Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Improve Toilet Tagging

[John Willis]

Javbw
> On Mar 31, 2017, at 5:47 AM, Micah Cochran  wrote:
> 
> and adds the gender designation

There needs to be another "gender" - elderly. 

In Japan, almost all public restrooms - at malls, service areas, public 
buildings, etc - have three designated toilets - blue "men's" toilets, red 
"ladies" toilets, and 1 "green" elderly/ disabled toilet.  They have separate 
entrances. The green toilet will be the closest entrance with a gigantic 
sliding door, and a large single room with a toilet, sink, and possibly a 
full-size adult wheelchair transfer table. 
This is beyond the normal "wheelchair accessible" stall or handrail equipped 
urinial you would still see in he normal restroom. 

I know that "elderly" is not a gender - but this special green toilet  is 
treated as if there was a third gender and signed and colored as prominently. 
They are shown on toilet maps and signed. They are treated as a third "gender". 
Even my middle school has this 1 special toilet with a separate entrance and 
designation, beyond boys, girls, men, and women. 

Also, If you are tagging stalls, please consider integrating in "kids" stalls- 
I have seen 1/2 height stalls (with tiny toilets) for kids to use, so parents 
can look over the top to see what they are doing. Tagging individual stalls 
also *requires* the type of toilet (squat, western, urinal, etc ) to be tagged 
- as the stalls in many public restrooms here are signed as to what type of 
toilet is available - so tagging stalls should also be able to tag what toilet 
is inside. Large restrooms at a service area will have a map displaying they 
layout of the toilet room and the types of toilets available, so being able to 
replicate that in OSM would be useful if one is mapping stalls. 

I know there are some existing tags (I think) for this - so please integrate 
them into your proposal. 

PS - thanks for thinking of the safety of the LBGT community. 

Javbw.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Improve Toilet Tagging

[Micah Cochran]

Hello all,

This is a proposal to make a few improvements to tagging toilets. This
proposal adds a tag for the arrangement of stalls and adds the gender
designation tagging on toilets that are within a place (where tagged
"toilet=yes").

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/
Toilet_Tagging_Improvements

Please take look at it an give me your comments in the discussion.

Thank you,
Micah
-- 

*Micah Cochran*

GIS Coordinator  -  City of Athens  -  Engineering Services & Community
Development Dept.  -  Dept. of Public Works Building  -  1600 ELM ST W,
Athens, AL  - geo:34.820608,-86.991474 -  p.
256-233-2224 <(256)%20233-2224>  -  f. 256-233-8791 <(256)%20233-8791> -
www.athensalabama.us
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay on areas

[Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana]

I didn't know about the practice of mapping the coastline along the baseline, 
AFAIK we don't map the baseline, only their 12nm offset (maritime borders)



Vice versa, the practice is mapping the baseline along the coastline. 
But I think this is no a good idea, because baseline extend up a bit 
outside of the coastline, if the baseline runs along the low tide. In 
some places the tidal range is huge.


The example of  Rio de la Plata exposed previously is clearly poorly 
mapped according the definition of natural=coastline. Note that 
according IHO Rio de la Plata is a sea.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes

[Topographe Fou]

  Well, I would use both ref AND colour.Then for the name what you propose looks good from my perspective.If you want to check or get some ideas you can also make some statistics with Overpass on how detours are commonly named.LeTopographeFouDe: roadsgu...@gmail.comEnvoyé: 30 mars 2017 6:19 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes  So if I use, for example, colour=blue in the relation, rather than have ref=Blue, I would have "name=I XX Blue Detour"?--RoadsguyOn Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Topographe Fou  wrote:  In your case I would probably also consider to add something like colour=green/yellow/... on the detour relation.LeTopographeFou   De: ba...@ursamundi.orgEnvoyé: 30 mars 2017 2:31 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes  Check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3DdetourOn Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:Is there an established way of mapping detour routes such as Pennsylvania's colored Interstate detours, as seen in this picture? I would think it would be as simple as using route relations with route=detour, ref=Green/Blue/Orange/etc, and detour=I 81/I 78/etc, but before I go and add these I want to know whether these should be mapped at all, and if so, what standard practice is.--Roadsguy
___
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] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes

[Albert Pundt]

So if I use, for example, colour=blue in the relation, rather than have
ref=Blue, I would have "name=I XX Blue Detour"?

--Roadsguy

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Topographe Fou 
wrote:

> In your case I would probably also consider to add something like
> colour=green/yellow/... on the detour relation.
>
> LeTopographeFou
> *De:* ba...@ursamundi.org
> *Envoyé:* 30 mars 2017 2:31 PM
> *À:* tagging@openstreetmap.org
> *Répondre à:* tagging@openstreetmap.org
> *Objet:* Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes
>
> Check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Ddetour
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Albert Pundt 
> wrote:
>
>> Is there an established way of mapping detour routes such as
>> Pennsylvania's colored Interstate detours, as seen in this picture
>> ? I
>> would think it would be as simple as using route relations with
>> route=detour, ref=Green/Blue/Orange/etc, and detour=I 81/I 78/etc, but
>> before I go and add these I want to know whether these should be mapped at
>> all, and if so, what standard practice is.
>>
>> --Roadsguy
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes

[Topographe Fou]

  In your case I would probably also consider to add something like colour=green/yellow/... on the detour relation.LeTopographeFouDe: ba...@ursamundi.orgEnvoyé: 30 mars 2017 2:31 PMÀ: tagging@openstreetmap.orgRépondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.orgObjet: Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes  Check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3DdetourOn Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:Is there an established way of mapping detour routes such as Pennsylvania's colored Interstate detours, as seen in this picture? I would think it would be as simple as using route relations with route=detour, ref=Green/Blue/Orange/etc, and detour=I 81/I 78/etc, but before I go and add these I want to know whether these should be mapped at all, and if so, what standard practice is.--Roadsguy
___
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] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes

[Paul Johnson]

Check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Ddetour

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Albert Pundt  wrote:

> Is there an established way of mapping detour routes such as
> Pennsylvania's colored Interstate detours, as seen in this picture
> ? I
> would think it would be as simple as using route relations with
> route=detour, ref=Green/Blue/Orange/etc, and detour=I 81/I 78/etc, but
> before I go and add these I want to know whether these should be mapped at
> all, and if so, what standard practice is.
>
> --Roadsguy
>
> ___
> 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] natural=bay on areas

[Andrew Harvey]

On 30 March 2017 at 07:41, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana
 wrote:
> An exact limit between the open ocean and a sheltered coast is too arbitrary
> as natural feature. It seems a political issue. You can use
> boundary=maritime + border_type=baseline for excluding internal waters from
> the open ocean, according of laws of the country. Check the article
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_waters

I'm looking to tag natural features as surveyed on the ground, not
political or administrative boundaries. Sure the boundary is fuzzy but
we can still get it close.

On 30 March 2017 at 08:00, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> No, it is not a political issue, the position of the baseline is not in
> doubt here.  If Andrew wants to indicate the sheltered nature of the
> coast in some way via supplemental tags that seems perfectly fine - as
> long as these tags are documented and verifiable of course.
>
> In any case tagging the bay as natural=bay will already indicate this
> part of the coastline to be of special nature.

Agreed. coastline=pelagic, natural=ria all are potential ways to help here.

For me Botany Bay (http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1214649)
isn't part of the open ocean but Bondi Bay
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/926183187) is, even though both
offer shelter.

On 30 March 2017 at 18:25, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> On 30 Mar 2017, at 01:06, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
>> because UNCLOS allows countries to specify a baseline separate from the 
>> coastline that encloses parts of the sea/ocean (thereby making those parts 
>> internal waters of the country) .
> I thought the baseline was generally separate from the actual coastline. It 
> is an administrative construct, while this thread is about natural features. 
> Internal waters, territorial waters , exclusive sea zones, they're all about 
> political and economical power and benefit, not about natural 
> geologic/geographical configurations.

Exactly. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseline_(sea),
the baseline political, they are like an administrative boundary.
That's a separate discussion, I'm only talking about natural features
here.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

[Kevin Kenny]

On 03/30/2017 07:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:


On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Kevin Kenny 
> wrote:



Obviously, if we are using the node for other purposes, we may
need to disambiguate with stop:direction=* or
give_way:direction=*, just as we do with other ambiguously-named tags.

I'm having a hard time picturing any case where this couldn't
work. It doesn't involve measuring distances to intersections,
trying to divine from a sign placement beside a way what it means
for traffic on the way, or any other weird preprocessing.


Well, every instance where the restriction only applies to one 
direction, because nodes lack direction.
Yes. Nodes lack direction. Ways do have direction. Traffic arrives at a 
node along a way. 'direction=*' indicates that the restriction applies 
to any way arriving at the node in the given direction, relative to the 
way it arrived on.


