[Tagging] dock=tidal
Hi, I just wondered how to tag a dock which is tidal, since the wiki does not propose anything for that case. In fact the wiki proposes dock=tidal for a dock, which has a tidal independent water level i.e. the water level is managed. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Ddock But maybe I am totaly wrong and the type of dock should be tagged as waterway=riverbank or natural=water, water=river. How ever this does not give the information that the dock is tidal. And if I am not wrong the meaning of tidal is exactly that the water level is changing depending on the tide and is not managed in any way. Overpass API gives me a number of 42 polygones for dock=tidal in total. I figured out that 9 seem to be wrongly mapped according the wiki, 19 are done by me and 14 seem to be correctly tagged. http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22dock%22%3D%22tidal%22+globalR So what do you think about deprecating the usage of dock=tidal as it is proposed at the wiki and propose the opposite? In that case I would propose something like dock=basin or dock=managed_water_level. Regards Tobias ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal
Dock=gated -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Comms towers
What's with Man_made=communications_tower tower:type=communications Does one tag towers with both ? -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Richard ricoz@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:09:56PM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag seems redundant. true, but I consider building=roof somewhat poor as the roof isn't usually floating in the air but there are pylons, sometimws one or more walls and often a building attached. Richard does it make a difference whether the roof is attached to walls (or a building), or whether it's on pylons? the wiki for building=roof says it can be used when a structure is open on at least 2 sides, which would seem to include a structure with no walls. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
JOSM’s validity checking will warn against a highway=* going through a building=roof but it accepts it if you add a layer=1, so in this situation I’ve been using the following tagging: building=roof layer=1 (and typically other things like amenity=fuel). Often, but not always, there is a small building under the canopy with an attendant or small convenience market. Using the building=roof + layer=1 combination on the canopy also allows adding the covered building. Setting the tag “covered=* would make sense to me in situations where buildings overhang or cover the highway but based on how it looks on the ground tunnel=yes seem inappropriate. Cheers, Tod On May 28, 2015, at 11:09 AM, Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com wrote: If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag seems redundant. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bryan Housel br...@7thposition.com mailto:br...@7thposition.com wrote: Isn’t that exactly the situation that `covered` is for - so that validators don’t raise a warning about the way passing through a building? (I don’t use this tag myself, but I assumed that’s why it exists). On May 28, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com mailto:bry...@obviously.com wrote: Here is another excessively mapped covered tag: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182529550 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182529550 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag seems redundant. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bryan Housel br...@7thposition.com wrote: Isn’t that exactly the situation that `covered` is for - so that validators don’t raise a warning about the way passing through a building? (I don’t use this tag myself, but I assumed that’s why it exists). On May 28, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: Here is another excessively mapped covered tag: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182529550 ___ 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] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
Isn’t that exactly the situation that `covered` is for - so that validators don’t raise a warning about the way passing through a building? (I don’t use this tag myself, but I assumed that’s why it exists). On May 28, 2015, at 1:41 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: Here is another excessively mapped covered tag: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182529550 ___ 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] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:09:56PM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no walls. Typically, I've seen those tagged building=roof. In that case, the covered=* tag seems redundant. true, but I consider building=roof somewhat poor as the roof isn't usually floating in the air but there are pylons, sometimws one or more walls and often a building attached. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
Here is another excessively mapped covered tag: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182529550 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Addresses are used to identify buildings. Not all buildings need to be identified. Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) The house numbers are used to identity flats, not the building. 8 different house numbers, 4 on the ground floor, 4 on the first. I don't remember where the mailboxes are located, they are probably grouped somewhere on the ground floor so the mailman does not have to take the stairs. But someone delivering a package to the front door might want to know that they have to take the stair and then follow the corridor to the Xth door. As many people have pointed out, addresses are used for many different things (mailboxes, entrances, buildings, rooms within building (e.g. Suite), parcels). But you keep on insisting on your view: address == building. But then at a certain moment you said that an address could go on a node and on a building. And when someone asks you to explain that, you start throwing back questions without explaining what you meant. So please sit back, relax and accept that not everyone shares your view. Addresses will be mapped as nodes, on buildings and as interpolation lines. This is OSM, this is accepted and the data consumers can (or have to) live with that. have a nice Friday m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
