[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Allan Mustard]

One of the commenters has suggested an additional tag indicating what
services a consulate or embassy provides, and that is one option.  Not
all consulates or consular sections of embassies offer all visa types,
for example.  The existent service=* tag could possibly be used.  For
example, one could add to either a consulate or an embassy the tag
service=[citizen services; notarials; apostiles; immigrant visas;
non-immigrant visas].  Thoughts?

> From: Colin Smale 

 > One further thought... There is also a big functional difference
between an embassy and a consulate. The former is more
government-oriented, whereas consulates provide services to
individual citizens. I know this is a big generalisation, but I hope
you will agree there is an important difference. BUT some embassies
also provide consular services, and some don't - they might direct
you to another address for your visa or whatever. If we tag
embassies and consulates distinctly, how do we add a secondary tag
to an embassy to indicate whether they do consular work or not?

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Kevin Kenny]

The Holy See is sovereign, so its nunciatures are embassies by another name.

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 8:20 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Umm .. here is some sort of exception.
>
> "Apostolic Nunciature of The Holy See" ... :-)
>
>
> Ok .. what is it (in OSM terms)? Presently in the data base as
> amenity=embassy
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Warin]

Umm .. here is some sort of exception.

"Apostolic Nunciature of The Holy See" ... :-)


Ok .. what is it (in OSM terms)? Presently in the data base as 
amenity=embassy





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

Re: [Tagging] Out of the bars and onto the map: An lgbtq:*=* tagging scheme?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 23. Oct 2018, at 20:27, Rory McCann  wrote:
> 
> There is an existing "gay" tag[1], which is used 650 times[2]. But it's
> a little restrictive. And it also suggested "gay:transgender=yes" which
> is just plain wrong.

> So to start off, I'm suggest a simple "lgbtq=yes" tag to
> mean "this thing is a LGBTQ thing".


there may be lgbtq things, but there are also places which are explicitly gay 
bars, i.e. for homosexual men. If you tag these as lesbian queer trans ... it 
may not be right 

Wouldn’t it be more consistent with what we already have, to add lesbian, 
queer, trans and bi tags?


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

Re: [Tagging] [Diversity-talk] Out of the bars and onto the map: An lgbtq:*=* tagging scheme?

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 19:27, Rory McCann  wrote:

> "shop=books lgbtq=yes" is a LGBTQ book shop,

Wouldn't that be "shop=books books=lgbtq"?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-10-23 23:15, Paul Allen wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 9:21 PM Colin Smale  wrote: 
> 
>> What's your point, Paul?
> 
> That there are distinctions between embassies and consulates.

And now back to the discussion in hand 

An embassy must be tagged/taggable to indicate whether it also offers
consular services such as visas. The proposal wiki contains a suggestion
to use  services [1]=visa;passport;refuge;ticket_home etc. An embassy
offering none these consular services will need to be tagged
services=none to prevent interpretation of a missing services=* tag as
"unknown" or "all services". 
  

Links:
--
[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:services&action=edit&redlink=1___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Paul Allen]

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 9:21 PM Colin Smale  wrote:

What's your point, Paul?
>

That there are distinctions between embassies and consulates.  And that
some of us are
old enough to remember them.  And that that those memories are repeatedly
triggered by
every post in this thread.  And that I have a crappy sense of humour.

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-10-23 20:50, Paul Allen wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 7:18 PM Colin Smale  wrote: 
> 
>> I know this is a big generalisation, but I hope you will agree there is an 
>> important difference.
> 
> An even bigger difference is that Consulate have a menthol filter but Embassy 
> have a plain 
> filter. 
> 
> I don't recall ever seeing a brand of cigarette called "Legation" though.

What's your point, Paul?___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Paul Allen]

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 7:18 PM Colin Smale  wrote:

I know this is a big generalisation, but I hope you will agree there is an
> important difference.
>

An even bigger difference is that Consulate have a menthol filter but
Embassy have a plain
filter.

I don't recall ever seeing a brand of cigarette called "Legation" though.

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

[Tagging] Out of the bars and onto the map: An lgbtq:*=* tagging scheme?

[Rory McCann]

Hi all,

I'd like to improve the state of mapping/tagging for LGBTQ topics, and
I'd like feedback.

There is an existing "gay" tag[1], which is used 650 times[2]. But it's
a little restrictive. And it also suggested "gay:transgender=yes" which
is just plain wrong.

So to start off, I'm suggest a simple "lgbtq=yes" tag to
mean "this thing is a LGBTQ thing". I've intermittently used
"lgbt"/"lgbtq" tag in the past, but I think "lgbtq" ("lesbian gay
bi trans queer") would probably be a little better.

So "amenity=bar lgbtq=yes" is what is commonly called a "gay bar".
"shop=books lgbtq=yes" is a LGBTQ book shop, "leisure=sauna lgbtq=yes"
is a gay sauna, etc. We can expand the tagging later, or just use
"lgbtq:(men|women|trans|cis|bears|...)=(yes|no)" straight (😉) away.

For trans issues, there's the whole topic of toilet tagging (unisex,
etc), which is tagged separately, and maybe there's some good way to tag
"informed consent" for medical clinics?

*When* to add a lgbtq=yes tag can be hard to know. In some places a gay
bar can be easily identified by a prominent rainbow flag. Some cultures
are less accepting, so bars might not be so blatant (I've seen this in
the EU). Using the common OSM rules of "local knowledge", people within
the local LGBTQ community are probably the best place to make a final call.

Like many things in OSM, most of the work will be the actual mapping.
It's best to tag areas your familiar with, IME online directories can
often have lots of facilities that no longer exist. At some point I want
to create a custom map based on this data (a la the now dead OpenQueerMap).

Thoughts? Comments? Feedback?

--
Rory

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Visitors_orientation#for_gay.3D.2A

[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=gay


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Colin Smale]

One further thought... 

There is also a big functional difference between an embassy and a
consulate. The former is more government-oriented, whereas consulates
provide services to individual citizens. I know this is a big
generalisation, but I hope you will agree there is an important
difference. BUT some embassies also provide consular services, and some
don't - they might direct you to another address for your visa or
whatever. If we tag embassies and consulates distinctly, how do we add a
secondary tag to an embassy to indicate whether they do consular work or
not?

On 2018-10-23 19:55, Allan Mustard wrote:

> Colin Smale  wrote:
>> 
>> The location of an embassy in the capital is surely not prescribed by law, 
>> but by expedience isn't it? The ambassador wants/needs to be near the action 
>> in order to carry out their primary role - interfacing with the host country 
>> government. 
> Answer: Yes. The location of an embassy is typically negotiated with the host 
> country government and is indeed a matter of expedience in most cases.  
>> 
>> There are also examples of countries with split capitals. I am in one now 
>> (Netherlands) - the capital is Amsterdam, but the embassies are in The 
>> Hague, which is the seat of government but not the capital. 
> Answer: Yes, there are exceptions to every rule!  That's why defining an 
> embassy as the mission where one finds an ambassador is the easiest and most 
> reliable way of defining an embassy.  To the casual observer, an embassy is a 
> building with a sign on it that reads "Embassy" (as long as it isn't a 
> Embassy Suites Hotel or something similar) and a consulate is a building with 
> a sign containing the word "Consulate".
>> 
>> Why is the location even relevant to this discussion, anyway?
> Answer: Because in the OSM space there is confusion of embassies and 
> consulates.  A consulate is not an embassy, but in OSM the amenity=embassy 
> tag is applied to consulates.  I am proposing to correct that, and to do 
> that, mappers must understand both the differences between an embassy and a 
> consulate and how to differentiate between them. Thanks for your help!
> 
> ___
> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Allan Mustard]

Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> The location of an embassy in the capital is surely not prescribed by
law, but by expedience isn't it? The ambassador wants/needs to be near
the action in order to carry out their primary role - interfacing with
the host country government.
Answer: Yes. The location of an embassy is typically negotiated with the
host country government and is indeed a matter of expedience in most
cases. 
>
> There are also examples of countries with split capitals. I am in one
now (Netherlands) - the capital is Amsterdam, but the embassies are in
The Hague, which is the seat of government but not the capital.
Answer: Yes, there are exceptions to every rule!  That's why defining an
embassy as the mission where one finds an ambassador is the easiest and
most reliable way of defining an embassy.  To the casual observer, an
embassy is a building with a sign on it that reads "Embassy" (as long as
it isn't a Embassy Suites Hotel or something similar) and a consulate is
a building with a sign containing the word "Consulate".
>
> Why is the location even relevant to this discussion, anyway?
Answer: Because in the OSM space there is confusion of embassies and
consulates.  A consulate is not an embassy, but in OSM the
amenity=embassy tag is applied to consulates.  I am proposing to correct
that, and to do that, mappers must understand both the differences
between an embassy and a consulate and how to differentiate between
them. Thanks for your help!
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:36 PM Adam Franco  wrote:

> Hi Dave, all,
>
> Based on this discussion I just recorded this short tutorial
>  of how I use JOSM and its Relation Toolbox
> plugin to to add adjoining land-cover areas as multipolygons with shared
> boundary ways to reduce duplication and overlapping ways.
>

Thanks for recording that! Now I don't have to. :)

Your workflow is essentially the same as mine, except that I use the
regular old relation editor to add and delete ways. Works well enough for
me, and I think it's only one or two clicks more than what you're doing. I
also make a lot of use of 'replace geometry' from utlilsplugin2, since a
lot of what I'm editing was born as imports and is being replaced with
updated data from the same sources. Yes, I'm very careful not to step on
the work of local mappers when I do it.

Depending on what's going on in the field, I might have called that
hedgerow a tree_row or a hedge and used a linear feature to map it.
Similarly, at breaks in tree cover for things like power lines and
pipelines, I might use man_made=cutline. Speeds up the process a little bit
more. For what it's worth, I tend to restrict the 'cutline' tag to a
standard (in NY) four-rod right-of-way; if the cutting is larger than that,
it gets a polygon.

Hopefully this will begin to show that for complex landcover, or similarly
complex admin boundaries, that multipolygons with shared ways are actually
quicker and easier to maintain than simple areas.  I know that they're
still controversial, even among experienced mappers, but for something
complicated like West Point https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/175474,
with a whole bunch of shared borders, rights-of-way cut out of it and what
not, I'd be really handicapped without shared ways.  I didn't get very far
on the landcover because I seldom map landcover other than in my own
neighbourhood or when fixing other people's mistakes.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Colin Smale]

On 2018-10-23 15:57, Allan Mustard wrote:

> Regarding Warin's comment, 
> 
>> They did conform to the 'rule' of embassy/high commission only in the 
>> capital. 
> 
> There is a small number of highly visible exceptions to the rule of embassies 
> and of missions equivalent to embassies being located in the capital.  The 
> various missions of member states to the United Nations in New York and 
> Geneva as well as the missions to the WTO in Geneva come to mind (these are 
> all missions to a multilateral organization). Fortunately most other such 
> international organizations are located in national capitals (OECD in Paris, 
> NATO and the European Union in Brussels, OSCE and some UN agencies in Vienna, 
> other UN agencies in Rome).  The easy way to determine if a mission is 
> equivalent to an embassy is to find out who is in charge of it, which can be 
> learned by Googling the mission's website.  Generally speaking, if the head 
> of the mission is an ambassador or charge d'affaires, the mission should be 
> tagged amenity=embassy.  If the "principal officer" bears a title with the 
> word "consul" in it, the amenity in question is a consulate.  The obsolete 
> head of mission
titles "minister plenipotentiary" and "envoy extraordinary" have fallen into 
disuse and I don't think it likely we will encounter them.

The location of an embassy in the capital is surely not prescribed by
law, but by expedience isn't it? The ambassador wants/needs to be near
the action in order to carry out their primary role - interfacing with
the host country government. 

There are also examples of countries with split capitals. I am in one
now (Netherlands) - the capital is Amsterdam, but the embassies are in
The Hague, which is the seat of government but not the capital. 

Why is the location even relevant to this discussion, anyway?___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Johnparis]

I believe there is already a list of embassy types on the wiki :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dembassy#Types_of_embassies

You might want to verify/expand as needed.


On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 3:58 PM Allan Mustard  wrote:

> Please continue to comment on this proposal:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Consulate
>
> I have posted comments received via the tagging mailing list to the
> discussion page of this proposal:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Consulate
>
> Please feel free to add comments either directly to the discussion page or
> via the tagging mailing list.
>
> Regarding Warin's comment,
>
> > They did conform to the 'rule' of embassy/high commission only in the
> capital.
>
> There is a small number of highly visible exceptions to the rule of
> embassies and of missions equivalent to embassies being located in the
> capital.  The various missions of member states to the United Nations in
> New York and Geneva as well as the missions to the WTO in Geneva come to
> mind (these are all missions to a multilateral organization). Fortunately
> most other such international organizations are located in national
> capitals (OECD in Paris, NATO and the European Union in Brussels, OSCE and
> some UN agencies in Vienna, other UN agencies in Rome).  The easy way to
> determine if a mission is equivalent to an embassy is to find out who is in
> charge of it, which can be learned by Googling the mission's website.
> Generally speaking, if the head of the mission is an ambassador or charge
> d'affaires, the mission should be tagged amenity=embassy.  If the
> "principal officer" bears a title with the word "consul" in it, the amenity
> in question is a consulate.  The obsolete head of mission titles "minister
> plenipotentiary" and "envoy extraordinary" have fallen into disuse and I
> don't think it likely we will encounter them.
>
> I am tempted to add some text to the Key:amenity=embassy article outlining
> exactly what an embassy is and how to recognize one, since an embassy can
> be called different things (embassy, nunciature, mission, legation, high
> commission, etc.) depending on who is sending it and to whom it is
> accredited.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)

[Allan Mustard]

Please continue to comment on this proposal:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Consulate

I have posted comments received via the tagging mailing list to the
discussion page of this proposal:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Consulate

Please feel free to add comments either directly to the discussion page
or via the tagging mailing list.

Regarding Warin's comment,

> They did conform to the 'rule' of embassy/high commission only in the
capital.

There is a small number of highly visible exceptions to the rule of
embassies and of missions equivalent to embassies being located in the
capital.  The various missions of member states to the United Nations in
New York and Geneva as well as the missions to the WTO in Geneva come to
mind (these are all missions to a multilateral organization).
Fortunately most other such international organizations are located in
national capitals (OECD in Paris, NATO and the European Union in
Brussels, OSCE and some UN agencies in Vienna, other UN agencies in
Rome).  The easy way to determine if a mission is equivalent to an
embassy is to find out who is in charge of it, which can be learned by
Googling the mission's website.  Generally speaking, if the head of the
mission is an ambassador or charge d'affaires, the mission should be
tagged amenity=embassy.  If the "principal officer" bears a title with
the word "consul" in it, the amenity in question is a consulate.  The
obsolete head of mission titles "minister plenipotentiary" and "envoy
extraordinary" have fallen into disuse and I don't think it likely we
will encounter them.

I am tempted to add some text to the Key:amenity=embassy article
outlining exactly what an embassy is and how to recognize one, since an
embassy can be called different things (embassy, nunciature, mission,
legation, high commission, etc.) depending on who is sending it and to
whom it is accredited.


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

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Peter Elderson]

Thaks! You make it look so easy... I might take this up for my area.

Op ma 22 okt. 2018 om 18:36 schreef Adam Franco :

> Hi Dave, all,
>
> Based on this discussion I just recorded this short tutorial
>  of how I use JOSM and its Relation Toolbox
> plugin to to add adjoining land-cover areas as multipolygons with shared
> boundary ways to reduce duplication and overlapping ways.
>
> The area I'm editing, is replete with examples of this type of mapping:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.0199/-73.1530
>
> The tools used are:
> * JOSM editor - https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
> * "Relation Toolbox" JOSM plugin -
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Relation_Toolbox
>
> Documentation on MultiPolygons in the OSM wiki:
> * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon_Examples
> * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
>
> For some reason I've gotten hooked on mapping landcover in my area and
> spend a lot of time adding multipolygons to do so. I find them vastly
> easier to manage, update, and fix than simple closed ways with overlapping
> edges (how I started). As I show in the video, adding detail usually just
> means splitting exiting ways and adding/subtracting using the Relation
> Toolbox.
>
> Hope this helps someone -- let me know if there are particular cases or
> questions and I'd be happy to record another video covering other
> situations.
>
> Best,
> Adam
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:47 AM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 5:27 AM Dave Swarthout 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Great. But what are you actually doing when you "sort the members" of a
>>> relation? And after sorting, how does one "ensure the members are
>>> connected"?
>>>
>>
>> Sorting something like a bus route ensures that the various ways that
>> constitute it are connected
>> nose-to-tail.  This is what "ensures the members are connected" and
>> ensures they are connected
>> in a sensible fashion.  Sorta.  It may not do a good job if the route
>> traverses the same way in the
>> same direction more than once.
>>
>> I've noted with dismay the lack of debugging support for relations. For
>>> example, I will get an error message when trying to upload an edited
>>> relation but when I ask JOSM to Zoom to the error, the display zooms out
>>> enough to include the entire relation with no clue as the where the actual
>>> problem is. Same thing when you ask to "jump to the next gap". Good luck on
>>> that also. Maybe it's just me?
>>>
>>
>> Nope, it's not just you.  I too have problems getting my head around
>> JOSM.  I use it when I have to,
>> to merge or split areas (such as when I find out that a large forest that
>> somebody else mapped
>> has two named chunks).  It's probable I find it hard to use because I
>> don't use it enough, which means
>> I don't use it much, which means...  But I also have to admit that I find
>> Java programs in general are
>> not a good fit with how my mind expects things to work and they all give
>> me a steeper learning curve
>> than non-Java programs.  Which means I try not to use them much, which
>> means...
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

[Dave Swarthout]

Adam,

Many thanks to you. The video was well done and quite interesting. I
started using the techniques you described immediately and it has made my
life incredibly easier. I had just completed the addition of a huge wood
multipolygon to Shuyak Island using my old method yesterday. Then today I
created many multipolygons on a portion of Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge,
Ban Island, using them for woods, wetlands, and then joining 19 sections of
coastline, lagoon, and wood to make the refuge boundary. Awesome. The
Relation Toolbox makes constructing a complex multipolygon from scratch a
snap. Some of the ways I created are shared by 3 or more relations.

