Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 2:48 AM, yvecai wrote: > I would find more logical to make links between databases with queries > rather by adding external references in one or the other. The later looks > like the poor man job (oversimplifying, I don't want to put down the great > job done at Wikidata).

Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice

I think an explicit tagging scheme that specifies the correspondence between place=* tags and admin_level=* tags is a good thing. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Fernando Trebien < fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > We're having a little discussion in the Brazilian communi

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata

On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Janko Mihelić wrote: > 2014-04-02 0:46 GMT+02:00 Eugene Alvin Villar : > > >> I'm not so sure about operator:wikidata=* (or wikidata:operator=* as >> suggested on the wiki talk page) and the other similar tags like that. I >> thi

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Wikidata

On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > I commend this proposal to the list: > >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata > I support wikidata=* itself. I'm not so sure about operator:wikidata=* (or wikidata:operator=* as suggested on the wiki talk page) an

Re: [Tagging] Issues relating to URIs and tagging

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > The model used there fails with Wikipedia links, > expressed as "en:Example", because the equivalent URL is > . Any suggestions for dealing > with that? > > [...] ambiguous keys ("ref=1234" - ref in whose

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Coastline-River transit placement

The Rio de la Plata example on the wiki page is pretty weird. At lower zoom levels, Buenos Aires and Montevideo become "landlocked". Now this may just be a rendering issue, but if these two capitals are considered coastal cities, then they should be next to the coastline instead of the coastline m

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin

n". When/to whom is this classification significant? > > Colin > > > > > On 2014-03-16 19:49, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > >> They all sound much like offices (landuse=commercial) to me. Ownershi

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=civic_admin

On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > They all sound much like offices (landuse=commercial) to me. Ownership > has nothing to do with land use. In this case, the city council happen to > be the users of the property, but if they need to downsize for whatever > reason and a parti

Re: [Tagging] leisure=events

When I think of leisure=events, I think of facilities (that are not convention centers) where you can hold social and corporate events such as company parties, wedding receptions, small musical concerts, product launchings and the like. Here in my country there are plenty of such facilities and I'm

Re: [Tagging] wikidata instead of wikipedia

This was discussed here on this mailing list almost a year ago: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013-February/013077.html Here's the proposed tag in discussion: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata I guess there's no new information to be added to the di

Re: [Tagging] Related: Antarctic territories

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Fernando Trebien < fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Makes sense. But is this practice (of using "dejure" and "defacto" roles) > already being adopted widely? If so, isn't it breaking compatibility with > many apps (for instance, Mapnik, but probably others too)

Re: [Tagging] Related: Antarctic territories

There's some related discussion on the Talk:Tag:boundary=adminstrative wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:boundary=administrative#Disputed_borders A suggestion is to replace the 'inner' and 'outer' relation roles (which is trivial to determine) with roles that specify the claim

Re: [Tagging] admin_boundary with multiple levels / county free citys / Kreisfreie Staedte

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:28 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Duplicating the relation seems easiest and is what I'd probably do, > but of course it is not 100% correct as there aren't two different > admin boundaries (or, in the case of Hamburg, and Berlin, three - here > admin_levels 4,6,8 are folded

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Gambling

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:58 PM, fly wrote: > I wonder if we should not use leisure in general and try to avoid > amenity. At least for new tags and tags with low numbers leisure=* > should be used. > +1 To spur the discussion on which key to use here are some numbers from Taginfo for the value

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:19 PM, fly wrote: > On 06.08.2013 16:27, Yuri D'Elia wrote: > > Fortunately, the boundaries of the area are not important in themselves. > > Nobody renders valley or mountain group borders. But we *do* use such > > boundaries for name placement. > > I think the best wou

[Tagging] Are addresses features or attributes?

<> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Pieren wrote: > Not for me. I think the address is a "feature" by ifself, not an > attribute of other features (like 'name'). > I want to know what do people think about addresses. 1. Are addresses features as Pieren suggests? Thus addresses should be mapped

Re: [Tagging] When was landuse=reservoir deprecated ?

