Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Am 07.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Richard Welty: On 10/7/13 1:08 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: I remember seeing such a cyclists must dismount on the narrow footway of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only was the footway narrow, [...] there's a cyclists must dismount sign for the footway along the Dunn Bridge between Albany and Rensselaer NY. well, if it is tagged as highway=footway you already have to dismount - otherwise it would be tagged as highway=cycleway. So where is the need for a bicycle=dismount here? I only see the practical need for a bicycle:dismount=no where bicycles are even not allowed dismounted. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Am 08.10.2013 20:16, schrieb Volker Schmidt: Just for your reference - while for many cases, I agree that bicycle=no is appropriate, there are quite interesting cycleways in the Czech Republic, where using bicycle=dismount for nodes on a path would make things easier for people editing OSM. Consider this: http://img.ct24.cz/cache/900x700/article/20/1936/193540.jpg http://img.ct24.cz/multimedia/videos/image/646/medium/193542.jpg (and don't ask me what idiot proposed a cycleway like this). This is the standard way of doing things here in Italy as well. At every end of cycleway sign you are legally supposed to dismount and cross the lateral road as pedestrian well, as it is also signed as the end of the legal footway/sidewalk - in my opinion it is no need for a _dismount_ there. In my opinion it is just a legal backdoor, that on these driveways (or serviceways?) you leave the legal cycleway/footway (with the regarding legal rights above the otherwise crossing traffic) and have to obey the crossing traffic for your own risk - even as walker, but also as cyclist. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
On 7 October 2013 17:09, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote: I wonder if it is useful to tag bicycle=dismount on ways. At least in Germany there is no official traffic sign despite of the existence of some. I don't think the issue here is really whether there is a need within instances of no cycling to distinguish between no bicycles at all and bicycles can be pushed. It seems from the posts below that there are plenty of situations where both cases apply, and it's clearly important information to know if you're planning cycling routes. We therefore do need a way to distinguish between the two cases. The big problem that I see is (especially in areas where the default position is no cycling = bikes can be pushed) that people have used bicycle=no on ways where cycling is banned but it's fine to push a bike. In other words the bicycle=* key has been used to express access rights for cycling, not for bicycles. As a result (at least on some areas) data users are forced to interpret bicycle=no as no cycling, but bikes can be pushed as a best guess at what the mapper meant. Thus bicycle=dismount actually add no further information, except that you can be more certain that pushing bike is allowed. If bicycle=* is currently widely used to express access rights for cycling, then I'd suggest we leave it like that, as it does the job pretty well. Rather than trying to add additional values to this key to capture access rigths for pushed/wheeled bicycles (e.g. bicycle=no_and_not_even_pushed), I'd suggest that we define an additional key: Something along the lines of bicycle:pushed=*. bicycle=* then tells you if you can ride a bike (as it does currently), while bicycle:pushed=* tells you if you can push/wheel it. Any cases of bicycle=dismount could be easily converted to bicycle=no, bicycle:pushed=yes. The only issue is cases of bicycle=no which have been used to mean no cycling and no pushing either. Perhaps it will be necessary to look at national defaults to handle this (i.e. what value of bicycle:pushed should be assumed if bicycle=no and there's no bicycle:pushed=* tag present). Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
2013/10/9 Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com f bicycle=* is currently widely used to express access rights for cycling, then I'd suggest we leave it like that, as it does the job pretty well. +1 Rather than trying to add additional values to this key to capture access rigths for pushed/wheeled bicycles (e.g. bicycle=no_and_not_even_pushed), I'd suggest that we define an additional key: +1 Something along the lines of bicycle:pushed=*. bicycle=* then tells you if you can ride a bike (as it does currently), while bicycle:pushed=* tells you if you can push/wheel it. not sure if this is a good key, as someone pushing a bicycle is not a cyclist, so not being allowed to push a bike is not a restriction for cyclists but for pedestrians. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Call for more feedbacks about emergency=aed or emergency=defibrillator
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On the units I've seen in the wild the term aed or AED appears in nearly every case, but the word defibrillator is frequently absent. On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Andrew Errington Yup, in Japan they are *everywhere*, with orange enclosures and big letters reading AED. From what I've seen in different pictures is that the label AED is never alone and you can read the word defibrillator translated into the local language for obvious reasons. I'm happy to see that in some countries, everybody knows what AED means... just think about the other countries. For example access It' not originaly my proposal but I can add some sub-tags ideas like accessing conditions or automated=no (where yes is considered as default). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Call for more feedbacks about emergency=aed or emergency=defibrillator
On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 18:06:52 Pieren wrote: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On the units I've seen in the wild the term aed or AED appears in nearly every case, but the word defibrillator is frequently absent. On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Andrew Errington Yup, in Japan they are *everywhere*, with orange enclosures and big letters reading AED. From what I've seen in different pictures is that the label AED is never alone and you can read the word defibrillator translated into the local language for obvious reasons. I'm happy to see that in some countries, everybody knows what AED means... just think about the other countries. I was. What are you going to call an AED in any language? If you have an A, an E, and a D sound in your language, that's what it will be (unless you're French, DAE, or Spanish, DEA). Besides, putting 'aed' in a tag does not mean that 'aed' should appear when it's rendered. Only the definition is important, and English is commonly used in OSM for that. Once someone has tagged something as 'aed' (since that is what it *is*), you can render it any way you like. Here are some examples from Japan: http://nottotallyrad.blogspot.kr/2008/10/aed-lessons-from-japan.html How shall we tag a vending machine with an AED storage compartment? Andrew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Power tower and pole usefulness
Hi Bryce, Did you mean you find the proposal a bit difficult to understand ? Yes it is. Nevertheless, many of tagging is optional, I can edit the document to show it in a more understandable way. This proposal doesn't prevent mappers to map large overhead transmission lines as landmark if they want to. It describe a consistent tagging scheme to allow mappers who want to get deeper in description. Cheers. *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2013/10/9 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM, François Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu wrote: You can send me any formal and constructive suggestion about that. Vote will begin shortly. Stay tuned. I've found the power proposal a bit much to follow... ... but have found it satisfying to map the simpler case of which street corridors have overhead vs. undergrounded wires (utilities=underground). I hope the eventual power proposal continues to have a place for those of us who map larger transmission lines as landmarks, even if the electrical characteristics are unknown or unimportant to us. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Hi, I wonder if there is somebody interested in tagging large areas. I started tagging some highlands, because there is nothing compareable to this. Tagging highlands might be not so much about ground survey, because there are usually no borders with a label, but they seem to be obviously necessary. Do you have any suggestions for the tagging? Refenreces http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/cracklinrain/diary/20178 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Cracklinrain/highlands Regards cracklinrain ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Tobias cra_klinr...@gmx.de Do you have any suggestions for the tagging? this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Basically our data model is not very suited to tag large areas, and these topographic areas tend to not have sharp borders, so they would IMHO request a new datatype. I might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. For tagging within osm the logical namespace would be under the natural key IMHO. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de wrote: Am 07.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Richard Welty: On 10/7/13 1:08 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: I remember seeing such a cyclists must dismount on the narrow footway of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only was the footway narrow, [...] there's a cyclists must dismount sign for the footway along the Dunn Bridge between Albany and Rensselaer NY. well, if it is tagged as highway=footway you already have to dismount - otherwise it would be tagged as highway=cycleway. So where is the need for a bicycle=dismount here? I only see the practical need for a bicycle:dismount=no where bicycles are even not allowed dismounted. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Bicycle:dismount=no is ambiguous. Many people are likely to interpret this as meaning you are allowed to be mounted on a bike, but not allowed to dismount from a bike. I think bicycle=no would be clearer in meaning. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de wrote: Am 07.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Richard Welty: On 10/7/13 1:08 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: I remember seeing such a cyclists must dismount on the narrow footway of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only was the footway narrow, [...] there's a cyclists must dismount sign for the footway along the Dunn Bridge between Albany and Rensselaer NY. well, if it is tagged as highway=footway you already have to dismount - otherwise it would be tagged as highway=cycleway. So where is the need for a bicycle=dismount here? you're making an assumption about tagging of ways that may not apply generally. in some parts of the US, we have true multi-use paths where pedestrians and cyclists are considered equal users. those are frequently tagged highway=path with access tags to denote the types of uses that are permitted. for the two bridges i mentioned in the Albany NY area, both are connected to the multi-use path network along the river and in OSM they're currently tagged highway=path/foot=yes/bicycle=dismount which accurately reflects the signage and legal usage. if we create tagging schemes where you need to know the whole footway = dismounted cyclist scheme, then you will end up with mistagging by those who aren't aware of the distinction. we are better off, i think, if the tagging maps in an obvious way to the signs we see. richard signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
