Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

> On Jan 9, 2019, at 8:23 PM, Stefan Keller wrote: > > Hi, > > As one of the originators of this thread I'd like to second that the > Wiki is important. It's not only a documentation tool but also a > communication. We all need patience with Wikis and it's curation and > users - like we e.g.

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

> On Jan 9, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Jan 9, 2019, 7:33 PM by bhou...@gmail.com: > On Jan 9, 2019, at 1:18 PM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > Jan 7, 2019, 4:12 PM by bhou...@gmail.com : > And on “the wiki”, I have

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

> On Jan 9, 2019, at 1:18 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Jan 7, 2019, 4:12 PM by bhou...@gmail.com: > And on “the wiki”, I have basically given up on the OSM wiki because it > contains so much wrong information and opinion, and I’m tired of having my > edits reverted. I just recently had

Re: [Tagging] service

> On Jan 8, 2019, at 2:30 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > > Am 07.01.2019 um 16:12 schrieb Bryan Housel: >> ... >> On “both is OK”. the `service:vehicle` issue was because we can’t use the >> same key `service=*` to contain both things like `tyres` (a few thousands) >&g

Re: [Tagging] service

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:22 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Hi Bryan > I've just created a new page for shop=caravan > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan > , which i copied from the > shop=car page. > > As such, it's also copied

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:01 PM, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > Doesn’t taginfo use the wiki as the source of tags that are listed? No, taginfo’s source is the actual tag data from the OSM database. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

[Tagging] Changeset tag for issue closing

iD now integrates with the KeepRight Q/A tool.. This is pretty great, and you should try it out: https://twitter.com/bhousel/status/1081398222176817152 But I have a tagging question. As we roll out this feature, as well as other Q/A

Re: [Tagging] Facts and opinions

> Just recently the iD Editor maintainer added more multiCombo functions > (like [3]) and presets key (like "service:vehicle" [4]). Both is OK > per se, but the latter preset was undocumented on the Wiki, and > obviously the iD Editor maintainer prefers namespaces over semicolons > for handling

Re: [Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

We discussed it here on this list last year. You started the thread even, so you can’t pretend like you "just realized” it. I even asked people to update the wiki. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036095.html

Re: [Tagging] iD news - 2.12.0 released 

> On Dec 27, 2018, at 7:51 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Thanks Bryan > Separate request for each brand, or one for multiples? either is fine! > & what do you need - just name & what they do / type of store & speciality? Mainly just the name and whatever tags should go with it

Re: [Tagging] iD news - 2.12.0 released 

> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 12:14, Bryan Housel <mailto:bhou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >  Brand Name Suggestions > We've released a huge upgrade to the brand name suggestions in iD. Thank you > to everyone who volunteered to match brand names to their proper > Ope

[Tagging] iD news - 2.12.0 released 

Last week, after several months of work, we released iD v2.12.0 for editing OpenStreetMap. I hope you like it! Here are some of the highlights from the release: ✌️ 2-finger pan and zoom gestures Mac users can now use 2 finger trackpad gestures to pan and zoom the map. Try swiping with 2

Re: [Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

> So how would you tag this situation: >

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

> On Oct 26, 2018, at 6:44 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked crossing > is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there is no need > for a tag here, as there is nothing special. > > Otherwise I would need to set a

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

> On Oct 26, 2018, at 6:26 AM, marc marc wrote: > > Le 26. 10. 18 à 01:18, Bryan Housel a écrit : >> I don’t like `crossing=zebra` either.<...> iD will support these 2 presets: >> - `crossing=marked` which is labeled “Marked Crosswalk" >> - `crossing=unmarke

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

Oh! I don’t like `crossing=zebra` either. Not sure whether you caught the end of that issue #4788, but anyway I've decided I'm tired of hearing people complain about `crossing=zebra` so going forward iD will support these 2 presets: - `crossing=marked` which is labeled “Marked Crosswalk"

Re: [Tagging] amenity=clinic or healthcare=clinic

Yes, iD now adds the `healthcare=` tags alongside the legacy tags. https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/3589 We also considered asking users if they want to “upgrade” old tags, but I received enough pushback that I just decided to drop the idea.

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign direction tagging..

