Re: [Tagging] amenity=police
office=government ? i was just looking at something similar with immigration offices, oft frequented by travelers. embassies, yes. in-country immigration offices, no. -- Alex On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: To move this forward I've put this in proposal draft form: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dranger_station While the amenity amenity tag is overloaded, it seems more practical to put ranger stations next to fire and police stations, at least for now. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] amenity=police
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Alex Rollin alex.rol...@gmail.com wrote: office=government ? i was just looking at something similar with immigration offices, oft frequented by travelers. embassies, yes. in-country immigration offices, no. That's broader, and works for some ranger stations. But private natural area landowners also have ranger stations, which can be understood as the go-to place for permits, police issues, maintenance issues, maps, guidance, etc. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Re : Re : Tagging of topographic areas with a name
I meant any like in any tag you want, not all :) For mountains, users might find reasonable to group peaks and ridges, but the rental holiday may feel it belongs too, and not necessarily the baker. Anyway the question is, does this belong to osm ? I already found some polygons in valleys with a name on it, so I guess it's already in. Yves ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:19 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: On 06.08.2013 16:27, Yuri D'Elia wrote: Fortunately, the boundaries of the area are not important in themselves. Nobody renders valley or mountain group borders. But we *do* use such boundaries for name placement. I think the best would be to invent a new boundary type. boundary=topologic or geographic topologic/geographic=valley/cordillera/mountain_range/region and some ranking for the categories As the borders are often not that clear and also not that important they should not be rendered and do not have to be that exact but for rendering names like in [1] we need them. This solution can also apply to bodies of water that are not whole lakes or rivers. We currently (I think) do not tag the extent (even if fuzzy) of seas, bays, inlets, coves, fjords, and the like. The International Hydrographic Organization has published a document delimiting the oceans and major seas of the world: Limits of Oceans Seas, Special Publication No. 23. Smaller bodies of water may be delimited by national governments. The natural=coastline can be used to build up area relations of the proposed type=topologic/geography and extra ways can be used elsewhere. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] amenity=police
Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 08:17, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com ha scritto: office=government ? i was just looking at something similar with immigration offices, oft frequented by travelers. embassies, yes. in-country immigration offices, no. That's broader, and works for some ranger stations. it is far too broad IMHO, if we tagged everything on that level of detail we had just a total of 15 tags and it would be hard to make any practical sense out of the data... Cheers, Martin___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 10:00, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com ha scritto: This solution can also apply to bodies of water that are not whole lakes or rivers. We currently (I think) do not tag the extent (even if fuzzy) of seas, bays, inlets, coves, fjords, and the like. don't know about the rest, but there are 3 natural=bay in the db http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=natural%3Dbay cheers, Martin___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 10:00, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com ha scritto: We currently (I think) do not tag the ***extent*** (even if fuzzy) of seas, bays, inlets, coves, fjords, and the like. don't know about the rest, but there are 3 natural=bay in the db http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=natural%3Dbay ... and 29000 of them are nodes, i.e. no extent. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=bay Geir Ove ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
The best way I can think of for drawing oceans, is to put a tag on all natural=coastline ways that are bordering it. Something like ocean:name:en=Atlantic ocean. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
2013/8/7 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com The best way I can think of for drawing oceans, is to put a tag on all natural=coastline ways that are bordering it. Something like ocean:name:en=Atlantic ocean. If you look closely onto this you'll see that there are not only the oceans but a whole hierarchy of names seas and oceans and parts of them, so there is not only one name per coastline but a lot of them. Dependent on the scale of your map you'll emphasize different ones and omit others. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
2013/8/7 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com If you look closely onto this you'll see that there are not only the oceans but a whole hierarchy of names seas and oceans and parts of them, so there is not only one name per coastline but a lot of them. Dependent on the scale of your map you'll emphasize different ones and omit others. +1 That's why I chose ocean, because I'm sure there's only one on each coastline. There can be more than one bay or sea, like the Mediterranean and the Adriatic sea. Relations are not possible, there's too much ways, so the only thing I can think of are tags like sea_level_1:name:en=Mediterranean sea, sea_level_2:name:en=Adriatic sea. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station
