[Tagging] highway building entrance - non parking

A highway entry to a building can be tagged amenity=parking_entrance ... but that does not fit for a car wash, food/drink drive through situation, nor an exit. So how would you tag it? For the moment I have used entrance=yes. -- I would have thought

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

I agree with Martin and I must insist: no abbreviations or acronyms please. My ideas are about: alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own wine=yes/no/bring_your_own - althio On 11 April 2017 at 00:13, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote: > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=byo > > Finds 3

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=byo Finds 3 "byo", 2 "byob" and there is also 1 "bring_your_own_wine" so there's not a huge precedent in OSM either way, but both BYO and BYOB are understood "as is" in English and probably more commonly used than the expanded version. It's similar

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

2017-04-10 15:12 GMT+02:00 Michal Fabík : > well, there's a well-established acronym for "bring your own booze": > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYOB, so I guess "byob=yes" could work? > -1, no abbreviations or acronyms, preferably, unless already introduced. Cheers,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - historic=tombstone

2017-04-10 22:55 GMT+02:00 Michal Fabík : > Definition: use this tag for prominent tombstones I would not put "prominent" in the definition, otherwise the question will be: how can we tag a non-prominent tombstone? Cheers, Martin

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - historic=tombstone

Hi, please comment. (And please don't be too harsh, this is my first proposal:)) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/historic%3Dtombstone Definition: use this tag for prominent tombstones -- Michal Fabík ___ Tagging mailing

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Mattias Dalkvist wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Michael Patrick > wrote: > >> >> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an >> inventory is is a non-trivial task >>

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

Just because a tract of land is being used for forestry doesn't mean it won't have streams on it, and low spots may have ponds. On April 10, 2017 2:36:20 PM Kevin Kenny wrote: On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > landuse =forest. areas used to grow and log trees (actual current human > use of land), a pond would not be included but a clearcut area still > dedicated to growing trees would. > In beaver country, there's

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

Maybe the"drink:" key, it's used to indicate which drink are sold/served. (drink=* - A suggested tag for marking availability of special beverages; see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drink) Key:drink - OpenStreetMap

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

Hi, There are two examples of byob=yes, one of bring_your_own_wine=yes, and one alcohol=bring_your_own_bottle. No doubt there are other tags of which I'm not aware. I would have thought that London must have a goodly number of BYOB establishments, and surely more than 4. Regards, Jerry

Re: [Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Dave F wrote: > Hi > > I've a restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol but allows customers to bring > their own & the restaurant will open & serve it. > > I can't find anything relevant in taginfo. Any ideas? > > DaveF > Hi, well,

[Tagging] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

Hi I've a restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol but allows customers to bring their own & the restaurant will open & serve it. I can't find anything relevant in taginfo. Any ideas? DaveF --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [Tagging] Advertising redefinitions in the wiki

2017-04-08 18:28 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm : > I took the liberty of moving "Advertising" to > "User:Barnes38/Advertising" as it is clearly this user's personal > playground that is still waiting for broader discussion. > when you write "moved", has this to be read as

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

sent from a phone > On 10. Apr 2017, at 07:17, Clifford Snow wrote: > > Any suggestions on how we should be mapping forested areas would be > appreciated. my suggestion is to map the following 3 aspects (not necessarily in the same osm feature, but orthogonally,

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

I think this is a great solution. It is not possible to over-estimate the amount of work and skill involved in classification of imagery from any source. It is great for the OSM community to think that we can map the streets of the world, it is a different matter to map vegetation types. Emmor

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Michael Patrick wrote: > > Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover >> using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a >> nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

> Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover > using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a > nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent > vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep,

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

Landcover=wood (or the presently OSM popular 'natural=wood')applies to trees of all types, ages, planting densities and heights. So there are some sub tags that can be used under that land cover. Harvesting operations are a function of land use (forestry or farm) and could be a sub tag under

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

Clifford, You are correct, landuse is different from landcover. I assume you are tagging farmland as landuse, not landcover. The problem with landcover is that the currency and consistency of the source information is critical and is very difficult in OSM. The OSM tagging for landcover should