Well, that road is certainly not a good example of what we have in Alaska.
Our unpaved roads are all-weather roads and can tolerate a lot of rain.
The great majority would not degrade to that condition. They are a mixture
of sand, clay and gravel optimized for the purpose and laid down on top of
a
2014/1/1 Fernando Trebien
> Yet, the last time I talked about life cycle here (2013-09-28, on
> abandoned hiking trails), I felt that the 3rd approach
> (:=) had most support.
+1, different keys (by prefixing) help avoiding misinterpretations, while
additional keys for combination (like "statu
2014/1/3 Russell Deffner
> Maybe more so if you are in Colorado, as sales of Marijuana to adults (for
> recreation/any use) began the morning of the first. Therefor I propose the
> usage of shop=marijuana for this new business, have created a wiki-page for
> the proposal -
> http://wiki.openstre
On 1/2/14 8:31 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> I think of the word "flat" as being distinctly British. I have only
> rarely heard the word "flat" used to describe and apartment in the
> U.S. When I first glanced at the beginning of this thread I thought
> the OP was referring to flats of flowers. LOL
f
I think of the word "flat" as being distinctly British. I have only rarely
heard the word "flat" used to describe and apartment in the U.S. When I
first glanced at the beginning of this thread I thought the OP was
referring to flats of flowers. LOL
Cheers,
Dave
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:21 PM,
2014/1/1 Fernando Trebien
> Listing 1: way count of paved ways
>
> 2193896 asphalt
> 1479671 paved
> 195633 concrete
> 174309 paving_stones
> 111608 cobblestone
>
I think you can clearly see here that we need more different values for
asphalt ^^
cheers,
Martin
+1 for rendering unpaved roads d
On 2 January 2014 15:57, Fernando Trebien wrote:
> I like your idea of splitting surface values into paved and unpaved
> tags quite a lot, Matthijs. It allows certain values (such as
> compacted) to be considered paved or unpaved by different communities,
> and it's easy to identify a contradictio
Konfrare Albert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Another option: obstacle=heap[1]
> Regards
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Obstacle
>
>
> 2014/1/2 Peter Wendorff
>
> > Hi,
> > What about hazard=rock_slide [1]?
> >
> > regards
> > Peter
> >
> > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/
Hi,
Another option: obstacle=heap[1]
Regards
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Obstacle
2014/1/2 Peter Wendorff
> Hi,
> What about hazard=rock_slide [1]?
>
> regards
> Peter
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard
>
> Am 02.01.2014 17:51, sch
Hi,
What about hazard=rock_slide [1]?
regards
Peter
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard
Am 02.01.2014 17:51, schrieb John F. Eldredge:
> What tag would you use on a section of roadway prone to landslides or
> fallen rocks? I am not talking about tagging a currently-k
Am 02.01.2014 17:39, schrieb Fernando Trebien:
> I'm quite convinced that it's impossible to pick only one tag or the
> other for this particular rendering decision and please everyone at
> the same time. That's why I'm still in favour of combining them, then
> each community can use whatever they
I like your idea of splitting surface values into paved and unpaved
tags quite a lot, Matthijs. It allows certain values (such as
compacted) to be considered paved or unpaved by different communities,
and it's easy to identify a contradiction (when both tags are
present).
To note, I see the risk y
On 2 January 2014 16:15, gweber wrote:
> I would strongly favour a simple dashed border style whenever the surface
> tag falls into the unpaved categories. It is as simple as that. From my
> experience in driving on rural roads in Brazil, nothing else is required.
The disadvantage of using the su
What tag would you use on a section of roadway prone to landslides or fallen
rocks? I am not talking about tagging a currently-known slide, but rather
tagging a potential hazard. Some years ago, I traveled through a region of the
Appalachian mountains where the ground was particularly unstable
>
>
> OsmAnd which is both a routing and a rendering engine for Android platforms
>
I am currently trying to get Osmand's attention to the same problem. The
point is that Mapnik's default rendering style is replicated to other
applications. Indeed, Osmand's style is nearly identical to Mapnik's.
I'm quite convinced that it's impossible to pick only one tag or the
other for this particular rendering decision and please everyone at
the same time. That's why I'm still in favour of combining them, then
each community can use whatever they like, and the discussion of which
one is the best would
I understand that, Richard, but my main concern is with rendering.
Like I said, it also affects tag usage by new users, and therefore it
affects map quality and maintenance effort. I think rendering and
routing apps are the two major data consumers from digital maps, and
so we should take both into
Sorry for coming late to this discussion. I have been trying to get some
attention to the surface=unpaved rendering issue for some time. Fernando
alerted me that this discussion is now being held in this discussion list.
Essentially the problem is that currently there is no way to alert the users
On 02/01/2014 13:55, Philip Barnes wrote:
Hi Nounours
I know its an American, not an English word, but tourism=apartment has
237 uses.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/tourism=apartment
I agree flat should be the correct term, but maybe too late to change
now.
Actually, I was just thin
On 1/2/14 9:49 AM, Fernando Trebien wrote:
> So, which approach is most convenient for the rendering app?
> Definitely it's using the tracktype tag, there's only 1 value to be
> ever considered.
>
i really think we should spend less time on rendering and more time
simply on accurately and concisely
Even if we choose the surface tag, I believe new values for tracktype
can be pushed no matter what we decide in this discussion, it seems a
lot more reasonable than using the 4wd_only=yes tag (so don't give up
yet :D ). I was going to naively propose tagging more measurable
qualities of the road, b
Hi Nounours
I know its an American, not an English word, but tourism=apartment has
237 uses.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/tourism=apartment
I agree flat should be the correct term, but maybe too late to change
now.
Phil (trigpoint)
On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 14:48 +0100, nounours77 wrote:
Dear all,
Mapping holiday flats is interesting, since if I look for a holiday flat at a
location that interests me, I can spot available flats e.g. close to the beach
or the village etc. and access directly to the contact information.
Or, currently there are tags for all kind of accommodation:
I think that allowing anything else other than paved and unpaved in surface was
a mistake. Separate paved and unpaved keys should be used for surface details
(surface=paved, paved=asphalt - instead of surface=asphalt, surface=paved,
paved=concrete, concrete=plates - instead of insane surface=con
24 matches
Mail list logo