On 29/05/2015 9:45 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: I've seen 'covered' being used (once!) and my opinion is this: First example under railway bridge, now car park - use tunnel, not 'covered'. Anywhere within buildings, use tunnel=building_passage. The only real significant place 'covered' would seem most appropriate would be where a highway is covered where the cover is purely for the benefit of the highway - e.g. West Cornwall covered bridge. So basically, the cover follows the line of the highway and for no other reason than to cover it. Me? I have a track .. that is 'covered' by an over hanging natural cliff. I've not mapped it yet .. as I have not personnally been there ... and it cannot be seen from a satellite view. For things that are 'covered' by a bridge ... tag the other thing as a bridge .. not tag tunnel on the thing going under the bridge. Roofs for petrol stations get tagged building=roof, layer=1 .. and the 'attached' building gets tagged building=yes or building=retail. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 28 May 2015 at 08:24, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Mike, what's a node address and what's an area address (without resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the many address databases I have worked with. Address on a node and address on an area ! ??? On 2015-05-28 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: On 28 May 2015 at 00:39, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it seems correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense really. Mike, you keep on insisting that addresses should always be put on an area and never on a node. Now here you say it's common sense and correct to put it on a node (that represents the mailbox). What is your position really? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Quite simply area addresses should be on the area and not a node and addresses for a node should be on the node. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On May 29, 2015, at 11:02 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: And that ties in nicely with my thoughts of removing the words and generating tags and values by symbols ! Mapping by emoji! Just put a hot dog symbol in the hot-dog stand! ^_^ For getting data into the database from novice mappers - that might not be a bad idea - however the text description that would invariably be needed to explain the icons would lead to the same thing. And as long as there are very rigid definitions in the tags - then the icons won't fit the ground truth except in the countries of the people who created the tags. Which is true currently - as I find examples that are completely untaggable in the current system because of the insistence on a single or primary tag. Case in point: Video rental shops in Japan also rent music CDs and video games (and sometimes books/manga too). They also are a bookstore. And stationary and collectables shop. This media, goods, and rental shop (as they say on the outside) is a very common store type - there are many *chains* that offer this combination, equating to several thousand stores - but currently there is absolutely no tagging value to convey this properly. It is not primarily a rental shop with a few magazines, nor a stationary shop with a few books or DVDs. It is its own beast. Tsutaya, Geo, FamilyBook, and others are all big chains that do this. It is simply not a combination that is common in other parts of the world (AFAIK). And without some more hierarchy to handle new and multiple values, it will be impossible to tag, even with emoji. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On May 28, 2015, at 4:52 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: while man_made covers technical structures and facilities (like factories, chimneys, flagpoles, lighthouses, silos, ...). If there is one big change I would like to make it would be to greatly reduce the scope of man_made=works. Most factories are buildings, So building=industrial (and so on for the office, etc) And landuse=industrial for the area the factory sits on. For the giant gas refineries which are a giant tangle of pipes and tubes and everything taking up huge amount of space without a specific building, man_made=works seems appropriate. Currently, building=industrial +landuse=industrial has usurped man_made=works completely. Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
I've seen 'covered' being used (once!) and my opinion is this: First example under railway bridge, now car park - use tunnel, not 'covered'. Anywhere within buildings, use tunnel=building_passage. The only real significant place 'covered' would seem most appropriate would be where a highway is covered where the cover is purely for the benefit of the highway - e.g. West Cornwall covered bridge. So basically, the cover follows the line of the highway and for no other reason than to cover it. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?
One case where covered would be appropriate would be a highway or railway in the mountains, where a slanted roof is above the way to protect against falling rocks and/or avalanches. I remember encountering such in the Swiss Alps. On May 28, 2015 6:46:21 PM pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: I've seen 'covered' being used (once!) and my opinion is this: First example under railway bridge, now car park - use tunnel, not 'covered'. Anywhere within buildings, use tunnel=building_passage. The only real significant place 'covered' would seem most appropriate would be where a highway is covered where the cover is purely for the benefit of the highway - e.g. West Cornwall covered bridge. So basically, the cover follows the line of the highway and for no other reason than to cover it. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail -- ___ 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] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On May 28, 2015, at 6:22 PM, AYTOUN RALPH ralph.ayt...@ntlworld.com wrote: And with this argument for a hierarchical approach we are back to the start point of umbrella tags that cover all possibilities which is landuse=educational as a polygon encompassing the whole area and the whole range of educational facilities. using landuse=school excludes universities, colleges, etc and you would then need other tags landuse=university and landuse=college, which then makes the landuse tagging specific instead of general. If we look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse the first sentence is correct Mainly used for describe the primary use of land by humans. so the hierarchical approach should then be something like landuse=agriculture... agriculture would then be sub categorised with farmland (worked land for crops), orchard (trees planted for their fruits), vineyard, pasture, etc. landuse=residential (could be divided into urban and rural which have totally different infrastructures) landuse=commercial landuse=industrial landuse=educational landuse=civic landuse=transport instead of the myriad of specifics that we now have like landuse=peat_cutting and landuse=salt_pondthese are all sub categories of the primary use of the land. I know this has diverted from the main topic here but I wanted to point out the overall usage to highlight how my suggestion fits into the overall picture. +1 There are advantages to certain separations (to make it easier on renders), but there are so many very specific land land uses, while whole categories don't have a single tag. A hierarchical system has room to accept new tags while keeping everyone on the same level of importance. The downside is when one group or culture sees a whole category in a different way - a primary road in Japan has a completely different meaning than the rest of OSM, for example. But I prefer the hierarchical system - a flat tag system has good points, but it's so hard to document and learn, and probably to keep renderer a up to date - as a minor change requires a whole new tag, instead of a new sub-tag value. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On 29 May 2015 at 02:54, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote: On May 28, 2015, at 4:52 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: while man_made covers technical structures and facilities (like factories, chimneys, flagpoles, lighthouses, silos, ...). If there is one big change I would like to make it would be to greatly reduce the scope of man_made=works. Most factories are buildings, So building=industrial (and so on for the office, etc) And landuse=industrial for the area the factory sits on. For the giant gas refineries which are a giant tangle of pipes and tubes and everything taking up huge amount of space without a specific building, man_made=works seems appropriate. Currently, building=industrial +landuse=industrial has usurped man_made=works completely. Javbw. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging I'm not sure a refinery would even be a 'works'. 'Industrial' seems fine to me. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 28 May 2015 at 09:49, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with areas. Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. Addresses are used to identify buildings. Not all buildings need to be identified. In multi-occupancy buildings (apartments, shared offices etc) each separately registered unit needs its own address (in order to ensure post etc is directed to the right party); the geometry of each unit can vary wildly, in three dimensions. A 1:1 relation between addresses and areas (actually volumes might be a better word here) is certainly very common, but not enough to cover the reality. The purpose is to get a person (postman or otherwise) to the right place. It might not be accurately mappable where the right place is and the person may have to use initiative at the 'general location' to find the right door or letterbox. International addressing in databases is an extremely complex area, which is caused to a large extent by people thinking they understand their own address (after all, everybody has one) No they don't ! (long list of examples intentionally omitted!) I've added mine at the bottom. and then expecting the rest of the world to follow the same model. The UK address model lives in a parallel universe compared to the administrative boundaries. It needs extra fields (locality for example) to disambiguate, when a Post Town has multiple roads with the same name. The UK has properties which don't have a number (just a name). Until recently it used counties which hadn't existed for years. All this because the addressing system is run by Royal Mail, purely for its own convenience in delivering mail, and there's nothing better. I pity some countries which don't have addresses, and have stuff delivered based on mileposts and landmarks. Maybe what3words[1] will catch on. How will we put that in OSM I wonder? Ireland still doesn't have postcodes by the way, despite working on it for the past million years. All they have at the moment is Loc8 [2] which is a private initiative, probably born out of frustration with the lack of progress by An Post. They are about to get Eircode[3] which looks incredibly complex for what it is. //colin [1] http://what3words.com/ [2] http://www.myloc8ion.com/ [3] http://www.eircode.ie/ Mike. 54.212404,-3.270514 https://maps.google.com/maps?f=qsource=s_qhl=engeocode=q=54.212404,-3.270514aq=sll=54.212154,-3.270836sspn=0.001441,0.004128vpsrc=6t=hg=54.212404,-3.270514ie=UTF8ll=54.212404,-3.270514spn=0.001441,0.004128z=19iwloc=A Earth Milky Way Universe 1 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 5/28/15 8:44 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: Do explain first problem - where google points do you have any idea how many things are wrong with that statement? the two big ones: 1) we must not depend on anything google does 2) google doesn't even reliably get it right so handwaving where google points is simply wrong. way wrong. richard On 29 May 2015 at 01:39, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 5/28/15 8:26 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: Postcodes don't have addresses! Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address Bigstone Meadow Tutshill Nr Chepstow Gloucestershire England ummm, i think you have quite a bit to learn about geocoding. -- 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] housenumber on node and area
Do explain On 29 May 2015 at 01:39, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 5/28/15 8:26 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: Postcodes don't have addresses! Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address Bigstone Meadow Tutshill Nr Chepstow Gloucestershire England ummm, i think you have quite a bit to learn about geocoding. 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 -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 29 May 2015 at 01:50, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 5/28/15 8:44 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: Do explain first problem - where google points do you have any idea how many things are wrong with that statement? the two big ones: 1) we must not depend on anything google does 2) google doesn't even reliably get it right so handwaving where google points is simply wrong. way wrong. richard 1) and 2) are irrelevant. