[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (meadow=pasture)
Hello, I proposed (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/pasture) landuse=pasture, but there seems to be more support for meadow=pasture together with landuse=meadow. Should we use meadow http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:meadow=pasture http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:meadow%3Dpastureaction=editredlink=1 to tell that a landuse http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse=meadow http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow is not primarily used for mowing (which is the default) but for grazing? (The animals can be defined in a different tag which is not the subject of the current voting.) To make it clear again: Original proposal was landuse=pasture, but voting is for meadow http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:meadow=pasture http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:meadow%3Dpastureaction=editredlink=1. Segatus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (meadow=pasture)
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Volker Paul volker.p...@v-paul.de wrote: Should we use meadow=pasture to tell that a landuse=meadow is not primarily used for mowing (which is the default) but for grazing? I guess most of the contributors add landuse from aerial imagery. And it is hard to distinguish meadow for mowing or for grazing even if you know the area (excepted if you are in the close neighbourhood or the owner yourself). I think we cannot guess what was the default until now. The best you can do is to create a subtag for both and count on contributors to supply such details. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
Il giorno 18/ago/2013, alle ore 15:54, Yuri D'Elia wav...@users.sourceforge.net ha scritto: Just for clarity, I was really hoping to find an already-established tagging scheme for these features (named topological areas, valleys), and bringing up the schemes I found in several other places rather than trying to overcomplicate things. what is already there is mostly in the natural namespace or sometimes tagged as place=locality (mostly on nodes). Our data model (scale, db) is not suited very well for topographic areas (there are usually more low scale). A better solution would IMHO be to have multilingual shape files for this kind of data and mix them at render time 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 18/ago/2013, alle ore 17:29, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm ha scritto: This is already done for ridges, with natural=ridge. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge It is used a bit. Not sure if any renderers show it. ridges are linear I think something similar could be used for valleys. -1, valleys are areas It won't really work for mountain ranges, as they are often not linear. could they be relations with summits and ridges? 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 18/ago/2013, alle ore 17:54, Christian Müller cmu...@gmx.de ha scritto: The term boundary does not make any implication on it's width. it has no width at all, it is a line A boundary may be defined on a nanometer, meter or kilometer scale. what doesn't say anything about a width, but tells you the grade of detail to expect Even political boundaries are in reality many meters wide, e.g. to defend them. Think of the historical inner german border for example. The Berlin Wall (the 2 walls and the space in between) was entirely on eastern German territory and wasn't the actual boundary (which was a few meters before the actual wall) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (meadow=pasture)
Il giorno 19/ago/2013, alle ore 11:16, Volker Paul volker.p...@v-paul.de ha scritto: I proposed (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/pasture) landuse=pasture, but there seems to be more support for meadow=pasture together with landuse=meadow. Should we use meadow=pasture to tell that a landuse=meadow is not primarily used for mowing (which is the default) but for grazing? +1 for subtagging meadow, -1 for defaults cheers, Martin___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] road side
On 2013-08-19 00:24, André Pirard wrote: Hi, There are many wiki articles mentioning the road side and tagging what's on it, e. g.parking. But I couldn't find how to tag a plain road side itself. It is not part of the roadway (chaussée) but it's part of the public highway (voie publique). Often in gravel, It is not a parking where cars are invited but cars may stop on it. It may be as wide as the roadway, often expropriated in a plan to widen the road. It's an area. Hence, the private properties are far recessed, also because roads are drawn thinner than real. The problem is that private driveways have to be connected to the roadway through it. That means, that those areas must be tagged as car passable. If the roadway is: highway=secondary name=itsname What must be the tagging of those areas? Just the same,maybe? With area=yes But what about routing that shouldn't go through it except to/from the properties? Any deterrent precaution? Under what article should this explanation be found? Sounds like you mean the shoulder. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder It should usually be tagged as an attribute on the highway, not mapped as a separate way or area. Craig ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] road side
On Aug 19, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: Sounds like you mean the shoulder. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder It should usually be tagged as an attribute on the highway, not mapped as a separate way or area. Craig +1 Except that I think in the UK they might call it the verge so we might have a dialect issue. -Tod ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] road side
for better or worse, shoulder has ~1500 uses, verge has zero. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=shoulder On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: On Aug 19, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: Sounds like you mean the shoulder. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder It should usually be tagged as an attribute on the highway, not mapped as a separate way or area. Craig +1 Except that I think in the UK they might call it the verge so we might have a dialect issue. -Tod ___ 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] road side
On 2013-08-19 14:37, Tod Fitch wrote: On Aug 19, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: Sounds like you mean the shoulder. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder It should usually be tagged as an attribute on the highway, not mapped as a separate way or area. Craig +1 Except that I think in the UK they might call it the verge so we might have a dialect issue. Shoulder is a fairly common term in the UK. Usually as in hard shoulder, ie a paved lane at the side of a motorway, which you are not allowed to drive on or park on, except for emergencies. See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder_%28road%29 A verge is quite different - usually a grassy area, next to the road. And may be rather rough, with bumps, holes, ditches, or obstructed with bushes or trees. So probably not a good idea to drive or park on it. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_verge Craig ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
Il giorno 18/ago/2013, alle ore 17:54, Christian Müller cmu...@gmx.de ha scritto: The term boundary does not make any implication on it's width. it has no width at all, it is a line -1. It may be _represented_ by a line, as declared by an entity. Even though the boundaries of territories may be declared using lines, you have to keep in mind that this is an abstraction. Often these lines just represent the center of a _buffer_ around a core area. A line of zero width is an abstraction for a boundary. Again, the term boundary does not make any implication on it's width. It may be represented by a line with zero width, but may just as well be by an area with constant or variing width as you walk around the core area to be defined. Of course, if you use an (buffer) area for definition, you may very well start to realize the recursive nature in trying to define a boundary - as you wonder about how to represent the boundary of the buffer area. Should it be a line of zero width or, again, be a buffer area? [..] This especially holds true for natural regions that originally might just have been declared by a mere description in a natural language. However you will find examples of this in other fields - take Bohr's model of the atom. The probability for an electron to reside in one shell won't change abruptly on the shells boundary abstracted by a sphere's surface of zero width. These shells are zones. Back to our matter of _topographic areas_ you will find a note about the abstract nature of boundaries elsewhere, e.g. in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundaries_in_landscape_history If you focus on the last part of the second sentence, quote the boundary can often be seen by differences in land use on either side. you may find that the concept of natural boundaries is about finding similar features on one of two adjacent sides, separating them from similar-found features on the other. So a boundary separates one side from the other, or connects one side to the other, depending on the glass being half empty or half full. The criteria taken into account when grouping similar features to form undivided areas and the precision of measurement together determine how sharp or fuzzy this boundary between areas will be. To simplify the fact that in practice you will never find a zero width boundary you could also substitute: A boundary is an area between areas. When institutions define natural regions you will sometimes see this reflected in coined terms such as boundary zone. These are crippling a sharp, mathematically used, zero width expressed boundary into what effectively is an area boundary, since it's not feasible to narrow down a natural area, i.e. zone to a point where a zero-width line abstraction comes to mind naturally. Even political boundaries are in reality many meters wide, e.g. to defend them. Think of the historical inner german border for example. The Berlin Wall (the 2 walls and the space in between) was entirely on eastern German territory and wasn't the actual boundary (which was a few meters before the actual wall) It all depends on what exactly you refer to. In day-to-day life you should not find too many people that think of a zero width line abstraction when talking about this histo-political boundary. It may have been at the time it was declared, but there are other people having more insight on this. And it may have been a bad example, yes. Greetings ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] road side
Tod Fitch wrote: Except that I think in the UK they might call it the verge so we might have a dialect issue. In the UK verge normally means a patch of grass at the side of a road, but if it's a paved area at the side of the motorway that's usually called the hard shoulder. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (man_made=silo)
Unless there is a objection, I'd like to bring to quick vote this already discussed proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dsilo http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Silo This tag has 20,000+ uses, and appears well established. Giving is a proper wiki page makes editor integration nicer. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Re : road side
Is there a generic term that could include shoulder and verge, 'road-side' maybe ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Re : road side
On Mon, August 19, 2013 11:11 am, yve...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a generic term that could include shoulder and verge, 'road-side' maybe ? In the US it would be shoulder for both: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/publications/flexibility/ch06.cfm Maybe shoulder=* Where * is one of gravel, grass, paved, etc. -tod ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (man_made=silo)
My understanding is that tags in general use don't need a vote. Assuming that's correct, I've updated the man_made=silo page with info from the proposal. (Although from taginfo, few existing silos have additional tags) Brad On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: Unless there is a objection, I'd like to bring to quick vote this already discussed proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dsilo http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Silo This tag has 20,000+ uses, and appears well established. Giving is a proper wiki page makes editor integration nicer. ___ 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] road side
On 2013-08-19 15:37, Tod Fitch wrote : On Aug 19, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: Sounds like you mean the "shoulder". See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder It should usually be tagged as an attribute on the highway, not mapped as a separate way or area. Craig +1 Except that I think in the UK they might call it the verge so we might have a dialect issue. Thanks for all the answers and the terminology issue (the French word verge is certainly not a shoulder ;-)) Unfortunately, as we can see it here, and even better here (kudos the renderers), it is an area, rather wide, and has to be tagged as an area if we want the limits of private properties to be correct. An issue is that routing software must find its way between the driveways and the road. I skip the details of the problem I solved by connecting the driveways to the road, which they don't, and I'm currently in the process of testing the parking. So, the basic problem is that the parking is unwanted and with what to replace it. On 2013-08-19 01:24, André Pirard wrote : It is not part of the roadway (chaussée) but it's part of the public highway (voie publique). Often in gravel, It is not a parking where cars are invited but cars may stop on it. It may be as wide as the roadway, often expropriated in a plan to widen the road. It's an area. Hence, the private properties are far recessed, also because roads are drawn thinner than real. The problem is that private driveways have to be connected to the roadway through it. That means, that those areas must be tagged as car passable. If the roadway is: highway=secondary name=itsname What must be the tagging of those areas? Just the same,maybe? With area=yes But what about routing that shouldn't go through it except to/from the properties? Any deterrent precaution? Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: At the risk that this is mapping for the renderer, but what Wolfgang proposes is exactly how it is done on traditional paper maps. It gives you the possibility to label some loosely defined entity, by creating some labelling along a non visible way. However, there is a serious complication in this, which consists in the fact that you would have to assign some kind of importance to the label to allow the renderer to decide at which zoom levels to show the labelling and with what kind of visibility. A traditional paper mapper makes visibility decisions, which automated agents have more trouble with. For example: imagine three ridges, all named, all about the same length. Which should show at low zoom? A cartographer might know that the local residents refer to the third ridge most often, and that it is somehow more important. An automated agent could try: but the data is likely outside of OSM. Should it google for the name and count the hits? Send an email to nearby mappers? --- Some manual tweaking of the importance has wide applicability in OSM, despite the obvious disagreements on the exact rankings/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name
Am 17.08.2013, 17:13 Uhr, schrieb fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: On 16.08.2013 19:05, Masi Master wrote: The problem is, that multipolygon don't work in 2 cases: - The areas touch each other. - The areas are multipolygons. A multipolygon as a member in a other multipolygon is not allowed. Either we allowed this, or we need any relation which collect these things... You can always split the ways and use the parts tagged with outer/inner I thought about a lake, which has some parts with a own name. If we need an additional multipolygon for the whole lake, first we had to cut off the island twice (in the lake and the sub-lake), and second we can not tag both lakes with natural water, because we don't want to add more water to the database than exists. So in my eyes, we need both (upper) features for multipolygons. It prevent errors if an island is not cut off twice by multipolygon:inner. And the whole lake can be combined by the sub-lakes, without the natural=water tag. This is a bit away from the new valley mountain discus, but has a connection to the first mail. Tagging should be thought-out with possible examples, if we don't want to change the tagging or live with a bad tagging. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (man_made=silo)
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com wrote: My understanding is that tags in general use don't need a vote. I see one use of silo=* in taginfo which is not something I would call general use... The tags name=name of the facility and operator shouldn't go on the silos themselves but on the polygon surrounding the whole facility. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
