Re: [Tagging] railway=station areas

On 17/10/2020 09:53, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 15. Oct 2020, at 15:12, Dave F via Tagging wrote: Please send all messages to the public forum Martin. I will write to whoever I want, not your business. Wow. The arrogant hypocrisy. (& v. short term memory) You may already

Re: [Tagging] railway=station areas

On 17/10/2020 10:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 15. Oct 2020, at 16:40, Dave F via Tagging wrote: Which negates any desire to change the meaning of railway=station from "places where customers can access railway services or where goods are loaded and unloaded." I am perf

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

Irrelevant of any implied meaning, 'man_made' always appeared to be a clunky, catch-all tag. OSM was being a bit lazy. I mean, *everything* is either man made or natural.  We really should come up with more specific, accurate key tags. DaveF On 19/10/2020 12:45, Jo wrote: It would be best to

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

That in a project to create an up to date map, there are people involved who get upset over things changing is, indeed, weird. DaveF On 19/10/2020 13:58, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Yes, latest update date can be a hint but treating it is as an argument to avoid making an edit is

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

I'm in no way supporting the proposal, but this argument of 'it'll make the entities look fully up to date" is illogical. If taken to it's conclusion, nothing will ever be update again. It's false to think that just because an entity was amended yesterday, it means it's up to date: If a typo

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

On 19/10/2020 15:39, Robert Delmenico wrote: Regardless of the origin of the term, the current use of 'man' is to identify adult males. That's your misinterpretation. You think you're being original with your proposal, but it's not the case. Every couple of years someone come along with the

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

No. In the context of OSM, think of man_made=bridge akin to a noun. The actual bridge object. bridge=* is akin to an adjective/attribute of an object. DaveF On 20/10/2020 05:56, Robert Delmenico wrote: Essentially though, they mean the same thing: man_made=bridge is for areas yes is for ways

[Tagging] railway=station areas

Apologies for breaking the thread, but I was unable to connect to Tagging & missed the initial message in my email client. I'm the user in disagreement. (Although reading the current railway=station wiki page I'm not convinced there's an genuine alternative belief). I believe most of this

Re: [Tagging] railway=station areas

On 10/10/2020 00:34, Andrew Harvey wrote: I believe most of this discussion is moot as the *vast* majority of railway=stations are mapped as nodes: I don't think that makes the point moot since nodes are just a quick first pass way to map a station, railway=station is one of the

Re: [Tagging] railway=station areas

Please send messages to forum, John. On 14/10/2020 03:17, John D. wrote: unless you visit the platform or there is a visible sign how do you know where the train stops ? Unsure of the relevance of that to this discussion. how is nodes better than area ? Points have already been made.

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

On 16/09/2020 14:59, Jeremy Harris wrote: On 16/09/2020 14:26, Matthew Woehlke wrote: On 16/09/2020 05.57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I noticed that crossing=zebra tag usage is drastically shrinking while the very generic crossing=marked, which was quite unpopular before (2013-2018 below

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

I thought the correct tag for this was crossing_ref. Have you cross checked to see if they've been swapped instead of removed? DaveF On 16/09/2020 10:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I noticed that crossing=zebra tag usage is drastically shrinking while the very generic crossing=marked, which

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

Please don't crossthread newsgroups. If you have to alert the few who don't subscribe to both, post a message telling them it's on another newsgroup. DaveF On 16/09/2020 14:11, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote: Mateusz Konieczny via talk:

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

On 26/10/2020 23:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: crossing_ref as far as I have understood the tag, is not about the type of crossing, I think you've misunderstood. DaveF ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

/2020 15:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 16. Sept. 2020 um 16:27 Uhr schrieb Dave F via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>: I thought the correct tag for this was crossing_ref. Have you cross checked to see if they've been swapped instead of removed? crossi

Re: [Tagging] surface=boardwalk? is it duplicate of surface=wood?

To me, boardwalk describes the design & appearance rather than the surface construction: An elevated walkway. Although I do admit that's mostly influenced by The Drifters song. DaveF On 21/11/2020 23:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Is there some value in surface=boardwalk tag? It

Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v. water

On 22/11/2020 22:27, Christoph Hormann wrote: Exactly. It also shows how we in OSM traditionally make decisions about tagging. An idea to change tagging practice was suggested - on an open channel for everyone to read and comment on without hurdles and with an archive that allows us now to

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

On 16/11/2020 16:17, Seth Deegan wrote: The Cycle Routes Wiki Page states: "It is preferred to tag the cycle routes using relations instead of tagging the ways." If I come across a route that has the

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

On 17/11/2020 03:09, Seth Deegan wrote: May I ask why not source=*? TBH. I'm not a fan of the tag. I don't think it adds much value. It's too subjective/variable, but... It relates to the individual contributor editing individual objects. A contributor can obtain data from many different

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

On 17/11/2020 18:56, stevea wrote: I've found published data (from the authority authorised to amend the route) are often too inaccurate, out of date or lacking in detail to warrant transferring to OSM. Then, don’t import, curate or transfer them to OSM. I don’t believe we want "inaccurate,

Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v. water

On 22/11/2020 11:24, Richard Fairhurst wrote: [cross-posted to talk-us@ and tagging@, please choose your follow-ups wisely] If you go against the accepted principle of not X-posting on a newsgroup, you've no entitlement to lecture how others respond. Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > It seems

Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v. water

On 22/11/2020 18:12, Clay Smalley wrote: On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Dave F via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: Contributing to the database (also *volunteers*) are expected to map to a certain standard. There shouldn't be a reason to expect de