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On 28 May 2015 at 07:28, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: On May 16, 2015, at 10:29 PM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Thanks for the post, John. Thanks for reading ^^ How about: Forest=natural ? isn’t that natural=wood? I don't know the difference between a wood and a forest! or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted forest]. A forest is a man-altered area, so i believe “forest” already implies man-used. But it is not man_made (as a building is), as the forest is not a non-building structure. Is Amazon rain forest man-affected? landuse=school is, to the map, the same as area=school which is the same as Area is the name for a type of unit in the database (node, way, area) so that sounds confusing. so how about using land=school for your example. I think your 'confusion' is my 'simplification'. We're talking about an area - because that's what we're talking about and to mark that area, we use the 'area' function - no matter the eventual purpose of that area. school or perhaps school=primary school=secondary school=music When I have a facility which encompasses multiple buildings with different purposes (a music school , a computer school, a sports facility, etc) and that entire facility is considered a “school” with a singular name (FooBar university), there has to be some kind of *generic purpose-based tag* for the area. Area=school or Area=University. that is how I see landuse=* . You can reimagine it to have other names, or other tagging styles, but eventually you will lead yourself to purpose=education because if you go much narrower, the world is so varied that the 6 categories you need don’t quite line up with the 6 I need, and the 12 someone else needs - so to have a single catch all is much more flexible. Maybe we can agree on some age splits (Pre K-12 , higher) but if you start going deeper than that - what about combined primary-secondary? what about combined secondary-high? What about a facility that does K-12 all on the same campus? making 35 different tags is not helpful to get taggers tagging and renderers rendering. my fictional tag example landuse=school [currently amenity=school] school=k-12 k-12=secondary;high religion=buddhist denomination=honen Name=FooBar Buddhist Junior Senior High School secondary=3 high_school=3 vs land=honen_buddhist_secondary_high_school This basic hierarchical approach makes it easy to support new users (unless everything is abstracted away, which it is totally not) and Major things to be supported by renderers (which are really really conservative) so we get the best of all worlds for a large amount of things that can fit easily into some big catch-all category, and still have it refined by the subtags for further use . I've no issue with subtags - the main issue is the top-level tag lacking useful information. I've suggested area= instead of amenity= giving area=school, area=building - but then as an area is drawn, the name 'area' becomes unnecessary. school=grounds school=building or building=school grounds=school is perhaps better. The big point is what does 'landuse' (or 'natural') tell us that's new information landuse can be read as “purpose” Natural can be read as “existing in the world with little to no alteration by man. But how valuable is that to the map-reader ? ? bridge=natural would be a case where natural is giving information as it is not expected bridges to be natural. a natural bridge (like a rock crossing a chasm) sounds cool. Can you find a sports pitch that's not landuse ? there's no need to have landuse=sports_pitch. And to prove my point, OSM doesn't ! we have instead leisure=sports_pitch - but it's still landuse but not tagged as such. So now, it seems OSM tags landuse on its own whims, is inconsistent; is confusing I was about to say what sports_pitch isn't 'leisure' - and then thought: commercial=sports_pitch - e.g. professional football grounds A commercial sports facility would have a landuse encompassing all the pitches, parking lots, and other buildings (leisure=sports_center) that make up FooBar Sports Center. landuse=commercial (i think) name:foobar Sports Center sport=multi That sounds like a hybrid - a commercial enterprise providing leisure facilities. I could see there being a landuse=recreation or leisure, but we have chosen to define a lot of land uses by economic means (commercial, industrial, residential, agriculture, etc). This lack of completeness in landuse (there is no landuse=civic yet, I’m pushing for it) would help solve some issues, IMO. Very specific landuses (landuse=poodle_training_ground) sounds really bad to me. there are some which should have been sub-keys (like farmland+crop) but no one was looking that far ahead, such as landuse=farmland now instead of landuse=agriculture and agriculture=* would be better,
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 28 May 2015 at 07:32, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a different town, and sometimes even a different country. What would you call the geographic address for NP16 7JU? The postal address is Chepstow. It's not even in Wales. Postcodes don't have addresses! Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address Bigstone Meadow Tutshill Nr Chepstow Gloucestershire England -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 5/28/15 8:26 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: Postcodes don't have addresses! Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address Bigstone Meadow Tutshill Nr Chepstow Gloucestershire England ummm, i think you have quite a bit to learn about geocoding. 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] housenumber on node and area
Hi Mike, Here's the entrance https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-15.91204/135.52593 There's nothing mapped there but if you look at bing imagery you can see where the access is. Here's the approximate centroid https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-15.5677/135.7972 Cheers Ross On 28/05/15 10:00, pmailkeey . wrote: Hi Ross, On 27 May 2015 at 10:03, Ross i...@4x4falcon.com mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. The entrance is here: http://binged.it/1Rn0nOY but the centroid is about here: http://binged.it/1Rn0zhb Can you plot this address area on OSM, include a loose node for the 'entrance' and give me an OSM map link for it ? Cheers. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * * * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* * * TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Comms towers
According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcommunications_tower One does. On 29 May 2015 at 07:18, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: What's with Man_made=communications_tower tower:type=communications Does one tag towers with both ? -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ 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] Comms towers
according to this wiki page there is a difference between man_made=communications_tower and man_made=tower tower:type=communications and then there is also man_made=mast tower:type=communications pretty easy to understand :-) On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote: According to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcommunications_tower One does. On 29 May 2015 at 07:18, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: What's with Man_made=communications_tower tower:type=communications Does one tag towers with both ? -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ 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] housenumber on node and area
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Mike. 54.212404,-3.270514 https://maps.google.com/maps?f=qsource=s_qhl=engeocode=q=54.212404,-3.270514aq=sll=54.212154,-3.270836sspn=0.001441,0.004128vpsrc=6t=hg=54.212404,-3.270514ie=UTF8ll=54.212404,-3.270514spn=0.001441,0.004128z=19iwloc=A Earth Milky Way Universe 1 What in case you live on the sixth floor ? m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
2015-05-28 8:28 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: How about: Forest=natural ? isn’t that natural=wood? or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted forest]. A forest is a man-altered area, so i believe “forest” already implies man-used. But it is not man_made (as a building is), as the forest is not a non-building structure. I believe the (not so uncommon amongst OSM mappers) reading of natural as tag for everything related to nature and man_made for all kind of stuff made by mankind is not really helpful. The way these are integrated into the tagging scheme is slightly different, they both cover only a subset of the aforementioned, namely natural covers natural geographic features like beaches, swamps, bays, peaks, mountain passes, single trees, springs, brush, heath, boulders, ... with a few (more recent) exceptions like mud and sand (which actually overlap with other like beach and wetland and which are landcovers / materials / surfaces rather than features), while man_made covers technical structures and facilities (like factories, chimneys, flagpoles, lighthouses, silos, ...). Btw.: a forest can or cannot be a man altered area, typically it now is in many parts of the world and once wasn't. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a different town, and sometimes even a different country. What would you call the geographic address for NP16 7JU? The postal address is Chepstow. It's not even in Wales. On 27 May 2015 at 08:07, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Martin et al., It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the question we will never agree about the answer except by coincidence, and that would be the worst situation of all. What are the use cases for an address? Is it as a routing target? A label or annotation for a building? or a property in a looser sense? Is it for the benefit of the postman? Or what? //colin In the UK we have postal addresses and geographic addresses. In the main they're the same but where there isn't a postal address, there's only the geographic address. There are cases where the postal address and geographic address are different - such as PO Box numbers where a firm at one address has their post delivered to another address. Address: geographic/routing (A description for finding a 'place' - a (geographic) location; the next 8 bits, a web page etc. Address: postal post delivery. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ 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] housenumber on node and area
Mike, what's a node address and what's an area address (without resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the many address databases I have worked with. On 2015-05-28 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: On 28 May 2015 at 00:39, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it seems correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense really. Mike, you keep on insisting that addresses should always be put on an area and never on a node. Now here you say it's common sense and correct to put it on a node (that represents the mailbox). What is your position really? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Quite simply area addresses should be on the area and not a node and addresses for a node should be on the node. -- Mike. @millomweb [2] - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via THE AREA'S PREMIER WEBSITE - CURRENTLY UNAVAILABLE DUE TO ONGOING HARASSMENT OF ME, MY FAMILY, PROPERTY PETS TCs [3] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction [3] https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
Am 28.05.2015 um 09:24 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: Mike, what's a node address and what's an area address (without resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the many address databases I have worked with. have you dealt with international addresses or were they related to specific countries? Were the addresses in these dbs polygons or points? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with areas. Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. In multi-occupancy buildings (apartments, shared offices etc) each separately registered unit needs its own address (in order to ensure post etc is directed to the right party); the geometry of each unit can vary wildly, in three dimensions. A 1:1 relation between addresses and areas (actually volumes might be a better word here) is certainly very common, but not enough to cover the reality. International addressing in databases is an extremely complex area, which is caused to a large extent by people thinking they understand their own address (after all, everybody has one) and then expecting the rest of the world to follow the same model. The UK address model lives in a parallel universe compared to the administrative boundaries. It needs extra fields (locality for example) to disambiguate, when a Post Town has multiple roads with the same name. The UK has properties which don't have a number (just a name). Until recently it used counties which hadn't existed for years. All this because the addressing system is run by Royal Mail, purely for its own convenience in delivering mail, and there's nothing better. I pity some countries which don't have addresses, and have stuff delivered based on mileposts and landmarks. Maybe what3words[1] will catch on. How will we put that in OSM I wonder? Ireland still doesn't have postcodes by the way, despite working on it for the past million years. All they have at the moment is Loc8 [2] which is a private initiative, probably born out of frustration with the lack of progress by An Post. They are about to get Eircode[3] which looks incredibly complex for what it is. //colin [1] http://what3words.com/ [2] http://www.myloc8ion.com/ [2] [3] http://www.eircode.ie/ On 2015-05-28 09:34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 28.05.2015 um 09:24 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: Mike, what's a node address and what's an area address (without resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the many address databases I have worked with. have you dealt with international addresses or were they related to specific countries? Were the addresses in these dbs polygons or points? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] http://www.myloc8ion.com/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
