Yep, count me as +1
David
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 15:04 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
Dear all,
I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point
was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for
accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even
/Key:mtb:scale
David
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org
have such a scale for MTB and dirt bikes, why not for four
wheeled vehicles ? Copy the style and approach ?
Incidentally, take a look at where that guy on scale=4 is heading,
crazy !
David
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:53 PM, David Bannon
dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
On Mon, 2015-03
manners are ! Perhaps a short
para on good manners on the voting page ?
David
[...]
CU
Jörg
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
will start a new thread to flush out who does.
David
.
Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
2015-03-13 2:06 GMT+01:00 David dban...@internode.on.net:
No, numeric values are not a good choice - really not. I also don't like
the values much, but at least it's clear that good is better
case, assume we can/will have
a good description behind each value. Or not ?
It might also be worthwhile indicating how strong you feel about your choice.
I'd prefer #1, #3 then, if i must, #2. 2 assumes too much about what makes the
road difficult.
David
.
Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com
no or a nominal fee;
David
.
johnw jo...@mac.com wrote:
I added some comments to the discussion page -
I would like another value of camp site added - a trekking campsite.
There needs to be a very hard separation between a spot where camping is
“suggested” (perhaps by people who know where some good
within that
area could be specificialy mapped.
David
.
Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
Two issues I think the proposal should address:
1) Use separate tagging for a place you can park a caravan or car overnight
(as per your example),
compared to a place you can pitch a tent without
could
usefully contribute myself and have bookmarked a few pages but got no
further.
That might be the real question.
David
.
Shawn K. Quinn skqu...@rushpost.com wrote:
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 20:14 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:21 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote
, questions, for better values, numerical or verbal ?
Is it acceptable for a tag to have two, parallel sets of values, why not ?
If we can get past there, we can then look for more descriptive sets of
words
David
.
Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this should be resolved with lots
an amenity, you book in there, pay a fee, complain. The reception desk itself
has no tourism function.
David
.
Andreas Labres l...@lab.at wrote:
Sorry, but amenity= is the wrong key. Should be tourism= IMHO.
/al
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
pretty good.
David
.
Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
2015-03-12 10:36 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
I believe that the main problem are the value names. If these were called
grade1 to grade8 many more people would likely use these values and I guess
to show the tag is about as good as it can get.
Now, having said that, i don't use the tag because the names used are
horrible. Firstly, smoothness itself is not the only issue and the values
?? I live on a road I'd have to call very bad ? No way !
David
jgpacker john.pack...@gmail.com wrote
clear, the pictures look about right to me.
David
.
Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote:
On 11.03.2015 17:29, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
Perhaps we can extend the library of pictures in the wiki to give people a
better feeling which rating means what.
I agree that work on the pictures is needed
to consider the number of
times a tag is used (among other things). So, the wiki and similar
focuses efforts on a smaller set of tags.
Have a think about the Tower of Babel.
David
. thus I may have wasted my effort.
-1, there are lots of other uses for the data besides the one
data collection.
True, but its still the main goal IMHO. Would you suggest otherwise ?
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
what ever map they want
to see. Iff they have the skills and time necessary. Sigh !
Don't go suggesting a pull request - who knows what that would be
taken as meaning !
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
be done by approaching the taggers ? I'm assuming there are only a
small set of them ?
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
there are 554 -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Proposed_features_under_way
I guess I am suggesting there are quite a lot, technically, under way.
I'd rather see them either make it the 'official' list or be rejected.
David
___
Tagging mailing
.
But overall, well said !
Incidentally, worth providing a link to proposals when you mention them.
I find it quite hard to find existing proposals, perhaps because there
are so many abandoned ones.
David
At this moment I have three proposals the comment stage (campsite
classification, vehicle
services available if we were
forced to stop using one.
Loomio looks good but apparently its been around since 2014. What will
it look like in a year's time ?