Re: [Tagging] Extremely long Amtrak route relations / coastline v. water

I'm surprised you think that as you were a contributor to the discussions: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3102 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-March/035347.html DaveF On 22/11/2020 16:32, Christoph Hormann wrote: Dave F via Tagging hat am

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

"Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results" On 20/10/2020 19:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: but it’s fair to discuss every proposal on its own. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

It appears so. Pretending there is a bias, doesn't mean there is one. DaveF On 21/10/2020 02:34, Phake Nick wrote: At this point it's clear enough OP is just trolling? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

On 11/10/2022 19:34, Evan Carroll wrote: Some examples of these nameless sections are, * w1101484647 by A_Prokopova_lyft Not looked at all your examples, but i can't see a problem with your first. It covers a large area of no just a building but car parking etc, and is surround by landuse

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

On 03/10/2022 12:55, Volker Schmidt wrote: On Mon, 3 Oct 2022, 12:20 Marc_marc, wrote: imho only one main feature/objet : the stream bed and car use it, a bit like a bicycle uses a road. OT, but I cannot let it pass: Roads, in most cases, are dedicated to vehicles (including

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

On 03/10/2022 09:11, Warin wrote: 2 primary features, identified by feature tags, represented by one OpenStreetMap element. Main key for stream is waterway, for road it is highway. In the osm2pgsql standard style, both are primary keys. The guide says 'one feature = one OSM entry'.

[Tagging] not:brand:wikidata?

Hi What is 'not:brand:wikidata'? There are 5000+ in the database. Can't see any wiki details. I'm struggling to comprehend the logic. Cheers DaveF ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

On 03/10/2022 06:51, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Oct 2, 2022, 23:30 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: sent from a phone On 2 Oct 2022, at 19:40, martianfreeloader wrote: - primary feature [1] - main key [2] - primary key [3] -

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

On 29/12/2022 09:47, Warin wrote: Hi, I think the 'names' should be removed from these 'unnamed' things ..the 'name' is the name of the route not the individual tracks/paths some of which existed before some routes were created. +1 DaveF ___

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

Yves wrote: Remove the name of the way, put a name on each relations. Except if it makes sense to keep the name also on the way for whatever reason you see fit. Le 30 décembre 2022 18:06:12 GMT+01:00, Dave F via Tagging a écrit : What do you do if there are two routes? DaveF On 3

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

What do you do if there are two routes? DaveF On 30/12/2022 02:19, brad wrote: +1 If the only name is the route name I think it makes good sense to put it on the local way too, that's the name of the trail. Brad On 12/29/22 08:59, Zeke Farwell wrote: I've heard the assertion that a way has

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

On 29/12/2022 15:13, Zeke Farwell wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 9:15 AM Dave F via Tagging wrote: The actual way routes progress along often have their own, different, name. These should be ithe name placed in the way's name tag. Yes, the way name tag should be the most local

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

On 29/12/2022 12:32, Yves via Tagging wrote: The simpliest way to map a long route is to give the same name to every ways it is composed of. The reason route relations were created was because long routes share the /same/ ways. It avoids cluttering up the name & ref tags The actual way

[Tagging] plantation=yes?

Hi What does plantation=yes represent? Associated with woods, but nothing in the wiki. 2437  uses worldwide. Seems too vague to be OSM useful. DaveF ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate sport=cricket_nets

I don't sport=cricket_nets is fine. it's clear. it's specific. It doesn't interfere with any other tags. The argument that it's not, technically, a sport & therefore inaccurate is... meh. DaveF On 30/01/2023 13:54, Illia Marchenko wrote: Hello everyone, I suggest deprecating

[Tagging] Picnic_table with barbecue table extension.

https://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpghttps://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpgHi I've a leisure=picnic_table but has an extended table top made of metal to accommodate disposable barbecues. Can anybody recommend a sub-tag that's more descriptive than barbecue=yes?

Re: [Tagging] Picnic_table with barbecue table extension.

reference? On Mon, 22 May 2023, 19:06 Dave F via Tagging, wrote: https://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpghttps://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpgHi I've a leisure=picnic_table but has an extended table top made of metal to accommodate disposable barbecues. Can anybody recommend a sub-tag that's more

Re: [Tagging] Perimeter of a pitch

Have you not checked the OSM wiki for pitch? DaveF On 21/05/2023 21:08, Raphael wrote: Hello everyone Does the area outside the sidelines of a pitch up a board, a fence, a change in surface or similar belong to a pitch (sports field) or not? I'm asking because there's [some disagreement][^1]

[Tagging] Area of young trees - saplings

Is there a tag for areas where you trees are planted? Too small to be self supporting they're often individually attached to a pole & encased in a protective tube. natural=wood seems inappropriate, as does scrub. I thought 'saplings' would be suitable, but taginfo return none DaveF

Re: [Tagging] Area of young trees - saplings

already. Anne -- Sent from my Android phone with WEB.DE <http://WEB.DE> Mail. Please excuse my brevity. On 16/05/2023, 13:49 Dave F via Tagging wrote: Is there a tag for areas where you trees are planted? Too small to be self supporting they're often individually attached to

[Tagging] The reason to not use loc_name is far too subjective.

The wiki says this: "but only where this is deemed to be too much of a slang name or otherwise unofficial-sounding. Ordinarily though, the name which local people use is the name we set in the name=* tag!" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Local_names_(loc_name) This is, once again,

<    1   2