2013/10/9 John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com I think bicycle=no would be clearer in meaning. you can insist on this, but we are not starting to map right now, and given that bicycle has the longstanding meaning of cyclist in osm, your proposal would imply a change on this meaning --- a tag that is used 461k times. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Can happen where pedestrians and stopping are prohibited, but cycling is allowed. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Nokia N9 On 09/10/2013 14:55 John F. Eldredge wrote: Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de wrote: Am 07.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Richard Welty: On 10/7/13 1:08 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: I remember seeing such a cyclists must dismount on the narrow footway of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only was the footway narrow, [...] there's a cyclists must dismount sign for the footway along the Dunn Bridge between Albany and Rensselaer NY. well, if it is tagged as highway=footway you already have to dismount - otherwise it would be tagged as highway=cycleway. So where is the need for a bicycle=dismount here? I only see the practical need for a bicycle:dismount=no where bicycles are even not allowed dismounted. Georg Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Bicycle:dismount=no is ambiguous. Many people are likely to interpret this as meaning you are allowed to be mounted on a bike, but not allowed to dismount from a bike. I think bicycle=no would be clearer in meaning. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com 2013/10/9 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. there is also the proposal for mountain_range, ridge, ... cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. there is also the proposal for mountain_range, ridge, ... Thank you for both hints so far. Cheers cracklinrain ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Bad idea. Replace region by boundary or multipolygon and you get it. Not really a good proposal trying to reinvent the wheel with different words. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
this is a topic discussed several times in precedence, you can find discussions here and also on talk-de (your email suggests you understand German). I read the last discussion about natural/mapping large areas a little bit. Actually my preparation was mainly based on the missing content at the wiki. Seems to be as if I could start a some documentation of the discussions at the lists and other ideas. Basically our data model is not very suited to tag large areas, and these topographic areas tend to not have sharp borders, so they would IMHO request a new datatype. A datatype for blurry large areas or just for blurry areas? Borders are also multipolygons and of the same size. So the size itself is not the problem - or is it indeed? I might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. A parallel project, let's name it OpenGeoMap, would neccessarily require to merge the projects in a way that does not bother anybody. Regarding other natural tags like natural=desert etc and borders such a project would be a great idea. Regarding other data types it is not a benefit I would say, because keeping the data seperated would deny to relate them to each other. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Tobias cra_klinr...@gmx.de It might be a better idea to start a parallel project (e.g. with shapefiles in a more adequate scale), e.g. starting with natural earths physical dataset and adding translations and refinements. This dataset could be crowdsourced and distributed in a license compatible with osm in order to make them mixable. A parallel project, let's name it OpenGeoMap, would neccessarily require to merge the projects in a way that does not bother anybody. in my understanding you would not have to merge them, you could use them in parallel (say as an overlay, or an additional layer in rendering phase). In the end, OSM is very detailed, much more detailed than these topographical regions, take the black forest from your example: it is usually divided into the southern, middle and the northern black forest, but according to newer classification divided into far more sub-entities as can be seen here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturr%C3%A4umliche_Gliederung_des_Schwarzwaldes. Still, all these subregions cannot be drawn in a spatial definition comparable to the osm data, they are rather blurry. From looking at this table in wikipedia it seems to depend on the geological characteristics where they put them, i.e. this won't be surveyable by laymen and probably other than specialist knowledge you'll also need specialist equipment to survey (because we are talking about underground properties). As a solution we'd copy from the experts ;-) It depends what you wanted to do with this data, if you want to draw a nicely curved text Schwarzwald on a zoom 9 tile you will not need very detailed data, if you want to decide whether a given house is still in the Schwarzwald or already in the rhine valley you'll probably find out that also a very detailed map still might leave this up to its individual definition of both (if its on the border the answer might depend on who you ask, and an answer like on the border of both might be more reasonable than deciding for one). Well, you could use a rendered osm background (i.e. a slippy map) and draw above, say in QGis or similar, some rough polygons and refine these initial polygons iteratively when you notice that there are problems, but where would you get the information from? In the end it seems more promising to collect and reassemble the findings of experts (e.g. these maps published in Wikipedia and based on the Bundesanstalt für Landeskunde) and distribute them (if legally possible) as a unified dataset with translations (i.e. you will have to create a consistent hierarchy, name and translation columns as attributes for the geometry). You will have the spatial reference so you could at any time merge this dataset with OSM if you needed to. Regarding other natural tags like natural=desert etc and borders such a project would be a great idea. also these other tags like desert are not yet in general usage, and they suffer from similar problems (blurry borders, unclear definitions, not easily surveyable). Regarding other data types it is not a benefit I would say, because keeping the data seperated would deny to relate them to each other. see above, they will always relate to each other because of the geocoding, and they would never fit 100% because of the different scales involved by their nature (how they are defined / get surveyed). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
2013/10/9 John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com After I posted this message, I read another message suggesting bicycle:push=no, which is a better suggestion than bicycle=no. I still believe that something along foot:bicycle-pushing=no would be better, as a cyclist who dismounted his bicycle is not a cyclist but a pedestrian. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
btw.: here you can find maps with the natural regions (apparently complete) of Germany in 1:200.000. There is a copyright hint: © ehemaliges Institut für Landeskunde, mit freundlicher Genehmigung des Bundesinstituts für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschunghttp://www.bbsr.bund.de/cln_016/sid_226F01ABD534381195FDEBFD0ECF614F/BBSR/DE/Home/homepage__node.html?__nnn=trueim BBR Stab Wissenschaftliche Dienste), maybe you can ask the BBR / BBSR how they feel about releasing these as open data (if not done already). http://geographie.giersbeck.de/karten/ cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/10/9 John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com After I posted this message, I read another message suggesting bicycle:push=no, which is a better suggestion than bicycle=no. I still believe that something along foot:bicycle-pushing=no would be better, as a cyclist who dismounted his bicycle is not a cyclist but a pedestrian. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Good point. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Am 09.10.2013 16:32, schrieb Pieren: On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Another starting point could be the following (abandoned) proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Region and its discussion page. Bad idea. Replace region by boundary or multipolygon and you get it. Not really a good proposal trying to reinvent the wheel with different words. Just for clarification: I suggested the wiki page as a starting point to look into past discussions around this topic. I fully agree that this proposal is abandoned for good reason. Regarding the idea itself I agree with Martin: I do not think something large scale and fuzzy like the Black Forest should be mapped in the database at all. If you think about this a bit longer it would totally be reasonable to create a giant multipolygon for an ocean or a continent - to me that's no good idea. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Michael Krämer ohr...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding the idea itself I agree with Martin: I do not think something large scale and fuzzy like the Black Forest should be mapped in the database at all. If you think about this a bit longer it would totally be reasonable to create a giant multipolygon for an ocean or a continent - to me that's no good idea. I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
Am 09.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Pieren: I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 In fact that's a pretty good example for me: I think the line is at least off by a few kilometers near the western part of the German-Austrian border ;-) I noticed that there are also entries for the continents but just single nodes. That's probably a more pragmatic approach to make things searchable in Nominatim. Michael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping the Black Forest
2013/10/9 Pieren pier...@gmail.com I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607 yes, I am aware of that, but decided to ignore them. My guess is that they will soon be broken and repeatedly be broken until at some point it will be decided to delete them, similar to the italian landmass ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
