that we should keep all blurred photographs. The
fact that an unused snapshot of your friend could theoretically be used to
illustrate an article on "Photographic portraiture" does not mean that we
should keep all photographs of unknown people. The fact that an unused
pornographic image could theoretically be used to illustrate an article on
pornography does not mean that we should keep low quality pornographic
images (see also Censorship).
> [...] Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an
educational purpose:
> Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself
and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are
plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose,
such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational
even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere.

Via:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Contributing_your_own_work

Some other technology (like IPFS) may also be sufficient for such party
photos and the mentioned Flickr also has a creative commons & public domain
sharing option that allows reuse for stock footage.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Flickr

Also about uploading your party pictures as a child: you may not have
received the informed consent of all models portrayed on the picture (i.e.,
your family and other customers) that you have uploaded. For example in
many countries, you must sign individual waivers if you want to publish the
photographs that include identifiable humans. This is especially true with
Commons, because the purpose of uploading is to contribute the content in a
manner which allows other contributors to edit, remix and reuse your
photographs in ways that you or your models did not anticipate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebrity_privacy#Right_of_publicity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_privacy

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:54 AM Thibault Molleman <
thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ah ok, I had a bunch of my images deleted that I uploaded when i was a kid
> (maybe not the smartest thing to do at the time.)
> They were birthday photos and put them up cause figured it could work as
> stock photos (remember one site actually using one of them) and they got
> deleted a couple years ago.
> (looking back on the deletion requests. Turns out they were just unsure
> what the license was. (fair enough, uploaded them when I was 12 or
> something, so probably didn't really know what I was doing).
>
> Guess wikimedia commons galleries are a good solution then.
> Maybe it should be made more clear on the wiki that this is the thing you
> should do if you want to upload multiple images
>
> Cheers,
> Thibault
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 11:30, Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:04, Thibault Molleman
>>  wrote:
>> >
>> > Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
>> Commons
>> > just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>>
>> That is not a valid reason for deletion from Wikimedia Commons.
>>
>> Commons' scope is far wider than just hosting images for Wikipedia.
>>
>> > Maybe a special example but still:
>> > Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
>> > couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
>> > moderation team.
>>
>> There is no "moderation team" on Commons; deletion decisions there are
>> made by the community of contributors at large (just like edits in
>> OSM).
>>
>> Your images sound as though they would be in scope. Did you try to upload
>> them?
>>
>> Do you have an example of an image which has been deleted from Commons?
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> 

Re: [Tagging] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[joost schouppe]

Well, in the Netherlands cyclestreet seems to be a "suggestional" traffic
sign. In Belgium cyclestreet it has a clear legal meaning. In Germany
bicycle_road has a clear (but quite different) legal meaning. So putting
the Dutch and Belgian thing together but not the German, that doesn't make
much sense. There's plenty of discussion on the Dutch forum about this. A
fundamental remark: "apps that use the original German definition will see
the road as forbidden for cars unless otherwise tagged", which does not
make sense in Belgium or Holland.

See e.g.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=63473
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=709379#p709379
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:The_Netherlands_roads_tagging


Op wo 26 aug. 2020 om 08:51 schreef Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:

> I am curious is there any difference in practical use of this two tags.
>
> Aug 25, 2020, 12:13 by vosc...@gmail.com:
>
> Hi,
> I have come across a new (to me) street sign In Italy:
> https://italy-cycling-guide.info/tips-advice/riding-in-italy/
> The road is a one-lane residential road on which bicycles and pedestrians
> can circulate.
> I don't know the legal status, however (I am inquiring).
>
> In that contest I have noticed that we have two wiki pages defining two
> tags, which seem to be describing nearly the same concept:
> bicycle_road 
> created 14:54, 7 August 2010
> 
> ‎
> cyclestreet
> 
> created 09:58, 9 May 2018
> ‎
>
>
> The main difference, as I understand it, is that the bicycle road is for
> bicycles only, unless there are additional signs, whereas
> on a cycle street "cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited
> by the character and layout of the cyclestreet"
>
> To make the confusion perfect, both wiki pages use the same (German) road
> sign as illustration for the situation in Germany.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_244_-_Beginn_der_Fahrradstra%C3%9Fe,_StVO_1997.svg
>
> Taginfo:
> bicycle_road=yes
>  7906
> cyclestreet=yes
>  4076
>
> Volker
> Padova, Italy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

I didn't share my viewpoint yet here. In my opinion, there is usually no
need for more than one image on a POI (two at worst), so I don't see a
need. If you want to photograph each entrance of a school, why don't you
attach each photo to the respective entrance? If you made photographs of
each hall, why don't you do indoor mapping and attach the photos to the
respective hall, etc.

In general, I think it is more productive to create a Wikipedia article
about a thing of major interest (like a university) and illustrate the
article with a proper amount of images and/or create a gallery there. In
this case, even 1 OSM image link is considered excessive, as it could and
should be scraped from the sidebar of the article by data users instead. In
my experience, Wikipedia does a better job at maintaining articles (and
galleries) than OSM in many, if not all regions.

Your link is 100 characters long, and a field is limited to up to 255
unicode characters, so two of these could fit in. I think if you use
reasonable providers, links should be reasonably short. Filenames are
optional in IPFS links and also, if we added schema-specific a key for ipfs
(similar to Mapillary/Flickr/etc), it could be a lot less shorter (46
characters a piece + semicolons), like
image:ipfs=QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:06 AM Thibault Molleman <
thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
> Commons just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
> Maybe a special example but still:
> Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
> couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
> moderation team.
>
> As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by
>> doubling it:
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>>
>> Ah interesting, somehow missed that.
> It's a solution, but still doesn't solve the problem of long urls clogging
> up one tag.
> Definitely if you have long urls because of unique hash/id's
> (extreme example: IPFS urls:
> https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd?filename=IMG_20200727_172553.jpg
> )
>
> Cheers,
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:54, bkil  wrote:
>
>> As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by
>> doubling it:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman <
>> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> While I use the semicolon for some other tags already, the problem with
>>> using it for something that has a URL.
>>> Is that TECHNICALLYaccording to the specification, a URL can contain a
>>> semicolon.
>>> So I feel like the use of a semicolon in a url based tag isn't a good
>>> solution
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:44 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
>>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>>
 If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
 is standard.

 At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.


 Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:

 Hi,

 It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put
 multiple images on one node/way/relation.
 Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
 Either via:
 `image=url1;url2;url3`
 or
 ```
 image=url1
 image:2=url2
 image:3=url3
 ```
 That later would allow for any application that currently uses images
 to still continue to work perfectly.

 Curious to hear your thoughts

 Cheers,
 Thibault


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

>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

Ah ok, I had a bunch of my images deleted that I uploaded when i was a kid
(maybe not the smartest thing to do at the time.)
They were birthday photos and put them up cause figured it could work as
stock photos (remember one site actually using one of them) and they got
deleted a couple years ago.
(looking back on the deletion requests. Turns out they were just unsure
what the license was. (fair enough, uploaded them when I was 12 or
something, so probably didn't really know what I was doing).

Guess wikimedia commons galleries are a good solution then.
Maybe it should be made more clear on the wiki that this is the thing you
should do if you want to upload multiple images

Cheers,
Thibault

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 11:30, Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:04, Thibault Molleman
>  wrote:
> >
> > Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
> Commons
> > just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
>
> That is not a valid reason for deletion from Wikimedia Commons.
>
> Commons' scope is far wider than just hosting images for Wikipedia.
>
> > Maybe a special example but still:
> > Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
> > couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
> > moderation team.
>
> There is no "moderation team" on Commons; deletion decisions there are
> made by the community of contributors at large (just like edits in
> OSM).
>
> Your images sound as though they would be in scope. Did you try to upload
> them?
>
> Do you have an example of an image which has been deleted from Commons?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:04, Thibault Molleman
 wrote:
>
> Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from Commons
> just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".

That is not a valid reason for deletion from Wikimedia Commons.

Commons' scope is far wider than just hosting images for Wikipedia.

> Maybe a special example but still:
> Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
> couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
> moderation team.

There is no "moderation team" on Commons; deletion decisions there are
made by the community of contributors at large (just like edits in
OSM).

Your images sound as though they would be in scope. Did you try to upload them?

Do you have an example of an image which has been deleted from Commons?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

Ah, I feel like there are certain images that might get deleted from
Commons just because they don't "contribute to wikipedia articles".
Maybe a special example but still:
Recently mapped a construction zone for a residential area and took a
couple photos. Those might not "belong on Commons" according to their
moderation team.

As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by
> doubling it:
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>
> Ah interesting, somehow missed that.
It's a solution, but still doesn't solve the problem of long urls clogging
up one tag.
Definitely if you have long urls because of unique hash/id's
(extreme example: IPFS urls:
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd?filename=IMG_20200727_172553.jpg
)

Cheers,

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:54, bkil  wrote:

> As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by
> doubling it:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman <
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While I use the semicolon for some other tags already, the problem with
>> using it for something that has a URL.
>> Is that TECHNICALLYaccording to the specification, a URL can contain a
>> semicolon.
>> So I feel like the use of a semicolon in a url based tag isn't a good
>> solution
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:44 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>
>>> If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
>>> is standard.
>>>
>>> At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.
>>>
>>>
>>> Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put
>>> multiple images on one node/way/relation.
>>> Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
>>> Either via:
>>> `image=url1;url2;url3`
>>> or
>>> ```
>>> image=url1
>>> image:2=url2
>>> image:3=url3
>>> ```
>>> That later would allow for any application that currently uses images to
>>> still continue to work perfectly.
>>>
>>> Curious to hear your thoughts
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Thibault
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

