Was this RFC ever submitted to the mailinglist?
Shop sounds a bit strange to me as you say, maybe it's also just that
non-native speakers see it a bit different. But as you say we kinda lack
a key for services.
On 3/9/15 08:50 , Jan van Bekkum wrote:
As the comments period is over and no
2015-03-11 8:24 GMT+01:00 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Please
let's not adopt deletionism as well.
+1, seriously.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2015-03-11 13:53 GMT+01:00 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
I search an adjective about this tag and I hesitate between very_bad
and horrible ;-)
In my opinion this tag is pretty bad.
Btw, what's different today about its verifiability ? I think most of
the people rejecting this tag simply
2015-03-11 12:06 GMT+00:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2015-03-11 12:56 GMT+01:00 Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org:
As you can see, each block is subdivided into land plots - each with a
courtyard and several buildings that usually all belong to an extended
family. Those
On 12/03/2015 05:49, Warin wrote:
On 11/03/2015 4:06 AM, Sam Dyck wrote:
In Canada, privately licensed frequencies, not CB
Humm Why call it a 'channel'? And not 'frequency? Might reduce
confusion with CB radio channels?
And why 'haul'? I'm actually having no success finding examples of
On Mar 11, 2015 7:44 PM, Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 11 March 2015 at 18:04, althio althio.fo...@gmail.com wrote:
The trouble is there is no definition yet of city_block
Not so. When I added it to osm wiki I also put there a reference to
the definition found in
As described in paving_stones:n thread there is a problem with
surface=paving_stones:integer
values. To offer better alternative for storing information about size of
square paving stones I am
proposing this tag.
Key: square_paving_stones:width
Value: size of square paving stone in cm.
2015-03-11 23:15 GMT+01:00 David dban...@internode.on.net:
I consider the definitions quite reasonable for this tag. Yes,there is a
degree of subjectiveness there,there has to be given what it is trying to
do. Honestly, we really need to got over this dread fear of being
subjective. Not
2015-03-12 7:24 GMT+01:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com:
That is a very complex question. You may add bicycle to the vehicles too.
Animals and humans .. too?
Soft surfaces may not support the vehicle weight (given a tyre size and
number).
Slippery surfaces may no provide enough traction.
On mercredi 11 mars 2015, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
in some cases it's modernizing tagging
I don't like the sound of Modernizing tagging in a mechanical way, that
should be handeled with care, and time.
If you intend to replace all type=deciduous to leaf_cycle=deciduous send a new
email with a
Landuse=* is not just about defining a residential area or an industrial zone.
I use all of the class landuses to define the individual grounds for a specific
company’s factory or for a certain shop. yes, I can use the landuse to define a
section, but I just as often use it to define
2015-03-12 7:54 GMT+01:00 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com:
reference to
the definition found in Wikipedia and that's also how I've used the
tag.
and if someone changes the Wikipedia page, the definition for our tag
will change as well?
How likely is that? Not that
Warin, you have a 50/50 split.
Maybe it's better to try to address the issues and re-vote the proposal? We
could have a good tag, but we are going towards a barely accepted one.
My main concern is not even that we don't have the vast majority support,
but that the proposal hasn't provided a
2015-03-12 2:53 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
The level of opposition -- regardless of the technical count -- indicates
the proposal can use some improvement.
I urge any person getting this level of opposition to reconsider, resolve
the issues, and resubmit.
If you look
+1
But make it 1-8 note grade1-grade8 for simplicity IMHO. The
grade1-grade5 for tracktype is an error in itself...
It does not matter if it's easier or more difficult - the main thing is
that people using it should know what they enter. With the current
values like good some mappers just
2015-03-12 11:21 GMT+01:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com:
Is grade1 now excellent or horrible?
No, numeric values are not a good choice - really not. I also don't like
the values much, but at least it's clear that good is better than bad.
it really doesn't help you a lot to know
-1, I like the idea of OSM maps being consistent on a worldwide basis.
I would support the idea of a regional style iff it turns out to be
practicable. One, isolated example. One of the reasons i was given for the
inability to render unsealed roads was that the preferred style, dashed
infill,
One personal factual example;
5 buildings with an area including parking, landscaping etc .. of
about 2 square kilometers
One reception desk. Yes only one.
The node of reception desk is spatially within the area .. so
'connected' to the rest .. as are the car parks within the area.
On
I think this should be resolved with lots and lots of photos..
I think it would be a mistake to put too much emphasis on photos. In my
experience, photos very rarely show the true usability of a road or track. It
does really need to be looked at in context, the issues averaged out by eye.
One,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Andreas Labres l...@lab.at wrote:
Sorry, but amenity= is the wrong key. Should be tourism= IMHO.
I voted yes for amenity... however I agree the tourism/amenity issue
should be worked out and the proposal resubmitted for vote.
---
I find tourism wrong,
I voted yes for this proposal.
The same people who are leaving confused comments are likely to be
confused at tagging time also.
The level of opposition is indicating some sort of problem with the
proposal.
___
Tagging mailing list
I think the judgement words should be taken out of the tags.
*For hiking a horrible trail may be nicer than a smooth one. Stepping
over roots for example is not always unpleasant.*
glassy -
smooth -
rough -
bumpy -
or an measurement
1-20cm
20-30cm
30-50cm
Sorry, but amenity= is the wrong key. Should be tourism= IMHO.
/al
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 2:56 AM, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote:
The standard map has an impossible job - trying to be a nice map,
providing feedmap to mappers that an esoteric thing that they've just
mapped is now present on the map and trying to work for everyone around the
world
On Mar 12, 2015, at 10:40 AM, Andreas Labres wrote:
Sorry, but amenity= is the wrong key. Should be tourism= IMHO.
Tourism for the reception desk for visitors, most likely only business or
invited individuals, at a facility of International Corp? That sounds wrong to
me.
Not sure if it
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Tim Waters chippy2...@gmail.com wrote:
In the UK, in urban areas, it is more common to see telephone wires (and
poles) in residential streets than power lines, but again not many mappers
have mapped them. I also think that they are not being rendered currently
On 12/03/2015 17:11, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
It's technically possible to divide that, at least along fairly coarse
boundaries.
(not that it's particularly relevant to the tagging list, but just in
case anyone wasn't aware) that's what Mapquest already do:
On Mar 12, 2015, at 6:56 PM, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote:
The standard map has an impossible job - trying to be a nice map
This is true, and thanks for linking to the resources to set up the server for
a special version.
However, what I would like to see implemented, I
Am 12.03.2015 um 22:11 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
Tagging a node with reception_desk is not the given use case.
it doesn't matter if it's a node or a small area, most likely it will be
smaller than the feature for which it is the reception
cheers
Martin
On 12/03/2015 21:11, John Willis wrote:
On Mar 12, 2015, at 6:56 PM, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote:
The standard map has an impossible job - trying to be a nice map
This is true, and thanks for linking to the resources to set up the server for
a special version.
However, what I
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
Am 12.03.2015 um 22:11 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
Tagging a node with reception_desk is not the given use case.
it doesn't matter if it's a node or a small area, most likely it will be
I'm wondering, there seems to be potential overlap with
tourism=information. From what is written on the reception desk page, it
seems like the main difference is that the tag reception_desk also controls
access to a site, and a reception desk which only gives information may as
well be tagged
Am 12.03.2015 um 21:48 schrieb Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com:
I'm wondering, there seems to be potential overlap with tourism=information
yes, if the feature is tourism related there might be overlap for a subset of
information=*
This is not a problem as you could either tag
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote:
Look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity and tell me those
don't have reception desks.
And you can't put them inside an amenity if it's just a node of a building
like for example many doctors.
Tagging a
(I think of the roads we drove in Kenya), so any input is welcome even if it
isn't perfect. We ran into some nasty surprises during our trip because the
road quality wasn't tagged at all.
+1.
I also widely use smoothness=* in Madagascar. Indeed, I use it to
describe practicability of roads
- It's not simple at all. Using amenity
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity=* for this makes it
impossible to combine it with such POIs. Also why amenity at all? For me
it looks like a I didn't find anything better, I mean amenity
Just a couple of observations.
The first is that there are not many such elements in urban areas for the
problem to become an obvious one. This will change if more mappers add
power lines and these examples become more obvious.
In the UK, in urban areas, it is more common to see telephone wires
On 12 March 2015 at 02:21, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
I opened a ticket in which I was told it was my fault for thinking it it
was a bad idea and to stop complaining or claiming persecution (which was
really really weird).
Just to be clear, this was not a comment by one of the maintainers of
Resubmitting by request of maper Sly:
The edit described at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Bryce_C_Nesbitt
was modified based on mailing list input, and sits at complete removal of
the cluster value for denotation, along with a certain fixme value.
The cluster value was
anything that is big enough to have a reception is better represented by an
area than by a node- IMHO. At the time I micromap the reception I'd likely
also convert the node POI into an area
So how do you now connect the reception with the area? What if you have
different levels?
Sorry, but amenity= is the wrong key. Should be tourism= IMHO.
Hmm, i don't think so. While it may be sometimes, its more of amenity than
tourism. Lets take an extreme case, a caravan park. Yes, the most likely role
of the caravan park is tourism (but maybe not). But the reception desk is just
Am 12.03.2015 um 22:38 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
Perfect: we'll just invent a new OSM primitive, the sub node, for
micromapping within a given node.
anything that is big enough to have a reception is better represented by an
area than by a node- IMHO. At the time I
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 20:14 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:21 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
In certain countries (such as the one I am in) the thick black
line has a single purpose - private train lines. The zebra
striped lines -carto uses are
2015-03-12 4:14 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
In certain countries (such as the one I am in) the thick black line has a
single purpose - private train lines. The zebra striped lines -carto uses
are for national lines only (JR lines in Japan), and the thick black lines
are for
2015-03-12 10:36 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
I believe that the main problem are the value names. If these were called
grade1 to grade8 many more people would likely use these values and I guess
there would be much fewer objections.
Is grade1 now excellent or
+1
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:05 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
2015-03-12 2:53 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com:
The level of opposition -- regardless of the technical count -- indicates
the proposal can use some improvement.
I urge any person getting
There are two fundamental approaches to this and I believe that in this
discussion the two are mixed:
1. The physical status of the road is described as well as possible and
it is left to the receiver of this information to judge if he/she can use
the road. This is quite complex as many
I think this should be resolved with lots and lots of photos, which the
community then segregates into classes. Smoothness on asphalt is something
entirely different than smoothness on sand, or smoothness on ground.
When a mapper is in doubt, just look at 10 photos which are determined to
be
2015-03-12 12:29 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
I think this should be resolved with lots and lots of photos, which the
community then segregates into classes. Smoothness on asphalt is something
entirely different than smoothness on sand, or smoothness on ground.
I believe the
2015-03-11 16:51 GMT+01:00 Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com:
This is why I am of the view that survey points should be mapped on
separate nodes.
I agree, having an area tagged as survey point doesn't make much sense,
it will be a precise point, typically marked with a metal
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:21 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com
mailto:jo...@mac.com wrote:
... which is a real detriment to the OSM/-carto render in Japan ...
So create your own rendering (either on your own, or with the rest of
the Japanese community). Many different ones exist already - for
On 12/03/2015 7:57 PM, Steve Doerr wrote:
On 12/03/2015 05:49, Warin wrote:
On 11/03/2015 4:06 AM, Sam Dyck wrote:
In Canada, privately licensed frequencies, not CB
Humm Why call it a 'channel'? And not 'frequency? Might reduce
confusion with CB radio channels?
And why 'haul'? I'm
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Richard Z. ricoz@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:57:28AM +1100, Warin wrote:
Mapping a maze path would reduce the enjoyment of the maze .. at least
for
me. Even if it was a single path.
spoiler_warning=yes ?
I do not think that is
I'll summarise at the end.
A clear statement of any opposition, its number on any one point and
potential resolution/s or rebuttals can be made then.
I'd rather get a good indication of any problems and ideas to go forward
through the voting system now that it has started rather than
No, numeric values are not a good choice - really not. I also don't like the
values much, but at least it's clear that good is better than bad.
But Martin, its not a good or bad situation, thats the point. Some people
seek out extremely challenging roads to traverse. While dead smooth is
On 12/03/2015 7:57 PM, Steve Doerr wrote:
On 12/03/2015 05:49, Warin wrote:
On 11/03/2015 4:06 AM, Sam Dyck wrote:
In Canada, privately licensed frequencies, not CB
Humm Why call it a 'channel'? And not 'frequency? Might reduce
confusion with CB radio channels?
And why 'haul'? I'm
On 11 March 2015 at 23:52, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 11.03.2015 um 19:43 schrieb Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com:
reference to
the definition found in Wikipedia and that's also how I've used the
tag.
and if someone changes the Wikipedia page, the
not the suggested values on the page .. those are for an indication ONLY
.. and should be further discussed and voted on if the proposal is
approved.
It is strange and confusing - how key is supposed to be used without any
valid values?
2015-03-12 2:16 GMT+01:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com:
On 12/03/2015 5:39 PM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
I think that we should explicitly include or exclude steepness in the
smoothness definition. Opinions?
Exclude. 'Steepness' is covered by the incline tag.
There is no mention of width or surface in the smoothness tag.. nor
should there be. The
On 12/03/2015 6:04 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
not the suggested values on the page .. those are for an indication
ONLY .. and should be further discussed and voted on if the proposal
is approved.
It is strange and confusing - how key is supposed to be used without
any valid values?
I don't say that the pictures are wrong, but it would be helpful to have
perhaps six representative pictures of every level.
Related question: does the tag only cover uneven ground or also for example
also deep soft sand that may be difficult to cross. The tag surface=sand in
itself doesn't tell
On 12/03/2015 5:05 PM, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
but the bottom line question is: how hard is it to pass with a 2WD,
4WD, motorcycle etc.
That is a very complex question. You may add bicycle to the vehicles
too. Animals and humans .. too?
Soft surfaces may not support the vehicle weight (given
On 11.03.2015 23:23, David wrote:
I am a little unsure what the problem is with the pictures. Could you be a
bit more specific please Friedrich ?
It would be very hard to have a set of pictures that cover every case but, as
Jan said, if we are only one level out, thats still very useful
Has anyone ever mentioned merging place=block and place=city_block ? I
have found no mention of this question. Would the merging of those two
tags for an apparently identical concept be beneficial ? Of course after
extensive discussion (and I won't be the one advocating either of the
two - as
64 matches
Mail list logo
