Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] refs describing routes instead of ways

2010-12-20 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: the way's ACTUAL reference number. Meaning? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] refs describing routes instead of ways

2010-12-20 Thread Toby Murray
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I'm wondering why we still are trying the whole describe the route on the way method of handling the ref= tag on ways. Because it is currently the only way to get any kind of highway shield rendered. Get relation-based

Re: [Tagging] bridge=aqueduct mapped as polygon riverbank?

2010-12-20 Thread Wyo
yvecai wrote: In any case, for routing it is better to keep a way waterway=canal in the middle, no? Sure, any type of waterway. Some add a tag boat=yes albeit I don't think its sufficient since boats can be any size. There's a german article in Wikipedia which describes them better

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Rendering locks in Mapnik/Osmarender

2010-12-20 Thread Wyo
Wyo wrote: I've set up a proposal for rendering locks on waterways in Mapnik/Osmarender. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rendering_locks_in_Mapnik Rendering lock on waterway seems to me a rather important feature when planning holidays nearby. Locks are not only important

Re: [Tagging] Operator in leisure=stadium?

2010-12-20 Thread Diego Woitasen
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Diego Woitasen di...@woitasen.com.ar wrote: On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Robert Elsenaar rob...@elsenaar.info wrote: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/ Robert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Alan Mintz Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 6:46 AM To:

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Rendering locks in Mapnik/Osmarender

2010-12-20 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Wyo wrote: Hmm, no remarks at all. Now what shall i do next to get this into renderers? Write and submit good-quality patches for Mapnik itself, osm2pgsql and the standard stylesheet. I believe Mapnik itself isn't yet capable of rotated icons (see slide 8 at

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Rendering locks in Mapnik/Osmarender

2010-12-20 Thread Lennard
On 20-12-2010 22:29, Wyo wrote: Hmm, no remarks at all. Now what shall i do next to get this into renderers? In the case of mapnik: wait. The current version used on osm.org cannot rotate symbols, and we haven't transitioned to the yet-to-be-released mapnik2 either. -- Lennard

[Tagging] Deprecated features - highway=disused

2010-12-20 Thread dies38061
I came across http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Disused_road today. I applied the proposal page template, indicating that the proposal had been obsoleted, as noted in the commentary on the page. Looking at the tag info for highway

Re: [Tagging] Deprecated features - highway=disused

2010-12-20 Thread Craig Wallace
On 20/12/2010 22:23, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote: I came across http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Disused_road today. I applied the proposal page template, indicating that the proposal had been obsoleted, as noted in the commentary on the page. Looking at the tag info for

Re: [Tagging] Deprecated features - highway=disused

2010-12-20 Thread john
It is not uncommon for stretches of old highways to become private roads if existing driveways still connect to them, or to be closed to motor traffic but be used as hiking or bicycle trails. The latter usage is particularly common with old bridges. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re:

Re: [Tagging] Deprecated features - highway=disused

2010-12-20 Thread Colin Smale
As the concept of disused could apply to millions of different things, I would prefer to see a more generic system which could be applied uniformly. I would like to see the life_cycle tag resurrected (proposed in 2008) something like this: life_cycle=planned (only exists on paper)

[Tagging] 0-0 address lines

2010-12-20 Thread Nathan Edgars II
There are a lot of ways in Canada like http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/71852646 that have addr:housenumber = 0 at both ends. Is this a bad import or legitimate way of tagging? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] 0-0 address lines

2010-12-20 Thread Sam Vekemans
Hi, You might want to ask the talk-ca list... instead of tagging list :) It's the default value for CanVec when the data is not available. Every 6 months, the source data (as Natural Resources Canada made .osm files) gets updated. So more provinces will have housenumbers, in time :) ... the 1st

Re: [Tagging] 0-0 address lines

2010-12-20 Thread Sam Vekemans
... and the reason for having a '0' was to show where (geometrically) it will be. So if people do know what the housenumber range actually is (or want to extrapolate it from statsCan) they are welcome to. cheers, Sam On 12/20/10, Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, You might

Re: [Tagging] 0-0 address lines

2010-12-20 Thread Nathan Edgars II
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, You might want to ask the talk-ca list... instead of tagging list :) Why would I want to subscribe to talk-ca just to ask a tagging question? It's the default value for CanVec when the data is not available.