Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines
2012/1/21 Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com: The sign carries the name of this area. It is sitting in the middle of a short section of split carriageway residential road indicating that you are now entering the Sharingbrook neighborhood. I would say that includes the road. Yes, I'd also see roads as parts of neighbourhoods, but neighbourhoods aren't landuse, they are settlement parts and should be tagged within the place-namespace. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dneighbourhood cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines
On 17/01/2012 15:41, Jo wrote: For what it's worth. When I start rendering/printing maps based on OSM, I think it's extremely ugly if the landuse is not 'connected' to the roads, i.e. that the landuse uses separate parallel ways with a small space in between for its definition. That would be factually incorrect. Also remember that the way for the road represents an infinitesimally narrow centre line. Any width the road might have is dictated by the rendering. Example of why not to join landuse to ways: Imagine you joined a landuse=field to a road. This field has a hedge boundary with a gate in it for a footpath to pass through. In this scenario the gate tag would also be on the road indicating there's a barrier to the traffic. Clearly wrong. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Tagging Inland Marinas, Ports, Docks and Basins
I'm fairly new to OSM but I am interested in adding the data on and around inland waterways in the UK as I have a boat and find that the detail on Bing and Google maps are very poor for showing how to get to local amenities on foot from a waterway. I am thoroughly confused however how best to tag water spaces built for the mooring of boats. Historically, in the late 1700's early 1800's, when such places were constructed for freight they were variously called docks, basins or ports and were used for the loading and unloading of boats, or trans-shipment between boats, as well as the mooring of boats awaiting for orders. Today, of course, the majority of these are used for mooring leisure boats and have been joined by new constructions which are usually called marinas. Most of these are scooped out of farmland although some leverage existing flooded quarries. Potlatch offers an icon for tagging marinas but the tag it applies is leisure=marina which according to the wiki should be used to cover the full extent of facilities associated with a marina including any land-based services. I find it regularly applied just to the water space with another tag to make sure it renders as water; often waterway=canal which renders as a line on some renderers even though it is a drawn as a polygon. I've also found inland marinas tagged waterway=dock which broadly matches the wiki description if you substitute boats for ships in the description. Although it doesn't specifically mention mooring, which would also be a function inherently supported by a ship dock as well as a boat dock. Many marinas include some kind of slipway or dry-dock for boat repair. I've also are also some marinas tagged as landuse=basin, but I notice that landuse=reservoir has been deprecated to be replaced by natural=water+water=reservoir. On this basis, why hasn't landuse=basin waterway=dock been similarly deprecated? I have to say I find natural=water counter intuitive for man-made structures that contain water, but if this is the way forward I'll go with the flow. In which case a marina should be tagged natural=water, but then water =? marina,mooring,dock, basin,port? Or doesn't it matter? Is it good to capture the historical usage? I assume boat=yes could also be added to indicate it a navigable water space? Advice please!//Mike ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging Inland Marinas, Ports, Docks and Basins
I use waterway=dock, leisure=marina Take a look at my two local marinas on the Ripon Canal: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.12314lon=-1.50001zoom=16layers=M ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines
2012/1/22 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com On 17/01/2012 15:41, Jo wrote: For what it's worth. When I start rendering/printing maps based on OSM, I think it's extremely ugly if the landuse is not 'connected' to the roads, i.e. that the landuse uses separate parallel ways with a small space in between for its definition. That would be factually incorrect. Also remember that the way for the road represents an infinitesimally narrow centre line. Any width the road might have is dictated by the rendering. Example of why not to join landuse to ways: Imagine you joined a landuse=field to a road. This field has a hedge boundary with a gate in it for a footpath to pass through. In this scenario the gate tag would also be on the road indicating there's a barrier to the traffic. Clearly wrong. Since it's obvious that either I understood how to use landuse tagging, or there is no consensus on how it has to be used, I'll continue by mostly ignoring it, as I did before. It's a lot of work to join landuses together and make them contiguous to the roads where appropriate, so I'll let it be. I might even start filtering it out with JOSM, as the noise it clearly is. For me landuse was a way of indicating the general use of the land. If people want to start exaggerating even further than I do myself then I'll let it be. This is an area where I mostly started from zero and which I've been mapping extensively: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.9162lon=4.9975zoom=14layers=M I mapped it the summer before bing imagery became available and postprocessed a bit further about one year ago. I hope I can get back there this summer and go on with it. I'm not planning to start mapping the landuse in the ridiculous way I've seen around that turning circle though. It's time consuming enough as it is to map larger areas. OTOH, even though I think it's rididiculous, I won't remove it, if I find such landuses, although my fingers would itch to use Ctrl-J on them... As for automatically postprocessing those, in order to use them to create maps, I don't see how I would go about programming that. Which means that in my private copy I'd probably have to remove all of them and then apply more general landuses before being able to print maps. This is fine if I only need a map once of an area, but not feasible if I need them regularly. Polyglot ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging Inland Marinas, Ports, Docks and Basins
2012/1/22 Mike Valiant mike_vali...@hotmail.com: Potlatch offers an icon for tagging marinas but the tag it applies is leisure=marina which according to the wiki should be used to cover the full extent of facilities associated with a marina including any land-based services. +1, I'd also tag it in this way I find it regularly applied just to the water space with another tag to make sure it renders as water; you can extend the area of the marina in these cases. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines
Nathan Edgars II wrote: So much for your ground truth, eh? [...] Obviously you know nothing about this specific case, and should not be making bogus suggestions about tagging. Could we calm this down a bit, please? Thank you. Richard tagging@ admin -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Re-OSM-talk-Mapping-guidelines-tp7196185p7214116.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
