Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Warin]

I am against overlaying one way on top of another.

The wiki suggests both tags together on a single way is acceptable;

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland#Islands_in_the_sea

Given the suggested alternatives, I prefer both tags together.


On 15/12/19 12:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 15. Dec 2019, at 02:11, Paul Allen  wrote:

The inner is entirely within the outer, so it meets the letter of the law (but 
maybe not the spirit).
Can renderers cope with it?


basically you have just outer members then (one in the simplest case), 
renderers and other data consumers (geocoding etc) should not have problems, 
but it may be an extra effort to parse it (relation refers to way, way refers 
to nodes). Some mappers dismiss it for this reason. IMHO editing is much easier 
for these than it is for stacked ways, and when you want to have the way 
closely tied to the area like here, it also behaves generally as desired (when 
modifying the way, the area is automatically updated as well)

Cheers Martin
___
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] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Dec 2019, at 02:11, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> The inner is entirely within the outer, so it meets the letter of the law 
> (but maybe not the spirit).
> Can renderers cope with it?


basically you have just outer members then (one in the simplest case), 
renderers and other data consumers (geocoding etc) should not have problems, 
but it may be an extra effort to parse it (relation refers to way, way refers 
to nodes). Some mappers dismiss it for this reason. IMHO editing is much easier 
for these than it is for stacked ways, and when you want to have the way 
closely tied to the area like here, it also behaves generally as desired (when 
modifying the way, the area is automatically updated as well)

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Paul Allen]

On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 00:32, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

 Or you could create a multipolygon relation for the island by adding the
> coastline as outer way
>

That's something I hadn't thought of.  I just experimented in iD (didn't
save the result, it was
pure invention) and it seems to work.  It certainly makes it a lot easier
to edit in iD, although
perhaps a little confusing if you encounter one of these without knowing
why it was done that
way (and some mappers, it is said, are scared of multipolygons).  Is it
legitimate, though?
The inner is entirely within the outer, so it meets the letter of the law
(but maybe not the spirit).
Can renderers cope with it?

I'm in two minds on this one.  It makes maintenance (in iD and maybe other
editors) easier.
But it's confusing if you don't know why it's been done that way.  And it
feels clunky and
bodgetastic.  But while there's a rule against tagging for the renderer
there isn't (as yet) a
rule against tagging for the editor.

I'll wait until I see what others say before I decide whether or not to use
the trick.  But I commend
you for your ingenuity, whatever they say.

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Dec 2019, at 00:15, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There would not be too many coast lines with names, fewer again with a 
> continuous coasts that have names.
> So I would think the name applies to the island, not the coast.


you can think it is most probable, yes, it’s not modelled though. What about 
the other tags (gns)?

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Dec 2019, at 00:14, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
> You could go with the one object/one way method.  Draw an area for the 
> place=island.  On top of
> that draw a closed way for the coastline.  It's extra work, and a bit 
> tedious, but not too bad. 


yes, you could either draw a second way on top (with Josm you’d only have to 
draw 2 points and with F (follow) you could do it in seconds), although the 
result IMHO is harder to edit and the overlap is harder to notice/may pass 
unnoticed. Or you could create a multipolygon relation for the island by adding 
the coastline as outer way - if you’d have to split the coastline for other 
reasons this would still perfectly work without further work in common editors  
(splitting of MP members is typically handled automatically by editing software 
with regard to the relation)


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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Warin]

On 15/12/19 09:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


Looking at the individual islands, it is kind of problematic that the 
linear coastline and the area place=island are not distinguishable: 
you can’t tell whether that’s the name of the coastline or the island 
or both, e.g. here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3932#map=8/-3.222/144.098



There would not be too many coast lines with names, fewer again with a 
continuous coasts that have names.

So I would think the name applies to the island, not the coast.



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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 22:27, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

Looking at the individual islands, it is kind of problematic that the
> linear coastline and the area place=island are not distinguishable: you
> can’t tell whether that’s the name of the coastline or the island or both,
> e.g. here
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3932#map=8/-3.222/144.098
>

You could go with the one object/one way method.  Draw an area for the
place=island.  On top of
that draw a closed way for the coastline.  It's extra work, and a bit
tedious, but not too bad.  However,
the problem with that is when it becomes necessary to alter one object but
not the other (such as
adding tags to make the island a nature reserve) as iD makes that harder
than it need be (I have
no idea how josm handles it as I find it a worse fit to my way of thinking
than iD).

