Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I propose to add the following to the Parking wiki page, in the table of the Tags section, as follows: (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking) Column Key: access Column Value: public/customer/private Column Element: [node or area] Column Comment: Specify the intended users of the parking lot. access=public if intended for the general public, access=customer if intended only for those who are visiting nearby shops/amenities, or access=private if access is more restrictive than access=customer (e.g. for staff only, or requiring specific permission). Sorry, let me try that definition one more time: Specify the intended users of the parking lot. access=public if parking is available for general public use; access=customer if parking is only for those who are visiting nearby shops/amenities; access=private if access is otherwise restricted (e.g. for staff only, or requiring specific permission, etc.). Only use access=customer or access=private if this restriction is signed or otherwise enforced. The final sentence is to make the tag verifiable. Thoughts? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
Am 18.05.2010 09:13, schrieb Roy Wallace: On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Roy Wallacewaldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I propose to add the following to the Parking wiki page, in the table of the Tags section, as follows: (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking) Column Key: access Column Value: public/customer/private Column Element: [node or area] Column Comment: Specify the intended users of the parking lot. access=public if intended for the general public, access=customer if intended only for those who are visiting nearby shops/amenities, or access=private if access is more restrictive than access=customer (e.g. for staff only, or requiring specific permission). Sorry, let me try that definition one more time: Specify the intended users of the parking lot. access=public if parking is available for general public use; access=customer if parking is only for those who are visiting nearby shops/amenities; access=private if access is otherwise restricted (e.g. for staff only, or requiring specific permission, etc.). Only use access=customer or access=private if this restriction is signed or otherwise enforced. The final sentence is to make the tag verifiable. Thoughts? Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. Regards, ULFL ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On 18 May 2010 17:23, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. I was thinking access=destination although then you need to link the parking lot to the destination, although you probably would for access=customer as well since you might need to know where to spend money, or window shop, to be considered a customer. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
2010/5/18 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
Hi, I had finally some time to write down some proposal of sub-tagging for leisure=garden as discussed earlier. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Garden_specification Since I'm no big gardener any comments and suggestions are more than welcomed. Regards, Petr Morávek signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
2010/5/18 Petr Morávek [Xificurk] xific...@gmail.com: Hi, I had finally some time to write down some proposal of sub-tagging for leisure=garden as discussed earlier. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Garden_specification Since I'm no big gardener any comments and suggestions are more than welcomed. Thanks for putting this up. I would actually try to reduce some of it to the necessary: The most common form of garden, located in proximity to a residence, usually private access only. The main purpose is usually relaxation activities. - I would delete The main purpose is usually relaxation activities. because it restricts without benefit. Botanical gardens are generally well-tended parks displaying a wide range of plants labeled with their botanical names. They may contain specialist plant collections such as cacti and succulent plants, herb gardens, plants from particular parts of the world, and so on. I would put it more into a scientific context: Botanical gardens are scientifically structured and labelled collections of living plants with the purpose of scientific research, conservation, display and education. garden:style=kitchen - These gardens have usually no aesthetic function, they're used for growing vegetable, herbs, etc. I would delete These gardens have usually no aesthetic function because it is IMHO not usefull and depends on taste. I added garden:style=rosarium. Are there any ideas how to solve the problem that this more or less obsoletes leisure=park? Shall we allow the values garden:type and garden:style for parks as well? This could be done by simply avoiding the prefix (type and style without the garden). Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
There is maybe also some potential conflict with allotment gardens? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This doesn't seem consistent with parking restricted to customers. Do you think this is a problem? I think, if access=* is to mean something different when applied to a parking lot, I would like the wiki to be updated to be more explicit about it. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer napsal(a): Thanks for putting this up. I would actually try to reduce some of it to the necessary: The most common form of garden, located in proximity to a residence, usually private access only. The main purpose is usually relaxation activities. - I would delete The main purpose is usually relaxation activities. because it restricts without benefit. By this I have tried to incorporate the idea that in case of residential garden it doesn't really matter if you have a nice garden in the french style or a plain lawn. Botanical gardens are generally well-tended parks displaying a wide range of plants labeled with their botanical names. They may contain specialist plant collections such as cacti and succulent plants, herb gardens, plants from particular parts of the world, and so on. I would put it more into a scientific context: Botanical gardens are scientifically structured and labelled collections of living plants with the purpose of scientific research, conservation, display and education. This was mostly copied out of wikipedia, but your definition is better, I would just change the last and to or. garden:style=kitchen - These gardens have usually no aesthetic function, they're used for growing vegetable, herbs, etc. I would delete These gardens have usually no aesthetic function because it is IMHO not usefull and depends on taste. Makes sense, I'll change that Are there any ideas how to solve the problem that this more or less obsoletes leisure=park? Shall we allow the values garden:type and garden:style for parks as well? This could be done by simply avoiding the prefix (type and style without the garden). I have thought about that, but... 1) We need the prefix, so it is clear type/style of what we are tagging. 2) It is true that leisure=park is somewhat similar to the garden, but I still consider a park as more or less grassy area with fewer plants, or at least smaller variety. And personally I don't know any area where I would hesitate if I should tag it as a park or garden - usually most of the local folks call it one way or the other and the area often has one of the words in its name. 3) This could in theory incorporate many of other tags like landuse=allotments,vineyard,orchard etc., but I guess these are meant for rather large scale, and I think they should stay where they are (landuse key). I think leisure=garden should be located exclusively in landuse=recreation_ground, or residential (for garden:type=residential), maybe even landuse=allotments if anyone wants to tag each property separately. Regards, Petr signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging communication transponders
Here's a sample tower I produced, I'd appreciate any comments about the tags I used if there is better ones I didn't notice sample.osm Description: Binary data ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com writes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This doesn't seem consistent with parking restricted to customers. Do you think this is a problem? I think, if access=* is to mean something different when applied to a parking lot, I would like the wiki to be updated to be more explicit about it. I think access=permissive is the right tag, but the wording in the wiki could be improved and a convention for parking agreed. eg The owner gives general permission for access but where there is no public right of way. For example, use of a car park by customers only or permission to walk across a field For car parks: Use access=yes for public parking, access=permissive for customer parking and access=private for staff parking, or whatever. I have seen parking lots where there is a sign or an implication that use is intended for and/or restricted to those using the associated business (everywhere) parking where there is no public right of access (private property), but random parking is allowed (sometimes) I would call the first access=destination and the second access=permissive. pgpHt8wVTMS4L.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
2010/5/19 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com: I would call the first access=destination and the second access=permissive. yes, by thinking it over I also see some space for a restriction between permissive and private and destination is more elegant cause it uses an already introduced value for access. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This doesn't seem consistent with parking restricted to customers. Do you think this is a problem? I think, if access=* is to mean something different when applied to a parking lot, I would like the wiki to be updated to be more explicit about it. I think access=permissive is the right tag, but the wording in the wiki could be improved and a convention for parking agreed. eg The owner gives general permission for access but where there is no public right of way. For example, use of a car park by customers only or permission to walk across a field Be careful. I think some public carparks, e.g. multi-storey parking, open 24 hours a day, charging a fee, run by a private business, are access=permissive. For car parks: Use access=yes for public parking, access=permissive for customer parking and access=private for staff parking, or whatever. I do agree that a convention for parking should be specified. But I DON'T think we should use access=permissive simultaneously with two very different meanings: 1) (wiki definition) privately owned land, for example by a business, with general access allowed to anyone 2) (the proposed parking-specific definition) access allowed to customers ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of notice that tow-away is enforced for unauthorized parking. So the general idea is you're free to park there, ONLY if you're visiting the businesses serviced by the lot. Sounds like access=private, unless and until there's a more specific tag. Access=public? No, the public has no right of access. Access=permissive? No, the owner does not give *general* permission to access. Access=destination? No, the public has no right of access. Something specific like access=customer would be better. Or maybe access=restricted; access:restriction=whatever is actually written on the sign. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
I'm currently going through mapping fixed position GPS receivers that are used for measuring tectonic plate movements, can anyone think of a better tag than man_made=gps_receiver ? It was suggested to mark it as a survey point, but these locations aren't used for surveying. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/739113588 http://www.ga.gov.au/geodesy/argn/sydn.jsp ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
2010/5/19 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: On 19 May 2010 12:56, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: or at least a more specific tag than man_made=gps_receiver. If you want a dedicated tag use sth. like plate_tectonic_monitoring I wasn't feeling inspired today, which is why I posted to this list asking for tag naming suggestions on what to refer to these as, since man_made=a_well_surveyed_known_position_with_high_accuracy_to_monitor_gps_signals is a bit of a mouthful. Yes, but it doesn't get less if you put man_made=gps_receiver and note=a_well_surveyed_known_position_with_high_accuracy_to_monitor_gps_signals I suggest that tagging somehow is understandable ideally without even needing the wiki to look up what it intends. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:56 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 19 May 2010 11:48, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: From wikipedia: Surveying or land surveying is the technique and science of accurately determining the terrestrial or three-dimensional position of points and the distances and angles between them. These points are usually on the surface of the Earth, and they are often used to establish land maps and boundaries for ownership or governmental purposes. Exactly, these locations are used to monitor the movement of a tectonic plate, atmospheric conditions and potentially drift of GPS satellite locations, none of which has anything to do with used to establish land maps and boundaries That was quite a selective quote of my quote. The first sentence boils down to surveying = determining the position of points. And monitoring (which is indeed just determining on an ongoing basis) the position of tectonic plates are GPS satellites matches this definition. We'll have to agree to disagree then, Ok. tagging them as just another survey marker is a reduction of information to lowest common denominator. There's no need to lose information - just use other additional tags. How about man_made=survey_point + survey_point=fancy_tectonic_whatever_thing? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On 19 May 2010 13:56, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Exactly, these locations are used to monitor the movement of a tectonic plate, atmospheric conditions and potentially drift of GPS satellite locations, none of which has anything to do with used to establish land maps and boundaries That was quite a selective quote of my quote. The first sentence boils Maybe so, but it seemed as important as any other part. down to surveying = determining the position of points. And surveying markers were used determining other points relative to known points, this is the inverse, it's a known point monitoring other points (aka GPS sats). monitoring (which is indeed just determining on an ongoing basis) the position of tectonic plates are GPS satellites matches this definition. The position of the plates are derived based on monitoring signals from sats, also plate monitoring is only one function, from GA's website: Data from all the ARGN sites are automatically downloaded to Geoscience Australia in Canberra using a variety of dedicated phone lines, Internet and/or satellite communications. These data are being used for a range of scientific, geodynamic and other projects including integrity monitoring and legal traceability. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
NASA has a list of 421 of these sites located world wide: http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/network/list.html The IGS is a voluntary federation of many worldwide agencies that pool resources and permanent GNSS station data to generate precise GNSS products. In general, you can think of the IGS as the highest-precision international civilian GPS community. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
