Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

On 20/03/19 19:38, Lorenzo Stucchi wrote: Hi, I said the its interesting also to known what there is the area without trees. I don’t thinks that make sense to tag this as an area without trees but with a tag that specify what there is in this area. Then specify it in detail! Do not, for

[Tagging] The return of namespacing + yes/no topic vs ;-list

Hi all While the power substation proposal is still under voting, I got some comments regarding the chosen logic with subkeys and yes/no values. They explicitly describe expected transformer or converter is missing in a given substation.

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Again, please note the context this has been orginally written in. It dealt with the suggestion of cycleway:left:direction=forward There was no intention of importing other objects of discussion, like you and others did. Greetings    > 03/20/19, 11:57, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > Suggesting

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

I do, for the reasons and in the context given, but please go ahead and throw that context away.   Regards, cmuelle8   > On 03/20/19, 07:27, althio wrote: > > "rather bad thing"?!? Who says? Source? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:12 PM "Christian Müller" wrote: > Suggesting forward and backward as tag > values is a rather bad thing, as these > are values for route relation roles. > I would say that is true for nodes, though this situation is being handled for nodes that are part of ways better

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

Nodes on ways do have an "inherited" direction (unless they are end nodes) The wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_sign says: " You may use traffic_sign:forward =* to specify that this particular sign affects vehicles moving in

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Hi, a. If the object of the research is just to map deforestation, you only need to map trees. You also need 100% coverage of all tree areas. You do not need to map "no landcover". b. If the object is to map deforestation AND what replaces the trees, you need to map the replacing landcovers

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

a. If the object of the research is just to map deforestation, you only need to map trees. You also need 100% coverage of all tree areas. You do not need to map "no landcover". b. If the object is to map deforestation AND what replaces the trees, you need to map the replacing landcovers as well,

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Hi, I said the its interesting also to known what there is the area without trees. I don’t thinks that make sense to tag this as an area without trees but with a tag that specify what there is in this area. Yes I remember about the fact of the key natural. Best, Lorenzo > Il giorno 20 mar

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

sent from a phone > Am 20.03.2019 um 08:27 schrieb althio : > > "rather bad thing"?!? Who says? Source? on ways the tag is perfectly fine for directional properties, but if you look at actual usage, there is also a lot of nonsense, for example here:

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

On 20/03/19 18:54, Lorenzo Stucchi wrote: Hi Giovanni, We thinks that it also important understand if the area is without vegetation because becomes a cultivated land, an artificial area or the trees are just cutted for wood and so some year after they will appear again. For this reason we

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

Hi Giovanni, We thinks that it also important understand if the area is without vegetation because becomes a cultivated land, an artificial area or the trees are just cutted for wood and so some year after they will appear again. For this reason we thinks that is interesting to understand also

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation wikipage proposal

hi, Thanks Joseph for the answer. The area in which I take the examples is this https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/2.3879/-73.9050 check with digital globe premium imagery (N.B. please don’t map this area we will have and event about mapping this area) "landcover = trees that is a tag

Re: [Tagging] Do we still need cycleway=opposite_lane? (Was: Do we still need cycleway=opposite?)

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 23:13, "Christian Müller" wrote: > Suggesting forward and backward as tag > values is a rather bad thing, as these > are values for route relation roles. > "rather bad thing"?!? Who says? Source? This is not what exists in the wiki page: