This not tagging for renderer is quite misleading. I would always
agree that mapping incorrectly for any reason is wrong. But if the
mapping is accurate I do not mind that it is for renderer.
After all these discussions do not show any globally acknowledged way
of modelling reality and renderers/ro
2012/8/26 Markus Lindholm :
> On 25 August 2012 01:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> "purposeful" in this case translates to "mapping for the router" *1 in
>> OSM-speak.
>
> We're not supposed to map for the renderer nor the router. Exactly for
> whom are we to map?
I guess this is a misconcepti
On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 20:30 +0200, Erik Johansson wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Craig Wallace wrote:
> > On 26/08/2012 08:42, Markus Lindholm wrote:
> >>
> >> Also, no one has offered any other solution to the routing issue. The
> >> divider tag has been proposed, but I think it has be
On 26 August 2012 10:42, Markus Lindholm wrote:
> We're not supposed to map for the renderer nor the router. Exactly for
> whom are we to map?
For nothing, and no one. Which also means: for anything, everything and all.
The OSM approach - as I understand it - is to collect data about
reality in
Yes, you need to add "access=yes". The router does not know who may pass
a checkpoint and "access=yes" is definitely not the default for a
checkpoint (private would be more likely).
This is a general issue for all point type barriers where a default
access is unknown and mappers forget to add
This agricultural inspection station [1] has the tag barrier=checkpoint,
which OSRM appears to interpret as access=no. [2] Is this a bug in the
router, or should additional/different tags be used?
I've consulted the wiki, and can't find anything definitive about how this
should tagged. Any sugge
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Craig Wallace wrote:
> On 26/08/2012 08:42, Markus Lindholm wrote:
>>
>> Also, no one has offered any other solution to the routing issue. The
>> divider tag has been proposed, but I think it has been demonstrated
>> not to work, as routing decision are made on the
A proposal on how to tag if a beach got a blue flag and also how to add
information how the bathing water quality is according to the EU.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Beach_and_bathing_water_qu
ality
This have been dicussed before in july.
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.or
Hi,
First I have to excuse myself for this 100% off-topic mail. I nonetheless sent
it to this mailing list because here might(!) be the right target group.
I need a few volunteers for a short survey. They need to be native speakers,
preferable from GB, and not(!) involved in the legal or financ
On 26/08/2012 08:42, Markus Lindholm wrote:
Also, no one has offered any other solution to the routing issue. The
divider tag has been proposed, but I think it has been demonstrated
not to work, as routing decision are made on the node and not on the
line.
Where has it been demonstrated not to
probably we should also add a religion=christian (and maybe
denomination) and we could invent a new tag to express to whow the
object is dedicated.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
2012/8/26 Michael Krämer :
> How about historic=wayside_shrine? Unfortunately my French is rather limited
> so I basically could only look at the pictures in the Wikipedia. But this
> looked quite a bit like these "wayside shrines".
In the past I also used wayside_shrine for these (or similar one
On 25 August 2012 01:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2012/8/20 Markus Lindholm :
>> I've been mostly mapping in large cities, hardly anything in the
>> countryside. So I can only say that I've found it purposeful in the
>> city to map with two highways when legally separated.
>
>
> "purposeful" i
13 matches
Mail list logo