On May 16, 2015, at 10:29 PM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Thanks for the post, John. Thanks for reading ^^ I think the problem is the tagging method. Why does there have to be two parts to it ? beyond necessary database syntax (key=value), This is a flat vs hierarchical question. Do we have Education=school / school=elementary or just school=elemntary by itself? There is data to be gleaned from the hierarchical approach - it is an education facility. It is not a private tutoring shop. it is a member of other similar facilities in education (Junior high, High, University, etc). In some cases the more complicated method makes it easier to find what is in a category, such as a top level tag holds all the building types (building=shop) and then shop holds all the different shop types (shop=groomer). and we can then create an additional tag (groomer=poodle_groomer) if we need to add more information. And the debate rages on if it should be that or shop:groomer=poodle or similar - but that still is a hierarchy of information. building=poodle_groomer contains less information and is less easily understood by mappers and renderers. Landuse=schoolgrounds is the same as schoolgrounds. Natural=forest is the same as simply forest. key=value. so.. schoolgrounds=yes? How about: Forest=natural ? isn’t that natural=wood? or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted forest]. A forest is a man-altered area, so i believe “forest” already implies man-used. But it is not man_made (as a building is), as the forest is not a non-building structure. landuse=school is, to the map, the same as area=school which is the same as Area is the name for a type of unit in the database (node, way, area) so that sounds confusing. so how about using land=school for your example. school or perhaps school=primary school=secondary school=music When I have a facility which encompasses multiple buildings with different purposes (a music school , a computer school, a sports facility, etc) and that entire facility is considered a “school” with a singular name (FooBar university), there has to be some kind of *generic purpose-based tag* for the area. that is how I see landuse=* . You can reimagine it to have other names, or other tagging styles, but eventually you will lead yourself to purpose=education because if you go much narrower, the world is so varied that the 6 categories you need don’t quite line up with the 6 I need, and the 12 someone else needs - so to have a single catch all is much more flexible. Maybe we can agree on some age splits (Pre K-12 , higher) but if you start going deeper than that - what about combined primary-secondary? what about combined secondary-high? What about a facility that does K-12 all on the same campus? making 35 different tags is not helpful to get taggers tagging and renderers rendering. my fictional tag example landuse=school [currently amenity=school] school=k-12 k-12=secondary;high religion=buddhist denomination=honen Name=FooBar Buddhist Junior Senior High School secondary=3 high_school=3 vs land=honen_buddhist_secondary_high_school This basic hierarchical approach makes it easy to support new users (unless everything is abstracted away, which it is totally not) and Major things to be supported by renderers (which are really really conservative) so we get the best of all worlds for a large amount of things that can fit easily into some big catch-all category, and still have it refined by the subtags for further use . All the renderers need to see is “ landuse=school “ and I get my render. The rest is for completeness’ sake. imagine the values needed to support land=* in your scheme. land=* would have hundreds of unrelated types of areas all jammed together. there is no split to them for parsing or rendering. and any new value would have to be supported by updating all the renderers. I can create a new value of k-12= and nothing needs to be changed, until support for rendering the k-12 tag is supported later. The big point is what does 'landuse' (or 'natural') tell us that's new information landuse can be read as “purpose” Natural can be read as “existing in the world with little to no alteration by man. ? bridge=natural would be a case where natural is giving information as it is not expected bridges to be natural. a natural bridge (like a rock crossing a chasm) sounds cool. Can you find a sports pitch that's not landuse ? there's no need to have landuse=sports_pitch. And to prove my point, OSM doesn't ! we have instead leisure=sports_pitch - but it's still landuse but not tagged as such. So now, it seems OSM tags landuse on its own whims, is inconsistent; is confusing A commercial sports facility would have a landuse encompassing all the pitches, parking lots, and other buildings (leisure=sports_center) that make up FooBar
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
On 2015-05-28 12:24, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-05-28 12:12 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: If you have a block of flats with 2000 people apparently living at the same address, I can't imagine that a single, shared letter box will be enough. Each apartment will have its own address. Or are you talking about where each apartment has its own private letter box in the entrance hall? yes. the latter. They all have the same address, but they all have their own individual letter box. There are many many cases like this. You (the mail service) don't need a distinct address for each property (=apartment / unit). Maybe the postman doesn't care, but I (the sender of the letter) do. I want to know that the correct John Smith gets my letter. And I am not going to send everything with recorded delivery just in case. In my opinion, the apartment number (= the letterbox identifier) is therefore part of the address. Which would bring us back to what's an address? Is it for delivering letters, or is it about the property itself? it is all of this. You are of course absolutely right, my question was intended rhetorically... but nonetheless with a serious background. Address means different things to different people. Either we federalise and delegate responsibility for the model to countries (agree to differ), and give up on the futile exercise of trying to agree on a simple model that will fit every case in the world, or we analyse various systems across the world and make a more abstract model which can fit all of the cases analysed - which will probably be viewed by everyone as unnecessarily complex for their particular use case. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
2015-05-28 12:12 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: If you have a block of flats with 2000 people apparently living at the same address, I can't imagine that a single, shared letter box will be enough. Each apartment will have its own address. Or are you talking about where each apartment has its own private letter box in the entrance hall? yes. the latter. They all have the same address, but they all have their own individual letter box. There are many many cases like this. You (the mail service) don't need a distinct address for each property (=apartment / unit). Which would bring us back to what's an address? Is it for delivering letters, or is it about the property itself? it is all of this. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
And with this argument for a hierarchical approach we are back to the start point of umbrella tags that cover all possibilities which is landuse=educational as a polygon encompassing the whole area and the whole range of educational facilities. using landuse=school excludes universities, colleges, etc and you would then need other tags landuse=university and landuse=college, which then makes the landuse tagging specific instead of general. If we look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse the first sentence is correct Mainly used for describe the *primary use* of land by humans. so the hierarchical approach should then be something like landuse=agriculture... agriculture would then be sub categorised with farmland (worked land for crops), orchard (trees planted for their fruits), vineyard, pasture, etc. landuse=residential (could be divided into urban and rural which have totally different infrastructures) landuse=commercial landuse=industrial landuse=educational landuse=civic landuse=transport instead of the myriad of specifics that we now have like landuse=peat_cutting and landuse=salt_pondthese are all sub categories of the primary use of the land. I know this has diverted from the main topic here but I wanted to point out the overall usage to highlight how my suggestion fits into the overall picture. On 28 May 2015 at 08:52, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-05-28 8:28 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: How about: Forest=natural ? isn’t that natural=wood? or forest=man_made ? [=plantation or somesuch term for a human-planted forest]. A forest is a man-altered area, so i believe “forest” already implies man-used. But it is not man_made (as a building is), as the forest is not a non-building structure. I believe the (not so uncommon amongst OSM mappers) reading of natural as tag for everything related to nature and man_made for all kind of stuff made by mankind is not really helpful. The way these are integrated into the tagging scheme is slightly different, they both cover only a subset of the aforementioned, namely natural covers natural geographic features like beaches, swamps, bays, peaks, mountain passes, single trees, springs, brush, heath, boulders, ... with a few (more recent) exceptions like mud and sand (which actually overlap with other like beach and wetland and which are landcovers / materials / surfaces rather than features), while man_made covers technical structures and facilities (like factories, chimneys, flagpoles, lighthouses, silos, ...). Btw.: a forest can or cannot be a man altered area, typically it now is in many parts of the world and once wasn't. 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] housenumber on node and area
On 2015-05-28 11:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-05-28 10:49 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with areas. Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. actually in Italy garages sometimes get their own addresses if they have a separate gate. A gate can also have it's own housenumber without leading to anything, like here: https://www.google.it/maps/@41.83254,12.477383,3a,75y,283h,85.62t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1seGMH98B7GPT129x3i2PgaQ!2e0!6m1!1e1 [1] this is number 6, leading to the garden of the house of which all actual housenumbers are 8 and the entrance is here: https://www.google.it/maps/@41.832353,12.477295,3a,75y,300.31h,96.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQZDm_XBQAUDVxW8KkF2YGg!2e0!6m1!1e1 [2] You used the magic word sometimes. Same in NL, if they are discontiguous with the rest of the property. But only sometimes, not always. I have never seen a garage/shed in the UK with an independent address. In multi-occupancy buildings (apartments, shared offices etc) each separately registered unit needs its own address (in order to ensure post etc is directed to the right party); no, you can have all post boxes at one spot and people will go there to retrieve their mail. No need for distinct addresses (because typically you will also write a name, not just an address). Again, that is possible in some cases. The postal service (and other deliverers such as bailiffs) needs to be able to guarantee that it got to the addressee, or at least the addressee's property. Hence the need for a unique address for each unit. In NL every unit must have its own letter box. If you have a block of flats with 2000 people apparently living at the same address, I can't imagine that a single, shared letter box will be enough. Each apartment will have its own address. Or are you talking about where each apartment has its own private letter box in the entrance hall? Which would bring us back to what's an address? Is it for delivering letters, or is it about the property itself? Maybe we should have a N:M between address and property unit, with mail delivery location as an optional element to the address? If the address is a node, it needs to be related to the property unit somehow. 2-d geometry is not enough for this if the node is located outside the property unit, or if the address refers to multiple property units. If it is located at the mail delivery location, then it may not be useful for navigation purposes unless you can derive the property unit location (and/or its entrance(s)) from the address node. It can also be different (several addresses), but it really depends on the local situation. Or maybe you are referring to the UK only? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [3] Links: -- [1] https://www.google.it/maps/@41.83254,12.477383,3a,75y,283h,85.62t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1seGMH98B7GPT129x3i2PgaQ!2e0!6m1!1e1 [2] https://www.google.it/maps/@41.832353,12.477295,3a,75y,300.31h,96.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQZDm_XBQAUDVxW8KkF2YGg!2e0!6m1!1e1 [3] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