I think we need to play safe. I'll bet jbpacker thinks that's because
I'm old ! (guilty as accused Your Honour)
David
It may be a bit off
will remove such
entries when they can establish they should not be there.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
accessible places ?
I see a problem here, some parts of the world refer to 'toilet' as
meaning only that part you sit on
Its reasonably easy to add an OSM underlay behind your own set of (eg)
POI. I'd suggest people who want to show such specialised data sets
should take that approach.
David
when speaking to
someone, but unless you agree on their meaning, you won't be understood.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
,
something both you, Bryce, and I voted for.
Your proposed rule would decide in favour of 'no' (14 v. 8)
Its interesting to note that most 'no' were concerned it is a tourism
only tag despite that issue being discussed (and resolved ??) on this
list.
David
I agree with Jan in that a small set of (universally acceptable) values
would make the proposal more attractive. Can we identify a few that can
be bundled in ?
Ones that won't annoy those who lurk silently until voting time ?
David
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 06:22 +, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
Warin
be a misnomer IMHO. They are sometimes
described as free camps. The word free is used as much as in free
speech as it is in free beer.
But I do like the idea of a category of camp site. Makes a lot of sense.
Maybe the solution is to add my category to your list ?
David
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 17:27
, we need to deal with it.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Bryce, given the discussion that took place on the mailing list prior to
you hitting the wiki, maybe its time you (as proposer) started the
clock ?
So, if you declare today start of RFC, two weeks, start voting ?
David
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 23:23 -0800, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
It's clear
earlier. I am afraid your announcement got lost in the noise at the
time.
David
On Thu, 2015-02-19 at 09:09 +1100, Warin wrote:
After over a week of comments on the proposal of a new key rubbish= ..
this is the replacement by a new proposal for the new key:
waste_collection.
The same points
Well done Bryce, I did not realise that there was a 'failed' attempt to
get this through as dumpstation in the past !
The name may not be ideal IMHO but I'll definitely vote for it.
Mind if I add a bit of the recent history, how we arrived at this
proposal ?
David
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 23:23
.
Indeed it should. But adds some variables, I have added a suggestion we
add description= to deal with things like that. The text might be boat
use only, on board pump required, unsuitable large vehicles.
I added a Rationale, potted history of this discussion.
David
to feminine
hygiene.
Anyone know what the term is in Europe ?
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
in the tag seems a good idea.
Please suggest an alternative Martin.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
long !
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
than waste= in my opinion.
Thanks Martin
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
it evolved a 'u'. And we, the
Aussies, got that later version !
Cute ?
David
On Thu, 2015-02-19 at 09:10 +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Bryce, here in Australia, we use a lot of UK terms (and frown on the
horrid American ones creeping into our vocabulary). But no one here
uses
Elsan.
Now
// not quite same thing
Remember that fewer and fewer mappers ever see the tags, due to hiding
by editing tools.
True.
RV Dump Station
Elsan Point
Sanitation Station
That list could be quite long if we are to have one or more entries from
every country :-)
David
googling and even with lots of hints, did not get a valid hit.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
don't care ! Please, put something up for a vote and I'll vote
for it. Just get it done, this has gone on for far too long.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
of the
toilet)?
Not sure I agree. If we document it properly, its searchable and pretty
easy to tag. And we say amenity=waste_disposal and the waste is XXX.
Agree I'd prefer a high level tag but its not bad like that, really.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
=dump_station
dump_station=fee
or
amenity=dump_station:fee=yes
Anyway, I'll support any reasonable proposal, we need a promotable
solution.
David
PS - I suspect we can do better than any f the existing ones you listed
below :-)
http://www.sanidumps.com/
http://openpois.net/
http://www.poi
=nema_5_15
* power_supply:schedule= intermittent
Or do you feel that power_supply:intermittent=yes is better than
power_supply:schedule= intermittent?
I prefer power_supply:schedule= approach, then a range of possible
values including intermittent.
David
is distancing himself.
I'm back to refining docs about using existing tags.
David
waste-collection= .. is a fair description for most waste/rubbish
points that are mapped and also covers recycling .. as it is waste and
is usually collected for the mapped point
.
David
but it's one I think is very appropriate. And much better than
waste=chemical_toilet, which is ambiguous (is the toilet the waste or
its contents?) I have a similar objection to the term
toilet:disposal=*
Neither phrase is in common use in the U.S.
--
Dave
to weather, three or four
times a year. Thats occasional failure rather than intermittent ?
2. At a place I like to camp at in Central Australia, power is provided
during particular times of the day, from memory, 7:00am-9:00pm and
5:30pm-8:30pm. That also is probably not intermittent ?
David
the disposal point is is
of value.
rubbish=chemical_toiletis, perhaps ambiguous. Do we like
rubbish_disposal= waste_disposal= ???
Lets see some hands please ?
David
On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 08:47 +1100, Warin wrote:
On 9/02/2015 1:59 PM, David Bannon wrote:
On Mon, 2015-02-09
, are you suggesting that its
sufficiently 'ripe' to be asking for a formal (ie in the wiki) vote
yet ? Bearing in mind we have had only you, me and Dave S contribute to
the discussion ?
David
---
so .. for me
waste_collection
://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:waste
David
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 12:00 +1100, Warin wrote:
On 14/02/2015 11:43 AM, David Bannon wrote:
On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 11:16 +1100, Warin wrote:
.
I'd split the voting up into
.
waste, collection is the more frequent case
, trash, waste whatever
Hmm, rubbish_receptacle perhaps ? And definitely not
rubbish_receptacle_desk !!
(sorry)
David
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features_key%3Drubbish
At present there as a number of 'waste' values under the amenity key.
Some people say the amenity key
=reception_desk is about as specific as you are likely to get.
Amenity is a go to when a mapper is looking for a tag, new ones such
as Office or Booth make the discovery process a little harder and
don't, IMHO, deliver any extra clarity.
David
What about using office?
I was also surprised
sites, mining sites, the list would be
quite long. So, I'd vote for amenity=
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
the redundant amenity=waste_disposal
The problem there is treating waste= as a high level tag. Considering
just how big an issue waste disposal is to humanity, I cannot help but
think its justified.
But won't be surprised if there are dissenters
David
On 5/02/2015 12:04 PM, Dave Swarthout
within that space
would represent the reception_desk. Clearly the larger area would not be
tagged =reception desk would it ?
The usefulness here it to identify where, in the larger area, the
reception desk is.
Hmm
David
For example, if it was part
of a site relation*, then a role like role
I agree its wordier than it need be but those tags exist and we don't
need to go through an approval process.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
a tent, I didn't get that.
Personally, I'd only put a new tag on the wiki in a proposal page. If we
agree, here, on things that work, I'd go that way.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
step involving waste= I don't like the two stage
approach, know Dave S does not either.
I know there are a lot of amenity tags but there are a lot of amenities
in this world.
David
---
Additional thing .. distinguishing between amenity=waste_disposal and
amenity
that
some are listed as suitable only for cassette model and not the larger
holding tank. Minority but some. I also note that some are listed as
unsuitable for larger vehicles - are these issues we should be
including in the re-write ? Important enough to make it to a widely
regarded publication.
David
) dumpstation one, think we need have a
go at getting that approved, important. Is the model to reactivate the
existing page ?
David
On Tue, 2015-02-03 at 07:15 +1100, Warin wrote:
Done. Thanks .. I knew there was one out there somewhere. I think
amenity=dump_station needs to be redone
start by improving the documentation there ?
David
On Tue, 2015-02-03 at 12:05 +1100, Warin wrote:
The key:amenity=waste_disposal has a sub key
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:waste where some of the things
you mention as stated. These presently are;
* waste=trash - (for trash
/Extend_camp_site
attempted this some years ago but it appears to have grown too big and it run
out of steam.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
specific additions, pitch specific additions to
tourism=camp_site
3. Warin's kitchen specific ones.
We could prepare and discuss as a set but keep voting separate so we
don't get a few negative votes killing whole thing ?
