Re: [Tagging] Wilderness huts
On 01/04/2014 02:01, Dave Swarthout wrote: Fly mentioned shelter_type just now — another type of wilderness accommodation is a basic shelter called a lean-to, a rough three sided, roofed shelter, open to the elements on one side. That's an odd use of the word 'lean-to'. Yes, a lean-to is a three-sided structure, but it's only a lean-to if it 'leans' against another structure which effectively supplies the fourth side. A free-standing lean-to is a contradiction in terms! -- Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wilderness huts
In the old days when the term was first brought into use in the Adirondack Mountains, it was just that, a bunch of spruce branches leaning against a tree. At any rate, they are common features in the eastern American wilderness regions. See this link about lean-tos on the Appalachian Trail http://www.appalachiantrail.org/hiking/hiking-basics/camping-shelters The Adirondack Mountains in NY State have lean-tos as well. I've stayed in lean-tos many times in my younger days. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adirondack_lean-to List of lean-tos: http://cnyhiking.com/AdirondackLeanTos.htm On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/04/2014 02:01, Dave Swarthout wrote: Fly mentioned shelter_type just now — another type of wilderness accommodation is a basic shelter called a lean-to, a rough three sided, roofed shelter, open to the elements on one side. That's an odd use of the word 'lean-to'. Yes, a lean-to is a three-sided structure, but it's only a lean-to if it 'leans' against another structure which effectively supplies the fourth side. A free-standing lean-to is a contradiction in terms! -- Steve ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wilderness huts
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 08:01:01AM +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote: I think a link to shelter:type would be a good addition to the Map Features; Tourism page for further choices when tagging wilderness shelters. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shelter_type. Note that this page throws more confusion into the discussion because on it they define a basic_hut that is, by my definition at least, the same thing we're talking about here. What a mess! No, in the alps its not the same. In the alps tourism=wilderness_hut is used for remote buildings operated by an alpine club, but (in contrast to alpine_hut) without staff. These buildings are strongly built and well equiped (kitchen and beds) houses, called self catering huts in German (Selbstversorgerhütten). They are locked and you need a key from the alpine club. These huts are for members of the alpine club only. In contrast to this, shelter_type=basic_hut is a lightly built small shelter with four walls and no equipment. Mostly they are situated on high mountain levels, free accessable, sometimes with some kind of bed but often without; you always can sleep in a sleeping bag there. In German they are called Biwakschachtel (bivouac box). Cheers René -- René Maroufi i...@maroufi.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
Hello everyone, This is my first post to the list, which I've just joined, but I've been a mapper for a few years and some of you might remember me as compere at last year's State of the Map. Yesterday, I met with the W3Cs' data on the web best practice working group. At their request, I gave a talk on the use of URIs (particularly linked data URIs) and related tags, in OSM. I described, and we then discussed, how we tag entities in OSM, using UIDs but not necessarily URLs, and issues facing data users who need to resolve those UIDs back to URLs; for example: openplaques_plaque = 1536 to: http://openplaques.org/plaques/1536 To that end, I've just modified [[Template:KeyDescription]] by adding two parameters: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:historic%3Dmemorialdiff=prevoldid=1010411 for website and url_pattern; see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:openplaques_plaque of an example of how they're intended to be used (the label display needs tweaking). The model used there fails with Wikipedia links, expressed as en:Example, because the equivalent URL is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example. Any suggestions for dealing with that? They were very impressed with the inclusion of Wikidata IDs https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Wikidata The sooner we move that from Talk:Proposed_features/ to Key:, the better. Other issues which are unhelpful to data re-users include keys with missing documentation; redundant keys (Key:openplaques_plaque vs Key:openplaques_id); ambiguous keys (ref=1234 - ref in whose database?) and the perennial problem of the lack of stable URIs for entities in OSM. I have yet to solve that one... -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wilderness huts
