Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread john
Two feet wide is about what I had estimated by looking at the photograph, which is why I commented that the bicycle might fit into the bike lane, but part of the rider would have to extend over the line into the automobile lane. Your wheels would be more-or-less atop the lane divider stripe. -

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Anthony
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > Not having a sense of depth, I'd guess in the narrow spot it's about 4 > feet wide, which is, believe it or not, the federal minimum width for > bike lanes (though I wish Ray would hurry up and adopt Oregon's 6 foot > lanes and make them manda

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/01/2011 09:15 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Nathan Edgars II > wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Dave F. >> wrote: >>> Is the adjacent path shared? if so, note that that would be the safer >>> passage. >> >> It's a sidewalk, and it's most likely not safer be

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 12/31/2010 04:27 PM, Anthony wrote: > Any suggestions how to tag this? > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IMG_7491.JPG As part of the existing way, just tag it "cycleway=lane" to indicate that there's a restricted lane reserved for bicycles. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sluice_gate

2011-01-02 Thread John Smith
On 3 January 2011 11:59, Paul Norman wrote: > I've set up a proposal for sluice_gates, which are typically found on small > waterways in agricultural areas at > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sluice_gate You might want to add an example photo for those not familiar with thes

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/01/2011 10:52 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Greg Troxel > wrote: >> By trying to objectively tag the reality (not entirely possible of >> course), we also avoid all the debates about what is and isn't safe in >> general, and where the dividing line is. > > In this c

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/01/2011 01:28 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Robert Elsenaar > wrote: >> "hazard:bicycle" is the other way round. If there is a key/value e.g. >> "hazard=narrow" then you can easily use "cycleway:hazard=narrow" to tag the >> fact that the hazard tag is specifi

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/01/2011 07:54 AM, Dave F. wrote: > Is the adjacent path shared? if so, note that that would be the safer > passage. Most states prohibit bicycles from sidewalks, or limit their speed to a walking speed on sidewalks, making them useless for bicyclists. That, and nobody expects vehicles to b

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Johnson
On 01/01/2011 07:08 AM, Ed Hillsman wrote: > On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Anthony > wrote: >>/ Any suggestions how to tag this? > />/ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IMG_7491.JPG/ > > If the "lane" is too narrow to function safely as a

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sluice_gate

2011-01-02 Thread Paul Norman
I've set up a proposal for sluice_gates, which are typically found on small waterways in agricultural areas at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sluice_gate ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Anthony
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote: > I do not want someone telling me "this is not relevant enough" and > having the right to delete my edits. Then make edits which are relevant enough, or pay for your own servers to store them. ___

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Ralf Kleineisel
On 01/02/2011 08:45 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > You seem to believe that people make up their own ontologies in > isolation. But that's observably not true. Mappers /voluntarily/ use > established tags, as long as they know them and don't fundamentally > disagree with them. For obvious reasons: They

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Ralf Kleineisel
On 01/02/2011 07:52 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > On 02/01/2011 19:24, Ralf Kleineisel wrote: >> I prefer this over being told what I may map and what not. > Does that not depend on whether you are working for yourself, or as a > part of a cooperative project? Do you not care whether others can use > w

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Tobias Knerr
Colin Smale wrote: > Anarchy will > produce "WOM" - Write Only Memory - whereby everybody adds their own > little bit of information using their own ontology, resulting in minimal > data quality. We don't have an anarchy. We have an informal meritocracy, where people influence the whole depending

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Anthony
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote: > On 01/02/2011 05:42 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote: > >> This was a expected answer. I frequently try to discover the reason OSM >> mappers accepting this anarchistic rule of NOT having tagging rules at all. >> What are the advantages for this? >

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Robert Elsenaar
Exactly, loners has no use for the project. I do not map for storing data but for the use of my data on maps. Lets present the first OSM Common Rule: "OSM does not restrict people to map anything. Only when a object is frequently mapped, The OSM community will descide what tags should be used

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Colin Smale
On 02/01/2011 19:24, Ralf Kleineisel wrote: On 01/02/2011 05:42 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote: This was a expected answer. I frequently try to discover the reason OSM mappers accepting this anarchistic rule of NOT having tagging rules at all. What are the advantages for this? I prefer this over be

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Ralf Kleineisel
On 01/02/2011 05:42 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote: > This was a expected answer. I frequently try to discover the reason OSM > mappers accepting this anarchistic rule of NOT having tagging rules at all. > What are the advantages for this? I prefer this over being told what I may map and what not. __

Re: [Tagging] Ultimate list of approved keys

2011-01-02 Thread Robert Elsenaar
This was a expected answer. I frequently try to discover the reason OSM mappers accepting this anarchistic rule of NOT having tagging rules at all. What are the advantages for this? - robert - -Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Richard Weait Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 10:08 PM To: T