Unless I've missed something (always possible) iD has no way of selecting
one of two or more
coincident objects: you get whichever one it decides to give you.  If
either of the objects has one
node that isn't shared with the other, then you can hunt around for a line
segment that gives you
the object you want.  If not, you have to disconnect a node, move it a
little way, so you have line
segments that aren't shared (you may have to move more than one node if
there are more than
two object, it depends how lucky you are), make your changes, then move the
node(s) back.

Actually, it's also a problem with objects that aren't entirely coincident,
if they're large, such as
forest bounding a heath..  You may have to move the map a long way to find
where they diverge
so that you can select one rather than the other.

What is obviously needed in iD is something like assigning control-click to
cycle through the
possible coincident objects.  I suggested as much many months ago, but it
was ignored.  And
that was before I seemed to have entered iD's general "ignore these people"
list for disagreeing
with them about something.

The above is somewhat off-topic here, especially as iD has effectively
added this mailing
list to its "ignore these people" list, but editor UIs influence tagging
decisions by mappers.
It may be desirable to use two objects to handle islands but if editors
make it a pain then it will
rarely happen.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 123, Issue 48

[Michael Patrick]

> An agreement must be reached on the names of international
> objects. It is currently unregulated and these names
> introduced a few years ago are almost always in imperialist
> English, which is not always appropriate and discriminates
> against other nations. ... 1. I suggest removing the "name"
> .. and "wikipedia" tags completely ... 2. For seas and bays
> marked as place=sea) I suggest to enter in the "name" tag
> names in the official languages of neighboring countries

>>  international air pilots and by international agreement use English
>> as a means of communication. international sailors who, again by
>>  international agreement use 'seaspeak'. Seaspeak in based on English.

Aviation English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_English

Wikipedia is not an 'authoritative source'. For a long time now,
these geonames (toponyms) have been harmonized by various international
and national agencies and organizations. In 1948, the  United Nations
Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) was
established as a clearing house:  https://unstats.un.org/unsd/ungegn/ ...

Most all nations have some sort of 'Names Board' authority ( Germany:
http://www.stagn.de/DE/Home/home_node.html ), and some have
such for lower admin levels (Oregon Geographic Names Board
https://www.ohs.org/about-us/affiliates-and-partners/oregon-geographic-names-board/
)
There are also organizations actively establishing aboriginal / indigenous
toponym gazetteers and updating the 'official' repositories.

Probably the most comprehensive source for international toponyms is
the U.S. National Geospatial Agency NGA GEOnet Names Server (GNS)
http://geonames.nga.mil/gns/html/index.html the gazetteer at
http://geonames.nga.mil/namesgaz/ ... a query can return eleven name
types ( Conventional, Approved BGN, Unverified, Provisional, Variant,
Anglicized Variant, Native Script, Unverified Native Script, Provisional
Native Script, Variant Native Script ) if available. Note that this
database not only includes 'official' but informal local variants and
past 'official' names. They update every week, all the data is
available for download in various formats, and they exchange data
with other geoname authorities.

For smaller scale maps showing the feature types you mention,
this source can probably provide you the various transliterations
of geonames in a region. For larger scales, depending on the
country, the local board may provide similar data.

Reference:  ( Open Access ) "A quantitative analysis of global
gazetteers: Patterns of coverage for common feature types"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971516302496

Michael Patrick
Data Ferret
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 22:16, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> I agree, there are some more  examples like IBM and BP. The capitalization
> of the _name_ should be like it is used (and likely registered).


I was hoping (with no expectation of success) that nobody would open the BP
can of worms.

The company was "British Petroleum plc" but that was its formal name and it
was generally
referred to as "BP."   In 2001 it went through a renaming exercise and now
trades as "BP plc."
Prior to 2001 "BP" would have been an initialism and we might legitimately
have used
"British Petroleum" for the name and "BP" for the short_name.  Now BP is
the full name, and
it is no longer an initialism.  But "Bp" looks silly.  However, on their
greenburst logo, they
use "bp" (which also looks silly as a name on a map).  I haven't checked
what iD tries
to force on us, but I'd go with BP.

BP isn't the only company to adopt an initialism as its name.  British
Technology Group renamed
itself to BTG.  However, BTG was recently acquired by Boston Scientific,
who seem to be dispensing
with BTG as a trading name.


> I also agree with Frederik though, if we feel the orthography of their
> name is particularly designed to game lists or maps, like “the BEST foo” we
> can individually make exceptions and must not slavishly adhere to their
> marketing.
>

As with everything, it comes down to judgement.  We can't hope to produce
rules that can cope
with every possible eventuality, just general guides that may sometimes
have to be interpreted.

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

>> On 14. Dec 2019, at 12:46, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> That looks correct, archipelagos are normal multipolygon relations.  


+1


> Building them from the same coastline ways that are used to map the 
> individual islands is the established method for mapping them.

Looking at the individual islands, it is kind of problematic that the linear 
coastline and the area place=island are not distinguishable: you can’t tell 
whether that’s the name of the coastline or the island or both, e.g. here 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3932#map=8/-3.222/144.098

Or to what the the gns-tags apply...


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

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 14. Dec 2019, at 21:30, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> I would favor adding the name exactly as it appears in a sign, even including 
> punctuation marks if it's in their sign. For example AT AT at one time 
> was an abbreviation for American Telephone & Telegraph but they dropped the 
> full name for AT sometime back. It technically isn't an acronym anymore.  
> TCBY (The Countries Best Yogurt) is a yogurt shop that is widely recognized 
> in the US. If you wrote Tcyb, I doubt most people would even recognize it.


I agree, there are some more  examples like IBM and BP. The capitalization of 
the _name_ should be like it is used (and likely registered). I also agree with 
Frederik though, if we feel the orthography of their name is particularly 
designed to game lists or maps, like “the BEST foo” we can individually make 
exceptions and must not slavishly adhere to their marketing.

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Warin]

On 15/12/19 01:58, Jo wrote:

Jesus would float, obviously, but what about his bicycle?


mtnbs float too. Don't know about the road bike.


On Fri, Dec 13, 2019, 20:59 Peter Elderson > wrote:


We  happily add ferry transfers to hiking routes. Nobody has been
found trying to walk on the water. Nobody that we know of...

Fr gr Peter Elderson


Op vr 13 dec. 2019 om 20:39 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>>:



sent from a phone


On 13. Dec 2019, at 18:37, Francesco Ansanelli
mailto:franci...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I added a bicycle route that implies the use of a funicular
(railway).
I'm not sure how to "tell" in the relation that you have to
take the train and not ride the railway.
Can you give me some hint?



I am not sure there is an agreed way to express this. From a
cycling point of view the route is interrupted at this point
We would have to introduce multimodal relations to cater for
situations like this

Cheers Martin



___
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 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] Business names in capital letters

[Clifford Snow]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 11:20 AM Markus  wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 01:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
> >
> > When that is how the business name is shown, what is our policy for it?
>
> I thought we had a policy for it, but i can't fine one. It's probably
> rather an observation that names in all caps are mapped in title case
> except for acronyms. I think this makes sense because it doesn't give
> these names more importance than other names in title case. By the
> way, newspapers do the same.
>
did come to mind.


I would favor adding the name exactly as it appears in a sign, even
including punctuation marks if it's in their sign. For example AT AT
at one time was an abbreviation for American Telephone & Telegraph but they
dropped the full name for AT sometime back. It technically isn't an
acronym anymore.  TCBY (The Countries Best Yogurt) is a yogurt shop that is
widely recognized in the US. If you wrote Tcyb, I doubt most people would
even recognize it. If written out, The Countries Best Yogurt, people
probably would recognize it either. See
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2304474733 for an example.

Newspapers have a different reason for changing case and even dropping
punctuation marks, readability. OSM is interested in capturing ground
truth.

The iD editor has a great feature that corrects the name to the official
name along with wikidata tags. The name just needs to be in their database.
It would be nice if JOSM had a similar feature.

Best,
Clifford



-- 
@osm_washington
www.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

[Markus]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 01:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
>
> When that is how the business name is shown, what is our policy for it?

I thought we had a policy for it, but i can't fine one. It's probably
rather an observation that names in all caps are mapped in title case
except for acronyms. I think this makes sense because it doesn't give
these names more importance than other names in title case. By the
way, newspapers do the same.