2015-05-28 10:49 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with areas. Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. actually in Italy garages sometimes get their own addresses if they have a separate gate. A gate can also have it's own housenumber without leading to anything, like here: https://www.google.it/maps/@41.83254,12.477383,3a,75y,283h,85.62t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1seGMH98B7GPT129x3i2PgaQ!2e0!6m1!1e1 this is number 6, leading to the garden of the house of which all actual housenumbers are 8 and the entrance is here: https://www.google.it/maps/@41.832353,12.477295,3a,75y,300.31h,96.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQZDm_XBQAUDVxW8KkF2YGg!2e0!6m1!1e1 In multi-occupancy buildings (apartments, shared offices etc) each separately registered unit needs its own address (in order to ensure post etc is directed to the right party); no, you can have all post boxes at one spot and people will go there to retrieve their mail. No need for distinct addresses (because typically you will also write a name, not just an address). It can also be different (several addresses), but it really depends on the local situation. Or maybe you are referring to the UK only? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging
W dniu 28.05.2015 11:22, AYTOUN RALPH napisał(a): And with this argument for a hierarchical approach we are back to the start point of umbrella tags that cover all possibilities which is landuse=educational as a polygon encompassing the whole area and the whole range of educational facilities. using landuse=school excludes universities, colleges, etc and you would then need other tags landuse=university and landuse=college, which then makes the landuse tagging specific instead of general. We have also landuse/landcover dispute (landuse=grass should be rather landcover=grass or landuse=meadow probably), so landuse is not really general - I would see it as the object category tree: area water ... land building ... landuse educational kindergarten school (- like primary school) higher/further education (- in Poland HE/FE classification is not used or known, we have only higher schools) university college ... landcover grass sand trees ... We could simply extend the current system of compulsive categorization with such schema, but I think we can do much better and avoid future problems by taking this responsibility from the mappers and letting them focus on the ground truth rather than requiring them to do some philosophical work with categories. We should care for ontology outside the tagging, because it belongs to meta- level. Using Wikidata as a helper would be rich and established source for qualifying and relations between objects and categories. This would also give us more flexibility, because with compulsive categories we're not sure if the mapper is sure that this is the right category or is just following convention from Wiki. We could also expand it much easier with new categories when needed. If we look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse [1] the first sentence is correct Mainly used for describe the PRIMARY USE of land by humans. But we may be not aware of the status. Forest is a great example - in many cases we just see the trees and don't know if they are used or not, but we're pushed to choose if it's natural=wood or landuse=forest, because there is no established area/land=trees tagging. And what about trees in the park - they're not a forest, but still we can say they're used and taken care of by man. I would prefer something really general, like for example: area=trees/land=trees/landcover=trees forest=mixed school=primary/yes (if we don't know the type) and let the category tree be curated in our Wikidata instance (or anything we consider suitable for this task). so the hierarchical approach should then be something like landuse=agriculture... agriculture would then be sub categorised with farmland (worked land for crops), orchard (trees planted for their fruits), vineyard, pasture, etc. landuse=residential (could be divided into urban and rural which have totally different infrastructures) landuse=commercial landuse=industrial landuse=educational landuse=civic landuse=transport instead of the myriad of specifics that we now have like landuse=peat_cutting and landuse=salt_pondthese are all sub categories of the primary use of the land. And the area of a driving school or a private higher school may be just: area=driving_school area=school + school=higher + owner=private because it's at the same time commercial AND educational in many cases. It's just a sketch (what about public commercial entities? and so on), but the less compulsive categorization in tagging, the better. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area
Also, large industrial facilities may have all mail delivered to a central office, yet have separate street addresses for individual buildings for delivering goods. On May 28, 2015 9:21:44 AM Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a different town, and sometimes even a different country. What would you call the geographic address for NP16 7JU? The postal address is Chepstow. It's not even in Wales. On 27 May 2015 at 08:07, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: Martin et al., It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the question we will never agree about the answer except by coincidence, and that would be the worst situation of all. What are the use cases for an address? Is it as a routing target? A label or annotation for a building? or a property in a looser sense? Is it for the benefit of the postman? Or what? //colin In the UK we have postal addresses and geographic addresses. In the main they're the same but where there isn't a postal address, there's only the geographic address. There are cases where the postal address and geographic address are different - such as PO Box numbers where a firm at one address has their post delivered to another address. Address: geographic/routing (A description for finding a 'place' - a (geographic) location; the next 8 bits, a web page etc. Address: postal post delivery. -- Mike. @millomweb https://sites.google.com/site/millomweb/index/introduction - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland via *the area's premier website - * *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property pets* TCs https://sites.google.com/site/pmailkeey/e-mail ___ 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
