Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

2017-10-05 Thread Dave Swarthout
IMO, this sort of information does not belong in the OSM database. If a shop owner is expert in the field, fine; let them say so in a website specific to the business and we can add the "expertise" information in that way. OSM cannot be a database of all things in existence. Besides that, such

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

2017-10-05 Thread Mikolai-Alexander Gütschow
Thanks Martin for your answers, please refer to the Talkpage for my answers: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Public_Transport_v2_Vehicle_Type_%22coach%22 Cheers! El 05/10/17 a las 06:22, Martin Koppenhoefer escribió: 2017-10-05 0:09 GMT+02:00 Mikolai-Alexander

Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

2017-10-05 Thread Warin
On 05-Oct-17 10:41 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: In my understanding, we would not map the personal preferences and hobbies of individuals. ? We all map our personal preference and hobbies! Walkers map public rights of way and bicycle riders map bicycle paths, bicycle parking, bicycle repair

Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

2017-10-05 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
But wouldn't you expect (hope? :-)) that the staff at a specialist shop, be it motorcycles, computers, 2-way radios or anything, would be "expert" in their field? Thanks Graeme On 5 October 2017 at 22:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > 2017-10-05 13:41 GMT+02:00 Tom

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread Mark Bradley
> Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 11:14:56 + > From: marc marc > To: "tagging@openstreetmap.org" > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant > Extensions) > > Hello, > > Le 05. 10. 17 à 12:16, Viking a écrit : > > I

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-10-05 0:09 GMT+02:00 Mikolai-Alexander Gütschow < mikolai.guetsc...@t-online.de>: > Now, I've looked again at the Oxomoa scheme proposal which already > suggested an idea to differentiate between different bus route types by > using the key "bus". Are there any arguments against this

Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-10-05 13:41 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer : > In the wake of the discussion about the methods used to push the > "motorcycle_friendly" tag, I found that the tag > "proprietor:motorcyclist=yes/no Whether the proprietor rides himself > (and therefore got expertise)" > being

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-10-05 13:51 GMT+02:00 Janko Mihelić : > > No.. I've been meaning to do it for some time, but laziness prevailed. > if you don't document it, it will come back sooner or later ;-) You can also add just a small hint for now, so it could be improved later. Cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Janko Mihelić
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, 16:47 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 4. Oct 2017, at 14:53, Janko Mihelić wrote: > > > > I use historic=memorial_site. There are 31 of them in OSM right now. > > > I think this is fine for these cases, do

[Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

2017-10-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
In the wake of the discussion about the methods used to push the "motorcycle_friendly" tag, I found that the tag "proprietor:motorcyclist=yes/no Whether the proprietor rides himself (and therefore got expertise)" being described [1], and used 12x in the database. In my understanding, we would

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2017-10-05 12:37 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > Would depend on the case. > > However if each individual tree is a node in OSM, as it would be if each > has an individual plaque with name, > then it is simpler to include the nodes in a site relation rather than > make an new area.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 05. 10. 17 à 12:16, Viking a écrit : > I really don't understand why so many people oppose this proposal [1] without > ever having participated in the discussions it is indeed strange that no opponent took the time to say during the RFC arguments that are found now during the vote.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread Yves
That's often the case with the voting process. However there is a few constructive comments that could be addressed to refine this proposal. Think about what is essential, and what is not (like namespaces or not). In such a specialized tagging scheme, I always thought it would be nice if

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread Warin
On 05-Oct-17 09:16 PM, Viking wrote: I really don't understand why so many people oppose this proposal [1] without ever having participated in the discussions that lasted for months. We did many efforts to reach this compromise that seems a good solution for firefighters' needs, and now people

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Warin
On 05-Oct-17 08:49 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 5. Oct 2017, at 00:07, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Then a site relation could be used to combine them into a combined feature? a simple polygon would do as well, or are the commemorative trees very sparse? In

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Warin
The tag landuse says some thing about the land being used for some productive purpose for humans. In that way landuse=forest says that the area is used/going to be used to produce something of benefit to humans. At some time that area may be harvested of trees .. and then have no trees for a a

Re: [Tagging] Mapping metro interchanges

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone On 4. Oct 2017, at 23:23, Ilya Zverev wrote: So, should it be one railway=station + station=subway or four? I’m not sure for king’s cross, but in the case of Berlin, U Stadtmitte, there are 2 stations with this name , they are connected by a pedestrian

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread Viking
I really don't understand why so many people oppose this proposal [1] without ever having participated in the discussions that lasted for months. We did many efforts to reach this compromise that seems a good solution for firefighters' needs, and now people are opposing to it whithout

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
I know that it is controversial topic but in practice both natural=wood and landuse=forest means "area where trees are growing" On 5 Oct 2017 10:55 a.m., "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote: sent from a phone > On 5. Oct 2017, at 04:58, Graeme Fitzpatrick

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 5. Oct 2017, at 04:58, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > It's definitely not intended for forestry / logging purposes, so it's not > landuse=forest common osm interpretation of landuse=forest is less strict, I think cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 5. Oct 2017, at 00:07, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Then a site relation could be used to combine them into a combined feature? a simple polygon would do as well, or are the commemorative trees very sparse? In the latter case I agree a site relation could

Re: [Tagging] war_memorial

2017-10-05 Thread Jerry Clough - OSM
Can I contribute to this debate? AFAIK I invented memorial=war_memorial for the Project of the Week which coincided with 11th November 2010. I agonised a certain amount about the best tag (both because of issues mentioned here, and because it would apply to both historic=monument and

Re: [Tagging] cake decorating school

2017-10-05 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Hi Dave This sort of thing was discussed a few weeks ago with the suggestion of an Education= tag to supplement the existing amenity=school listing: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-September/033455.html One of the concepts was for "special" training places to be listed as