David
___
Tagging mailing list
, I'll add a second column ...
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
are allocated
a site and must keep you guy ropes in it. But they are not my
favourite !
David
On 31/01/2015 3:18 PM, David Bannon wrote:
On Sat, 2015-01-31 at 14:55 +1100, Warin wrote:
... I think the following things should be mapped to add information
to the map in regards some, mainly
on
facilities at what are called Free Camps in Oz, generally no (or very
little) charge, remote, basic facilities for well equipped campers.
Opposite end of your target .
But could be turned into a nice package IMHO.
David
stove top (no, not a bbq)
microwave_oven
fridge
the data they enter used in some way. That
seeing is an essential part of the feedback loop. We need to consider
that when looking at how people choose (or invent) tags.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
time I'm there ?
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 23:17 +0100, Michał Brzozowski wrote:
I am writing to propose a new, hopefully more precise and
self-describing tag for shops that sell electronic parts.
Good move.
David
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/shop%3Delectronic_parts
mappers and renders ? I'd support that but I am afraid I don't
find the article clearly leads me there. Problem is, IMHO, in the early
parts of the article, its a distraction.
David
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 15:28 +0100, Ulrich Lamm wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers
not
work ! We can continue to argue is OK anyway or we can fix it. Choose.
David
On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 01:13 -0700, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote:
I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways
(and probably other types of elements) official.
First of all
.
Please folks, think of the big picture, not the edge cases.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
life threatening issues resulting from unclear maps. This
proposal will provide valuable, dare I say usable info for consumers !
David
On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 23:42 +0200, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote:
Hello all,
I've posted the below message on the forum, and have been directed
from
if
the changeset is still open, so I think it depends on whether
whatever created the changeset closed it, or left it to autoclose
after an hour of no activity.
-David
--
턞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 턂
턢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 턂
this tag on a node at the crest of the hill should be acceptable, as the
hazard may occur (potentially in multiple places) along fairly long way.
PS — the american MUTCD has a warning sign for vertical curvatures that may
cause long vehicles to ground.
David K
, sealed
roads, just add something for those unsealed roads. Dashed infill IMHO !
I still don't see how widely this access coding that seems associated
with dashed infill is used. Any examples please ?
David
We currently do not use the colour of the casing for anything but we
do use the colour
roads in -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Australian_Tagging_Guidelines
Some more ranting on my wiki page (inc discussion)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Davo
David
On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 13:00 -0600, Jesse Crawford wrote:
Apologies if this is the wrong list, I'm new
to mean
David
On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 19:03 +0200, André Pirard wrote:
Hi,
Following this discussion here is a proposed clarification to
Key:source.
The goal is to define the word, make date mandatory, use ISO format,
define per source tag meaning.
Is there any objection or suggestion
Andre, good post. I like the idea that entries be dated. Like you, i see
problems with using the word survey. In this context, could mean two things.
Maybe the simplest would be date= ???
Or current= ???
Like you, i'd strongly recommend ISO date format.
David
.
André Pirard a.pirard.pa
should be using for Andre's purpose ?
(Sorry Andre, cannot remember how to do the mark above the 'e' in your
name. Very rude of me.)
David
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 18:01 +0200, André Pirard wrote:
On 2014-06-09 11:59, Glenn Plas wrote :
On 09-06-14 08:31, André Pirard wrote:
Hi,
Some
To be honest Tod, I don't think we want to add a *:confirmed= tag to
every existing tag over time.
But as we've both suggested, maybe the solution to Andre's issue is just
to make better use of the date stamps already there ?
David
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 17:21 -0700, Tod Fitch wrote:
Am I
should tag the world so
some particular maps look nice ? Personally, I think nice maps are
accurate, informative ones. Visually appeal is important too but not at
the expense of 'informative'.
I support Greg's approach.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
people. However, little progress has been
made. I consider it very important in a large percentage of the worlds
land area. However, it does not interest most of the world's mappers !
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
that difficulty
based on the tracktype tag but not sufficient interest. We'll just have
to wait for the coroners report...
David
Here in the UK, for example, highway=track is often used for private
farm tracks, so you can't safely route over it unless access tags have
been added. But evidently
= . There are many other
roads, world wide, often quite important ones, that are beyond grade5.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
like 'softness' does not cover all issue, neither does
'smoothness'. smoothness= has a very good set of values and is well
documented but not well used because of the name, smoothness, is
incomplete and the values just a little offensive !
David, I tried to search for images of the Kennedy
for the holes or you break
something ! But interesting idea
David
Of course, the closely related parameter is speed.
Two other optimizing data for routing appear to be readily available:
declivity as contour lines and straightness which is computable from
the map of the road.
I think
have never seen a map that shows smoothness=. Some evil people
consider this fact when choosing which tag to use.
Maybe, folks, we should take more notice of the smoothness= tag ? If
promoted it could be whats needed ?
David
On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, vali wrote:
Hi
I tried
, a heavily modified 4wd is necessary. Take a film crew.
All right, just a bit tongue in cheek but you see what I mean.
David
On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 12:14 +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Yes, I agree firmness works better than stiffness for describing a
surface. I still would prefer a term
,
this approach is seen as 'subjective', a serious crime ...
Sigh...
David
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Atracktypediff=1002090oldid=992679
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AMap_Features%3Atracktypediff=1002096oldid=971383
http
killed using an OSM map. Its only a matter of
time.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
drive. Some drivers get nervous on unmade roads as they develop pot
holes much quicker and the surface can deliver surprises.
So I suggest 'dirt', 'earth' and 'ground' are really not very
informative terms.
David
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 16:57 -0300, Fernando Trebien wrote:
So:
- earth is a close
walk up to and
buy things from. Alternatively, I could have used office=yes,
though that loses a lot of information about what sort of a business
it is.
Is there a better approach here?
-David
--
턞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 턂
턢 Mozilla
.
David
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 21:12 +1100, David Bannon wrote:
OK folks, I have moved a draft summary of the discussion on this topic
to my OSM wiki discussion page. Anyone with OSM Wiki credentials is
welcome to edit it to try and make the choices clearer.
if you don't have OSM credentials
you are
asking. Maybe you would like to chip in ? These things always work a bit
better if you have a lot of people around you
David
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 12:29 +0100, BGNO BGNO wrote:
I don't think it is in general possible to derive the trafficability
information from physical models
Oh, dave and all others ! So sorry, I did not include a link !
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Davo
Sigh
David
On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 20:12 +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote:
@David - where is the summary located exactly? I reckon I need a
specific link to your Wiki page
issues...
david
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 17:07 +1100, David Bannon wrote:
OK, this discussion is huge and conducted in a great manner.
But being so huge, I feel lost ! So, here is an attempt to summarize
where we are and what the options seems to be. Maybe by identifying what
we already agree
a mountain bike
Fernando pointed out that to make a truly objective assessment, we'd
need many more tags and some elaborate technology to measure. Gerald
suggested a smartphone app to do the measuring but is he allowing for
variation of suspension in the vehicle in use ?
David S and Dominic don't
are already used, in huge numbers.
Now, BGNO, if trafficability is going to fly, we'll need a better view
of the possible values, thoughts ?
David
On Fri, 2014-01-03 at 09:27 +0100, BGNO BGNO wrote:
Hi,
I am proposing a new
key: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/trafficability
are warned and not put in danger. I would be
happy to support and sensible trigger tag. Except, perhaps, smoothness=,
I will not describe the pretty little road I live on as horrible !
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
=earth ? Badly maintained =compacted can be far worse than
=dirt sometimes, pot holes (as we call there here) can be unexpected and
dangerous at speed. There are so many legal values
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
201 - 300 of 508 matches
Mail list logo
