On 26/09/19 05:34, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2019-09-25 21:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
before number portability was introduced, a landline was more
connected to a place than to a person/business, while mobile phones
always have been personal. Big companies may be different, but places
with
Somewhat off the topic of 'was there a proposal for' .. but follow the
distorted thread..
disused:*=* means it cannot presently be used for its intended purpose.
That does not mean it does not exist. How renders chose to display that
is up to them.
But the tagging is correct and truthful.
Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2019 um 16:24 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 14:48, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
> E.g. an abandoned:building is probably more a ruin than a building, while
>> a disused building is still a building.
>>
>
> Either way, the building is still visible and can
On 2019-09-25 21:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> before number portability was introduced, a landline was more connected to a
> place than to a person/business, while mobile phones always have been
> personal. Big companies may be different, but places with small businesses
> often keep the
sent from a phone
> On 25. Sep 2019, at 18:02, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> It is very much on topic because it is the basis of whether or not there is
> any point in making
> a distinction between a mobile and a landline. If there are no charge
> differences then they're
> both just phone
That is definitely not what I want. I was just picking up the suggestions made from within this list.Yes, the current Key:phone wiki page provides a way to tag those cases we're talking about which I am going to describe further:- `phone:` Phone number that can be reached from just within the
On 2019-09-25 20:51, Paul Allen wrote:
> What Colin suggested was that PERHAPS we need to deal with the situation
> where the
> phone has one number when dialled from within the same country but a
> different number
> when dialled internationally. What he failed to notice is that the wiki
>
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 19:54, Philip Barnes wrote:
> In the UK it is easy to tell a mobile number, I would not be happy getting
> a builder who only has a mobile number. It suggests lack of permanent
> location.
>
Or a one-man-and-a-dog operation and he's not managed to train the dog to
answer
In the UK it is easy to tell a mobile number, I would not be happy getting a
builder who only has a mobile number. It suggests lack of permanent location.
Phil (trigpoint)
On Wednesday, 25 September 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Valor Naram wrote:
>
> > We should not
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 18:08, Valor Naram wrote:
> So you suggest `phone:international` and `phone` beside of the other keys
> `phone:press`, `phone:night`, `phone:emergency`?
>
Every time somebody suggest that we don't need all the phone variants that
can be
found in the wild, you pop up
So you suggest `phone:international` and `phone` beside of the other keys `phone:press`, `phone:night`, `phone:emergency`?~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] [Key:phone] - Suggesting wiki page changingFrom: Colin Smale To:
On 2019-09-25 18:02, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Valor Naram wrote:
>
>> We should not talk any longer about charging plans (which provider and when
>> will apply different charges to whom) because we're difting off --> going
>> Off-Topic.
>
> It is very much on topic
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 17:00, Valor Naram wrote:
> We should not talk any longer about charging plans (which provider and
> when will apply different charges to whom) because we're difting off -->
> going Off-Topic.
>
It is very much on topic because it is the basis of whether or not there is
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 16:11, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2019-09-25 16:08, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> In the UK, people can tell that from the area code.
>
>
> What about the cases where calls to customers on the same provider are
> free? In general you have no way of knowing who is on which provider.
We should not talk any longer about charging plans (which provider and when will apply different charges to whom) because we're difting off --> going Off-Topic.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] [Key:phone] - Suggesting wiki page
On 2019-09-25 16:08, Paul Allen wrote:
> In the UK, people can tell that from the area code.
What about the cases where calls to customers on the same provider are
free? In general you have no way of knowing who is on which provider.
And thanks to number portability it is getting shuffled at a
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 14:48, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
E.g. an abandoned:building is probably more a ruin than a building, while a
> disused building is still a building.
>
Either way, the building is still visible and can be used for navigation
purposes. If you add
disused=yes or
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 14:30, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
right, you might be charged differently according to your plan / the kind
> of device you are calling from. There may be also more distinctions (e.g.
> local numbers cheaper),
>
Yep. All those things and more. Scott Adams (the Dilbert
Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2019 um 13:08 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> I saw that the wiki page Key:disused:
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:) had a status of
> "approved", but I only found a proposal approving the tag disused=yes
> (see
>
Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2019 um 14:10 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 09:04, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't see the problem, can you explain?
>>
>
> [Note: some simplifications ahead. Broadly true but there are many
> exceptions in
> reality.]
>
> In the UK, calling
So we're good to keep `phone:mobile` for mappers who know if the number is a mobile one or landline.We can keep `phone:mobile` for explicit ones where you can say to 100% this is a mobile phone number and will be *generally* charged as such.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor NaramPS: Don't be
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 09:04, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> I don't see the problem, can you explain?
>
[Note: some simplifications ahead. Broadly true but there are many
exceptions in
reality.]
In the UK, calling rom landlines, calls to mobile numbers are more
expensive than calls
to
On 25/9/19 9:06 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
When were the "Lifecycle prefixes" like "disused:key=*",
"abandoned:key=*" and "construction:key=*" first used or discussed?
Have a look at the talk page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:disused:#Demote_tags_into_a_disused:_namespace
I saw that the wiki page Key:disused:
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:) had a status of
"approved", but I only found a proposal approving the tag disused=yes
(see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:disused:=103021)
When were the "Lifecycle prefixes" like
If I had to decide between landuse and landcover, I would also prefer
landcover. Still I am not sure whether landuse is a good tag for this, as
it is about the prevalent use of land, while the open defecation seems more
an additional property (e.g. landuse=residential and open_defecation=yes
Am Di., 24. Sept. 2019 um 13:17 Uhr schrieb Valor Naram via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> So the distinction of mobile and landline is a problem. Is there any
> possibility to distinct between landline and mobile also in Italy?
I don't see the problem, can you explain? By the way,
26 matches
Mail list logo
