Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting
Well, they re not open to the public - only the designated houses in the area can use their station, not anyone else. You don’t use other people’s stations. There is one closer to my house, but I’m not allowed to use it, because the one pictred is “ours”. it is regualrly maintained, on rotation, by the users of it. These are not public garbage cans, they are a drop-off point between specific customers and the garbage pickup. They are not completely private, like a mail transfer box, but they are not public either. Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: I would distinguish between an amenity=waste_* for structures that are open for everybody to bring their waste, with or without fee, thus as a POI somebody would navigate to (where can I bring my waste), and the cabinet=waste merely describing the street inventory (what is that odd locked box for). johnw wrote on 2014-10-31 07:00: I was going to suggest Waste Transfer station http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dwaste_transfer_station But after reading the wiki for it, it was not at all what I expected. In America, at least in most suburban areas, waste is collected from individual residences via bins/cans on the street with(enormous) trucks, so there is no static transfer points whatsoever, it goes from curb to landfill directly. In Japan, There are static waste collection Garbage stations [ゴミ ステーション] per street or area, and are often large, steel, screened cages that are stuffed full of 45 liter bags. There is no possible way fro a truck to service the myriad of little tiny buildings, some of them only on walking paths - even in cities of 100K people, so there is a garbage station for every 20-30 houses or so, or one for a large apartment or company. Temporary ones are merely nets to keep the crows off the bags, but most are permanent ones worth mapping. My local garbage station (2 cabinets) http://goo.gl/maps/VLgMP a full one nearby http://goo.gl/maps/eqVS3 although some are old and look disused, they are used daily or weekly by the populace, and mapping them would be useful on a very local level (like the cabinets in general). Please add a line item for waste transfer, similar to the postal transfer - this is a missing step in the garbage collection, and a cabinet that have been overlooked. Also, I suggest also adding sliding for the door hinge option (as the second one has no hinges) Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: François Lacombe wrote on 2014-10-30 21:42: I would suggest street_cabinet=garbage for the equipment you've mentioned. maybe =waste is more consistent with existing tags such as amenity=waste disposal, amenity=waste basket or generator:source=waste Garbage is less used in tags so far. A cabinet is a feature where workers can't enter. A building is the opposite. Then, substations and other stuff can be divided between those two sorts. That's a very plausible distinction and should be documented. tom ___ 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] sub key for cycle ways
Sure, but I think it is best to do that in addition and not instead of cycleway=* tagging. For one it takes more effort, 2. the cases where the bike lane is in the middle of the road is limited. (not counting parking lanes). 3. cycleway=track would look funny using that scheme. Also adding more data about the lane is imo easier with a namespace based tagging scheme of cycleway:*=*. On Sa, Nov 1, 2014 at 3:30 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Can we move towards using the lanes tagging used for every other mode already? It's much more precise and can deal with situations like where the bike lane is not the extreme left/right lane. On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Hubert sg.fo...@gmx.de wrote: Hallo, since a new main value for UK:advisary cyclelane, DE:Schutzstreifen, A:Mehrzweckstreifen, NL:fietsstrook met onderbroken streep, F:bande cyclable conseillée et réservée, CZ:cyklistický jízdní pruh didnt get approved, Im thinking of introducing a sub key for that. (Like many of you already suggested.) As a start Im thinking of cycleway=lane + lane=soft_lane for that purpose. However just a key for that one occasion doesnt seem logical, so a set of keys defining different types of on lane/on road surface cycle infrastructure should be developed, to keep the tagging consistent or to create a structured concept. In order to do that, Im thinking of introducing lane=strict_lane, soft_lane, suggestive_lane for lane like cycle ways where bicycles are encouraged to stay on one side of the road and shared_lane=sharrows, pictogram, busway for roads/lanes where bicyclists are not separated from other traffic. The in my opinion the main problems in that idea are the use of lane=suggestive_lane and shared_lane= busway. lane=suggestive_lane because it is in contrast of the current tagging as cycleway=shared_lane in the Netherlands. At least as far as I can remember. Im also not sure whether smurf lanes in the UK are tagged as cycleway=shared_lane. shared_lane= busway since this is currently tagged as cycleway=share_ busway. I think that in favor of structure, shared_lane= busway should be allowed. However, I havent made up my mind about that yet, or whether cycleway=share_ busway should be deprecated or just be discouraged. This would leave cycleway=track, lane, shared_lane, opposite_track, opposite_lane, opposite as the main values, lane=strict_lane, soft_lane, suggestive_lane and shared_lane=sharrows, pictogram, busway. Not part of the sub key discussion: As an addition one could say that a cycleway=track is also a lane like cycle infrastructure, which would make it a lane=track sub key. Also any cycleway=opposite(_*) could be represented by, for example, highway=* + oneway=yes + oneway:bicycle=no + cycleway=right/left/both cycleway:right/left =lane + cycleway:right/left:oneway= yes/-1 (assuming right hand traffic) What are your thoughts on this tagging scheme? Im sorry, if this is a bit confusing. Its late but I just couldnt wait writing. Best regard Hubert ___ 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] sub key for cycle ways
2. the cases where the bike lane is in the middle of the road is limited - bicycle lane in the middle is standard before advanced stop line (to be on the left side of right-turn) - at least in Poland 3. “cycleway=track” would look funny using that scheme - cycleway=track is anyway not compatible with detailed tagging 2014-11-01 14:18 GMT+01:00 Hubert sg.fo...@gmx.de: Sure, but I think it is best to do that in addition and not instead of “ cycleway=*“ tagging. For one it takes more effort, 2. the cases where the bike lane is in the middle of the road is limited. (not counting parking lanes). 3. “cycleway=track” would look funny using that scheme. Also adding more data about the lane is imo easier with a namespace based tagging scheme of “cycleway:*=*. On Sa, Nov 1, 2014 at 3:30 AM, Paul Johnson *ba...@ursamundi.org* ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: Can we move towards using the lanes tagging used for every other mode already? It's much more precise and can deal with situations like where the bike lane is not the extreme left/right lane. On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Hubert *sg.fo...@gmx.de* sg.fo...@gmx.de wrote: Hallo, since a new main value for UK:advisary cyclelane, DE:Schutzstreifen, A:Mehrzweckstreifen, NL:fietsstrook met onderbroken streep, F:bande cyclable conseillée et réservée, CZ:cyklistický jízdní pruh didn’t get approved, I’m thinking of introducing a sub key for that. (Like many of you already suggested.) As a start I’m thinking of “cycleway=lane + lane=soft_lane” for that purpose. However just a key for that one occasion doesn’t seem logical, so a set of keys defining different types of “on lane”/”on road surface” cycle infrastructure should be developed, to keep the tagging consistent or to create a structured concept. In order to do that, I’m thinking of introducing “lane=strict_lane, soft_lane, suggestive_lane” for lane like cycle ways where bicycles are ‘encouraged’ to stay on one side of the road and “shared_lane=sharrows, pictogram, busway” for roads/lanes where bicyclists are not separated from other traffic. The in my opinion the main problems in that idea are the use of “lane=suggestive_lane” and “shared_lane= busway. “lane=suggestive_lane” because it is in contrast of the current tagging as “cycleway=shared_lane” in the Netherlands. At least as far as I can remember. I’m also not sure whether “smurf lanes” in the UK are tagged as “cycleway=shared_lane”. “shared_lane= busway” since this is currently tagged as “cycleway=share_ busway”. I think that in favor of structure, “shared_lane= busway” should be allowed. However, I haven’t made up my mind about that yet, or whether “cycleway=share_ busway” should be deprecated or just be discouraged. This would leave “cycleway=track, lane, shared_lane, opposite_track, opposite_lane, opposite” as the main values, “lane=strict_lane, soft_lane, suggestive_lane” and “shared_lane=sharrows, pictogram, busway”. Not part of the sub key discussion: As an addition one could say that a “cycleway=track” is also a lane like cycle infrastructure, which would make it a “lane=track” sub key. Also any “cycleway=opposite(_*)” could be represented by, for example, “highway=* + oneway=yes + oneway:bicycle=no + cycleway=right/left/both cycleway:right/left =lane + cycleway:right/left:oneway= yes/-1” (assuming right hand traffic) What are your thoughts on this tagging scheme? I’m sorry, if this is a bit confusing. It’s late but I just couldn’t wait writing. Best regard Hubert ___ Tagging mailing list *Tagging@openstreetmap.org* Tagging@openstreetmap.org *https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging* https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ 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] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting
Hi, I've already edited Rational paragraph to give a better description with distinction between buildings where workers can enter. Secondly, ok for street_cabinet=waste (and maybe street_cabinet=waste_management if cabinets are encountered with devices to manage waste transit or storage) man_made=street_cabinet isn't incompatible with amenity=waste_* and street_cabinet=waste should concern anything regarding waste. I'm not so friendly with proposal editing while voting. Nevertheless, with such extensive keys like street_cabinet=* I think users won't mind if we document additional values. Is everybody ok with it ? *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2014-11-01 11:04 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: Well, they re not open to the public - only the designated houses in the area can use their station, not anyone else. You don’t use other people’s stations. There is one closer to my house, but I’m not allowed to use it, because the one pictred is “ours”. it is regualrly maintained, on rotation, by the users of it. These are not public garbage cans, they are a drop-off point between specific customers and the garbage pickup. They are not completely private, like a mail transfer box, but they are not public either. Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: I would distinguish between an amenity=waste_* for structures that are open for everybody to bring their waste, with or without fee, thus as a POI somebody would navigate to (where can I bring my waste), and the cabinet=waste merely describing the street inventory (what is that odd locked box for). johnw wrote on 2014-10-31 07:00: I was going to suggest Waste Transfer station http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dwaste_transfer_station But after reading the wiki for it, it was not at all what I expected. In America, at least in most suburban areas, waste is collected from individual residences via bins/cans on the street with(enormous) trucks, so there is no static transfer points whatsoever, it goes from curb to landfill directly. In Japan, There are static waste collection Garbage stations [ゴミ ステーション] per street or area, and are often large, steel, screened cages that are stuffed full of 45 liter bags. There is no possible way fro a truck to service the myriad of little tiny buildings, some of them only on walking paths - even in cities of 100K people, so there is a garbage station for every 20-30 houses or so, or one for a large apartment or company. Temporary