Could the more general description found for mountain hut http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_hut be used in the context of alpine_hut as this would make it more universal. This would then cover the climbing huts found in the UK as described in the wikipedia article. Additional tags could then be used to state whether it provides food, bedding, has a warden etc. Alpine Huts don't always provide food and bedding. As has already been mentioned, Bothies are probably the equivalent of a wilderness_hut in the UK but to make this fit the requirement with fire place really needs be removed.The wikipedia article description http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness_hut would cover these. We also have a few hostels that are remote to the extent that you have to walk or cycle to them. Some provide food and have a warden, some don't. Another type of accommodation that it would be useful to map is the emergency shelter. It is always good to know where these are, just in case! Regards Dudley Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 12:13:44 +0200 From: dieterdre...@gmail.com To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Wilderness huts 2014-04-01 4:20 GMT+02:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com: Wikipedia shows several huts of the type I mean here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness_hut .Their definition says these are free — that is not the case in Alaska but is mostly true elsewhere in the U.S. AFAIK We have access=* and fee=* to state this information. Yes, I believe we shuldn't introduce the requirement free for wilderness_hut. It is common to give some sort of voluntary donation if you sleep in one of those huts around here, a contribution to the maintenance efforts for these places. They are also often locked up so you will have to contact the local operator in order to get access, still I don't see how access will come into play here. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
Hi Andy, 2014-04-01 16:29 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk: Hello everyone, This is my first post to the list, which I've just joined, but I've been a mapper for a few years and some of you might remember me as compere at last year's State of the Map. And well done indeed! Yesterday, I met with the W3Cs' data on the web best practice working group. At their request, I gave a talk on the use of URIs (particularly linked data URIs) and related tags, in OSM. I described, and we then discussed, how we tag entities in OSM, using UIDs but not necessarily URLs, and issues facing data users who need to resolve those UIDs back to URLs; for example: openplaques_plaque = 1536 to: http://openplaques.org/plaques/1536 To that end, I've just modified [[Template:KeyDescription]] by adding two parameters: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:historic%3Dmemorialdiff=prevoldid=1010411 for website and url_pattern That URL doesn't seem right. I think you mean https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AKeyDescriptiondiff=1010399oldid=1009143 see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:openplaques_plaque of an example of how they're intended to be used (the label display needs tweaking). Tell me if I've misunderstood you, but you're proposing that the url_pattern given in the wiki infobox KeyDescription is intended to be machine-readable, in the sense that a third-party data consumer can plug url_pattern together with the actual key-values found in OSM and automatically find the URL for something? If so, the idea is intriguing and I think it's a nice lightweight thing we can do. I have a small quibble which is please change it from URL to URI, since I think the latter is the more appropriate concept. We're aiming to interlink _identities_ of items really, for the machines. The model used there fails with Wikipedia links, expressed as en:Example, because the equivalent URL is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example. Any suggestions for dealing with that? I don't see a plausible way of dealing with this that wouldn't be a crazy hack. So I'd recommend that data re-users will simply need to treat this as a special case if it's important to them. (I've always thought the wikipedia tag would have worked better as wikipedia:en=Example -- in that case, your template approach would have worked fine.) They were very impressed with the inclusion of Wikidata IDs https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Wikidata The sooner we move that from Talk:Proposed_features/ to Key:, the better. Wikidata proposal looks good to me. Other issues which are unhelpful to data re-users include keys with missing documentation; redundant keys (Key:openplaques_plaque vs Key:openplaques_id); I have never seen these tags, but there are very few uses - this example is probably really easy to consolidate into one tag. The harder cases will - as discussed in recent threads on this list - will remain in a state of productive controversy for a long time to come! Sorry, data re-users, but that's wiki-life for you. ambiguous keys (ref=1234 - ref in whose database?) That's an interesting question. ref is widely used, and generally used quite coherently, _but_ its meaning is contextual on other tags. For example, amenity=post_box operator=Royal Mail tells you where to expect the ref to point. I wonder if operator sets the context in many other cases? (I accept, of course, that many objects aren't tagged with operator.) and the perennial problem of the lack of stable URIs for entities in OSM. I have yet to solve that one... OSM objects are not stable, same as Wikipedia articles. For Wikipedia they provide partial stability through long-term historical oldid links and redirects. I don't think tagging (i.e. this list) can solve the permalink problem. It needs osm.org to provide a URL scheme that allows people to link to a specific historical _version_ of an osm object. We already provide direct links to changesets and to object histories, so the data is all there. Best Dan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
On 1 April 2014 17:31, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-04-01 16:29 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk: last year's State of the Map. And well done indeed! Thank you. I've just modified [[Template:KeyDescription]] by adding two parameters: for website and url_pattern Tell me if I've misunderstood you, but you're proposing that the url_pattern given in the wiki infobox KeyDescription is intended to be machine-readable, in the sense that a third-party data consumer can plug url_pattern together with the actual key-values found in OSM and automatically find the URL for something? If so, the idea is intriguing and I think it's a nice lightweight thing we can do. Yes; that's it. I have a small quibble which is please change it from URL to URI, since I think the latter is the more appropriate concept. We're aiming to interlink _identities_ of items really, for the machines. I'd be happy to do that; what do others think? While semantically correct, I think more mapper might understand URL. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Wikidata The sooner we move that from Talk:Proposed_features/ to Key:, the better. Wikidata proposal looks good to me. I'm about to move it to RfC. I look forward to your support ;-) Other issues which are unhelpful to data re-users include keys with missing documentation; redundant keys (Key:openplaques_plaque vs Key:openplaques_id); I have never seen these tags, but there are very few uses - this example is probably really easy to consolidate into one tag. Yes; but it was just an example. Nonetheless, the former is the better name, as OpenPlaques also has IDs for people and organisations, as well as the plaques themselves. ambiguous keys (ref=1234 - ref in whose database?) That's an interesting question. ref is widely used, and generally used quite coherently, _but_ its meaning is contextual on other tags. For example, amenity=post_box operator=Royal Mail tells you where to expect the ref to point. I wonder if operator sets the context in many other cases? (I accept, of course, that many objects aren't tagged with operator.) Or the ref may not relate to the operator. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.u ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata
I commend this proposal to the list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] natural=cloud
Hi all, I'm new on this mailing list, but I spend a few months already on the talk-fr list and I've been mapping for a while longer. I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I was quite surprised that there wasn't already a tag for clouds, and I hope it will become a widely accepted and used tag in the future. Cheers, Pierre ps: it has already been added to the french rendering : http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=17lat=48.63541lon=-1.51142layers=B000FFT ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. I just have some concerns about layering. How do we tag places where bridges and clouds cross, like in the following picture? http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1316696923/slideshow Do we add nodes on the place where the cloud crosses the bridge? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
I am hoping this has something to do with it being April 1st On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. I just have some concerns about layering. How do we tag places where bridges and clouds cross, like in the following picture? http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1316696923/slideshow Do we add nodes on the place where the cloud crosses the bridge? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
On Tuesday 01 April 2014, Pierre Knobel wrote: Hi all, I'm new on this mailing list, but I spend a few months already on the talk-fr list and I've been mapping for a while longer. I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud A little late for an April Fool for most of the planet... By the way there are regions on earth where cloud cover is persistent enough to be map-worthy (at least way more persistent than a lot of natural=water commonly mapped these days...) - the problem is of course these areas have no sharp boundaries. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
2014-04-01 19:14 GMT+02:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. +1, but I think it should be cloud:type rather than cloud_type, to emphasize that it is a subtag of cloud. Interesting also the idea of natural=wind, maybe we can link the two by a relation, e.g. type=natural? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
I see the problem, it's tricky. Maybe we've hit the boundaries of what it is possible to achieve with nodes, ways and relations. Maybe we should ask the developers to add a new type of object that would be more suitable for this situation. It would need to be diffuse, span over several layers and englobe underlying objects. On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nlwrote: On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. I just have some concerns about layering. How do we tag places where bridges and clouds cross, like in the following picture? http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1316696923/slideshow Do we add nodes on the place where the cloud crosses the bridge? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
Sounds about right, but add layer=* tags where appropriate. Clouds go above the land, so we have to make sure they render above everything (except certain bridges and buildings). Might as well add layer=5 to all of them for good measure. On Apr 1, 2014 12:16 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. I just have some concerns about layering. How do we tag places where bridges and clouds cross, like in the following picture? http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1316696923/slideshow Do we add nodes on the place where the cloud crosses the bridge? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
Pierre Knobel wrote on Tue, 1 Apr 2014 19:08:01 +0200: I'm new on this mailing list, but I spend a few months already on the talk-fr list and I've been mapping for a while longer. I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I was quite surprised that there wasn't already a tag for clouds, and I hope it will become a widely accepted and used tag in the future. Since you seem busy with the proposal I linked it at my OSM-Blog the German and the UK forum. Hope some people learn about it soon. Thanks for your efforts so far! Thomas ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
Rendering for natural=cloud has been added to the FR rendering: http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=15lat=48.63541lon=-1.51142layers=B000FFT white = non rainy cloud dark = rainy cloud 2014-04-01 19:25 GMT+02:00 Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com: Sounds about right, but add layer=* tags where appropriate. Clouds go above the land, so we have to make sure they render above everything (except certain bridges and buildings). Might as well add layer=5 to all of them for good measure. On Apr 1, 2014 12:16 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: On 1 April 2014 18:08, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com wrote: I just wanted to mention a new tag I created yesterday: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcloud I think this is tag a very good idea. Clouds are very noticeable features in the landscape. I just have some concerns about layering. How do we tag places where bridges and clouds cross, like in the following picture? http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-1316696923/slideshow Do we add nodes on the place where the cloud crosses the bridge? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France Conférence State Of The Map France du 4 au 6 avril à Parishttp://openstreetmap.fr/sotmfr ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
On 4/1/14 1:01 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: I'd be happy to do that; what do others think? While semantically correct, I think more mapper might understand URL. is it a URI or a URL? if it's strictly a URL, that's fine, URL as a term is not deprecated, it's merely a subset of URI. but if you intend to be able operate on the URN side of the URI house, then you need to use URI properly. as for ref, i think that the door to the barn has been open for a long time and it may be challenging to accomplish a general fix. i think instead that for specific entities that use ref (e.g., highways) you'll get farther by specifying what ref means for the class of entity. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote: The model used there fails with Wikipedia links, expressed as en:Example, because the equivalent URL is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example. Any suggestions for dealing with that? [...] ambiguous keys (ref=1234 - ref in whose database?) [...] I think you might be better off providing an algorithm to generally handle such cases because specifying a URL pattern like http://openplaques.org/plaques/[value]; is too simple for the diverse ways that people tag OSM objects. For example, the algorithm will use capturing regexes to split the key and/or value into parts. And then you can assemble the URI/URL depending on the presence of other tags and on GIS-related aspects of the tagged object (for example, if the object is inside the boundary relation for France). For the wikipedia=* example, you can have: tag_regex = ([^;]+):(.+) uri_algorithm = uri_pattern:https://$1.wikipedia.org/wiki/$2; The uri_algorithm would have to be in the form of a switch or case construct like for ref. uri_algorithm = case fr_highways: condition = has:highway=* in polygon[has:type=boundary has:admin_level=2 has:ISO3166-1=FR] uri_pattern = http://...$value...; Now that I think about it, Apache's HTTP server mod_rewrite rules work exactly like this. mod_rewrite takes an input URL (or a tag in our case) and rewrites it to another URL by specifying RewriteCond and RewriteRule elements that correspond to my condition and uri_pattern/tag_regex example above respectively. RewriteCond is quite flexible since you can match on any aspect of the HTTP request such as requesting IP address, date and time of request, cookies, etc. RewriteRules specify a regex on the input URL and then the resulting URL pattern. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata
On 01.04.2014 19:04, Andy Mabbett wrote: I commend this proposal to the list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata I like Wikidata and therefore want to see this proposal approved. :) What I'm interested in, though: If an object exists both in Wikipedia and Wikidata, would you expect both tags to be used? Wikipedia links can be obtained from the Wikidata API for a given Wikidata ID and vice versa, so one of the two would suffice. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata
If an object exists both in Wikipedia and Wikidata, would you expect both tags to be used? Wikipedia links can be obtained from the Wikidata API for a given Wikidata ID and vice versa, so one of the two would suffice. It might seem redundant but the key wikipedia shouldn't be removed when adding the key wikidata to an object, because there are a number of sites that use the wikipedia tag and don't understand the wikidata tag right now. 2014-04-01 18:17 GMT-03:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de: On 01.04.2014 19:04, Andy Mabbett wrote: I commend this proposal to the list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata I like Wikidata and therefore want to see this proposal approved. :) What I'm interested in, though: If an object exists both in Wikipedia and Wikidata, would you expect both tags to be used? Wikipedia links can be obtained from the Wikidata API for a given Wikidata ID and vice versa, so one of the two would suffice. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=cloud
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 12:25:03PM -0500, Clay Smalley wrote: Sounds about right, but add layer=* tags where appropriate. Clouds go above the land, so we have to make sure they render above everything (except certain bridges and buildings). Might as well add layer=5 to all of them for good measure. location=* is the better tag. I propose: * location=clouds * location=heaven * location=7th_heaven Furthermore, objects in heaven could have levels. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging
On 2014-04-01 17:29, Andy Mabbett wrote : Hello everyone, This is my first post to the list, which I've just joined, but I've been a mapper for a few years and some of you might remember me as compere at last year's State of the Map. Yesterday, I met with the W3Cs' "data on the web best practice" working group. At their request, I gave a talk on the use of URIs (particularly linked data URIs) and related tags, in OSM. I described, and we then discussed, how we tag entities in OSM, using UIDs but not necessarily URLs, and issues facing data users who need to resolve those UIDs back to URLs; ... On my side, I often pointed out how little URL are used and that they could be used (consumed) by auto-recognizing them in tags where they were not initially supposed to be, like operator=*. I opened a JOSM bug saying that many presets lack the Website tag box where to enter an URL. I suggested embedding. They created a full Annotation:Contact preset and a command to embed a preset into another. Remains to effectively embed in defective presets that Contact preset containing the Website box. I also pointed out that for a user to help improve presets while tagging along, presets should be reloadable. They claimed that stopping/restarting JOSM during a work session is a mere matter !!! Not so. They finally said that they can improve the presets themselves. Bottom line: If you find a missing Website tag box in a JOSM preset, open a bug to request a Contact embedding. Practically yours, Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata
On 2014-04-01 23:17, Tobias Knerr wrote : On 01.04.2014 19:04, Andy Mabbett wrote: I commend this proposal to the list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata I like Wikidata and therefore want to see this proposal approved. :) What I'm interested in, though: If an object exists both in Wikipedia and Wikidata, would you expect both tags to be used? Wikipedia links can be obtained from the Wikidata API for a given Wikidata ID and vice versa, so one of the two would suffice. It has already been said that the word instead is not appropriate here right now. On the long range, the practical success of two methods will decide by itself. Practically, if I click item with ID Q1722 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1722, the first impression is A script on this page may be busy, or it may have stopped responding. You can stop the script now, or you can continue to see if the script will complete. then quite a dump of seemingly computer savvy data (OK with me but frightening many). I suppose that it should be formatted differently, but I'd like to see how to have an opinion. On the other hand, Wikipedia is fast and pretty and, as indeed I often want to switch to Дубровник for more interesting data and a challenge to understand I click ru in the left pane. It took me some time to get to Wikipedia from Wikidata and I was surprised to see there reference to Wikidata only in tools. The last URL I used for OSM is http://www.palogne.be and I would like to know how I can find the corresponding Wikidata ID to go alongside. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