No, I was thinking about linking Wikimedia Commons galleries.
(such linking also happens indirectly when wikipedia/wikidata tags get added)

Aug 26, 2020, 10:42 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:

> I think what Mateusz was referring to was seeing if we could somehow copy the 
> system that commons uses?
> (so that any app that can already accept wikimedia commons galleries also can 
> use this new system)
>
> Cheers
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:31, Martin Koppenhoefer <> dieterdre...@gmail.com> 
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>  
>>  > On 26. Aug 2020, at 10:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <>> 
>> tagging@openstreetmap.org>> > wrote:
>>  > 
>>  > See wikimedia_commons that may linki wikimedia commons
>>  > gallery.
>>  
>>  
>>  there are quite some links in “image” for wikimedia commons categories (but 
>> not all images in a category may be relevant for osm), a more universally 
>> applicable way could be interesting I agree. Currently if you want to add a 
>> recent photo the best way seems to remove the existing photo link, which is 
>> often not ideal. Also many features require at the very least 2 images for a 
>> decent representation (back and front)
>>  
>>  Cheers Martin 
>>  ___
>>  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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by
doubling it:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman <
thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> While I use the semicolon for some other tags already, the problem with
> using it for something that has a URL.
> Is that TECHNICALLYaccording to the specification, a URL can contain a
> semicolon.
> So I feel like the use of a semicolon in a url based tag isn't a good
> solution
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:44 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
>> is standard.
>>
>> At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.
>>
>>
>> Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put multiple
>> images on one node/way/relation.
>> Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
>> Either via:
>> `image=url1;url2;url3`
>> or
>> ```
>> image=url1
>> image:2=url2
>> image:3=url3
>> ```
>> That later would allow for any application that currently uses images to
>> still continue to work perfectly.
>>
>> Curious to hear your thoughts
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Thibault
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

I think what Mateusz was referring to was seeing if we could somehow copy
the system that commons uses?
(so that any app that can already accept wikimedia commons galleries also
can use this new system)

Cheers

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 10:31, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 26. Aug 2020, at 10:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > See wikimedia_commons that may linki wikimedia commons
> > gallery.
>
>
> there are quite some links in “image” for wikimedia commons categories
> (but not all images in a category may be relevant for osm), a more
> universally applicable way could be interesting I agree. Currently if you
> want to add a recent photo the best way seems to remove the existing photo
> link, which is often not ideal. Also many features require at the very
> least 2 images for a decent representation (back and front)
>
> Cheers Martin
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 26. Aug 2020, at 10:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
>  wrote:
> 
> See wikimedia_commons that may linki wikimedia commons
> gallery.


there are quite some links in “image” for wikimedia commons categories (but not 
all images in a category may be relevant for osm), a more universally 
applicable way could be interesting I agree. Currently if you want to add a 
recent photo the best way seems to remove the existing photo link, which is 
often not ideal. Also many features require at the very least 2 images for a 
decent representation (back and front)

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

See wikimedia_commons that may linki wikimedia commons
gallery.

Aug 26, 2020, 09:33 by me-osm-tagg...@keepawayfromfire.co.uk:

> As mentioned semi colon has issues with URLs. It may also be worth
> noting that a OSM value can only have 254 chars in it, a limit that
> would get hit quickly with a few URLs.
>
> I've thought about this before, I think we need 1 URL to point to
> multiple images. But it can't just be a non standard HTML gallery, it
> also needs to be programmatically fetchable so downstream OSM consumers
> can use the images directly.
>
> HTTP already has the capability for this with the Accept header.
>
> - If a given URL is loaded in a browser (Accept: text/html) it can show
> a HTML page with multiple images in.
>
> - If it's requested by a client like OsmAnd (eg Accept:
> application/gallery+json) it could return a JSON blob with details
> about the images, there licences, alt text, etc to be embedded in the
> app.
>
> But we'd need server support.
>
> Cj
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

That's a good idea actually!
Although I guess there is a part of me that thinks that having just a
simple image tag without any fancy stuff is still best for a primary image
(so that apps that want to implement it don't need to start messing with
this new format and can just load that simple url.

I guess the question then would be if you'd do something like:
"If there is a image_gallery tag on the item, use that instead of the image
tag"
and have the image tag be just image1 and the image_gallery refer to
image1,image2,image3 etc.

Also, I wonder if this could tie into an IPFS (decentralized internet
protocol) system as well


Cheers,
Thibault

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 09:35, Cj Malone <
me-osm-tagg...@keepawayfromfire.co.uk> wrote:

> As mentioned semi colon has issues with URLs. It may also be worth
> noting that a OSM value can only have 254 chars in it, a limit that
> would get hit quickly with a few URLs.
>
> I've thought about this before, I think we need 1 URL to point to
> multiple images. But it can't just be a non standard HTML gallery, it
> also needs to be programmatically fetchable so downstream OSM consumers
> can use the images directly.
>
> HTTP already has the capability for this with the Accept header.
>
> - If a given URL is loaded in a browser (Accept: text/html) it can show
> a HTML page with multiple images in.
>
> - If it's requested by a client like OsmAnd (eg Accept:
> application/gallery+json) it could return a JSON blob with details
> about the images, there licences, alt text, etc to be embedded in the
> app.
>
> But we'd need server support.
>
> Cj
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Cj Malone]

As mentioned semi colon has issues with URLs. It may also be worth
noting that a OSM value can only have 254 chars in it, a limit that
would get hit quickly with a few URLs.

I've thought about this before, I think we need 1 URL to point to
multiple images. But it can't just be a non standard HTML gallery, it
also needs to be programmatically fetchable so downstream OSM consumers
can use the images directly.

HTTP already has the capability for this with the Accept header.

- If a given URL is loaded in a browser (Accept: text/html) it can show
a HTML page with multiple images in.

- If it's requested by a client like OsmAnd (eg Accept:
application/gallery+json) it could return a JSON blob with details
about the images, there licences, alt text, etc to be embedded in the
app.

But we'd need server support.

Cj



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

While I use the semicolon for some other tags already, the problem with
using it for something that has a URL.
Is that TECHNICALLYaccording to the specification, a URL can contain a
semicolon.
So I feel like the use of a semicolon in a url based tag isn't a good
solution

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020, 08:44 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
> is standard.
>
> At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.
>
>
> Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:
>
> Hi,
>
> It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put multiple
> images on one node/way/relation.
> Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
> Either via:
> `image=url1;url2;url3`
> or
> ```
> image=url1
> image:2=url2
> image:3=url3
> ```
> That later would allow for any application that currently uses images to
> still continue to work perfectly.
>
> Curious to hear your thoughts
>
> Cheers,
> Thibault
>
>
> ___
> 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] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

I am curious is there any difference in practical use of this two tags.

Aug 25, 2020, 12:13 by vosc...@gmail.com:

> Hi,
> I have come across a new (to me) street sign In Italy:
> https://italy-cycling-guide.info/tips-advice/riding-in-italy/
> The road is a one-lane residential road on which bicycles and pedestrians can 
> circulate. 
> I don't know the legal status, however (I am inquiring).
>
> In that contest I have noticed that we have two wiki pages defining two tags, 
> which seem to be describing nearly the same concept:
> bicycle_road >  created 
> > 14:54, 7 August 2010 
> >
>  ‎
> cyclestreet 
> >   created 
> > 09:58, 9 May 2018 
> >
>  ‎ 
>
> The main difference, as I understand it, is that the bicycle road is for 
> bicycles only, unless there are additional signs, whereas
> on a cycle street "cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited by 
> the character and layout of the cyclestreet"
>
> To make the confusion perfect, both wiki pages use the same (German) road 
> sign as illustration for the situation in Germany.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_244_-_Beginn_der_Fahrradstra%C3%9Fe,_StVO_1997.svg
>
> Taginfo:
> bicycle_road <>> => yes 
> >  7906
> cyclestreet <>> => yes 
> >  4076
>
> Volker 
> Padova, Italy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

If someone really needs multiple images on one object then
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator
is standard.

At the same time use for that seems dubious for this specific tag.


Aug 26, 2020, 07:41 by thibaultmolle...@gmail.com:

> Hi,
>
> It seems like there (still) isn't a proper tagging system to put multiple 
> images on one node/way/relation.
> Having the ability to link other images as well would be useful I think.
> Either via:
> `image=url1;url2;url3`
> or
> ```
> image=url1
> image:2=url2
> image:3=url3
> ```
> That later would allow for any application that currently uses images to 
> still continue to work perfectly.
>
> Curious to hear your thoughts
>
> Cheers,
> Thibault
>

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

[Tagging] Bus specifc (or psv specific) turn rules

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

I added section at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn#Special_turn_rules_for_specific_vehicle_types

I also created

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:psv:lanes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_service_vehicles
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Psv=no
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:psv:lanes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:bicycle:lanes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:bus:lanes

Review for mistakes / adding photos from Wikimedia Commons (or maybe even 
taking a new photos) / adding examples / etc would be nice and welcomed.

Triggered by https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=799132 where 
someone asked about how to tag bus/psv turn lanes.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging