Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

On 1/12/20 11:29 pm, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 11:57, St Niklaas > wrote: A horse track is not a good choice to tend to walk on foot, it already has its own tag bridle way. There is a difference between tracks worn by wild animals and

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

On 1/12/20 9:43 pm, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 1. Dec 2020, at 11:18, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: The 'Auto' setting may not be 'optimal' for what you want, but as a compromise between data bloat and resolution/accuracy it maybe better than a fixed time as

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

On 1/12/20 9:36 pm, Colin Smale wrote: On 2020-12-01 11:14, Warin wrote: The differences are less than 10m. (The points of the green track are where data exists, the straight lines between those points simply connect the measured points. ) The 'simplify way' in JOSM is normal set for a

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

On 2/12/20 6:41 am, Philip Barnes wrote: On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 17:55 +0100, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Given "in the field they may also look like trails." it seems to not be solvable. How mappers are supposed to distinguish them from normal paths? Humans are animals, mammals to

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

On Tue, 2020-12-01 at 17:55 +0100, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > Given "in the field they may also look like trails." it seems to not > be solvable. > > How mappers are supposed to distinguish them from normal paths? Humans are animals, mammals to be a bit more exact. The non-human

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

Dec 1, 2020, 00:44 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > Am Di., 1. Dez. 2020 um 00:39 Uhr schrieb Lukas Richert <> > lrich...@posteo.net> >: > >> >> I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are many trails in >> my area that are clearly animal tracks and seldom used by people

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 11:59 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > Dec 1, 2020, 00:44 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > Am Di., 1. Dez. 2020 um 00:39 Uhr schrieb Lukas Richert < > lrich...@posteo.net>: > > I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

Given "in the field they may also look like trails." it seems to not be solvable. How mappers are supposed to distinguish them from normal paths? Nov 30, 2020, 20:41 by s8e...@runbox.com: > Hello everyone, > > With the Belgian community, we have been in contact with Natuurpunt, our main >

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 11:18 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > The 'Auto' setting may not be 'optimal' for what you want, but as a > compromise between data bloat and resolution/accuracy it maybe better than > a fixed time as judged by the developer/manufacture. > For not 'optimal' I mean

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

sent from a phone > On 1. Dec 2020, at 05:03, Peter Elderson wrote: > > humans=no? looks like an access tag, so it is not suitable unless this is the legal situation. Generally we might not be able to have a solution with a single tag, because of the differing legal situation. In some

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

On 1/12/20 5:07 pm, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote: Think your confusing two terms; resolution, accuracy I understand that you mean, but check this detail: https://ibb.co/7ycFW5J At least my impression is that the 1Sec is also more accurate. It's obviously only a single test, and the recording

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

sent from a phone > On 1. Dec 2020, at 04:31, Minh Nguyen via Tagging > wrote: > > Regardless, informal=yes seems especially appropriate for these animal-made > paths. *if* the path could be useful for humans (i.e. you can walk there), highway=path and informal=yes may be suitable,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

sent from a phone > On 1. Dec 2020, at 11:18, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The 'Auto' setting may not be 'optimal' for what you want, but as a > compromise between data bloat and resolution/accuracy it maybe better than a > fixed time as judged by the developer/manufacture.

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 11:57, St Niklaas wrote: > A horse track is not a good choice to tend to walk on foot, it already has > its own tag bridle way. > There is a difference between tracks worn by wild animals and bridleways. Wild animal tracks may not be walkable on foot. Bridleways are

Re: [Tagging] How to tag for dualband GPS ?

On 2020-12-01 11:14, Warin wrote: > The differences are less than 10m. (The points of the green track are where > data exists, the straight lines between those points simply connect the > measured points. ) > > The 'simplify way' in JOSM is normal set for a maximum difference of 3m as a >

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - electricity

Hello all, as there have been no further comments, I'd like to open the proposal for electricity to voting: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/electricity Cheers Lukas ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal Rejected - RFC - Admission

I fixed the wiki of the proposal, any new comments before I start the voting again? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Admission Janko čet, 26. stu 2020. u 16:43 Janko Mihelić napisao je: > Results: 1 approved, 6 opposed, 3 abstained. > >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

Hi everyone, I react on the notes of Graeme, There are a lot of things to map, but Animal trails or nature tracks are not the high items to map and if as suggested that they are found on areal views, I find that a good argument to stop using views without surveying locally and outside for a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal Rejected - RFC - Admission

IMO the word 'issue' here only makes sense if I read your description - encountering it out in the wild, I would have no idea what is meant https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/issue. The usage of issue as a verb is not all too common without further specification and goes against typical OSM