Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
7 lip 2019, 01:57 od bradha...@fastmail.com: > What wiki are you looking at?   At > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype,  grade5 says > "Soft. > Almost always an unimproved track lacking hard materials, same as surrounding > soil. " > > What if the surrounding soil is hard

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

2019-07-06 Thread brad
That is true if the terrain is agreeable.  Often it is steep and a very loose rocky surface so 4wd is necessary.  Even if it isn't very steep, since it is not maintained very often, if at all, erosion creates hazards in the road also requiring 4wd or at least a very high clearance vehicle.

Re: [Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
From the talk page: >I propose to tackle the varying quality of this page in different languages by >changing Map >Features to a single multilingual page that outputs its text in the user’s >preferred interface >language. >The tag tables can be generated from Taginfo/Taglists. For the best

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
I would think that an unimproved track across naturally solid rock or naturally well-compacted gravel would not be tracktype=grade5 - while it might be bumpy, it’s probably passable by any vehicke with sufficient clearance and tire size, even when wet, unlike a track of unimproved clay, silt or

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

2019-07-06 Thread brad
What wiki are you looking at?   At https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype,  grade5 says "Soft. Almost always an unimproved track lacking hard materials, same as surrounding soil. " What if the surrounding soil is hard materials??? Clearly written by someone that has not seen rocky

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-07-06 Thread Warin
On 07/07/19 00:38, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in the tagging? Should we use intermittent=yes and direction=both, or are they implied by waterway=tidal_channel? ...only recommend the use of intermittent=yes on channels which are

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

2019-07-06 Thread brad
Here's one, https://www.dropbox.com/s/agj4njek1r35vnz/2018-10-03-13.06.54r.jpg?dl=0 Maybe gets some maintenance every 10 or 20 years or so.  It is probably never soft, so it doesn't fit any tracktype definition. It is still used for a couple of  mines (worked by 1 or 2 people), but mostly

[Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Michael Patrick
> lit=weak is too subjective. > disclaimer: I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise as > part of my grant > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/368849 There is a lot of open access academic literature on your topic, covering objective measures and both

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Warin
On 06/07/19 22:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:00, Tobias Zwick wrote: I am pretty sure myself that hgv are defined differently: as goods vehicles with a "gross vehicle weight rating" (gvwr), a.k.a. "gross vehicle mass" (gvm) or plainly said maximum

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
7 lip 2019, 00:07 od matkoni...@tutanota.com: > 6 lip 2019, 23:52 od dieterdre...@gmail.com: > >> >> >> sent from a phone >> >>> On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >>> >>> It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is >>> how such objects are tagged in Poland. >>> >> >> >> at

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
6 lip 2019, 23:52 od dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> >> It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is >> how such objects are tagged in Poland. >> > > > at least in Germany there is a difference between bicycle=yes on a

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is > how such objects are tagged in Poland. at least in Germany there is a difference between bicycle=yes on a footway (it means they must not ride faster than walking speed

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
6 lip 2019, 22:31 od vosc...@gmail.com: > In IT it is legally essentially a footway on which cyclists are tolerated, > but the pedestrians have always priority to the extend that if there are too > many pedestrians the cyclists have to dismount, and always have to ride at > moderate

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

2019-07-06 Thread marc marc
Le 06.07.19 à 15:17, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > provide after-school additional instruction why it isn't still a school with another min_age/max_age or any additional tag ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

[Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

2019-07-06 Thread Andrew Hain
I have been working on a scheme to improve the cross-language quality of Map Features. [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Map_Features#Reimagining_Map_Features] Of course the page may deserve a bigger or deeper rethink. -- Andrew Talk:Map Features - OpenStreetMap

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Volker Schmidt
>"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with > foot=designated, use highway=path" > I interpreted this as invition to use the "neutral" tagging scheme based on highway=path + foot=designated + bicycle=designated + segregted0yes|no which is the tagging scheme that JOSM implicitly

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
6 lip 2019, 14:59 od tagging@openstreetmap.org: > >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, > >use highway=path" > >     This is incorrect. A cycleway tag can be used on a shared path, one which > can have a designation for other >     transport modes, such

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Minh Nguyen
On 2019-07-06 04:49, Colin Smale wrote: It is an intrinsic danger of international projects that words mean different things to different people. Hence the importance of keeping things objective, and recording facts, rather than judgements. It's about what things ARE, not what they are CALLED.

