Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-30 Thread Erik Johansson
These are more than 90% of values for surface, categorize them as
paved/unpaved the rest as unpaved.

surface=

asphalt
unpaved
paved
gravel
ground
dirt
grass
concrete
paving_stones
sand
cobblestone
compacted

paved=yes will remove then need for parsing those last % of surface=*
values, not sure it's worth it. To think that there is only one
definition of paved=yes, is a big mistake. There are few tags in OSM
that are specific enough to mean the same thing all over the world.



On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:42 AM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
 On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 00:23 +0200, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote:
 ..A good suggestion ...

 So it seems that yet again, we are going to reject this attempt to solve
 a real problem. Looking at the neg replies, because its not useful for
 bike riders; not useful for a number of undefined edge cases; is a
 duplicate of surface=.

 Thats just plain not true ! There is no suggestion that paved= should be
 used instead of surface=. I use surface= on all unsealed roads I map and
 would continue to do so if I also used paved=no.

 But there are 34 official values for surface= and 3581 values used. It
 is very plain that the mapping community want surface= as a fine
 grained, very detailed key. And thats great, people making specialised
 maps or engines can use those values, display them in a meaningful way
 to people they understand. My data will help them.

 But the vast majority of people just want to know that the road may not
 be what they are used to. Thats all. And paved= does that easily.

 In places like Australia, that information can be a life or death thing.
 People die here because they are inexperienced or ill equipped for roads
 they tackle. Generally visitors from Europe or North America.

 Please folks, think of the big picture, not the edge cases.

 David


 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



-- 
/emj

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

2014-09-30 Thread Janko Mihelić
2014-09-29 23:45 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:

 The case of Japan is different. In Japan, the name belongs to the _traffic
 signal_, and _not_ to the junction. We need to distinguish this, because
 they are usually differently rendered (traffic signal names usually with an
 icon and junction names usually without an icon).

 But what would we gain when we distinguish between th:junction_area and
 kr:junction_area - because here we have two values for the same feature.


If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on the
same node, then the logical solution is junction:name=* and
traffic_signals:name=*. Or in different languages: junction:name:th=* and
traffic_signals:name:kr=*.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

2014-09-30 Thread Pieren
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:

 If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on the
 same node,

As far as I understood, this is just a theoritical case. Also, in real
world, it doesn't make real sens to name the intersection AND a
traffic signal (with different names). So I would suspend this point
until a real case appears...

Pieren

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

2014-09-30 Thread Lukas Sommer
Oh, sorry, Pieren was faster… ;-)

Lukas Sommer

2014-09-30 12:34 GMT+00:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:

  If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on the
 same node, then the logical solution is junction:name=* and
 traffic_signals:name=*. Or in different languages: junction:name:th=* and
 traffic_signals:name:kr=*.

 Different names for junction and traffic signal are probably not a
 real-world case.

 Lukas Sommer

 2014-09-30 12:21 GMT+00:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:

 2014-09-29 23:45 GMT+02:00 Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com:

 The case of Japan is different. In Japan, the name belongs to the
 _traffic signal_, and _not_ to the junction. We need to distinguish this,
 because they are usually differently rendered (traffic signal names usually
 with an icon and junction names usually without an icon).

 But what would we gain when we distinguish between th:junction_area and
 kr:junction_area - because here we have two values for the same feature.


 If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on the
 same node, then the logical solution is junction:name=* and
 traffic_signals:name=*. Or in different languages: junction:name:th=* and
 traffic_signals:name:kr=*.



 ___
 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] tagging for graves?

2014-09-30 Thread Pieren
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Brad Neuhauser
brad.neuhau...@gmail.com wrote:

 In addition, there is a type=person relationship [4] which appears to be
 recommended for this kind of use.

This is typically stuff that are not related to any geographic
feature. It's really using OSM just as a free  access database,
bypassing the restrictions of wikipedia. Something that could be
deleted without regret on both database and wiki.

Pieren

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

2014-09-30 Thread Lukas Sommer
What would also be no problem, because you can give an individual name=*
tag to each node with highway=traffic_signals and another name=* tag to the
area.

Lukas Sommer

2014-09-30 18:56 GMT+00:00 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:

 Am 30.09.2014 14:34, schrieb Lukas Sommer:
  If there is a need to tag traffic signal names and junction names on
  the same node, then the logical solution is junction:name=* and
  traffic_signals:name=*. Or in different languages: junction:name:th=*
  and traffic_signals:name:kr=*.
 
  Different names for junction and traffic signal are probably not a
  real-world case.

 Once more cite a mail on the previous thread [1]

 Seems to be a real world example, which is mappable with nodes for the
 traffic_signals and an area for the junction.

 cu fly


 [1]

 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-September/019349.html


 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging