Re: [Tagging] Proposed Feature Adoption

The office key has been accepted to cover the variety of office types in the value space. The proposed agency certainly is significant on its own to justify such a value. tom Dominic Coletti wrote on 2015/11/29 02:42: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tag:adoption_agency

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Level:ref=*

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 6:05 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > > as an extra tag on POis that already has a level tag. When a level has a name or reference that is used for navigation, there should be some way to tag it's level name. If indoor mapping can't handle that, then it is

Re: [Tagging] Proposed Feature Adoption

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:10 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > The office key has been accepted to cover the variety of office types > in the value space. The proposed agency certainly is significant on > its own to justify such a value. > +1 Dave -- Dave Swarthout Homer,

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

In think the word you may be looking for is "ornamental". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornamental_plant Could you use landuse=field? The wiki suggests it has been abandoned but perhaps it should be used in the context. Presumably you could then add, field=ornamental_flowers. Regards

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

> On Nov 30, 2015, at 5:18 AM, Dudley Ibbett wrote: > > field=ornamental_flowers. In some cases, they are fields (nemophila, daffodils, lavender). https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/javbw/11094010745/ In other cases, the long strips of flowers between a maze of walkways

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Level:ref=*

This seems to lead to tons of unnecessary redundancy as proposed: as an extra tag on POis that already has a level tag. I would rather be looking for something that fits in with SIT (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging) better. Since SIT works really well (see OpenLevelUp),

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

Javbw > On Nov 29, 2015, at 10:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > too specific for landuse - It is man-altered from natural=* for a specific use (cleared of all natural vegetation and planted with a man-chosen display of flowers) - it is not landuse=farmland

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:15 AM, John Willis wrote: > Landuse=ornamental_flowers +1 -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Level:ref=*

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 02:45:26PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > Am 29.11.2015 um 13:53 schrieb John Willis : > > > > Still looking for feedback on the idea. > > > +1, I think it's good as is its brother level:name (at least as long as there

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Level:ref=*

Still looking for feedback on the idea. Javbw > On Nov 14, 2015, at 3:17 PM, johnw wrote: > > I created an RFC page for level:ref=* > > I look forward to your comments. here or on the discussion page. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/level:ref

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

Looking for further feedback - Thinking of creating landuse=flower_display For sections of land that a cultivated with flowers for decorative/attraction purposes - not a crop or for sale. Flower_field sounds like it could be a tag for a crop, and flower_bed is a small (unmappable?) Part part

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Level:ref=*

sent from a phone > Am 29.11.2015 um 13:53 schrieb John Willis : > > Still looking for feedback on the idea. +1, I think it's good as is its brother level:name (at least as long as there aren't proper level objects). cheers Martin

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

sent from a phone > Am 29.11.2015 um 14:02 schrieb John Willis : > > Thinking of creating landuse=flower_display For sections of land that a > cultivated with flowers for decorative/attraction purposes - I think that's too specific for landuse. "exhibitional" isn't a proper

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - tag:adoption_agency

Link to Proposal Page Definition– A way to tag places where prospective parents can adopt orphaned children. -- Dominic Coletti President & CEO 3Dreams Design 205 Anamoor Dr Cary, NC 27513 (919) 463-9554 NOTICE: This

[Tagging] RFC - tag: office=adoption_agency

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/tag:adoption_agency This proposal serves as a way to tag places where prospective parents can adopt orphaned children. -- Dominic Coletti President & CEO 3Dreams Design 205 Anamoor Dr Cary, NC 27513 (919) 463-9554 NOTICE: This email and any

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

+1... There are often large, ornamental gardens associated with "stately homes" (huge residences for aristocracy in the past) which are full of colourful plants. This sounds very similar, possibly without the residence. //colin On 2015-11-30 08:23, Dudley Ibbett wrote: > Do you need a

Re: [Tagging] amenity=bicycle_repair_station

Any quick comments on this schema, before I write it up? amenity=self_serve_tool_station brand=Dero Fixit operator=Metro Country Trails opening_hours=24/7 self_serve_tool_station:bicycles=yes self_serve_tool_station:snow_sports=no self_serve_tool_station:ice_skates=no

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

Do you need a landuse tag for the last two as they would be called gardens (in the UK) if people can move round them. Could you not just use leisure=garden for these? Regards Dudley > On 29 Nov 2015, at 22:16, John Willis wrote: > > >> On Nov 30, 2015, at 5:18 AM, Dudley