ones are merely nets to keep the crows off the bags, but most are permanent ones worth mapping. My local garbage station (2 cabinets) http://goo.gl/maps/VLgMP a full one nearby http://goo.gl/maps/eqVS3 although some are old and look disused, they are used daily or weekly by the populace, and mapping them would be useful on a very local level (like the cabinets in general). Please add a line item for waste transfer, similar to the postal transfer - this is a missing step in the garbage collection, and a cabinet that have been overlooked. Also, I suggest also adding sliding for the door hinge option (as the second one has no hinges) Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: François Lacombe wrote on 2014-10-30 21:42: I would suggest street_cabinet=garbage for the equipment you've mentioned. maybe =waste is more consistent with existing tags such as amenity=waste disposal, amenity=waste basket or generator:source=waste Garbage is less used in tags so far. A cabinet is a feature where workers can't enter. A building is the opposite. Then, substations and other stuff can be divided between those two sorts. That's a very plausible distinction and should be documented. tom ___ 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 mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting
I wouldn't touch the page until the voting is over. One can always add new values when the tag is in use and document them when needed. New building types are also added all the time. No need to document it right away. just my .5 cents m On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 11:05 PM, François Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu wrote: Hi, I've already edited Rational paragraph to give a better description with distinction between buildings where workers can enter. Secondly, ok for street_cabinet=waste (and maybe street_cabinet=waste_management if cabinets are encountered with devices to manage waste transit or storage) man_made=street_cabinet isn't incompatible with amenity=waste_* and street_cabinet=waste should concern anything regarding waste. I'm not so friendly with proposal editing while voting. Nevertheless, with such extensive keys like street_cabinet=* I think users won't mind if we document additional values. Is everybody ok with it ? *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com 2014-11-01 11:04 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: Well, they re not open to the public - only the designated houses in the area can use their station, not anyone else. You don’t use other people’s stations. There is one closer to my house, but I’m not allowed to use it, because the one pictred is “ours”. it is regualrly maintained, on rotation, by the users of it. These are not public garbage cans, they are a drop-off point between specific customers and the garbage pickup. They are not completely private, like a mail transfer box, but they are not public either. Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: I would distinguish between an amenity=waste_* for structures that are open for everybody to bring their waste, with or without fee, thus as a POI somebody would navigate to (where can I bring my waste), and the cabinet=waste merely describing the street inventory (what is that odd locked box for). johnw wrote on 2014-10-31 07:00: I was going to suggest Waste Transfer station http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dwaste_transfer_station But after reading the wiki for it, it was not at all what I expected. In America, at least in most suburban areas, waste is collected from individual residences via bins/cans on the street with(enormous) trucks, so there is no static transfer points whatsoever, it goes from curb to landfill directly. In Japan, There are static waste collection Garbage stations [ゴミ ステーション] per street or area, and are often large, steel, screened cages that are stuffed full of 45 liter bags. There is no possible way fro a truck to service the myriad of little tiny buildings, some of them only on walking paths - even in cities of 100K people, so there is a garbage station for every 20-30 houses or so, or one for a large apartment or company. Temporary ones are merely nets to keep the crows off the bags, but most are permanent ones worth mapping. My local garbage station (2 cabinets) http://goo.gl/maps/VLgMP a full one nearby http://goo.gl/maps/eqVS3 although some are old and look disused, they are used daily or weekly by the populace, and mapping them would be useful on a very local level (like the cabinets in general). Please add a line item for waste transfer, similar to the postal transfer - this is a missing step in the garbage collection, and a cabinet that have been overlooked. Also, I suggest also adding sliding for the door hinge option (as the second one has no hinges) Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: François Lacombe wrote on 2014-10-30 21:42: I would suggest street_cabinet=garbage for the equipment you've mentioned. maybe =waste is more consistent with existing tags such as amenity=waste disposal, amenity=waste basket or generator:source=waste Garbage is less used in tags so far. A cabinet is a feature where workers can't enter. A building is the opposite. Then, substations and other stuff can be divided between those two sorts. That's a very plausible distinction and should be documented. tom ___ 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 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] sub key for cycle ways
On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: 2. the cases where the bike lane is in the middle of the road is limited - bicycle lane in the middle is standard before advanced stop line (to be on the left side of right-turn) - at least in Poland Not unheard of to common in the US, depending on region, for the same reasons. You don't want through traffic right of a continuous turnlane or turn pocket. 3. “cycleway=track” would look funny using that scheme - cycleway=track is anyway not compatible with detailed tagging I'd argue that tracks are probably a distinct roadway anyway, given that they're bollard or curb separated and lane changes to the adjacent roadway is illegal. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
