On 31.08.2010 20:58, David Earl wrote:
Just to throw something else into this discussion...
highway=steps
It doesn't (or at least, isn't documented as) have direction, but
_could_ have in the same way as rivers (direction of way is down the
steps, say).
To quote the wiki: (http://wiki.opens
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> so "flow_direction" ?
How would you know if local waterways have the wrong direction without
specifically checking for the problem? OSM relies on the "enough
eyeballs" principle for finding major errors.
__
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> >> > A bug... there is few maps (even commercial) that "render" the flow
> >> > direction. I dont see this issue as a bug but perhaps a missing feature
> >> > or a request feature.
> >>
> >> It's a bug given the current tagging standard. All the eyeballs in the
> >> worl
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Nathan Edgars II
> wrote:
>
>> > A bug... there is few maps (even commercial) that "render" the flow
>> > direction. I dont see this issue as a bug but perhaps a missing feature
>> > or a request feature.
>>
>> It's a bug given the cur
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > A bug... there is few maps (even commercial) that "render" the flow
> > direction. I dont see this issue as a bug but perhaps a missing feature
> > or a request feature.
>
> It's a bug given the current tagging standard. All the eyeballs in the
> world can't find an e
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:19 AM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Nathan Edgars II
> wrote:
>> Anyway, bug filed: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3198
>
> A bug... there is few maps (even commercial) that "render" the flow
> direction. I dont see this issue as a bug but perhaps a missing feature
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > Mmh... It say that you can go on this waterway (on boat) only in this
> > direction. oneway is a restriction, not a direction...
>
> Yes, like oneway=yes on a road means you can only walk that way... oh.
No oneway apply to the main transport vehicule that the way is
I'm wondering if there's a reason this is beachvolleyball rather than
beach_volleyball. Most other tags seem to have underscores where
spaces would go between words.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listin
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Perhaps you can explain how I or anyone else will determine the
> direction of this waterway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=73765043
http://www.daftlogic.com/sandbox-google-maps-find-altitude.htm ?
> I don't know of any other feature
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Mmh... It say that you can go on this waterway (on boat) only in this
> direction. oneway is a restriction, not a direction...
Yes, like oneway=yes on a road means you can only walk that way... oh.
Anyway, bug filed: http://trac.open
- Original Message -
From: "Richard Fairhurst"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Waterway direction
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
Please please don't do that.
Navigable waterways do sometimes
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > Yes and the direction defined by the OSM way is a very old definition on the
> > wiki and a large consensus since years. Adding a oneway tag to solve a
> > Mapnik issue is what you know.
>
> Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
Mmh... It say t
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
Please please don't do that.
Navigable waterways do sometimes have oneway sections for boats. For
example, it's common on river bridges for one arch to be devoted to upstream
traffic, another to downstream.
Th
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Nathan Edgars II mailto:nerou...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I don't know of any other feature where the direction of the way means
something *without* another tag being added. I've traced a number of
waterways from aerials and never had any idea I was suppose
On 8/31/10 2:14 PM, Michael Barabanov wrote:
How about a kayaker having a hard time going against oneway=yes ? :)
F=ma
it's not just a good idea, it's the law.
richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.
How about a kayaker having a hard time going against oneway=yes ? :)
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:48 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> > wrote:
> >> 2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
> >>> A
2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> 2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
>>> Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
>> no, according to the oneway-definition in the wiki it says that
>> traffic is only allowed in this directi
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
>> Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
> no, according to the oneway-definition in the wiki it says that
> traffic is only allowed in this direction: it is a legal restriction
Gravit
2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
> Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way.
no, according to the oneway-definition in the wiki it says that
traffic is only allowed in this direction: it is a legal restriction
> It also makes it possible to see errors - how are
> you going to get e
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Pieren wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II
> wrote:
>>Someone else wrote but Pieren removed the attribution:
>>
>> > BTW if you add oneway=yes tag, it renders nicely on mapnik. As an
>> > example,
>> > converted Canadian NHN streams have
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> > BTW if you add oneway=yes tag, it renders nicely on mapnik. As an
> example,
> > converted Canadian NHN streams have oneway=yes.
>
> Yeah - what started this thread was someone objecting to my use of
> oneway=yes on a waterway :)
>
>
Y
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Michael Barabanov
wrote:
> BTW if you add oneway=yes tag, it renders nicely on mapnik. As an example,
> converted Canadian NHN streams have oneway=yes.
Yeah - what started this thread was someone objecting to my use of
oneway=yes on a waterway :)
_
BTW if you add oneway=yes tag, it renders nicely on mapnik. As an example,
converted Canadian NHN streams have oneway=yes.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 31.08.2010 14:40, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> > On 31.08.2010 13:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >> Personally I al
Well, chalk it up to "you learn something new every day." It makes a lot of
sense, and from what I've seen, is nearly universally used.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>
> I don't know of any other feature where the direction of the way means
> something *without* anothe
On 31.08.2010 14:40, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> On 31.08.2010 13:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> Personally I also map steps in a way that
>> the point from down to up.
> agree - but at steps that's not the common default, so I add
> direction=up always.
I'm using incline=up - which apparently is
On 31.08.2010 13:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Personally I also map steps in a way that
the point from down to up.
agree - but at steps that's not the common default, so I add
direction=up always.
regards
Peter
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@op
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:11 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> In the case you posted you could stand on Eastbrook Boulevard and see
> in which direction it flows.
And if it's not moving? Do I drop dye in and wait?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@opens
On 27.08.2010 00:11, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> Only using the relations I fear your problem is not solved, too:
> Consider a street where at the side is a sidewalk, and in between
> constantly changing a strip of grass, parking line, both of them, nothing.
> How would you render that only using tags
2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
> Perhaps you can explain how I or anyone else will determine the
> direction of this waterway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=73765043
> Should I ask one of the residents if I can go into their backyard and
> dump food coloring in the water?
If the direction of a
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:43 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:
>> motorway,motorway_lin
>>
>> In both the direction of the way means something withou another tag being
>> added. However most add oneway=yes to these.
also in junction=roundabout. Personally I also map steps in a way that
the point from
2010/8/31 Tom Chance :
> Based on this discussion, it seems that the best advice to put on my
> proposal for power generators is:
>
> - use site relations where the power=generator objects don't obviously
> overlap with the buildings they relate to, particularly where you are
> dealing with a clust
2010/8/31 Matthias Meißer :
> Is there any reason why you discuss this tag using this title?
> This is anoying cause my filter dont match.
Is there any reason you don't quote any text so that we would know
what you're talking about?
___
Tagging mailing
Is there any reason why you discuss this tag using this title?
This is anoying cause my filter dont match.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:43 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:
> motorway,motorway_link
>
> In both the direction of the way means something withou another tag being
> added. However most add oneway=yes to these.
Hmmm, true. They are however rendered differently on the most common
renderers, which actual
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:10 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> > a) you will add a note or FIXME to express this to the following
> > mapper. At least you have a 50% chance that it is already right.
>
> Perhaps you can explain how I or anyone else will determine the
> direction of this waterwa
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:10 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> a) you will add a note or FIXME to express this to the following
> mapper. At least you have a 50% chance that it is already right.
Perhaps you can explain how I or anyone else will determine the
direction of this waterway: http://www.
On 30 August 2010 14:18, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 8/30/10 9:06 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>> +1, but site-relations might still be useful in the context of power
>> generators. There are situations where the single objects do not
>> overlap but are side a side, for example you might have
2010/8/31 Nathan Edgars II :
>> Oops it's not lost. It's on the waterway=river and waterway=stream wiki
>> pages.
>
> So how do you specify that (a) you mapped a waterway but don't know
> the direction of flow, (b) it's a stagnant channel with no real flow,
> or (c) it's an artificial drainage can
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> yes, you can see that arthur st/wastell ct. in the east has an
> informal footway (the one of the link I modified from yours), in the
> west it hasn't. You can also see it on the nearmap aerial (even though
> it is a bit hard to see it because it "h
2010/8/31 Anthony :
> Huh? You realize this is the same location as your aerial, right?
> The aerial which you said showed no footway, and the google street
> view which you say does have the same lat/lon.
yes, you can see that arthur st/wastell ct. in the east has an
informal footway (the one o
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:27 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/8/31 Anthony :
>> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=-34.854348,138.535446&sll=28.0725,-82.548614&sspn=0.010981,0.01472&ie=UTF8&ll=-34.854396,138.535563&spn=0.000638,0.00092&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=-34.854406
2010/8/31 Anthony :
> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=-34.854348,138.535446&sll=28.0725,-82.548614&sspn=0.010981,0.01472&ie=UTF8&ll=-34.854396,138.535563&spn=0.000638,0.00092&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=-34.854406,138.535454&panoid=A6Al6CHbuWxD2rMFncHI3A&cbp=12,354.25,,0,21.14
42 matches
Mail list logo
