Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread bkil
Do note that fire hydrant plates depict opening direction, so if we would need to store direction to close, a mapper would yet again need to do mental work, that is not error prone and confusing. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:31 AM François Lacombe wrote: > > The question about the opening direction

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9. Oct 2018, at 23:03, yo paseopor wrote: > > for this reason the solution of tag the traffic signs ON the way it's the > best way to do it. Traffic signs are relative to their ways (because if the > way does not exist the existance of traffic sign is non-sense). Ways

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread François Lacombe
Hi, Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 00:45, Paul Allen a écrit : > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:31 PM François Lacombe < > fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The question about the opening direction should be propagated to this >> draft proposal regarding pipeline valves >> >>

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

2018-10-09 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Massive job, thanks Francois! :-) Question for you pleasse. Following on from the discussion re towers & masts, I've just mapped a couple of mobile phone towers. What should we call the base station hut / building usually adjacent to the base of the tower My understanding is they're not a

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Colin Smale
I am not saying these cases are impossible, only that they have to be accommodated, preferably as uniformly as possible. It is not intended as criticism, but as a critical test of fitness for purpose. If the tagging scheme can't handle these real-world situations, it's not ready for go-live yet.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

2018-10-09 Thread François Lacombe
Hi Paul, Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 00:31, Paul Allen a écrit : > I thought you'd agreed that "Central Office" was left-pond terminology > and, since OSM is > based on right-pond terminology, you'd use "Exchange" instead. There are > several places in > the proposal (including a heading) that

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10. Oct 2018, at 00:03, Paul Allen wrote: > > When I added one of these, five months ago, the most popular way of doing it > was > amenity=toy_library, so that's what I went with. +1, kiss Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Johnson
This whole "trying to cram everything including direction and how it relates to everything into a node" idea is fundamentally hosed. Also literally why relations are a thing that exist. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 5:26 PM yo paseopor wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:37 PM Tobias Knerr wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9. Oct 2018, at 21:19, bkil wrote: > > amenity=waste_basket > waste=dog_excrement > vending=excrement_bags > > I've also seen waste_basket:excrement_bags=yes and fee=no, but I don't > see much value in these at this point in time. while vending=* with fee=no is some

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

2018-10-09 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 08:04, Paul Allen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:24 PM ChameleonScales < > chameleonsca...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > amenity:library=game_and_toy >> > > When I added one of these, five months ago, the most popular way of doing > it was > amenity=toy_library, so that's

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:31 PM François Lacombe wrote: > The question about the opening direction should be propagated to this > draft proposal regarding pipeline valves > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Pipeline_valves_proposal > > I thought about

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:05 PM François Lacombe wrote: > Feel free to make any comment. > I thought you'd agreed that "Central Office" was left-pond terminology and, since OSM is based on right-pond terminology, you'd use "Exchange" instead. There are several places in the proposal (including

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread François Lacombe
The question about the opening direction should be propagated to this draft proposal regarding pipeline valves https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Pipeline_valves_proposal I thought about turn_to_close=clockwise / anticlockwise Whatever the final answer will be, this definitely

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread yo paseopor
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:37 PM Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 09.10.2018 17:42, yo paseopor wrote: > > So Please , let's talk about it. What will be the correct way to tag a > > traffic sign? > > How about the existing tagging scheme for traffic signs on nodes, > documented at

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Telecom local networks

2018-10-09 Thread François Lacombe
Hi The telecom networks proposal is currently in RFC and all issues or questions have been solved. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Telecom_local_loop The vote is about to begin shortly, by the end of the week. The tagging has been in use in France for last months, no big

Re: [Tagging] Game and toy library

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:24 PM ChameleonScales < chameleonsca...@protonmail.com> wrote: amenity:library=game_and_toy > When I added one of these, five months ago, the most popular way of doing it was amenity=toy_library, so that's what I went with. -- Paul

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Johnson
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018, 16:05 yo paseopor wrote: > for this reason the solution of tag the traffic signs ON the way it's the > best way to do it. Traffic signs are relative to their ways (because if the > way does not exist the existance of traffic sign is non-sense). Ways have > direction, also

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread yo paseopor
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM Colin Smale wrote: > I can think of a couple of non-trivial cases which will need to be handled: > > 1) multiple signs on a single post > As Finnish people do we can add subkey :2 :3 :4... (European regulations does nit recommend more than 3 traffic_signs

[Tagging] Game and toy library

2018-10-09 Thread ChameleonScales
Hi all, Game and toy libraries don't fit in any feature type. They can be but are not necessarily: - non-profit organizations - child care facilities - social faciilties - toy stores - libraries - probably other things So I think they should have their own feature type and tag. How about

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread John Willis
> On Oct 10, 2018, at 4:39 AM, bkil wrote: > > Why is shop=convenience not a proper tag for "the only retail building > in 40 miles radius"? Usually, the small retail shop in a very remote place is tailored to the daily needs of locals and tourists who do activities in that area. they stock

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:34 PM Viking wrote: > > As we did for most of the tags in [0], I would not use fire_hydrant: > prefix because we want a slim database and because opening:direction=* is (or can be) used for other > objects, as doors, taps, etc. > There are differing viewpoints on

Re: [Tagging] How to tag prefab / movable buildings

2018-10-09 Thread François Lacombe
Hi all, Prefabrication often ease the move of such buildings but it's not mandatory. According to all suggestions, what about this: structure:prefabricated=yes (the whole building is prefabricated) structure:prefabricated=facade (only the facade) structure:prefabricated= * any building part *

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread yo paseopor
for this reason the solution of tag the traffic signs ON the way it's the best way to do it. Traffic signs are relative to their ways (because if the way does not exist the existance of traffic sign is non-sense). Ways have direction, also their nodes can have this reference. Relations are

Re: [Tagging] hydrants

2018-10-09 Thread Viking
Bkill, you added fire_hydrant:opening to wiki page [0], but you should have discussed it here and/or in discussion page before. We did many efforts to widely discuss fire hydrant extensions [1] and finally approve them: you should at least discuss your proposal with people who spent so much

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, On 10/09/2018 05:42 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > It is not the first attempt to do that. Last days, with iD > implementation and my message I have think it was the solution. Also I > have waited some days and communicate to this list my intentions to > adopt the proposed iD scheme. But when I

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread bkil
Why is shop=convenience not a proper tag for "the only retail building in 40 miles radius"? Extra tags could be invented to highlight that it has a larger variety of non-food items than usual, or we could introduce a subtype with convenience=*. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:42 AM John Willis wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread bkil
You can tag the doggy bins like so: amenity=waste_basket waste=dog_excrement vending=excrement_bags I've also seen waste_basket:excrement_bags=yes and fee=no, but I don't see much value in these at this point in time. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:30 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Tobias Knerr
On 09.10.2018 17:42, yo paseopor wrote: > So Please , let's talk about it. What will be the correct way to tag a > traffic sign? How about the existing tagging scheme for traffic signs on nodes, documented at https://wiki.osm.org/Key:traffic_sign ? To sum it up: - Place a node for the traffic

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Colin Smale
I can think of a couple of non-trivial cases which will need to be handled: 1) multiple signs on a single post 2) signs with a dependent (qualifier) sign, such as "except for buses" 3) one or more signs on a larger panel - too large to represent as a node 4) signs applying only to certain

Re: [Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Johnson
Why not map traffic signs the way enforcement devices are currently mapped in relations? That's more foolproof than relying on nodes having nonextant direction, especially when most traffic signs aren't even members of ways. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018, 10:46 yo paseopor wrote: > > I want to start the

