Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: (...) But when we see nothing, it's plain wrong to add something to the database. But it's a common practice today in OSM. It seems you missed the long discussions about noname=yes or oneway=no. Such tags don't say here is nothing. It says that someone went on place and checked that the restriction does not apply. Otherwise, we cannot differenciate surveyed locations and missing information in OSM. Btw, I'm also in favour of maxheight=unsigned which is for me less controversial than maxheight=none (even as a non native English speaker). Although maxheight is the legal value (like all tags in the category access), none is suggesting that there is no height limit at all. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
2014-10-29 13:08 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: Btw, I'm also in favour of maxheight=unsigned maybe unmarked would be more English than unsigned? Alternatively it could also be default? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
why would we treat maxheight different from maxspeed ? I thought the consensus for maxspeed was to tag the maxspeed explicitly and the reason in source:maxspeed So why can't we fill in the default value for unsigned bridges explicitly , so e.g. maxheight=4 and add source:maxheight=Country:default ? regards m p.s. I'm aware of the history of source:maxspeed and that not everybody is happy with this tag. On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-29 13:08 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: Btw, I'm also in favour of maxheight=unsigned maybe unmarked would be more English than unsigned? Alternatively it could also be default? 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] what does maxheight=none mean?
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: So why can't we fill in the default value for unsigned bridges explicitly , so e.g. maxheight=4 and add source:maxheight=Country:default ? I don't know the max height in my country. And probably most of the contributors don't. So the simple maxheight=unsigned or unmarked or whatever is easier for the average contributor. What you suggest is possible and could be automated. But it could be done by the data consumers as well. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. maxheight is different from maxspeed in some aspects. Marc Gemis wrote on 2014-10-29 13:51: why would we treat maxheight different from maxspeed ? I thought the consensus for maxspeed was to tag the maxspeed explicitly and the reason in source:maxspeed So why can't we fill in the default value for unsigned bridges explicitly , so e.g. maxheight=4 and add source:maxheight=Country:default ? regards m p.s. I'm aware of the history of source:maxspeed and that not everybody is happy with this tag. On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-29 13:08 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com mailto:pier...@gmail.com: Btw, I'm also in favour of maxheight=unsigned maybe unmarked would be more English than unsigned? Alternatively it could also be default? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
2014-10-29 13:51 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: why would we treat maxheight different from maxspeed ? I thought the consensus for maxspeed was to tag the maxspeed explicitly and the reason in source:maxspeed So why can't we fill in the default value for unsigned bridges explicitly , so e.g. maxheight=4 and add source:maxheight=Country:default ? I think maxspeed and maxheight are different, as maxspeed is defined also when there is no sign (default maxspeed), but maxheight is not defined when there is no sign. There are still considerations to keep in mind (like vehicle classes and their max height) to infer for practical reasons some default maxheight, but that isn't exactly the same as default maxspeeds. Still I agree, we could tag this derived maxheight value and add a maxheight:source to say it is implicit. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
2014-10-29 14:01 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. examples? What is some reason? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
Hi, Currently, le wiki ([1]) suggests that maxspeed has to specify the unit knots when it's not km/h. But knot is the unit used worldwide on waterways. Why should we add something obvious on all waterway elements ? Could we suggest that the default unit for maxspeed on waterways is knot and the default km/h remains for highways and railways ? Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 05:21:06PM +0100, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: On 28/10/2014, Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:18:43AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-10-28 10:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: The assumption is that a large bay will typically be more important than a smaller bay. For a good rendering you'd show only the more important bay names in medium zoom level and show the less important ones in higher zoom levels. You would use the size to decide which name to omit in case you'd not have space to render all of them. so to decide which label should be bigger or rendered at lower zoom level you would suggest to: * map bays as areas, with all previously mentioned issues The issues are real, but we disagree on how big they are. I'm of the opinion that they aren't worth fussing over, but YMMV. well even if the issues were nonexistent, mapping the area of a bay seems to me like mapping an artificially introduced concept for which there is very little real world use or recognition otherwise. Also bays with very flat or deep geometry will result in disproportionately small areas so mappers may feel compelled to do some ugly workarounds if the name of the bay isn't shown as expected. So I would say * if there is some other reason valid to map the bay as area, do it * something better needs to be invented for hinting the renderer. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
