Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

I think just using platform door tags instead of platform gate tags should be enough, since there isn't a way to say something is ceiling-height yet (this matches the aforementioned door=* proposal, where doors are supposed to control ventilation etc.). jc86035 > On Sun, 16 Apr 2017, at 9:12 PM,

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

On 17.04.2017 01:27, Tom Hardy wrote: The closest I've come is http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780 where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created the relation. Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later were gone. I looked into it and found someone had move

Re: [Tagging] historic=tank and surprises with tags like car-sharing

On 2017-04-16 00:20, Michal Fabík wrote: > Hi, > I just mapped my third tank in about a month and I'm still wondering why it > isn't documented in the Wiki alongside historic=aircraft, historic=locomotive > etc. There's quite a few of them mapped already, according to Taginfo. One > could argue

[Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

On Sunday, April 16, 2017 10:59:00 PM CDT Tom Pfeifer wrote: > Identified as a glitch in the rendering databases, as assumed. See > the carto ticket above and > https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/156 for > explanation. > > No need to change any tagging for this (of course the sch

Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

Javbw > On Apr 17, 2017, at 12:53 AM, jc86035 wrote: > > barrier=platform_gates and > barrier=platform_doors to avoid requiring another tag for which type it is Sounds good. I think having a default material is wrong, as they are brushed stainless steel +plastic laminate in Tokyo (Keio lin

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16.04.2017 11:54, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city). The standard layer doesn't show it but

Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

> Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 09:04:57 +0900 > From: John Willis > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform > gates > Message-ID: <7e170a8b-9d85-4c54-9844-6516eb269...@mac.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; chars

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

>And (speaking as an American), if someone asked me to direct them to a post office, unless they were obviously about to send a parcel, I wouldn't send them to FedEx or the local copy shop (most of which offer shipping services, and some of which also offer a mailbox service). Thanks for clarifyin

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16 April 2017 11:54:19 IST, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >However on the information available to me ... I could not reliably map >the extent of the school .. so I would map it as a node only. >I think this is not regression but removes an assumption (from the >present tagging) that t

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On 04/16/2017 06:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a government run service with international links to other 'Post

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16/04/2017 06:40, Warin wrote: I would remove the amenity=school and place that on a node with the name and address stuff. Leave the building as a 'Plain Jane' building=school. This would be tagging explicitly for the renderer & making the database more inaccurate. Leaving it as is,

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16-Apr-17 07:54 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city). The standard layer doesn't show it bu

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards. > > > why? Maybe those mentioned offer only parcel shipping but there are also > private letter mail operators in some places I cannot find anything on the DHL abou

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a > government run service with international links to other 'Post Offices'. > A 'posted' item would be through the 'Post Office' no mater the sending or

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On 16-Apr-17 05:34 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Marc Gemis > wrote: On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org>> wrote: > How is it not a post office that just happens to have an operator other

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city). The standard layer doesn't show it but every other layer does, and it appears no

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

> I would expect from the proposal to define which places are to get the tag: Made them clear on proposal. On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > >> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards. > >

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards. Not to sound contrarian, but why not? When I was homeless, my "permanent address" was a rental box at a UPS Store by where I went to high school. FedEx Office is the only c

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > How is it not a post office that just happens to have an operator other > than > > the state? > > So if I ask you "where is the nearest post office?" , it is possible > that you send me

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

sent from a phone > On 15. Apr 2017, at 20:04, Marc Gemis wrote: > > We have different words for the two concepts in many languages, so why > can't we use those two words in mapping/tagging ? is it really 2 different concepts and not maybe more? Ciao, Martin __

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

sent from a phone > On 15. Apr 2017, at 20:04, Marc Gemis wrote: > > In Belgium you can e.g buy tax stamps in a post office, and not in a > courier office. this could change any time though. In Italy you can buy tax stamps at tobacco shops. > I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send