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 5:09 PM marc marc wrote: > Le 09. 10. 18 à 16:30, Paul Allen a écrit : > > How to tag? > > amenity=recycling > recycling:cans=yes > recycling:paper=yes > So far, so good. recycling:PET=yes or recycling:plastic_bottles=yes > It's neither of those. The plastic type isn't

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread marc marc
Le 09. 10. 18 à 16:30, Paul Allen a écrit : > How to tag? amenity=recycling recycling:cans=yes recycling:paper=yes recycling:PET=yes or recycling:plastic_bottles=yes recycling:waste=yes > only one of them would be rendered feel free to find/create/publish a icon that show the different types

[Tagging] Traffic_sign discussion

2018-10-09 Thread yo paseopor
I want to start the mother of all discussions about traffic signs It is not the first attempt to do that. Last days, with iD implementation and my message I have think it was the solution. Also I have waited some days and communicate to this list my intentions to adopt the proposed iD scheme. But

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread Jmapb
On 10/9/2018 6:55 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Both, restaurants and fast food places require that you can get there and get something ready to eat. If all they sell are products that require further preparation / cooking, I would not tag them as restaurant or fast food (with the exception

Re: [Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
Re: “convincing the renderer folks to render it“ Not as hard as you think. The folks at OpenStreetMap Carto have just revamped the mapping of recycling and waste bins. If you can get > 1000 uses of a new tag and can think of a good icon, it could get rendered. -Joseph On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 11:32

[Tagging] Combined waste/recycling bins

2018-10-09 Thread Paul Allen
A village a few miles from me (but in a different county) recently got one of these combined litter/recycling bins: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2241627292737699=1632021387031629&__tn__=C-R How to tag? Each of the two sections is around the size of a large

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-09 Thread Greg Troxel
Graeme Fitzpatrick writes: > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 03:58, SelfishSeahorse > wrote: > >> There is a risk that towers and masts are defined differently in >> English, but perhaps Martin's idea to combine the two definitions >> would make sense nevertheless. Part of the issue is UK English vs US

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Di., 9. Okt. 2018 um 14:28 Uhr schrieb Jonathon Rossi : > > My first thought was some sort of "landmark=yes" tag, there is already a > "denotation=landmark" tag for trees, however it appears like there might > have been a landmark tag in the past that was deprecated, and I realise > that it

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-09 Thread Jonathon Rossi
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 5:34 PM Lionel Giard wrote: > The problem i see with that "multipurpose" value is that it give no > information and could be misused for other tower:type (like > defensive;observation) which should not be rendered as communication_tower. > Thus i would propose to render

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Di., 9. Okt. 2018 um 04:57 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > I think I agree with you that "take-and-bake" places are a type of > restaurant or fast-food; that's how they are being tagged in the USA. > > IMHO a restaurant usually requires tables (or culturally

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Di., 9. Okt. 2018 um 00:52 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > In the USA there are shops that sell custom fresh pizzas, but they are > uncooked. You take the prepared pizza home and cook it yourself. In the > western USA, the chain is named “Papa Murphy’s Take And

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread Dave Swarthout
You know, some people have advocated for a tag or, more properly, a set of tags that can enumerate the items sold by a given shop. The tag set uses the key "sells:*=yes/no. So if a given shop sells Korean food, one could tag it as shop=food (or shop=convenience or grocery, or general) and

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
If you think the specialty shops should have there own tag, we could start using shop=specialty_grocery But I would like someone from England to confirm if this is the specific British term. I’m ok with using shop=general for the small shops in developing countries, if we can edit the wiki to

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

2018-10-09 Thread John Willis
sounds like there are several different kinds of shops being discussed - old old “markets”, from before there were super markets or convenience shops. - import/foreign foods shops catering to a local minority population or special cultural interest - “markets” in developing countries. >

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-09 Thread Lionel Giard
The problem i see with that "multipurpose" value is that it give no information and could be misused for other tower:type (like defensive;observation) which should not be rendered as communication_tower. Thus i would propose to render the "communication_tower" based on the height > 250 m