Regards

Markus

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

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

[Mateusz Konieczny]

14 Dec 2019, 13:57 by pla16...@gmail.com:

>> On the wider topic of writing names as they are on the sign, I would
>>  agree with this up to a certain point. It is entirely possible for a
>>  business to name itself "Fred's Bagels the BEST Bagels in Northern
>>  California Inc", at which point I would say they are starting to game
>>  our rules,
>>
>
> I like to think we make a difference, but such a big difference that people 
> alter their
> signage in order to game our rules?  Probably not. :)
>
They are unlikely to be targeting OSM,
but similar rule were used by other 
maps, telephone books and so on.
> Like everything we do, judgement is necessary.  If the name "PACIFIC" is 
> derived from
> some connection (however tenuous) with the ocean of that name, then tag it as 
> "Pacific."
> But if it's an acronym then "PACIFIC."
>
+1___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 14/12/2019 14:42, Volker Schmidt wrote:

Adding a bicycle=dismount is OK I suppose, but I'm unsure there's really

a problem.

This street in Padova  carries
a (mono-rail) tram (railway=tram) and is closed to bicycles, tagged with
bicycle=no.
I intended to re-tag this with bicycle=dismount in line with the notion
that you are allowed to push your bike along, like you are allowed to push
your bike across the pedestrian area in the city center.
I would not have dreamed that this would mean that I would have to take my
bicycle on the tram (which I am not allowed to do anyway).


Your example is irrelevant to the point in two ways - it doesn't have a 
bike route relation & what you're actually tagging is the residential road.


Cheers
DaveF


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

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Telecom distribution point

[François Lacombe]

Hi Everyone,

Sorry for long time to answeryour questions,

Le mar. 10 déc. 2019 à 19:58, Paul Allen  a écrit :

>
> Do you consider British Telecom DACS units to be a part of this?  They're
> old technology and I
> wouldn't expect new deployment as they're incompatible with ADSL but there
> may well be
> a lot of old installs still around.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_access_carrier_system
>

We also have those in France (called PCM).

They're only covered by the proposal if those "boxes" are the first you
encounter along the line starting from home.
If not, they are often included in a connection_point.

Facts are you may independently have multiplexers in distribution points or
connection points. It's only about their capacity and position in the
network.

Neverthess there is no tag currently to state the point is a dacs or not.
I may think about it later.

Le mar. 10 déc. 2019 à 23:06, Mateusz Konieczny  a
écrit :

> Yeah, vote is a good way to trigger comments.
>
> Certainly frustrating but hopefully it will
> result in a better tag and/or documentation.
>

No problem
Indeed it's a good occasion to improve and add points I didn't see neither.

Le mar. 10 déc. 2019 à 23:08, Graeme Fitzpatrick  a
écrit :

>
> In a lot of areas around here, all infrastructure is underground, so our
> lead-in cable (now an internet connection only) runs from a box on the
> outside wall of the house, under our front yard to a pit on the footpath,
> then to a bigger pit further down the road, & onwards from there.
>
> Should these pits be mapped under this scheme?
>

You may have a look to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:telecom%3Dconnection_point  if the
pits you talk about are located further in the network toward central
office.
Distribution points don't have patch panel to change subscribers from one
line to another. It's only local and direct connection to a bigger cable
(with less than 15 homes connected)
A connection point can handle a hundred of subscribers usually.

Be sure this precision will be added to improve documentation of
connection_point too.

Le mar. 10 déc. 2019 à 23:58, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit :

>
> I'm certainly not mapping them.
> Mainly because I don't know what these 'distribution points' really are.
>

Let's improve the example chapter with any situation you may see on ground
to disambiguate them.

All the best

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Jo]

My take on this would be to create a separate route relation for the
funicular part and add that to the bicycle route relation. For validation
purposes that would be the simplest and clearest way of doing things.
Simply adding the rails would mean that you'd have to cycle on the rails,
or at least try and most likely fail.

Polyglot

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 14:37 Richard Fairhurst  wrote:

> Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> > I added a bicycle route that implies the use of a funicular
> > (railway). I'm not sure how to "tell" in the relation that
> > you have to take the train and not ride the railway.
>
> Just add the railway to the bike route relation, and make sure that each
> end
> of the railway is directly connected to bike-routable ways. Here's
> cycle.travel routing via the Tauern Tunnel:
> https://cycle.travel/map?from=Salzburg=Grado
>
> (Unfortunately someone appears to have broken the relation since I last ran
> a routing update, removing the tunnel from it, so that'll need fixing...
> sigh. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2771761 )
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html
>
> ___
> 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] Rail segment in a bike route

[Jo]

Jesus would float, obviously, but what about his bicycle?