After reading the discussion and incorporating what I could, I am moving http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dranger_station to the next step. Please comment per voting procedures, here or on the talk page. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station
Note there is overlap between amentiy=ranger_station and tourism=information. A ranger station generally provides information in addition to other services. In the USA ranger stations have well established symbols, distinct from those used for tourist information only sites. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
On 06.08.2013 15:51, Yuri D'Elia wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/45.2466/6.0866 which has been tagged with a multipoligon relation. Unfortunately, the relation has some problems: - not rendered anywhere? This is a super-relation, with other relations as members. This is not allowed for multipolygon relations. It should rather be a type=collection relation. This is how water areas such as riverbanks use to be joined, and I use collection relations for sets of rocks etc. too. Don't expect dumb renderers like Mapnik to render superrelations, though. It seems to me that the closest tagging scheme might be a loose area with place=locality. Would that be a good idea? That depends on what the name belongs to. If it's the name of a lake, forest, or other physical feature, place=* would be just wrong. I saw several proposed tags in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Valley but not really an official tagging scheme. Valley names are very important features for a topographic map. These proposals are somewhat obsolete, as natural=* has widely been accepted as the key for all geomorphological features. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural, group 3. A valley is just the complement of a ridge or arete. Just draw a line along the valley and tag it with natural=valley. Similarly, we have areas for entire mountain groups, which are fundamental for a topographic map in the alps. Again, the boundaries of such areas are not so important, but it's mostly used as an indication for the name placement. natural=mountain_range is already in use for the Alps. The mountain groups within the Eastern Alps are tagged place=region, see the members of relation 2113486. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: After reading the discussion and incorporating what I could, I am moving http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dranger_station to the next step. Please comment per voting procedures, here or on the talk page. I like your proposal. It would simplify mapping in parks with dedicated ranger stations. Since there are 59 National Parks on our radar, each with a least one ranger station, often more, the feature will be used throughout the US. A Wikipedia search list over 6,000 results for ranger stations. The first few pages appear to be sites that should be mapped. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: It should rather be a type=collection relation. I really hate type=collection. One of the worst idea in OSM. All relations are collections. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway highway
I don't see how those tags are mutually exclusive. As for a dam being a waterway, makes about as much sense as highway=traffic_signals to me. On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 7:13 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, The waterway=dam http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dam definition is all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) Can I have waterway=dam highway=* ? I feel like Osmose hides nearby ready to jump. The actual case I meet is one of a dam incorrectly tagged as a bridge. And I inherit a menagerie of highway related attributes. And, once again, I'm baffled by a dam being a waterway, like a crossing being a highway and an artificial water reservoir being a natural. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway highway
Am Thu, 08 Aug 2013 02:13:38 +0200 schrieb André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com: Hi, The waterway=dam http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dam definition is all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) Can I have waterway=dam highway=* ? You could map the dam as area with the highway crossing it. Regards, Thomas ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] waterway highway
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:13 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.comwrote: The waterway=dam http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dam definition is all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) ... And, once again, I'm baffled by a dam being a waterway, like a crossing being a highway and an artificial water reservoir being a natural. I might just tag that with two ways, especially if the shape of the dam eventually diverges from the highway running over it. It just seems cleaner to have it just be a highway, no? waterway=dam level=0 name=Damn Dam highway=primary level=1 bridge=yes name=Damn View Highway I might share nodes between the two ways (if I'm feeling like a neatnick with no regard for iD and Potlach users). One day someone might decide to flesh out the dam way and turn it into an area for an example look at Boulder Dam / Hoover Dam, which is a waterway AND a building AND a dessert topping. Good thing it's not a highway also, as that would cross the line. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