> On Oct 1, 2018, at 5:23 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > > > ^ This is the problem. The wiki says we are supposed to do something like > `traffic_sign:forward=US:R1`, and we can't really do that. A preset needs to > be based on a "toplevel" tag like `traffic_sign=*` not > `traffic_sign:forward=*`

Re: [Tagging] My "weirdly unnatural aversion to relations"

> On Sep 29, 2018, at 6:56 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > I honestly don't understand why, ten years since it's introduction as OSM's > third basic primitive, there's still this weirdly unnatural aversion to > relations, even though they're quite a powerful primitive in our toolbox. From my own

[Tagging] Traffic sign direction tagging..

Hey Tagging List! While reviewing a pull request to add Traffic Sign presets to iD, I came across a tagging issue with how traffic sign directions are tagged. The details are here https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/5333 and relevant guidance

Re: [Tagging] tagging a gamesroom?

Probably `leisure=amusement_arcade`, which is not great but the best tag we have. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Damusement_arcade Thanks, Bryan > On Aug 17, 2018, at 9:29 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > > On

Re: [Tagging] Car pound, tow pound etc.

I’d strongly prefer not to use `landuse` for this. These facilities are sometimes indoor garages. (Anytime we use `landuse` for something that might also be mapped a building or POI, we’re doing it wrong.) `amenity=impound` makes sense to me. Here is some more information about the process:

[Tagging] iD news - v2.10.0 with OSM Notes and more

We released iD v2.10.0 last week!  OSM Notes You can now create, comment on, and resolve OpenStreetMap notes from within iD! This work was done as part of Thomas Hervey's 2018 Google Summer of Code project, and you can read about it in his diary here:

Re: [Tagging] landcover=asphalt ; landuse=highway

From what I remember people are already using `area:highway=*` for detailed street area mapping. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/area%3Ahighway I would think `landuse=highway` would work kind of like `landuse=railway`, used to map a

Re: [Tagging] shop=discount

> Meanwhile, there probably is a need to tag a kind of store that is sometimes > referred to as a discount store. I'm > thinking of the likes of Costco or Sam's Club. They're essentially > wholesalers operating on a cash and carry basis > and which are open to the public, not just retailers

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

> On Jun 24, 2018, at 7:05 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > Ok.. > I’ve decided after talking to a few more people about this that I’m going to > just support things in iD the best I can, and pull back from tagging > discussions. > > "just support things" sounds fine, if this means adding

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

e > >> On 24. Jun 2018, at 16:19, Bryan Housel wrote: >> >> I can’t be any more clear than this: >> >> I will support `covered=yes/no` as a checkbox. >> I will support `booth=*` as a dropdown >> I won’t support `covered=booth` . > > > tha

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

> On Jun 24, 2018, at 9:47 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > what about modifying all booth=yes on telephones to covered=booth ? No. That’s the exact opposite of what I’m trying to achieve. I feel like you might not have read very carefully any of the emails that I’ve sent on the

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

> On Jun 23, 2018, at 10:32 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > There should also be a separate page for first aid facility, if you're not > busy :-) I still think a staffed facility should be something under `healthcare=*` - there is lots on that page already. > Mentioned on the lifeguard

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

> Would you object if I changed the page to emergency=first_aid_kit for > example?? I would not mind at all - `emergency=first_aid_kit` was what I suggested originally. Someone else made that wiki page and I don’t know why they called it that. Anyway I just moved it to

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid

> Err .. proposals can be for anything, including sub tags. There should be > more of it. > Things like the sub tag 'sales' under motorcycle shops could have been > avoided if that had come to the tagging group. I would never waste people’s time by writing a proposal for something so simple

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

> On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:00 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We’re not adding `booth=yes` to all phones. Just the ones that >> - don’t already have a `booth=*` tag and > > That is not right. If they don't have a booth=* tag then don't think that > these all have a booth. > So I

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

> On Jun 19, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Bryan Housel wrote: > > Sounds good to me. > We can leave the thread open a few more days to see if anyone cares that much > about `covered=booth`. > I think 5 days is plenty. > > If nobody is using it, I’ll open an issue on > https:

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid

> On Jun 23, 2018, at 10:58 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > +1, if you want to describe the position of a first aid kit, a sensible tag > seems emergency=first_aid_kid > For a staffed location where you go for first aid, emergency=first_aid seems > ok (I’d rather use something more verbose