In Belgium the maximum height for a vehicle is 4m (on all roads, whether there is a bridge or not). So without sign a bridge should allow vehicles under the maximum height to pass. There are exceptions, which requires a special permit (pubic transport). Then the maximum height is 4.4m meters. I assume that for exceptional goods, which also requires special permission, the height can be even higher. This is part of the traffic code, which each citizen with a driving license should know. Will this be so much different in other countries ? Thus the tagging should indicate that without sign, the bridge allows at least vehicles with a height less than the legal maximum for vehicles in that country. regards m On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-29 14:01 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. examples? What is some reason? 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] natural=bay as nodes are evil
2014-10-29 14:40 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Also bays with very flat or deep geometry will result in disproportionately small areas so mappers may feel compelled to do some ugly workarounds if the name of the bay isn't shown as expected. disproportionate to what? water depth really doesn't matter at all in this context (IMHO) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-29 14:05: 2014-10-29 14:01 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer: Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. examples? What is some reason? - rural track never had sign posted - neglected road, sign fallen off - unsigned road gained hight due to maintenance While maxspeed is a legal limit, maxheight is derived from a physical limitation. Bridges can also be much higher than 4 m, but height not known, so why should I tag it 4 m. I'd prefer to tag what I see, i.e. I see no sign, I tag unsigned/unmarked/un-whatever-we-conclude. Keep it simple. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
km/h is derived, at least with an integer multiple of seconds, from SI units. mph and knots are not. I would prefer to keep one default unit per tag, consistently, everything else leads to confusion. Pieren wrote on 2014-10-29 14:14: Hi, Currently, le wiki ([1]) suggests that maxspeed has to specify the unit knots when it's not km/h. But knot is the unit used worldwide on waterways. Why should we add something obvious on all waterway elements ? Could we suggest that the default unit for maxspeed on waterways is knot and the default km/h remains for highways and railways ? Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed ___ 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] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: km/h is derived, at least with an integer multiple of seconds, from SI units. mph and knots are not. I would prefer to keep one default unit per tag, consistently, everything else leads to confusion. What is leading to confusion is to suggest that km/h is the default unit for waterway speed when knot is in use everywhere. Please think as a contributor, not as QA programmer or data consumer (it's easy to check if the speed limit belongs to a waterway or not). And The knot is a non-SI unit that is accepted for use with the SI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_%28unit%29) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil
2014-10-29 14:46 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-10-29 14:40 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com: Also bays with very flat or deep geometry will result in disproportionately small areas so mappers may feel compelled to do some ugly workarounds if the name of the bay isn't shown as expected. disproportionate to what? water depth really doesn't matter at all in this context (IMHO) I think he was talking about bay shapes: http://i.imgur.com/AMigrSf.png What if we mapped bays on coastlines, and then the renderer can connect the ending points with a straight line or a curve. And we can combine that with a node which can be something like place=country (a rendering hint). Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
2014-10-29 14:07 GMT+00:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: km/h is derived, at least with an integer multiple of seconds, from SI units. mph and knots are not. I would prefer to keep one default unit per tag, consistently, everything else leads to confusion. What is leading to confusion is to suggest that km/h is the default unit for waterway speed when knot is in use everywhere. Pieren, is there an example of confusion actually being caused? Please think as a contributor, not as QA programmer or data consumer (it's easy to check if the speed limit belongs to a waterway or not). It's easy to think up potential for confusion whichever way we go on this. Thinking as a contributor, the editing interfaces should make it clear which units the user is stating/implying - as iD does, for example. I definitely sympathise with Tom's reasoning for one unit per tag, so I'd suggest there would need to be a strong case for this mixed-units approach... Dan And The knot is a non-SI unit that is accepted for use with the SI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_%28unit%29) Pieren ___ 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] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On 29/10/2014 14:12, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: I don't know about other countries, but here in Finland the water maxspeed signage is in km/h although knot is used for almost everything else. In UK waterways, both MPH and knots are used. Usually MPH on canals and knots on rivers, though even this can depend on who the navigation authority is and how far back in history their statutes were written. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com wrote: On 29/10/2014 14:12, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: I don't know about other countries, but here in Finland the water maxspeed signage is in km/h although knot is used for almost everything else. In UK waterways, both MPH and knots are used. Usually MPH on canals and knots on rivers, though even this can depend on who the navigation authority is and how far back in history their statutes were written. Okay, if the unit is not generalized, then my idea doesn't make sens. Sorry for the noise. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On 10/29/14 10:47 AM, Malcolm Herring wrote: On 29/10/2014 14:12, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: I don't know about other countries, but here in Finland the water maxspeed signage is in km/h although knot is used for almost everything else. In UK waterways, both MPH and knots are used. Usually MPH on canals and knots on rivers, though even this can depend on who the navigation authority is and how far back in history their statutes were written. i understand where this is coming from, but i think we need to stick to a single units default for a given tag, and those should probably be in SI units. it's not exactly killing me to have to add mph when i tag maxspeed in the US. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil
On 28/10/2014, Christoph Hormann chris_horm...@gmx.de wrote: On Tuesday 28 October 2014, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: I admit I don't fully understand how your algorythm works. I can't imagine how you reduce everything to nodes and still retain information about orientation and curves. Can you change your rendering to display the infered polygons instead of the name ? I do not infer any areas, i just generate curves (splines) based on the nodes and the surrounding coastlines and place the text along them. Hum, so that's only usable for label rendering, not geocoding :/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
An example would be where the sign had fallen off, or been stolen by vandals. On October 29, 2014 8:05:10 AM CDT, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-29 14:01 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org: Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. examples? What is some reason? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil
On 29/10/2014, Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 05:21:06PM +0100, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: On 28/10/2014, Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com wrote: well even if the issues were nonexistent, mapping the area of a bay seems to me like mapping an artificially introduced concept for which there is very little real world use or recognition otherwise. Huh ? Forget about maps and osm for a moment. A bay is a body of water mostly surrounded by land. You're in a bay, not at a bay. It has a size, it's not a point in space with a buoy marking the spot. It's an area. The fact that a lot of sources have simplified it down to a point is an entirely different issue. But there's no reason that, with modern tools and manpower, we can't make a better job than those historical sources. And remember that when you see a rendered bay label, you don't actually know wether the source (wether it's some vector data or an idea in the sailor's brain) was an area or a point to begin with. Also bays with very flat or deep geometry will result in disproportionately small areas so mappers may feel compelled to do some ugly workarounds if the name of the bay isn't shown as expected. Disproportionate compared to what ? And fairly flat coastlines are a good example of cases that are tricky for algorythms, where the human mapper can probably make a better decision. So I would say * if there is some other reason valid to map the bay as area, do it pros: - bays are areas in real life - it makes geocoding trivial - it makes knowing which bays to render preferably easy (bigger bays first) - it enables representing nested bays - it is deterministic, as opposed to relying on a heuristic algorythm cons: - relations are harder to work with than nodes - the extent of bays is usually fuzzy; nodes make that fuzzyness obvious - most of the existing data (osm and potential imports) are nodes YMMV, those are reasons enough for me. * something better needs to be invented for hinting the renderer. It's not just the renderer, I actually think that the geocoding usacase is more important. And geocoding requires an area, wether it is provided in readily-usable form as osm data, or by a heuristics-based algorythm that infers it from a node. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?
On 29/10/2014, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: (...) But when we see nothing, it's plain wrong to add something to the database. But it's a common practice today in OSM. It seems you missed the long discussions about noname=yes or oneway=no. Such tags don't say here is nothing. It says that someone went on place and checked that the restriction does not apply. Otherwise, we cannot differenciate surveyed locations and missing information in OSM. The comparision doesn't apply well. no is a valid value for the oneway key. noname uses a different key than the one it relates to (instead of using name=none or name=unsigned). And both tags are definitive, whereas maxheight:signed=no (or whatever) is just waiting for a better tooled or experienced mapper to do the survey. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 02:47:48PM +, Malcolm Herring wrote: On 29/10/2014 14:12, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: I don't know about other countries, but here in Finland the water maxspeed signage is in km/h although knot is used for almost everything else. In UK waterways, both MPH and knots are used. Usually MPH on canals and knots on rivers, though even this can depend on who the navigation authority is and how far back in history their statutes were written. ouch. Luckily we don't map anything in UK vs US gallons or UK vs US barrels or tons.. or do we? Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On 29/10/2014 19:48, Richard Z. wrote: ouch. Luckily we don't map anything in UK vs US gallons or UK vs US barrels or tons.. or do we? US tons, certainly (and it has caught mappers out in the past when they've been looking for rogue values to correct). The UK uses (generally) metric measures for maxweights, a combination of both UK and metric for heights, and UK motorways have distances on signs in miles and what people from the USA would call mile markers in kilometers. Confused, you will be... Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0
Hi, On 10/29/2014 09:34 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote: * The tag tourism=bed_and_breakfast is no longer rendered - please use tourism=guest_house instead. Well - it might be your decision what to render and what not, but you shouldn't go so far as to request that people misrepresent reality in their mapping. A private residence where a single bedroom is made available to tourists is certainly no guest house and shouldn't be tagged as such! It is, and remains, a bed_and_breakfast. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house as currently defined fits private residence where a single bedroom is made available to tourists. It is even mentioned - ranging from purpose-built guest houses to family-based BedBreakfast 2014-10-29 21:55 GMT+01:00 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, On 10/29/2014 09:34 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote: * The tag tourism=bed_and_breakfast is no longer rendered - please use tourism=guest_house instead. Well - it might be your decision what to render and what not, but you shouldn't go so far as to request that people misrepresent reality in their mapping. A private residence where a single bedroom is made available to tourists is certainly no guest house and shouldn't be tagged as such! It is, and remains, a bed_and_breakfast. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0
Frederik, The tagging and the wiki have been that way for many years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bed_and_breakfast I share your discomfort, since I think of a BB as a different thing from a guesthouse. But over the years I've ended up using this tagging since it's documented and appears to be how people tag. I guess it's not Matthijs who made this decision... Best Dan 2014-10-29 20:55 GMT+00:00 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Hi, On 10/29/2014 09:34 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote: * The tag tourism=bed_and_breakfast is no longer rendered - please use tourism=guest_house instead. Well - it might be your decision what to render and what not, but you shouldn't go so far as to request that people misrepresent reality in their mapping. A private residence where a single bedroom is made available to tourists is certainly no guest house and shouldn't be tagged as such! It is, and remains, a bed_and_breakfast. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ 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] Default maxspeed unit on waterways
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Currently, le wiki ([1]) suggests that maxspeed has to specify the unit knots when it's not km/h. But knot is the unit used worldwide on waterways. Why should we add something obvious on all waterway elements? Except it totally isn't, especially inland, where countries often use the same units as on land. Even though the Columbia River's rivermarks are denominated in nautical miles upstream of the Columbia Bar (the area roughly from the end of the jetties into the Pacific Ocean at it's delta to roughly once you get past the riprap jetty that US 101 travels three miles into the Columbia River on before rising over the last mile on the Astoria-Megler Bridge), once you get past the Astoria Port of Entry area for foreign ships entering inland waters, speeds posted on buoys changes from knots to MPH. Could we suggest that the default unit for maxspeed on waterways is knot and the default km/h remains for highways and railways ? Yeah, how about no, let's keep maxspeed the default on km/h for the sake of the vast majority of elements that use maxspeed as a legal restriction. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0
On 29 October 2014 20:59, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote: I guess it's not Matthijs who made this decision... That's correct. See https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/695 for more details. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0
On Wednesday 29 October 2014, Dan S wrote: The tagging and the wiki have been that way for many years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bed_and_breakfast Well - not exactly, this redirect as well as the removal of tourism=bed_and_breakfast as an alternative from http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house has been done about a year ago. There is 'Deprecated' noted on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Atourism%3Dbed_and_breakfast but without there having been a proposal to deprecate it. tourism=bed_and_breakfast exists 609 times at the moment, guest_house=bed_and_breakfast 154 times. Generally given the huge influence the standard style has on mapping and that a lot of people articulated the need to differenciate between BB and larger guest houses in discussions i agree this change indeed is probably not to the better. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