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread marc marc
Le 06.07.19 à 14:59, Dave F via Tagging a écrit : > > use highway=path" > This is incorrect <...> on a shared path Funny to say that a shared PATH mapped with highway=PATH is incorrect. we already have this discussion several times on talk-fr, it's often the same scenario: - a cyclist considers

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

2019-07-06 Thread Minh Nguyen
On 2019-07-06 06:17, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: In May, yumean1119 suggested tagging Japanese "cram schools" as either office=educational_institution + education = cram_school or amenity=prep_school And then iD and the name_suggestion_index started using amenity=prep_school I added some test

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Dave F via Tagging
On 06/07/2019 14:08, Andy Townsend wrote: Where any editor gives incorrect suggestions I'd suggest raising a ticket with the editor concerned about it.  I've done that a couple of times in the past with JOSM and the issues have been resolved almost immediately. Obviously it helps to provide

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread marc marc
Le 06.07.19 à 14:52, bkil a écrit : > We would need something like: housed_in=vehicle location=vehicle ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
14 169 building=houseboat 6 lip 2019, 16:31 od joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: >> ... we could use something like building=boat, >> building=caravan or building=vehicle, but it is unfortunate that none >> of these can be understood to be buildings in any sense of the word. >> > >

Re: [Tagging] shared planter where you can harvest for free

2019-07-06 Thread joost schouppe
I like your suggestion, Jason. Also, indeed I meant the operator of this specific thing is a person, not "let's change the definition of operator=*" :) Op vr 5 jul. 2019 21:28 schreef Jmapb via Tagging : > On 7/5/2019 3:08 PM, Paul Allen wrote: > > I read joost's comment as "The operator of

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 16:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > building=static_caravan is common for mobile homes and caravans (aka > trailers) which are semi-permanently located in one place. Tagged on > ways 132, 566 times: >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-07-06 Thread François Lacombe
Le sam. 6 juil. 2019 à 16:39, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > > I don't know if the tag "direction=both" is used commonly with > waterways. There's no wiki page to describe this tag, and the page > Key:direction doesn't mention direction=both, though it's used 20,000 > times. More common is to add

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Volker Schmidt
Just two additional aspects from my own experience on bicycle, to make things even more complicated: 1) cycle and foot path illumintion dramatically depends on the presence of leaves on the trees that are planted along the road. (don't get me wrong: I like trees) 2) another effect which is very

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
6 Jul 2019, 14:07 by o...@westnordost.de: >> I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise >> > > I think that your suggestions would make the definition actually less precise > because they add a fair level of subjectiveness: "necessary to bring your own > light" > > The least

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
> How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in > the tagging? > Should we use intermittent=yes and direction=both, or are they implied by > waterway=tidal_channel? > ...only recommend the use of intermittent=yes on > channels which are fully empty at low tide time.

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
> ... we could use something like building=boat, > building=caravan or building=vehicle, but it is unfortunate that none > of these can be understood to be buildings in any sense of the word. building=static_caravan is common for mobile homes and caravans (aka trailers) which are semi-permanently

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Tobias Zwick
Ok, it seems that "unladen" is somewhat favoured here on the list because it is more precise, more common and conforms with the wording in the (UK) legislation. I'll change the one mention in the wiki of "maxemptyweight" to "maxunladenweight". Cheers Tobias On 06/07/2019 14:17, Martin

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
To summarize, In January, Javbw mentioned amenity=cram_school for these "juku" cram schools, e.g. brand Komon In February, office=tutoring was suggested by Jmapb, perhaps with tutoring=test_prep for those focused on test preparation only In March, Warin added the suggestion of

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Andy Townsend
On 06/07/2019 13:59, Dave F via Tagging wrote: Hi Unsure if these validation warnings on uploading a changeset in JOSM are new or I've never noticed them before: >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, use highway=path"     This is incorrect. A cycleway

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:59, Dave F via Tagging > wrote: > > Anybody know when & why these were introduced? IIRR, it was like 10-20 years ago. You should be able to find more information on the path page in the wiki. Cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread bkil
In many parts of Hungary, vegetation can overshadow street lights, especially if they are placed high enough. They may make efforts to protect roads against this, but they rarely consider footways. Hence I know a lot of streets where road illumination is fair, but the sidewalk right beside it

[Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

2019-07-06 Thread Dave F via Tagging
Hi Unsure if these validation warnings on uploading a changeset in JOSM are new or I've never noticed them before: >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, use highway=path"     This is incorrect. A cycleway tag can be used on a shared path, one which

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-07-06 Thread François Lacombe
Hi Joseph, Thank you for having relevantly chosen a different word from canal. One question, which doesn't necessarily imply error on the current version of the proposal How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in the tagging? Should we use intermittent=yes and

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread bkil
Floating restaurants, hotels and event halls are pretty common in Budapest. Some fancy ones even offer budget daily lunch menus. https://www.a38.hu/en If we interpreted the intention, semantics and usage patters of building=* in OSM, we could use something like building=boat, building=caravan or

Re: [Tagging] Use bbq=yes/no or barbecue_grill=yes/no with campsites?

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
Re: > basic picnic tables where you can provide your own mini grill It looks like we can propose "bring_own_bbq=yes" for that situation Re: > some fixed on a post grills Do you think this should be "bbq=yes" or "barbecue_grill=yes"? -Joseph On 7/6/19, Nita S. wrote: > One caravan park I am

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
I'd like to vote on the proposal for waterway=tidal_channel soon If you haven't read the page yet, please check and add any comments or bring up any problems that might have been missed. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel "Definition:A

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:07, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > The least subjective definition is to map the physical presence of street > lanterns on the way, not the light they emit. (This definition (though) would > mean that a footway close to a lit street would be mapped as

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 12:35, Colin Smale wrote: > > Instead of creating artificial boundaries quantising shades of grey into > black and white, why not make it more objective and record the light level in > lux on the centre line of the road? Or would it be better to do

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 12:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? > Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better > because it is easier to understand what it means for non native speakers

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Tobias Zwick
> I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise I think that your suggestions would make the definition actually less precise because they add a fair level of subjectiveness: "necessary to bring your own light" The least subjective definition is to map the physical presence of street

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Paul Allen
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:42, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: It is not feasible to do for a typical mapper to record "light level in > lux". > Sadly, however, it is the only objective way of specifying the light level. And even then, it's easy to do it wrong if you don't account for the angle of

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Tobias Zwick
>Unladen weight is used in European countries to apply only to goods >vehicles, either 3.5t or 7.5t, and is tagged as hgv=no/destination. Are you absolutely sure about this? I am pretty sure myself that hgv are defined differently: as goods vehicles with a "gross vehicle weight rating" (gvwr),

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Colin Smale
On 2019-07-06 12:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/24/made > Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better > because it is easier to understand

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Paul Allen
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:26, Philip Barnes wrote: > Unladen is certainly the used, and understood, way of expressing such > restrictions in the UK. > > https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained > > Off topic, and not your fault, but that is an explanation that isn't entirely free from

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
6 Jul 2019, 12:35 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > What problem are you trying to fix here? Usually it is pretty obvious if a > street has artificial lighting or not. > > Unclear desired tagging for footways lit by spillover lighting. As I mentioned it is usually obvious but there are cases where

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Warin
On 06/07/19 20:47, Ferdinand Schicke wrote: What I couldsee work would be to have additional lit=* values like lit=weak or lit=spillover or lit=10lux I tired to use my mobile phone to gauge the amount of night light .. it did not work very well at all! lit=weak is too subjective. I too

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Philip Barnes
On Saturday, 6 July 2019, Warin wrote: > On 06/07/19 19:46, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: > > > >> On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: > >>> > >>> On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > >>> > >>> On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >>> > >>> 3

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Warin
On 06/07/19 19:46, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: 1.1 At the examples: for max empty

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Philip Barnes
Unladen is certainly the used, and understood, way of expressing such restrictions in the UK. https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained Phil (trigpoint) On Saturday, 6 July 2019, Tobias Zwick wrote: > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? > Even if "unladen"

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Tobias Zwick
So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better because it is easier to understand what it means for non native speakers (simpler word). In the US, "empty" seems to be most commonly used, as it is

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Ferdinand Schicke
What I couldsee work would be to have additional lit=* values like lit=weak or lit=spillover or lit=10lux From: Mateusz Konieczny Sent: Samstag, 6. Juli 2019 12:26 To: Tagging Subject: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold Some cases of lit=yes are clear (direct lighting of street/footway by lamps)

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Colin Smale
What problem are you trying to fix here? Usually it is pretty obvious if a street has artificial lighting or not. Instead of creating artificial boundaries quantising shades of grey into black and white, why not make it more objective and record the light level in lux on the centre line of the

[Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Some cases of lit=yes are clear (direct lighting of street/footway by lamps) Some cases of lit=no are clear (no lighting whatsoever) But in cities there is also often strong or weak ambient light, for example: - carriageway is directly lit with so powerful light that spillover light makes

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Colin Smale
On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: > On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: > > On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: > 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. > It

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Warin
On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. It suggests itself. Added, with link back to

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

2019-07-06 Thread Colin Smale
On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: > 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. > It suggests itself. > Added, with link back to this post Here that would be called

Re: [Tagging] Christmas shop

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
It’s fine to make up new values in the “shop” key, so “shop=christmas” would work: already used 14 times. I think party shops are different. On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 3:51 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Just mapping a Christmas shop https://christmasshack.com.au/, which, as > the name suggests!,

[Tagging] Christmas shop

2019-07-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Just mapping a Christmas shop https://christmasshack.com.au/, which, as the name suggests!, is a shop that operates year round selling Christmas decorations & supplies of various sorts. Best option I could find to tag it is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=party Wondering if there

Re: [Tagging] Use bbq=yes/no or barbecue_grill=yes/no with campsites?

2019-07-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 16:27, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > Should we use bbq=yes or barbecue_grill=yes with campsites, caravan > sites and camp pitches to specify the presence of a grill that can be > used for bbq / grilling? > I would go for barbecue_grill=yes to show that there is "something"

Re: [Tagging] one feature one element

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
>> *"For example, use the feature leisure=picnic_site with the property >> tag drinking_water=yes, instead of using the separate feature tag >> amenity=drinking_water on the same node or area." >> >> This example is a bad idea and mappers shouldn't be encouraged to do >> so. amenity=drinking_water

Re: [Tagging] Use bbq=yes/no or barbecue_grill=yes/no with campsites?

2019-07-06 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
Another user added bring_own_bbq=yes as a suggestion on the amenity=bbq page But, getting back to the original question, which I need answered for my draft proposal Proposed_features/Campsite_properties: Should we use bbq=yes or barbecue_grill=yes with campsites, caravan sites and camp pitches