Re: [Tagging] iD presets

> On Jun 21, 2018, at 6:16 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > Then why do you object to Frederik's idea of separating the tagging > presets from editor development and give up control over the decisions? I offered to do exactly this a few years ago:

Re: [Tagging] Be the change you want to see in the world - was: emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 20, 2018, at 5:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > this is what I understood from the messages you recently sent here, e.g.: "We > have too many tags for different kinds of lifeguards. This is too confusing. > I don’t want to have to show all these choices to iD users. ... Let’s

Re: [Tagging] iD presets

Hey Christoph - You make some really interesting points in your email. Rather than replying point by point, I’m going to pick out a few phrases that stood out. It sounds like I need to do a better job of explaining... ‍ “How a tag becomes a preset in iD” First - and this is something that

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

aid facility to what you were looking for, a > simple first aid kit. In practical terms that would be a rather big > difference that should be reflected in the tagging. > > Simon > > Am 20.06.2018 um 19:51 schrieb Bryan Housel: >> I guess `emergency=first_aid` seems fine (sin

Re: [Tagging] emergency=fire_alarm , emergency=stop_button

ues/6> Thanks, Bryan > On Jun 11, 2018, at 10:53 AM, Bryan Housel wrote: > > Ok cool > > So we have > `emergency=fire_alarm` (for both indoor pull and outdoor box types, invent > a sub tag if needed to distinguish) > and > `emergency=stop_button` > > Who

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

say so the page seems a bit weird. >> Name on a first aid kit? Draw an area around the shop outline? >> >> Assuming that are simply C errors, I'll fix things in nobody has any >> objections. >> >> Simon >> >> Am 20.06.2018 um 19:31 schrie

Re: [Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

we can consider this one closed  > On Jun 11, 2018, at 12:08 AM, Bryan Housel wrote: > > I was looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency> today. > > Can we add a tag for `emergency=first

[Tagging] iD presets - was: emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 19, 2018, at 10:59 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > Perhaps it would make sense to treat the iD editor and the tagging > presets it uses as two different projects that are conceptually separate > enough so that the tagging presets as rolled out on osm.org can be > curated by a group

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

> This is not the first time, and you have stated more than once your idea of > tag creation and endorsement is top down, with the software maintainer > deciding the tags on the input side, sweeping away the confusing plurality of > comunity created tags. That’s not really what I think - are

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

Basically, yeah  > On Jun 19, 2018, at 9:47 AM, Andy Townsend wrote: > > On 19/06/2018 14:37, Bryan Housel wrote: >> Yes it was settled a week ago >> The migration is being discussed here: >> https://github.com/osmlab/osm-tagging/issues/1 >> This thread ca

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

FYI I closed this issue in iD yesterday. We now provide a field to let users decide whether to treat `amenity=shelter` as a building or not. Thanks all for your input! Bryan > On Jun 17, 2018, at 12:45 AM, Bryan Housel wrote: > > Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`? >

Re: [Tagging] drop covered=booth?

une 23 to start the cleanup.. As always, looking for volunteers to do the actual work of replacing the tags and cleaning up the wiki. Thanks, Bryan > On Jun 18, 2018, at 4:21 PM, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Bryan Housel <mailto:bhou...@gmail.com>

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

; > > 2018-06-19 15:14 GMT+02:00 Bryan Housel <mailto:bhou...@gmail.com>>: > Thank you for checking! > I guess those can be`emergency=lifeguard + lifeguard=base` > (what was decided before) > > > "decided"? > I suggest you use a different key

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

marc >> Sent: Tuesday, 19 June 2018 22:24 >> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard >> >> Le 19. 06. 18 à 13:56, Bryan Housel a écrit : >>>> the lifeguard base is defined for storage and administration

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 19, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > 2018-06-19 11:17 GMT+02:00 Andrew Harvey >: > Martin, which part? The whole reason this discussion started is because Bryan > wants to offer a way to tag a lifeguard facility iD without forcing

Re: [Tagging] New GitHub tagging repo "osmlab/osm-tagging" - was: emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 18, 2018, at 8:16 PM, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:36 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar > wrote: > > Just to comment on the Microsoft side angle here…. Please try to stay on topic. We’re not going to change our approach to GitHub anytime soon. If

Re: [Tagging] New GitHub tagging repo "osmlab/osm-tagging" - was: emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 18, 2018, at 5:27 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Jokes aside, there are many serious reasons why good old-fashioned > mailing lists should be the mainstay of important communication in OSM. I’m not suggesting to replace the mailing list. As you can probably tell form the past week,

[Tagging] drop covered=booth?

from https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/5088 `covered`, traditionally: Someone has asked me to add a `covered=booth` field to the telephone preset. I’m pushing back on the request slightly because `covered=*` already has a

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

at on them. But that still doesn't make them > buildings. They are more like containers with glass wall panels and a metal > roof on a slab of concrete. Relatively easy to move and relatively small in > size. > > Polyglot > > Op ma 18 jun. 2018 om 15:28 schreef Bryan H

[Tagging] New GitHub tagging repo "osmlab/osm-tagging" - was: emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 17, 2018, at 7:34 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > If the consensus is to change it to emergency=lifeguard + lifeguard=*, then I > think this needs to be changed in: > > 1. The wiki > 2. Put forward a proposal to do a mechanical edit to change the existing tags > 3. Carry out that

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

> There are also picnic shelters .. here they can have no walls just a roof to > shelter from the heat of the sun or the occasional bit of rain. > e.g. > https://www.riversideca.gov/park_rec/sites/riversideca.gov.park_rec/files/pictures/Picnic%20Shelter%20Hunter%20hobby.JPG > >

[Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`? The osm wiki page does not suggest `building=*` as a “tag to use in combination” https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=shelter But most other features which are closed-way structures

Re: [Tagging] iD news - v2.9.0 now with Bing Streetside support

> On Jun 17, 2018, at 12:31 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > On 17 June 2018 at 14:16, Bryan Housel <mailto:bhou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > No, I haven’t seen that.. Can you share the location around where you see > them? > Thanks Bryan > > All over the place

Re: [Tagging] iD news - v2.9.0 now with Bing Streetside support

No, I haven’t seen that.. Can you share the location around where you see them? Thanks Bryan > On Jun 17, 2018, at 12:04 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > > > > On 17 June 2018 at 00:32, Bryan Housel <mailto:bhou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Happy Summe

[Tagging] iD news - v2.9.0 now with Bing Streetside support

Happy Summer!  I just released iD v2.9.0 this week and it’s now available on openstreetmap.org for editing. If you use street level imagery you will like this...  Bing Streetside now supported iD now includes a layer for Bing Streetside! This new layer provides

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> On Jun 11, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > 11. Jun 2018 13:09 by bhou...@gmail.com : > But for right now, can we get that page taken down so people stop tagging it, > and have a proper proposal put up and accepted? > I added >

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> You are seriously telling me that if you have two ways that share a node, you > are unable to figure out what that node is without having it explicitly > listed as a totally redundant member of the relation? Yes - do you think the via node in a turn restriction is also redundant? It helps

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

> Two issues here. > First, the tag is not “transit:lanes” the tag is “transit” and it can be used > with the generalized “:lanes” suffix. > There are general rules for the :lanes suffix which can be added to pretty > much any tag you would have on a highway were the value could be different >

Re: [Tagging] emergency=fire_alarm , emergency=stop_button

Ok cool So we have `emergency=fire_alarm` (for both indoor pull and outdoor box types, invent a sub tag if needed to distinguish) and `emergency=stop_button` Who wants to add these pages? I’ll add presets for iD this week if we can just move this forward and wrap up the discussion. Thanks,

Re: [Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

Amazing, but I’m not surprised that the JOSM devs figured this out years ago :) OK, so we should probably have a conversation about how a tag like this can continue to exist for years with - not just no support but - literally everyone who writes software speaking out against it. But for right

Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

> Though I’m not fundamentally opposed to making it a hierarchical tag along > the lines of: > emergency=lifeguard > lifeguard=base/place/platform/tower Sounds good - lets do it! What are the next steps? > All the usual arguments for and against trying to change tags “by decree” > apply…

[Tagging] I can't support transit:lanes

I’ve had a few recent conversations about this proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/transit Unfortunately I can’t support it. Not only is the name bad (it should be named `transition:lanes` but

[Tagging] emergency=fire_alarm_box

I was looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency today. Someone just made this page for emergency=fire_alarm_box a few weeks ago https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_alarm_box

[Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

I was looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency today. We have too many tags for different kinds of lifeguards. This is too confusing. I don’t want to have to show all these choices to iD users. tag uses

[Tagging] emergency=first_aid_kit

I was looking at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency today. Can we add a tag for `emergency=first_aid_kit` ? thanks, Bryan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag

This comes up for discussion on iD’s issue tracker sometimes, and I always close it as something we won’t change. The usage numbers just don’t support it. https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4272

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

Hah speaking of lanes.. Why does the osm wiki page for `leisure=track` list `lanes=*` under the “useful combination” section. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=track I don’t believe I’ve ever seen an athletics track that

Re: [Tagging] service:vehicle: prefix

Hey all, this is something I added to iD because we can’t support reusing the `service=*` tag to also store values for vehicle services. The tag is already overwhelmingly used to hold values for `highway=service` and `railway=service`. So we added `service:vehicle` for users to tag these, and

[Tagging] iD news - v2.8.0, GSoC, OSM-US Hackathon 5/21-5/22 at Mapbox DC!

Hello all! I’ve got a bunch of exciting items to share about iD - please check out the news and share..  iD 2.8.0 released, including Community Index We've changed how things look on the post-upload screen. Now after saving your edits, you will see a list of OpenStreetMap communities that

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Hey tagging@ Wearing my “maintainer of iD” hat today, I feel like it’s important to comment on this. I agree it would be great to be able to build a dataset of legal defaults which can be used by routers and editors in interesting ways. This is a thing that comes up for discussion frequently.

Re: [Tagging] Rubberised playground surface

stuff on taginfo :) Thanks, Bryan > On Mar 12, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: > > "On 12 March 2018 at 13:02, Bryan Housel <br...@7thposition.com> wrote: >> Searching https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#value

Re: [Tagging] Rubberised playground surface

Searching https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values for “rubber” turns up a few alternatives, with “rubbercrumb” having the most traction: rubber 258 rubbercrumb 170 Rubber 7

[Tagging] iD news - v2.7.0, new imagery, upgraded turn restriction editor

Hey everyone, I just released iD v2.7.0 and it’s now available for editing on openstreetmap.org  Release Highlights •  We've added support for more background imagery from WMS servers. Thanks Martin Raifer and Guillaume Rischard for your work on this.. Press B to

Re: [Tagging] iD news - v2.6.0 lots of new features...

l.com> wrote: > > > > > On 23 January 2018 at 02:48, Bryan Housel <br...@7thposition.com > <mailto:br...@7thposition.com>> wrote: > Happy 2018! I just released iD v2.6.0 yesterday.. > > Thank you & your team for all your hard work - some of thes

[Tagging] iD news - v2.6.0 lots of new features...

Happy 2018! I just released iD v2.6.0 yesterday..  Release Highlights -  You can now adjust imagery brightness, contrast, saturation, and sharpness. (Not currently available in Internet Explorer or Edge) Try enhancing the background imagery by opening the Background pane (shortcut “B")

[Tagging] iD news: v2.5.0, OpenStreetCam, and request for translation help..

Happy December! We have lots moving in the iD editor project.  OpenStreetCam Last month, I released iD v2.5.0 (November 10, 2017), which includes support for OpenStreetCam. If you haven’t tried it yet, you should really check out how easy it is to work with street level imagery in iD.

Re: [Tagging] How to map a bin with dog excrement bags dispenser

2 nodes, please! It makes things much easier for iD, or any other data consumer that needs to match features to tag presets. related thread on iD: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4191#issuecomment-318943309

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

Hey, just want to add some thoughts here.. It would be really great if people could just use a tag for one thing. Reusing a tag like `service=*` for multiple things makes it difficult for us to suggest good values in the iD editor based on tag usage. Check out the popular values for the

Re: [Tagging] Mapping hotels on buildings or areas around buildings

kinds of features, not stuff like `landuse=*` or `natural=*`) > On Sep 29, 2017, at 11:02 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 29. Sep 2017, at 16:50, Bryan Housel <br...@7thposition.com> wrote: >> &g

