Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Colin Smale
Tobias, thanks for your constructive response. On 14/06/2012 03:22, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 13.06.2012 23:48, Colin Smale wrote: Taking the access discussion to a higher level of abstraction, and without abandoning the key-value pair paradigm, I believe we are looking for a way of giving a tag

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
Hi! Maybe someone can help me defining the following access restriction using the 1.5 proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Length_and_time_restriction_2.jpg Right now I'm pretty lost. :-( Martin ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
I think I found a solution using a self-defined rule: access:motor_vehicle!rule.time=10:00-18:00 access:motor_vehicle!rule.width=5+ access:motor_vehicle?rule=no Can this be simplified somehow (using the 1.5 proposal)? 2012/6/14 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: Hi! Maybe someone can

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Flaimo
With the access 1.5 and default opening_hours syntax it would look like this: define the rules for forward and backward: • access!forwardrule.time=Mo-Fr 16:00-18:00 • access!forwardrule.direction=forward • access!backwardrule.time=Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00 • access!backwardrule.direction=backward apply

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
I tried to express this with the other proposal. I got this: motor_vehicle:(Mo-Fr 16:00-18:00):forward=no agricultural:(Mo-Fr 16:00-18:00):forward=yes goods:(Mo-Fr 16:00-18:00):forward=yes motor_vehicle:(Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00):forward=no agricultural:(Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00):forward=no goods:(Mo-Fr

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Pieren
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Back to my idea to move all 'variables' to the value : Let say we create a new access keyword : condition (or access_condition, cond, expr or whatever_you_like) suffixed by a number, eg. condition1, condition2, etc

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
Yes, short and readable (IMO), but how would you express a conditional maxspeed? I suggested something similar some time ago, but people didnt seem to be very happy with it. It was something like: condition:name=expression anykey:conditional(name)=value The obvious drawback is, that you always

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
I created a (still very small) table showing some examples for both proposals: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Imagic/Werkstatt2 If you have any signposts or can provide a currently missing solution please feel free to update this page or send me the link to the signpost/a description and

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Pieren
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote: Yes, short and readable (IMO), but how would you express a conditional maxspeed? You mean: access:lgv.speed=120 access:lgv?wet.speed=80 condition1=wet maxspeed:lgv=120 or 80 in condition1 If we consider that a

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Colin Smale
On 14/06/2012 11:19, Pieren wrote: On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Back to my idea to move all 'variables' to the value : Let say we create a new access keyword : condition (or access_condition, cond, expr or whatever_you_like) suffixed by a number, eg.

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Flaimo
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 10:31:17 +0200 From: Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools        tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate Message-ID:        

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Vonwald
2012/6/14 Flaimo fla...@gmail.com: Maybe someone can help me defining the following access restriction using the 1.5 proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Length_and_time_restriction_2.jpg alternate version: access:motorized.time=Mo-Su 00:00-10:00,18:00-24:00

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Tobias Knerr
On 14.06.2012 08:38, Colin Smale wrote: My concern with this is that it may become unwieldy and cumbersome with anything beyond fairly trivial cases such as your maxspeed example. For me, the goal is to make the common cases *easy*, and the rare complex cases *possible*. For the human

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Peter Wendorff
Hi. I'm a little bit afraid about the discussion here and would like to point out that a key IMHO should be different than a value. I like the idea of namespaces for keys, to be able to group tags that belong together, but I think, even namespaced stuff should belong keylike. A key

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Colin Smale
On 14/06/2012 12:53, Flaimo wrote: this notation has the same flaw as the current access scheme. it mixes transportation modes and user roles. motor_vehicle is a transportation mode. agricultural is a user role. not everywhere on this planet agricultural automatically means motor_vehicle. that

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Ilari Kajaste
Hi fellow mappers! Disclaimer: I'm a relative newbie to OSM, so feel free to take my opinions as such. (I'm not a newbie to usability, data structure definitions or programming though.) On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Colin Smale wrote: Whatever syntax is used, the *primary* requirement is that it is

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Colin Smale
On 14/06/2012 13:00, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 14.06.2012 08:38, Colin Smale wrote: My concern with this is that it may become unwieldy and cumbersome with anything beyond fairly trivial cases such as your maxspeed example. For me, the goal is to make the common cases *easy*, and the rare complex

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Tobias Knerr
On 14.06.2012 13:30, Colin Smale wrote: motor_vehicle:forward:(Mo-Fr 16:00-18:00) = agricultural At first glance this looks like a motor vehicle going forward between those times is considered agricultural. It doesn't feel very intuitive, based on the established key=value paradigm. Putting a

[Tagging] reservoir_type=tailings

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Today we had a discussion on talk-de how to map the different pools and reservoirs in a wastewater treatment plant. One of the tags that came up was reservoir_type=tailings, referenced from this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreservoir It is not completely clear, if this

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2012/6/14 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: each jurisdiction. I don't expect there to be total agreement about agricultural either. There are signs for no agricultural vehicles, which in my experience refer to the type of vehicle and not what it is being used for at that moment. But this

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Philip Barnes
The other usage of the term agricultural is the type of vehicle. In the UK agricultural vehicles are prohibited on motorways due to their slow speeds. But a farmer could use his Land Rover on a motorway as it is a car being used for agriculture. Phil -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 14/06/2012

[Tagging] access agricultural, WAS Re: Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2012/6/14 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk: The other usage of the term agricultural is the type of vehicle. In the UK agricultural vehicles are prohibited on motorways due to their slow speeds. But a farmer could use his Land Rover on a motorway as it is a car being used for agriculture.

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Colin Smale
Martin, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it had better be a duck... What I mean with this, is if the grammar is so English-like such that people are tempted to use constructions which are not (or not quite) supported by the grammar, or if the way it works is contrary to how

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Eckhart Wörner
Hi martinq, Am Donnerstag, 14. Juni 2012, 22:19:06 schrieb martinq: and many other variants. It is almost impossible to tag it wrong. I'm sorry, but every time I've heard a statement similar to you cannot get it wrong it just boiled down to the computer cannot tell you that it's wrong. This

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the conditions debate

2012-06-14 Thread Eckhart Wörner
Hi Colin, Am Freitag, 15. Juni 2012, 00:24:18 schrieb Colin Smale: If I were king I would be looking for a system that: * makes common cases easy Extended conditions: ☑ * makes complex cases possible Extended conditions: ☑ * makes each rule as standalone as possible (one sign - one rule)

Re: [Tagging] reservoir_type=tailings

2012-06-14 Thread Brad Neuhauser
I've only heard tailings used to refer to the waste from mining. Regarding wastewater treatment, I'm assuming other reservoir_types discussed were things like sedimentation and aeration? Brad On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Today we had a