Highly recommended for anyone using relations in any form!

Take a look at my first effort with your coaching:
Relation: Ban Island (4253551)
Relation: Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge (8841597)

Dave

On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 11:35 PM Adam Franco  wrote:

> Hi Dave, all,
>
> Based on this discussion I just recorded this short tutorial
>  of how I use JOSM and its Relation Toolbox
> plugin to to add adjoining land-cover areas as multipolygons with shared
> boundary ways to reduce duplication and overlapping ways.
>
> The area I'm editing, is replete with examples of this type of mapping:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/44.0199/-73.1530
>
> The tools used are:
> * JOSM editor - https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
> * "Relation Toolbox" JOSM plugin -
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Relation_Toolbox
>
> Documentation on MultiPolygons in the OSM wiki:
> * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon_Examples
> * https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
>
> For some reason I've gotten hooked on mapping landcover in my area and
> spend a lot of time adding multipolygons to do so. I find them vastly
> easier to manage, update, and fix than simple closed ways with overlapping
> edges (how I started). As I show in the video, adding detail usually just
> means splitting exiting ways and adding/subtracting using the Relation
> Toolbox.
>
> Hope this helps someone -- let me know if there are particular cases or
> questions and I'd be happy to record another video covering other
> situations.
>
> Best,
> Adam
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:47 AM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 5:27 AM Dave Swarthout 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Great. But what are you actually doing when you "sort the members" of a
>>> relation? And after sorting, how does one "ensure the members are
>>> connected"?
>>>
>>
>> Sorting something like a bus route ensures that the various ways that
>> constitute it are connected
>> nose-to-tail.  This is what "ensures the members are connected" and
>> ensures they are connected
>> in a sensible fashion.  Sorta.  It may not do a good job if the route
>> traverses the same way in the
>> same direction more than once.
>>
>> I've noted with dismay the lack of debugging support for relations. For
>>> example, I will get an error message when trying to upload an edited
>>> relation but when I ask JOSM to Zoom to the error, the display zooms out
>>> enough to include the entire relation with no clue as the where the actual
>>> problem is. Same thing when you ask to "jump to the next gap". Good luck on
>>> that also. Maybe it's just me?
>>>
>>
>> Nope, it's not just you.  I too have problems getting my head around
>> JOSM.  I use it when I have to,
>> to merge or split areas (such as when I find out that a large forest that
>> somebody else mapped
>> has two named chunks).  It's probable I find it hard to use because I
>> don't use it enough, which means
>> I don't use it much, which means...  But I also have to admit that I find
>> Java programs in general are
>> not a good fit with how my mind expects things to work and they all give
>> me a steeper learning curve
>> than non-Java programs.  Which means I try not to use them much, which
>> means...
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>

-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

[Mark Wagner]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:27:01 +1100
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 23/10/18 05:04, Yves wrote:
> > Daniel, Mateusz and others: if nobody care to review those sub 
> > stations, this means they need care.
> > That's more a concern than an old tag in the DB.
> > You want them re tagged, then advertise for this and bring other 
> > people into this, like in 'build a community' .
> > Or do it automatically and let them rot.  
> 
> If nobody cares then a simply auto edit. These same nobodies will not 
> care if any errors of the past get replicated into the future.
> 
> Of the ones I have just reviewed, some 56 of them - 2 were potential 
> errors .. one looks to have been caused by an automatic edit that was 
> then incorrectly reverted .. not certain what happens there! There
> other looks to be a human error .. a turning circle and a substation
> on the same node?
> 
> So about a 4% error rate if unchecked. It is a small sample size ..
> so an error rate of, say, 8% could be forecast?

4-8% seems about right.  Of the 29 "power=station" that I just checked,
two are probably substations, but might be small-scale generating
plants instead, while two didn't look like part of the power
infrastructure at all.  Since I couldn't tell from aerial imagery what
the correct tag was, I left all four at the clearly incorrect
"power=station" so that a future user could easily identify what needs
work.

-- 
Mark

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