Did you even read what I wrote earlier?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-30 13:53 GMT+02:00 John Willis :

>
> there is defined tagging for these zones:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:zone:maxspeed
>
> Thanks, I will add that to the Japan tagging page on Monday as well.
>


Sorry, there's also another tag in use ;-
source:maxspeed can also be used for these:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source:maxspeed


maxspeed=30 and zone:maxspeed=DE:30 - 32952 uses
maxspeed=30 and source:maxspeed=DE:zone30 - 32018 uses
maxspeed=30 and source:maxspeed=DE:zone:30 - 21832 uses

I am going to propose on the German list the unification of the latter 2.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source%3Amaxspeed#values

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[John Willis]

> On Mar 30, 2017, at 7:00 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> there is defined tagging for these zones:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:zone:maxspeed
> 
> Cheers,
> Martin

Thanks, I will add that to the Japan tagging page on Monday as well. ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Kevin Kenny 
wrote:

>
> Obviously, if we are using the node for other purposes, we may need to
> disambiguate with stop:direction=* or give_way:direction=*, just as we do
> with other ambiguously-named tags.
>
> I'm having a hard time picturing any case where this couldn't work. It
> doesn't involve measuring distances to intersections, trying to divine from
> a sign placement beside a way what it means for traffic on the way, or any
> other weird preprocessing.


Well, every instance where the restriction only applies to one direction,
because nodes lack direction.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-30 10:52 GMT+02:00 John Willis :

> Could you make a residential=* subtag for the zone30?
>
> Highway=residential
> Residential=zone30
> Max speed=30
>


there is defined tagging for these zones:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:zone:maxspeed

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[John Willis]

Javbw
> On Mar 30, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Satoshi IIDA  wrote:
> 
> But there are some rare case to match "highway=living_street" such as the one 
> named "Zone 30" public highway/road in Japanese situation.

The idea of using the living street for those narrowly defined roads sounds 
like a good idea - but as Martin pointed out, the living street's definition is 
very particular. 

I have never heard of "zone 30" before - we have "school zones" in the US (and 
in Japan too)... 

If the "living street" is a residential street with special legal definition, 
is the "zone 30" a similar situation (beyond residential+max speed=30")?  

Could you make a residential=* subtag for the zone30? 

Highway=residential
Residential=zone30
Max speed=30

Javbw. 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30 Mar 2017, at 08:58, Satoshi IIDA  wrote:
> 
> But there are some rare case to match "highway=living_street" such as the one 
> named "Zone 30" public highway/road in Japanese situation.


in Germany (where this living street tag comes from), there's a big difference 
between a living street and a zone30, with the latter basically being a 
(residential) area with a maxspeed of 30 , while a living street is a much more 
regulated area with a maxspeed around 7km/h, no parking outside marked 
parkings, implicit yield obligation when leaving the street, general precedence 
of pedestrians over vehicles, people allowed to stay on the road (and play, 
etc.), ...

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay on areas

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30 Mar 2017, at 01:06, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
> 
> because UNCLOS allows countries to specify a baseline separate from the 
> coastline that encloses parts of the sea/ocean (thereby making those parts 
> internal waters of the country) .


I thought the baseline was generally separate from the actual coastline. It is 
an administrative construct, while this thread is about natural features. 
Internal waters, territorial waters , exclusive sea zones, they're all about 
political and economical power and benefit, not about natural 
geologic/geographical configurations.



> 
> If we follow the practice of mapping the coastline along the claimed baseline 
> like in the Rio de la Plata elsewhere in the world, then the Gulf of Sidra in 
> Libya[1] would be considered as an inland waterbody


I didn't know about the practice of mapping the coastline along the baseline, 
AFAIK we don't map the baseline, only their 12nm offset (maritime borders)

cheers,
Martin 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Living street" in Japan

[Satoshi IIDA]

Hello,

Just a information.
We had a similar discussion on talk-ja. (2016 oct)

We could not reach the detailed consensus at that time.
But there are some rare case to match "highway=living_street" such as the
one named "Zone 30" public highway/road in Japanese situation.

* thread:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ja/2016-October/009532.html

Hoping this could be useful.



2017-03-30 12:28 GMT+09:00 tomoya muramoto :

> OK I will send a message to him.
> muramoto
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Satoshi IIDA
mail: nyamp...@gmail.com
twitter: @nyampire
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging