Re: [Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 13:48, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Units. > > On tag info there are values with no units... they could be hours, > minute or days. > > I would suggest the default unit of hours. > > Abbreviations? > > h for hours > > m for minutes > > mos for months > d for days

[Tagging] units and notations for maxstay

Nothing I could see on the wiki for this. So some guidance would be good. Units. On tag info there are values with no units... they could be hours, minute or days. I would suggest the default unit of hours. Abbreviations? h for hours m for minutes mos for months Notations? For infinite

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for depth

On 19/02/19 14:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:45, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as height. Makes sense - default as m's, but can be marked as ft dependin

Re: [Tagging] units and notations for depth

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:45, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as > height. > Makes sense - default as m's, but can be marked as ft depending on local standards > There are also problems with estimation and variability. >

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Only navigability is intermittent. > > I think Graeme is suggesting > > boat=intermittent > > motorboat=intermittent > > These values are not documented but make sense. > Sorry, yes, that is what I was suggesting, rather tha

[Tagging] units and notations for depth

The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as height. There are also problems with estimation and variability. Some are using the tilde mark '~' to indicate 'approximately'. Some are using '-' for between eg depth=0.5-0.7 for between 0.5 and 0.7. Any opposition or bett

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On 19/02/19 11:33, Fernando Trebien wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 7:08 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: With a range like that, that changes so frequently, I think you're stuck with =intermittent, maybe with a description= to say that water depth is constantly varying between 0.5 & 10m? ! It i

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 7:08 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > With a range like that, that changes so frequently, I think you're stuck with > =intermittent, maybe with a description= to say that water depth is > constantly varying between 0.5 & 10m? ! It is not intermittent=yes as zero depth (no

[Tagging] Off topic - Re: Drain vs ditch

On 19/02/19 10:39, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 23:30, Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:23, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: According to a sketch in a comedy show from so long ago I can barely rem

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 23:30, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:23, Paul Allen wrote: > >> >> According to a sketch in a comedy show from so long ago I can barely >> remember it, the source >> of the River Thames was traced to a dripping tap. Which was fixed and >> the riv

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 09:23, Paul Allen wrote: > > According to a sketch in a comedy show from so long ago I can barely > remember it, the source > of the River Thames was traced to a dripping tap. Which was fixed and the > river dried up. > > I don't think it was Monty Python, though it might

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 22:50, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > Any river starts as a waterway=stream which is some kind of a wooden leg, > isn't it > According to a sketch in a comedy show from so long ago I can barely remember it, the source of the River Thames was traced to a dripping tap. Which w

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

*a wooden head*, to be more precise ) Cheers, Eugene вт, 19 февр. 2019 г. в 01:48, Eugene Podshivalov : > Any river starts as a waterway=stream which is some kind of a wooden leg, > isn't it? > > Cheers, > Eugene > > вт, 19 февр. 2019 г. в 01:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick : > >> >> >> On Tue, 19 Feb 20

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Any river starts as a waterway=stream which is some kind of a wooden leg, isn't it? Cheers, Eugene вт, 19 февр. 2019 г. в 01:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick : > > > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 06:11, Paul Allen wrote: > >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 19:50, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Am Mo., 18

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 06:11, Paul Allen wrote: > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 19:50, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> >> >> Am Mo., 18. Feb. 2019 um 19:41 Uhr schrieb Eugene Podshivalov < >> yauge...@gmail.com>: >> >>> There are a lot of straightened rivers and streams all over the world. >>> Would

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 20:44, Fernando Trebien wrote: > I think my problem in particular is determining when it is navigable > or not. It's like the difference between seasonal=* (predictable) and > intermittent=* (unpredictable), my case is the intermittent one. > > The local authority does not

Re: [Tagging] Protected Areas with multiple award

Hi Emanuel, I would first consider to put them under its Wikidata page (if any) with property P166. Personally I would not take time to enter awards on OSM but would link the OSM item to a Wikidata item and fill the Wikidata item with this kind of property. Moreover looking on Taginfo I can't

Re: [Tagging] start_date variants

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:28 AM Richard wrote: > It would also be interesting to be able to tag the start of construction - >> often construction starts many years before the building is finshed: >> Airport BER in Berlin, Germany or La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, Spain >> are famous examples. H

Re: [Tagging] start_date variants

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:03:01AM +0100, Stephan Bösch-Plepelits wrote: > Hi! > > I have some thoughts in the start_date tag, as I find it a bit too vague - > meaning start of what? > > Example: There is this museum, which openened in 2011, but the building is > much older, it was built in 1725:

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 19:50, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > Am Mo., 18. Feb. 2019 um 19:41 Uhr schrieb Eugene Podshivalov < > yauge...@gmail.com>: > >> There are a lot of straightened rivers and streams all over the world. >> Would it make sense to tag the straightened sections as canal/ditch/

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Am Mo., 18. Feb. 2019 um 19:41 Uhr schrieb Eugene Podshivalov < yauge...@gmail.com>: > There are a lot of straightened rivers and streams all over the world. > Would it make sense to tag the straightened sections as canal/ditch/drain > rather than river/stream? > I would not generally do it, but

[Tagging] Protected Areas with multiple award

I'm unsure how to tag two awards received by a specific protected area. Should it be something like protection_award=award1; award2? Thanks in advance ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

There are a lot of straightened rivers and streams all over the world. Would it make sense to tag the straightened sections as canal/ditch/drain rather than river/stream? Cheers, Eugene пн, 11 февр. 2019 г. в 22:07, Eugene Podshivalov : > пн, 11 февр. 2019 г. в 19:19, Hufkratzer : > >> This woul

Re: [Tagging] Sharps / syringe disposal

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 23:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > So, would waste=sharps be an acceptable term? According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharps_waste), sharps waste includes: * Hypodermic needles * Disposable scalpels and blades * Contaminated glass and some plastics Ther

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

On 2019-02-18 15:58, Dave F via Tagging wrote: >> Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. > > What consensus will it remove? Misunderstanding the meaning of a tag is not > consensual. Different tags allows the specifying of varying objects/attributes (not removing) (the non consens

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

As stated previously the sidewalk tag has no legal implication. The question within the app needs amending to clarify that's it's the legality of walking along the road that's being queried, not the ease or dangerousness. Cheers DaveF On 18/02/2019 12:05, Tobias Wrede wrote: Am 18.02.2019 um

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

On 18/02/2019 08:33, Peter Elderson wrote: Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. What consensus will it remove? Misunderstanding the meaning of a tag is not consensual. Different tags allows the specifying of varying objects/attributes Non-conflation is unrealistic. That c

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Am 18.02.2019 um 00:48 schrieb Dave F via Tagging: As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object. Sidewalk has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate legality. So? I don't think this is disputed. The reasoning here is that the absence of a sidewalk in some situ

Re: [Tagging] Rivers intermittently navigable

I think my problem in particular is determining when it is navigable or not. It's like the difference between seasonal=* (predictable) and intermittent=* (unpredictable), my case is the intermittent one. The local authority does not publish depth information about the rivers, but publishes vessel

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Because this is about foot=no, not handcart=no On February 17, 2019 11:23:46 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > >sent from a phone > >> On 17. Feb 2019, at 22:39, Tobias Zwick wrote: >> >> No, that tag is correct. It is not allowed to walk in the tunnel, >> because the tunnel is stil

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. Non-conflation is unrealistic. (wow, 5 negs in a row, respect!) Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 18 feb. 2019 om 01:45 heeft Dave F via Tagging > het volgende geschreven: > > True. Primarily because there's a false conflation of meanings, such as >