On Fri, Dec 13, 2019, 20:59 Peter Elderson  wrote:

> We  happily add ferry transfers to hiking routes. Nobody has been found
> trying to walk on the water. Nobody that we know of...
>
> Fr gr Peter Elderson
>
>
> Op vr 13 dec. 2019 om 20:39 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> On 13. Dec 2019, at 18:37, Francesco Ansanelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I added a bicycle route that implies the use of a funicular (railway).
>> I'm not sure how to "tell" in the relation that you have to take the
>> train and not ride the railway.
>> Can you give me some hint?
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not sure there is an agreed way to express this. From a cycling
>> point of view the route is interrupted at this point
>> We would have to introduce multimodal relations to cater for situations
>> like this
>>
>> Cheers Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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 mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Volker Schmidt]

:

> A router should never assume that a route tag overrules a way or node tag,
> for access.
>
That is certainly correct.
My point was that route membership or not can and does influence the
preference assigned to that way for routing purposes.

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Peter Elderson]

A router should never assume that a route tag overrules a way or node tag,
for access.

Vr gr Peter Elderson


Op za 14 dec. 2019 om 15:43 schreef Volker Schmidt :

>
>
>
> Adding a bicycle=dismount is OK I suppose, but I'm unsure there's really
>> a problem.
>
> This street in Padova 
> carries a (mono-rail) tram (railway=tram) and is closed to bicycles, tagged
> with bicycle=no.
> I intended to re-tag this with bicycle=dismount in line with the notion
> that you are allowed to push your bike along, like you are allowed to push
> your bike across the pedestrian area in the city center.
> I would not have dreamed that this would mean that I would have to take my
> bicycle on the tram (which I am not allowed to do anyway).
>
>
>> Routing software creators will always refer to tags on the ways. Common
>> sense needs to be exercised - If a router comes across 'railway'
>> 'dismount' should be a assumed.
>>
> Some bicycle routers take into account the fact that a way is part of a
> bicycle route.
> ___
> 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] Rail segment in a bike route

[Volker Schmidt]

Adding a bicycle=dismount is OK I suppose, but I'm unsure there's really
> a problem.

This street in Padova  carries
a (mono-rail) tram (railway=tram) and is closed to bicycles, tagged with
bicycle=no.
I intended to re-tag this with bicycle=dismount in line with the notion
that you are allowed to push your bike along, like you are allowed to push
your bike across the pedestrian area in the city center.
I would not have dreamed that this would mean that I would have to take my
bicycle on the tram (which I am not allowed to do anyway).


> Routing software creators will always refer to tags on the ways. Common
> sense needs to be exercised - If a router comes across 'railway'
> 'dismount' should be a assumed.
>
Some bicycle routers take into account the fact that a way is part of a
bicycle route.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Richard Fairhurst]

Francesco Ansanelli wrote:
> I added a bicycle route that implies the use of a funicular 
> (railway). I'm not sure how to "tell" in the relation that 
> you have to take the train and not ride the railway.

Just add the railway to the bike route relation, and make sure that each end
of the railway is directly connected to bike-routable ways. Here's
cycle.travel routing via the Tauern Tunnel:
https://cycle.travel/map?from=Salzburg=Grado

(Unfortunately someone appears to have broken the relation since I last ran
a routing update, removing the tunnel from it, so that'll need fixing...
sigh. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2771761 )

cheers
Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

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

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 11:21, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> On 14.12.19 01:57, Paul Allen wrote:
> > How does the company itself capitalize its own name?  Paint the label.
> > Even if it's an ugly label.
>
> I tend to view capitalisation as a design element not a part of the
> name. If they write their name in Comic Sans then I won't try to copy
> that either, so why copy funny capitalisation that is only intended to
> attract attention.
>

Because attracting attention may not be the intention.  FRED'S BAGELS is
attracting
attention.  But HSBC is an initialism, and UNESCO is an acronym; both
represent
longer names.

>
> On the wider topic of writing names as they are on the sign, I would
> agree with this up to a certain point. It is entirely possible for a
> business to name itself "Fred's Bagels the BEST Bagels in Northern
> California Inc", at which point I would say they are starting to game
> our rules,


I like to think we make a difference, but such a big difference that people
alter their
signage in order to game our rules?  Probably not. :)

Like everything we do, judgement is necessary.  If the name "PACIFIC" is
derived from
some connection (however tenuous) with the ocean of that name, then tag it
as "Pacific."
But if it's an acronym then "PACIFIC."

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

Re: [Tagging] Relation for place archipelago with members place island

[Christoph Hormann]

On Saturday 14 December 2019, Warin wrote:
>
> I think this is ok. But is there a better way?
>
> The particular relation is 55737 the Schouten Islands.

You mean

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/557367

That looks correct, archipelagos are normal multipolygon relations.  
Building them from the same coastline ways that are used to map the 
individual islands is the established method for mapping them.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 14/12/2019 10:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

if I saw this I would think I’d have to push the bike there, not take a train


Well, yes - you would have to push it into the carriage. Your assumption 
would only occur if the railway tag is ignored.


Cheers
DaveF

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 14/12/2019 07:00, Francesco Ansanelli wrote:

Thanks everybody for the feedback.
I've added the bicycle=dismount on the railway. I think we still need some
role in the relation to better describe the situation.


Adding a bicycle=dismount is OK I suppose, but I'm unsure there's really 
a problem. No extra tags need to be added to relations. Remember that 
ways can have multiple route relations.


Routing software creators will always refer to tags on the ways. Common 
sense needs to be exercised - If a router comes across 'railway' 
'dismount' should be a assumed.


Cheers
DaveF

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Volker Schmidt]

I agree with Martin.

As said before the tagging of

   - take the train (and your rucksack)
   - board the bus with your bicycle
   - take the ski-lift to get to the start of the next downhill section
   - take the water bus with your bike and be prepared that the captain
   does not accept any bicycles today because he has a bad day (real life
   example in Venice)
   - ride your bike on this stretch and than inflate your kayak for the
   next stretch (bikerafting )
   - ...

in a hiking/skiing/cycling/bikerafting/... routes need sorting out. I don't
think we have anything systematic so far.



On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 11:18, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 14. Dec 2019, at 08:02, Francesco Ansanelli 
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks everybody for the feedback.
> > I've added the bicycle=dismount on the railway.
>
>
> if I saw this I would think I’d have to push the bike there, not take a
> train
>
> Cheers Martin
> ___
> 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] Business names in capital letters

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 14.12.19 01:57, Paul Allen wrote:
> How does the company itself capitalize its own name?  Paint the label. 
> Even if it's an ugly label.

I tend to view capitalisation as a design element not a part of the
name. If they write their name in Comic Sans then I won't try to copy
that either, so why copy funny capitalisation that is only intended to
attract attention.

On the wider topic of writing names as they are on the sign, I would
agree with this up to a certain point. It is entirely possible for a
business to name itself "Fred's Bagels the BEST Bagels in Northern
California Inc", at which point I would say they are starting to game
our rules, hoping to be put on the map with exactly that name - and I'd
reduce the name to "Fred's Bagels", putting the rest in "offical_name"
or something.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 14. Dec 2019, at 08:02, Francesco Ansanelli  wrote:
> 
> Thanks everybody for the feedback.
> I've added the bicycle=dismount on the railway.


if I saw this I would think I’d have to push the bike there, not take a train

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

Re: [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 14. Dec 2019, at 03:16, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Wikipedia tags should include the relevant language..


it should include the relevant article. You cannot assume that all articles 
linked from a specific article to versions in different languages are all 
relevant for the OpenStreetMap object. Mostly they are, but it is not 
necessarily like this. WP authors don’t write or modify their articles with 
OpenStreetMap in mind, and a link which may make perfectly sense within 
wikipedia maybe does less so for OpenStreetMap 

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles - transport

[Peter Elderson]

if all the ideas for roles in routes are combined, you will need multiple roles 
for the relation members. 
When a member of a cycling route relation is tagged as a waterway or a railway, 
isn't that all the information you need to know it's a transfer? If the member 
is a relation, you could tag it with the transport mode. So the network tag for 
the section would remain for example ncn, and add a tag to indicate it's e.g. a 
train transfer.

Fr Gr Peter Elderson

> Op 14 dec. 2019 om 09:17 heeft Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Where a hiking route uses some transport to get from one walking section to 
> another should there be a roll 'transport'???
> 
> I know one of the American routes uses a canoe to cross a river, and at least 
> one of the Australian routes uses row boats to cross a river.
> 
> And, yes, this flows on from the bicycle route that uses a train for some 
> length.
> 
> 
> ___
> 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 - hiking_trail_relation_roles - transport

[Warin]

Where a hiking route uses some transport to get from one walking section to 
another should there be a roll 'transport'???

I know one of the American routes uses a canoe to cross a river, and at least 
one of the Australian routes uses row boats to cross a river.

And, yes, this flows on from the bicycle route that uses a train for some 
length.


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