Hi
In the UK, Amazon Logistics are adding useful data from their GPS'd
delivery vehicles. Mainly highway=service as the last part of their
journey to a destination.
However, one of their contributors removed service=driveway from a
highway=service road. In the changeset comments they said it
On 28/10/2019 09:42, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
On 10/28/19 03:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
"sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged
type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign
For me it seems a horrible and unaccepta
No.
Just because, once again, routing software fails & you don't use a
certain tag it is not a reason to deprecate. The tail does not wag the
dog in OSM.
Contact the navigation software developers & tell them to write some
decent code.
DaveF
On 23/10/2019 09:26, Florian Lohoff wrote:
Hi,
On 15/10/2019 16:24, Vɑdɪm wrote:
Apparently you've misunderstood the proposal. It is not about a place where
sunbathing is generally allowed, which indeed would be too vague/general.
It's about a dedicated place.
That you've changed your tune & given vague/unrealistic examples
suggests yo
Better to drop it. it's too vague/general.
All the examples in this list are leisure places (Beach, lido, park) at
which sunbathing is just one of many assumed activities. Swimming,
kicking a ball about, throwing a frisbee etc.There's no requirement to
explicitly tag it.
You'd be better off
On 14/10/2019 14:50, Dave F via Tagging wrote:
PS Can anyone explain what an " academic member" is?
Just found out it was a spell-correct typo. Volker is an ACA member
DaveF
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap
On 14/10/2019 00:17, Warin wrote:
On 14/10/19 07:26, Volker Schmidt wrote:
(disclosure: I am academic member, but express my personal view)
The Great Divide route is, to my knowledge, not signposted. The
source for thr route is most likely either a GPX track from ACA or a
map set from ACA, wh
Are you able to properly verify these are all "Random road your cycling
club likes to ride on the weekend" & not designated/signed routes?
ATM it appears you're vetting them purely on the class of highway used.
Designated cycle routes can go along "just regular roads, with no
designation for c
On 13/09/2019 16:14, Wolfgang Zenker wrote:
That would be kind of redundant, wouldn't it? We already use other tags
for the current function of a building,
I'm repeating much of my of my previous comment, but no, the schema
which hijacked building=* to represent the original historical function
On 11/09/2019 14:50, Paul Allen wrote:
I said that if it was a church and looks like a church then tag the building as
a church even if it now functions as something else.
Buildings don't have a 'type'. There's no 'class', no standard
architectural style or size. A quick image search proves
I've yet to see an argument for collecting all under the 'contact:*' tag
that bears scrutiny .
The "group them without having to keep a hardcoded list" falls down as
they have to be split into separate variables to make sense of them.
DaveF
On 25/08/2019 20:48, marc marc wrote:
Le 25.08.19
On 31/07/2019 08:20, Warin wrote:
"Any tag you like" is one of the OSM mantras.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
To be clearer it should be "Any tag you like.. to describe something
different"
If a valid tag is in use - use that.
Cheers
DaveF
How about using booking?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Abooking
DaveF
On 15/08/2019 03:36, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Another user has proposed the Key walk-in=* to specify if an amenity,
like a healthcare facility, sees people on a walk-in basis or not. In
particular it's for medical c
I believe the main reason isn't (& probably shouldn't) deprecated is
that it allows entities which are unused but still physically there, to
be rendered. disused:*=* aren't rendered on the 'standard' render.
Davef
On 29/07/2019 07:23, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
I was going to fix the status of a
Hi
This is not a criticism of Joseph.
This post confirms what I've been saying for the past year - PT tags add
nothing but confusion to OSM, which directly leads to errors.
highway=bus_stop is a completely separate tag to any in the PT schema.
It was created long before the invention of the
Even if 'construction' was to be used, it would still cause the same
confusion to Richard F
On 15/07/2019 20:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
14 Jul 2019, 21:03 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
Route relations should be aware of tags on ways. access=no can be used in part
to indicate road works.
Ju
On 14/07/2019 13:07, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Hi all,
Occasionally I encounter tag combinations like this:
bicycle=designated
highway=proposed
(from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335831004)
where the "bikes can ride along here" of the first tag is contradicted
by the "this ha
On 09/07/2019 14:04, MARLIN LUKE wrote:
Hi,
I've read in the wiki (and on this list) that it's best to avoid loosing
history.
This refers to the edit history of an object ie How many times it's been
amended, by whom, & what got changed.
I have an ATM mapped in a street which does not exis
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 a
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 can
(not read the whole thread as there are far too many from you, Simon.)
What is WMF ?
When you say "not posting more than 30 times per month" do you mean
thread starts or are you including responses?
Never understood the criticism of "noise" - if you don't like it, ignore
it.
These are foru
On 24/05/2019 18:56, Nick Bolten wrote:
But Nick, /you/ made it personal.
No, I didn't. I named nobody.
Nick, making it personal also means making it about yourself. You've
been self referential numerous times:
"My experience with this mailing list"
And yet, this thread is devolving into
On 24/05/2019 18:29, Nick Bolten wrote:
Notice the extent to which personalisms are being launched.
But Nick, /you/ made it personal. I haven't seen any of the behaviour
you claim. You probably need to grow some thicker skin.
If you're looking for sycophantic agreement with any point you mak
002052.html
But to quickly summarise: What Jo said.
DaveF
On 23/05/2019 23:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 04:49, Dave F via Tagging
wrote:
Platform should only be tagged when their is a *physical* object of a
raise platform, not just an imaginary area of pavement.
Sor
Please see the discussion on the Transit forum.
Platform should only be tagged when their is a *physical* object of a
raise platform, not just an imaginary area of pavement.
From OSM's Welcome page:
"OpenStreetMap is a place for mapping things that are both /real and
current/ "
"What it /does
If they'd wanted to do that the github thread wouldn't have been locked.
He's never been good at taking criticism.
He confesses *all* responses will be critical, but still thinks he's right.
DaveF
On 23/05/2019 18:26, Jmapb wrote:
On 5/23/2019 12:32 PM, Tobias Zwick wrote:
Undoubtedly, the de
Don't you think, with his refusal to participate in discussions about
raised issues, that it's often self inflicted?
On a couple of occasions he's said he ignores these forums & note how
often github threads are instantaneously closed.
DaveF
On 23/05/2019 09:16, Tobias Zwick wrote:
I like y
They've (just quincylvania?) got their logic backwards. A platform is,
by default, accessible by people. It's what they are designed for in the
real world.
I find it strange/worrying he makes these far reaching decisions
unilaterally (unless there's other hidden discussions not linked to in
#
On 07/05/2019 22:46, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Two spontanous reactions
1) You cannot deprecate a tagging that is used 750k times
(crossing=uncontrolled) or 570k times (crossing=traffic_signals)
In principle, why do you think it can't be performed?
___
Have these diversions been given a 'XYZ Canal' name? if not then it's a
river.
I think the duck test needs to be applied.
DaveF
On 25/04/2019 11:25, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
DaveF wrote:
The water flowing through it is still river water.
The water flowing down lots of canals is ultimately r
François
Le mer. 24 avr. 2019 à 20:40, Dave F via Tagging
a écrit :
Hi
This maybe UK specific but it's a tagging problem & maybe wider spread.
To allow navigation, rivers occasional have lock gates, usually as a
separate channel. Some contributors tag these incorrectly as
waterway
Hi
This maybe UK specific but it's a tagging problem & maybe wider spread.
To allow navigation, rivers occasional have lock gates, usually as a
separate channel. Some contributors tag these incorrectly as
waterway=canal for the centre line.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347369154
Howeve
On 21/04/2019 01:12, Warin wrote:
I am all for the introduction of the key education=*
It makes sense, adds detail - improves the map data base.
True.
The one that irks me is amenity=cafe. It isn't there for the benefit of
the community; it is a commercial enterprise & should be tagged
On 21/04/2019 21:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
Apr 21, 2019, 1:37 PM by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
User is still active. Overall, I would ask in at least some changesets
before or together with asking on ml.
If I want to know why an individual contributor adds a tag I would ask
on a changeset
Hi
'track_detail, used on railway tracks.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4414158
4700+ total worldwide 3900+ in the UK
I can find nothing in the wiki
Is track_detail meant to indicate that all tracks have been mapped?
Surely that can be noted just by looking at the map?
DaveF
_
Hi
Following a discussion on OSM-Carto, I'm curious what software uses
junction=yes as a polygon.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Dyes#How_to_use_on_an_area
A couple of examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5492033
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/218106249
They'
On 13/04/2019 01:37, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
polygon. This happens for all closed ways that a
Hi
https://snag.gy/3jSyt7.jpgSteps provided so that a rider can climb back
on. Any ideas? Could find anything in Taginfo or wiki
https://snag.gy/mwYNd6.jpghttps://snag.gy/mwYNd6.jpgamenity/leisure=horse_mount,
maybe.
https://snag.gy/mwYNd6.jpg
This example is provided at a road/bridleway cro
Am 18.02.2019 um 00:48 schrieb Dave F via Tagging:
As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object.
Sidewalk has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate
legality.
So? I don't think this is disputed.
The reasoning here is that the absence of a sid
conflation occurs doesn't make it acceptable. Your
misunderstanding/misuse of the 'sidewalk' tag is resolved with another tag.
(wow, 5 negs in a row, respect!)
Mvg Peter Elderson
Op 18 feb. 2019 om 01:45 heeft Dave F via Tagging
mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> het
00:30, Peter Elderson wrote:
I'm afraid countries differ with respect to legal imlications of
sidewalk.
This discussion, I've seen it 5 times now ande it never ends with
consensus. It never ends at all.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 18 feb. 2019 om 00:49 schreef Dave F via Tagging
As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object. Sidewalk
has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate legality.
On 17/02/2019 22:29, Tobias Wrede wrote:
Am 17.02.2019 um 20:44 schrieb Andy Townsend:
I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes
I should have been clearer. I was indicating a case where foot=no would
be appropriate, but I should have stated there are also cases where
'yes' or 'designated' are required. I'm still unsure why Tobias W.
thinks tracks shouldn't be queried at all yet residential roads should.
Don't misunders
On 15/02/2019 12:20, Tobias Wrede wrote:
Unfortunately, the legal situation is not always as clear as we wish
to. There are a lot of grey zones and we need to apply common sense
when tagging the access rules.
You're undoubtedly correct. However, foot=yes/no has always represented,
as stated
Why do you exclude tracks?
Legal access to them are often denied as they're on private land
(example: farms)
Why ford?
Why oneway?
Cheers
DaveF
On 15/02/2019 11:50, Tobias Wrede wrote:
As far as I am concerned roads that are most likely to merit a foot=no
are
- all highway road types excep
101 - 145 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
