[Tagging] highway building entrance - non parking

[Warin]

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 amenity=parking_entrance should be depreciated

where is the exit? Or is this a black hole into which cars disappear?

.. into something like entrance=parking

I note that the status is set to approved ...  That would be hard to 
get votes here!



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

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

[althio]

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 "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 to how you wouldn't get someone asking "can you help
> me get this perambulator onto the omnibus" :)
>
> On 10/04/2017 22:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> 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,
> 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
>

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

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

[ajt1...@gmail.com]

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 to how you wouldn't get someone 
asking "can you help me get this perambulator onto the omnibus" :)


On 10/04/2017 22:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


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,
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] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

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

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

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - historic=tombstone

[Michal Fabík]

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

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Kevin Kenny]

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
>> ,
>> especially maintaining it.
>>
>> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
>> the forestry web service(s).
>>
>>
> This is why I started to think about this, the data about forest harvest
> in Sweden is under a CCBY like licence, but I wanted to get a better
> understanding how to tag it before contacting them and see if we can import
> the data in to OSM.
>

The point about a federated map is that the data that OSM mappers don't
maintain won't be imported.

For maps that I produce (example:
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html?la=42.1344=-74.1186=14),
I usually don't attempt to use land cover from OSM. I use land cover data
from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD), while I have other data from
OSM and other sources. That makes it similar to elevation data - the layers
in the OSM map that show elevations don't have all the contours in OSM,
they get them from elsewhere.

For that reason, I generally map landcover only where (a) I have personal
knowledge that NLCD is wrong, or (b) I'm mapping in my own suburban
community and want higher-resolution landcover information than the 100m or
so that NLCD gives me. In most cases, for a hiker, NLCD is fine. I at least
have some information about where I might expect to get my feet wet, and
which way to go to avoid pushing through a spruce thicket. It tells me that
I might expect a nice, unobstructed view to the south where the trail
crosses County Road 3 near the center of
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html?la=42.5879=-74.1075=15.
That stuff is really what I need to know.

If everything were imported, there would be a nightmare trying to maintain
the data. If a local mapper has repaired anything about the imported
landcover information and there is a subsequent change to the same polygon
in your national database, what do you do? (Damaging the local mapper's
hard-won data is NOT acceptable.)

Incidentally, those maps also shows why I think that some other data should
not be imported. The trails shown in magenta are from some government
databases. The data are reliable in that they show the presence of trails
and their destinations, but their spatial accuracy leaves a lot to be
desired. You can see how the alignment is quite poor indeed where a magenta
trail is overlaid with a black one from OSM. The same database is what put
a parking lot in the middle of the woods south of the Schoharie Headwaters
Unit. (The parking is actually on the turning circle at the end of Prediger
Road). I show the magenta trails primarily as a mappers' 'to do' list for
field mapping.

So let me leave you with a challenging question: how would importing the
data benefit the OSM community more than federating it? What would
importing allow us to do that a federated approach would not? (For my
imports of public land boundaries in New York, my answer was, "it allows us
to conflate boundaries between land owned by different agencies, where the
complete set of parcels is not in any one agency's database." Moreover,
administrative boundaries often are an exception to the general rule that
federation is better than import.)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[John F. Eldredge]

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

[Kevin Kenny]

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 nothing inconsistent about a pond in
landuse=forest. It might grow trees perfectly well if it gets a period of
low beaver activity, and that may be the intention of the land manager.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

[Thibaud B]

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 Wiki
wiki.openstreetmap.org
Tagging. The individual tag values can be yes, served or retail. If a location 
is a restaurant which is serving for example club-mate the right combination 
would be ...



"drink:alcohol=no"  could be an idea ?


Regards

Thibaud


De : Michal Fabík 
Envoyé : lundi 10 avril 2017 15:12:24
À : Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Objet : 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, there's a well-established acronym for "bring your own booze": 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYOB, so I guess "byob=yes" could work? Then you 
need another tag to indicate whether the restaurants sells alcohol - I'm quite 
surprised that I couldn't find it in the Wiki. Then the situation you describe 
would be something like "alcohol=no" + "byob=yes".

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

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

[Jerry Clough - OSM]

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

  From: Dave F 
 To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"  
 Sent: Monday, 10 April 2017, 13:54
 Subject: [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


___
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] Restaurant that doesn't sell alcohol...

[Michal Fabík]

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, there's a well-established acronym for "bring your own booze":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYOB, so I guess "byob=yes" could work? Then
you need another tag to indicate whether the restaurants sells alcohol -
I'm quite surprised that I couldn't find it in the Wiki. Then the situation
you describe would be something like "alcohol=no" + "byob=yes".

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

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

[Dave F]

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


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

Re: [Tagging] Advertising redefinitions in the wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

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 "copied"?
This page is still there:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:advertising

The proposal is still in status "proposed":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/advertising
(IMHO could also be "de facto" as there are 27K uses of the advertising
key, but the key:advertising page is not only documenting the proposal, it
has lots of amendments, some of which have been questioned in the other
thread here).

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

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

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, also overlapping if required):

natural=*. the named feature/forest, also nested smaller ones inside bigger 
ones. This is for toponyms and geographic features, e.g. a pond in the forest 
would be included 

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.

landcover=trees
all kind of areas where trees grow (physical aspect)

cheers,
Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Vao Matua]

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

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:49 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 recent
>> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep,
>> but
>> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>>
>
> Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
> to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
> there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
> tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
> a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
> based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory
> 
> and satellite data 
> ...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
> within our web based GIS application.*'
>
> ... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
> geodata in Minecraft
> ')
> ... now that's Open Data!
>
> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
> inventory is is a non-trivial task
> ,
> especially maintaining it.
>
> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
> the forestry web service(s).
>
> Michael Patrick
> Data Ferret
> OSM Seattle
>
> ___
> 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] Forestry/logging

[Mattias Dalkvist]

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 recent
>> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep,
>> but
>> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>>
>
> Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
> to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
> there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
> tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
> a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
> based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory
> 
> and satellite data 
> ...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
> within our web based GIS application.*'
>
> ... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
> geodata in Minecraft
> ')
> ... now that's Open Data!
>
> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
> inventory is is a non-trivial task
> ,
> especially maintaining it.
>
> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
> the forestry web service(s).
>
>
This is why I started to think about this, the data about forest harvest in
Sweden is under a CCBY like licence, but I wanted to get a better
understanding how to tag it before contacting them and see if we can import
the data in to OSM.

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

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Michael Patrick]

> 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, but
> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>

Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory

and satellite data 
...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
within our web based GIS application.*'

... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
geodata in Minecraft
')
... now that's Open Data!

My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
inventory is is a non-trivial task
,
especially maintaining it.

A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
the forestry web service(s).

Michael Patrick
Data Ferret
OSM Seattle
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Warin]

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 these land uses.


There are some who say that the source tag should not be used, they want 
to rely on the changeset comments, these do carry a date.

Personally I prefer using the source tag.

On 10-Apr-17 04:32 PM, Vao Matua wrote:

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 have two additional *required* 
tags: "source=" and "source:date=" .


Regards,

Emmor

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Clifford Snow 
> wrote:



On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua > wrote:

This is an interesting discussion. As a tree farmer and
professional forester I am offended by the suggestion that a
harvested area is different landuse from areas that are in
other stages of forest growth.
I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but
I would say that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get
that information. There are so many basic features missing
from OSM, spending effort to collect vegetative landcover
seems like a lower need, especially considering the fact that
in a relatively short period of time the vegetative signature
will be different.


Palolo,
Thank you for your input. If I understand you, landuse=forest is
what the land is being used for while landcover is what's there.
To get a Warin's point, if you want to know if the area was
clearcut recently, we should be using landcover.

We do have a lot of features that need added to OSM. But I always
encourage new mappers to map what they like. Currently I have been
adding farmland to my county. It helps tell the counties story.
Farmland is just part of the story, a big part of the county is
also logging. Right now I'm reluctant to just start adding
forested areas until I learn more. Any suggestions on how we
should be mapping forested areas would be appreciated.

Best,
Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle

osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us 
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch

___
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] Forestry/logging

[Vao Matua]

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 have two additional *required* tags:
"source=" and "source:date=" .

Regards,

Emmor

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua  wrote:
>
>> This is an interesting discussion.  As a tree farmer and professional
>> forester I am offended by the suggestion that a harvested area is different
>> landuse from areas that are in other stages of forest growth.
>> I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but I would
>> say that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get that information.
>> There are so many basic features missing from OSM, spending effort to
>> collect vegetative landcover seems like a lower need, especially
>> considering the fact that in a relatively short period of time the
>> vegetative signature will be different.
>>
>
> Palolo,
> Thank you for your input. If I understand you, landuse=forest is what the
> land is being used for while landcover is what's there. To get a Warin's
> point, if you want to know if the area was clearcut recently, we should be
> using landcover.
>
> We do have a lot of features that need added to OSM. But I always
> encourage new mappers to map what they like. Currently I have been adding
> farmland to my county. It helps tell the counties story. Farmland is just
> part of the story, a big part of the county is also logging. Right now I'm
> reluctant to just start adding forested areas until I learn more. Any
> suggestions on how we should be mapping forested areas would be
> appreciated.
>
> Best,
> Clifford
>
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging