Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
johnw wrote: Access=disabled would be good for this situation, but In this the disabled is a group, i.e. a mode of transport as the wiki page calls them, and should be in the key and not in the value; otherwise some areas would get access=disabled;seniors;pregnant , which is awkward. Also the list of different access tag's values should already be comprehensive, various user group restrictions are subtypes of the values that are already described. Some of the values that one can see in taginfo in use now, could be better described with the access:conditional= syntax, such as access=dry_weather_only with access:conditional=yes @ (dry_weather), and many of the values with some hundreds of uses are plain mistakes, like access=bus (that's likely vehicle=no + bus=yes). -- alv ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
TL;DR: capacity=* (and access=*) need to better match reality and have more values - and have existing popular values (including iD presets) documented. On Aug 1, 2015, at 7:50 PM, Lauri Kytömaa lkyto...@gmail.com wrote: In this the disabled is a group, i.e. a mode of transport as the wiki page calls them, Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but this seems to be along the lines of access=customers - which is also widely used but undocumented on the access wiki (which is bizarre). access=emergency or similar is also undocumented (fire road, u-turn route through a median, etc) I want to say that only disabled vehicles can gain access through a barrier or use a parking isle. These vehicles are legally defined in many countries, and there are informal yet easily defined in other places (like Japan). This is similar to access=customers, where it is posted that only customers may use the parking lot, otherwise it is considered trespass (which is a legal thing) and in the US disabled parking is a legal definition with registrations, tags, and penalties - so that sounds similarly legal to me. If they are a legally separated group, access better be able to deal with it - which is why access=customers came about and is a better and more easily understood value than permissive for many retail/commercial facilities (which is sooo many facilities) . A Conditional value is an exception to another state, whereas access=* is more direct about the state. Seniors and priority is a grey area, but, as I stated, drivers over 75 are required to mark their vehicles with a symbol, and there are special parking spots for them in large facility. There should be some kind of accounting for them in the capacity:=x format. (This is not about access=seniors) Any kind of defined and size /purpose separated parking at a venue: bus, motorcycle, senior, pregnant, electric, (which has a value now - charging), taxi, or other marked and segregated parking should be represented in capacity:*=x **because that is what exists in the real world** - OSM should bend to reality and be consistent in its tagging for capacity:*=x otherwise people will tag around it and the documentation and implementation of the key will be worthless. There should be no issue with tagging a giant parking lot as: Amenity=parking Access=customers Capacity=1000 Capacity:disabled=30 Capacity:bus=20 Capacity:senior=10 Capacity:priority=5 Capacity:motorcycle=8 (service areas on motorways have motorcycle spots - not mopeds or bicycles) Capacity:taxi=4 (there are reserved parking for taxis waiting to move to the taxi stand when there are no customers) Capacity:emergency=2 (police/parking/ambulance parking reserved) Besides the police spots, I could tag a single large mall parking lot like that easily every 30km in Japan. Or breaking down the smaller lots (especially when they are separated by hedges/pathways from the main lot!) Amenity=parking Access=customers Capacity=20 Capacity:senior=20 Seems straightforward. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
On Aug 2, 2015, at 8:49 AM, Lauri Kytömaa lkyto...@gmail.com wrote: access=customers Either access=destination or access=permissive, depending on local laws an practices. (or motor_vehicle=*) Access=customers is an established (and documented*) and well used tag (100K uses), and a preset in iD. There have to be some similar good values besides permissive or destination. Javbw * The first page I looked at don’t have it documented, and now on another page it’s there, I messed up there... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dcustomers http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access=customers ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
Sent from my iPhone On Aug 2, 2015, at 4:25 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: access=no disabled=yes ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
(btw. I don't see any problems with capacity:x=* tags, just the access=* values) John Willis wrote: access=customers Either access=destination or access=permissive, depending on local laws an practices. (or motor_vehicle=*) access=emergency rather access=no + emergency=yes a legally separated group When it's a group, it belongs in the key, not in the value. There's two values that are a bit misleading (forestry and agriculture) but that's because they are used differently, i.e. there are (rare) signs which effectively mean vehicles allowed only if used for agriculture and other signs applying to vehicles registered as agricultural vehicles (not allowed, i.e. tractors and, possibly, other motorized machinery). -- alv ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New Key capacity:*=n values
sent from a phone Am 01.08.2015 um 14:29 schrieb John Willis jo...@mac.com: I want to say that only disabled vehicles can gain access through a barrier or use a parking isle. access=no disabled=yes cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] works_as_highway=primary
It makes sense to me to go more by physical attributes than the official primary/secondary/tertiary rating. Among other reasons, medium-term conditions such as construction projects may mean that the quickest route from point A to point B involves the use of a lower-rated roadway to bypass a choke point. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On July 29, 2015 8:24:23 AM Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: A better router might weight physical attributes such as lanes, surface and effective speed more prominently than heuristics based on logical stuff like administrative classifications and legal maximum speeds. Artificially manipulating the tagging to influence the results of routing algorithms is not the way to go - there is name for that... If the government say its primary, then it's primary, unless you want to replace that with subjective assessments. On 29 July 2015 15:08:33 CEST, Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote: On 07/29/2015 07:11 AM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: Routers can already use 'prefer primary to secondary' worldwide. Nowhere in the OSM world is secondary defined as better than primary. In any given area. a car router can confidently prefer 'primary'. Based on what John Willis has said about tagging in Japan, I don't think this is true. From what I understand from his previous posts to this and other OSM mailing lists, the OSM tagging in Japan follows the official classification, and often results in small windy roads through cities that are historically important being marked as primary, while modern bypass roads are marked as secondary or even lower. I think that this breaks a router's idea that primary is better than secondary, and I think that this problem is exactly why people advocate for not following official classification. --Andrew ___ 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