Re: [Tagging] Mapping hotels on buildings or areas around buildings

If you draw a “Hotel” in iD, you’ll see that it gets a `building=yes` tag added to it. (Users can change this if they like). Again, this is exactly in agreement with what the osm wiki page for `tourism=hotel` says to do. > On Sep 29, 2017, at 11:06 AM, LeTopographeFou

Re: [Tagging] Mapping hotels on buildings or areas around buildings

Yes, but the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dhotel page says "Set a node or draw as an area along the building outline." This is how iD

Re: [Tagging] iD news: v2.4.0 released

t; > Thanks. > > Le 26. 08. 17 à 07:47, Bryan Housel a écrit : >> `ideditor:walkthrough_started=yes` (“yes” if the user started the >> walkthrough) >> `ideditor:walkthrough_started=yes` (“yes” if the user completed all >> walkthrough section

[Tagging] iD news: v2.4.0 released

iD v2.4.0 was released August 25, 2017 and is now available for editing on openstreetmap.org  A few highlights from the release: NEW Esri World Imagery layer: Esri has made their World Imagery Service available for OSM use! Read more here:

Re: [Tagging] Rivers classification

“official_length" is actually a good example of something that really does not need to be tagged in OSM, and could instead be looked up if the river has a wikidata tag. See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3392 for others. Bryan > On Aug 8, 2017, at

Re: [Tagging] toilets:wheelchair or wheelchair_toilet (Both iD presets)

>> >> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com >> <mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com>> wrote: >> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_y-XYuXYAEbFAH.jpg >> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_y-XYuXYAEbFAH.jpg> >> >>

Re: [Tagging] toilets:wheelchair or wheelchair_toilet (Both iD presets)

I just searched the iD code and none of these tags are iD presets. Thanks, Bryan > On May 14, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Dave F wrote: > > Hi > > toilets:wheelchair 64875 (iD & wheelmap preset) > wheelchair_toilet 4550 (iD preset) > > What does wheelchair_toilet

[Tagging] iD news: v2.1.0 released

iD v2.1.0 was released Feb 4 2017 and is now available for editing on openstreetmap.org Here are some of our favorite new features: - Disconnected endpoints now appear slightly larger, and iD will warn if a user creates a disconnected road - Improved save flow

Re: [Tagging] name:zh-yue

using name:zh-yue=* (via overpass turbo) and replace the tag > with name:yue=*? Sounds like a good idea to me (and I wish there were more enthusiasm within OSM for cleaning up tags), but please check with the local community before doing a mass tag change like that. Thanks, Bryan > jc860

Re: [Tagging] name:zh-yue

Worth mentioning here that iD might be doing the wrong thing: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2457 We are using wikimedia as our source for languages, which is where the "zh-yue" came from. As mentioned in the ticket, I’m planning to

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

Previous discussion: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-June/017805.html Some people suggested `junction=traffic_circle` It’s used in taginfo a few times but pretty unofficial and rare. Bryan > On

[Tagging] iD v2.0.0 beta - help test!

We have been working really hard on iD the past few months and we’re releasing v2.0.0 in the next week or so. iD v2.0.0 will look and feel the same as v1.x but has significant changes to the code structure. It is written in a modular style, and uses new tools to build the code. This will

Re: [Tagging] Proposal for standardization of sidewalk schema (+ import)

Hey Meg, I read through your proposal at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sidewalk_schema I don’t see anything in there that is any different from how sidewalks and crossings are already being tagged in

Re: [Tagging] "no right turn on red" tagging?

Most tools follow the rule described here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction "If the first word is "no_", then no routing is possible from the "from" to the "to" member. If it is "only_", then you know that the only

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

My confusion was specifically about the use of `none` as part of a multiple lane indicator - like `none;left`or `none;right`. `none` by itself is well documented and clear. Thanks, Bryan > On Jun 11, 2016, at 3:28 PM, Johan C wrote: > > In that case they also missed the

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

t||” when editing in JOSM. > > [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn#Turning_indications > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn#Turning_indications> > > -Tod > > >> On Jun 10, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Bryan Housel <br...@7thposition.com >> <mailto

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

Hey James, (Disclaimer: I work for Mapbox, but I am not part of the team that is doing the lane tagging, and can’t speak for them). I do need to know more about your concern: Is `none` as part of a multiple turn lane option documented anywhere? I’m asking because we are adding turn lane

  1   2   >