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > fly writes: > > > But how to we proceed ? > > > > If we agree that landuse=reservoir should be used for the whole area. Do > > we need a temporary tag or adding water=reservoir to all of them? > > > > Only simple case are where a water=reservo

Re: [Tagging] how to tag professional schools

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Brian Wolford wrote: > Was wondering if anybody knew the proper way to tag > professional/trade/vocational schools. > > Specifically looking for auto repair school right now. But relevant also > for hair stylist school, HVAC repair school, ect... Even dance and mus

Re: [Tagging] Fast Food Restaurants

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 29/mag/2013, at 16:47, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > > Usually, but there exists exceptions such as service=drive-through instead > of the expected service

Re: [Tagging] Fast Food Restaurants

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > In addition to above, though, you may want to consider that Subway is > a chain restaurant, so you may want to consider > > brand=Subway instead of name=Subway > My preference is on name=Subway. Both are correct as the name of the store

Re: [Tagging] Fast Food Restaurants

On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Tac Tacelosky writes: > > > Are there any punctuation restrictions on tags? In particular, commas > > could be problematic for storing a list of tags as a single string. > > I am not clear on a formal grammer, but it seems clear that tag n

Re: [Tagging] Juice "restaurants"

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > I agree with specifically tagging them as juice bars (amenity=juice_bar). > > They also don't all qualify as cafes, since they don't all offer > seating, for example, if they're in a food court, or just a street > vendor with no seating. >

Re: [Tagging] Source tag - deprecated for use on objects?

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > But that's not really the point... the point is more that there's no > consensus, no sign of a consensus, and therefore any talk of "putting > source > on the changeset is to be the way forward" is premature. > +1 I have never tagged the

Re: [Tagging] château

I have no opinion on whether the proposed value should exist or not, but I do prefer that we avoid diacritics like that circumflex on top of the 'a' for enumerated values like building=* or historic=*. On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:53 PM, A.Pirard.Papou wrote: > On 2012-12-11 11:19, Pieren wrote :

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - age groups in schools

Is this information something that should be placed in a geodatabase like OSM? Or would this be better integrated into a separate school database. Maybe OpenSchoolDirectory? In that kind of database, you can include lots of information such as who is the principal, who operates the school, if the

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > Good explanation, I like this. However there is still the opening hours. How > would you use it on a map? Would you make a dynamic map in which only > amenities that are open *now* are drawn? If data like this was wrong, it > would be a dis

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > 2012/10/18 Eugene Alvin Villar >> >> opening hours and operators [...] are intrinsic >> >> properties of these amenities. Links to web pages *about* the amenity >> on third-party websites are not intrins

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > 2012/10/18 Eugene Alvin Villar >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Simone Saviolo >> wrote: >> > 2012/10/12 Eugene Alvin Villar >> >> >> >> However, I personally don't think

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > 2012/10/12 Eugene Alvin Villar >> >> However, I personally don't think your example of putting the URLs to >> a place's webpage on foursquare, Google+, Yelp, TripAdvisor, etc. is >> the way to go.

Re: [Tagging] Standard for external links to location based services

I see the need to link to a place's Facebook page in the case where the place has a Facebook page that they maintain but do not have their own website. (If I'm a small-time business owner, it's actually much easier to put up a Facebook page for my business and use that to interact with my customers

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Sat, 2012-07-21 at 11:43 -0400, David ``Smith'' wrote: >> Just contributing another data point on vocabulary… >> >> I am a native English speaker from Ohio, USA. I have been aware of >> the term "potable" for many years, probably since as

Re: [Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?

On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Apr 20, 2012 9:04 AM, "Alan Mintz" wrote: > >> I would go with name:en-PH=* or name:en:PH=* to mimic the standard IETF >> language tag format. > > en-PH feels more correct, since it's specifying dialect in a standard > format. This seem

Re: [Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?

In my opinion, nobody is in actual control of the atoll, though both China and the Philippines both claim that it controls it. On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Who is in actual control of the atoll? Are there people living there? > > cheers, > Martin >

[Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?

In the proverbial case of of Northern Cyprus, disputed names are "easy" because both sides use different languages, Greek (el) and Turkish (tr). What if the dispute names are in the same language? I was wondering about this because Philippines and China are currently in a stand-off regarding an at

Re: [Tagging] Level and type of school (ISCED, public/private/charter)

Don't we already tag tertiary schools differently by the following tags?: amenity=university amenity=college In my country, colleges are a separate classification from universities, so the two tags already somewhat makes sense. But I would like a way to tag if a school provides primary education,

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:47 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/4 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> I'm not advocating for wrong spelling, but I don't think hyphenation >> is part of spelling, but of grammar/syntax. Wikipedia says that >> "spelling is the writing o

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Eugene, I ask you to revert the automated edits you have done in the > past days concerning drive-throughs, e.g. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/seav/edits?page=3 > > You obviously did not follow the > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Anthony wrote: > Still, it doesn't make sense that "some people incorrectly use spaces > instead of hyphens" implies that we should convert hyphens into spaces > (which then get converted into underscores).  If we're going to > standardize, and one of the two choic

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:07 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/4 Eugene Alvin Villar : > Seriously, you seem to have picked on this particular issue and are > now advocating wrong spelling pretending this would make mapping > easier. IMHO correct spelling (inherent logics) is a

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Anthony wrote: > I don't deny that the underscore can be used in a programming language > to represent a hyphen.  I was denying that "Anyone with an good > programming background would immediately recognize how the formal keys > and values have been constructed".  

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >> Our tagging system (at least for formal values) generally uses English >> words, but the syntax is not English grammar. Anyone with an good >> programming backgro

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:59 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/4 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> 81 instances of denomination=latter_day_saints >> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/denomination=latter_day_saints > > see below > > >> 331 instances of denominat

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

0 instances of restriction=no_u-turn http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/restriction=no_u-turn On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> There is many more of them. I propose to use >> serv

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > There is many more of them. I propose to use > service=drive-through > to follow our standard recommendations (BE, no abbrevs, underscores > instead of spaces, hyphens where they should be). Funnily we have: 81 instances of denominatio

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Anthony wrote: > Besides, the fact that someone made a mistake back in 2007 is not a > good reason to make a similar mistake today.  There's no good reason > to replace hyphens with underscores. There are plenty of good reasons. The fact that many people seem to li

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 12:41 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> and also that there's >> a strong preference for underscores (In fact, there is no hyphenated >> key or value in the Map Features page). > > I think that this is a misconception. Usually we use the underscore in > keys and formal value

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

Hello everyone, Here's some additional context and history to frame the discussion: In April 2010, I first suggested having another value (namely, service=drive_thru) for the service=* tag for drive-through lanes similar to service=parking_aisle: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/

Re: [Tagging] service=drive-through or drive_through?

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:41 AM, SomeoneElse > The stats are crocked due to seav (who appears to be running a bot without > checking with local mappers first) changing them.  The last wiki edits were > by seav editing the page to match the version that they favoured.  The > "tagging@" discussion th

Re: [Tagging] Building life cycle

It might be worth discussing about life-cycle tagging in general and not just for buildings. There are a few life-cycle tagging proposals in the Wiki. On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote: > I would like to know weather the building life cycle would be > something like this: > *b

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tower:type=lighting proposal

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 6:46 PM, John Smith wrote: > "I propose the following new tag {{tag|tower:type|lighting}} as follows:" > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:man_made%3Dtower&diff=next&oldid=639593 Would this also include street lamps? http://wiki.openstree

Re: [Tagging] branch=* tag to specify the particular branch of a chain of stores/amenities

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 4/27/2011 7:32 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: >> >> On 04/27/2011 06:17 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: I think the standard is brand=*. >>> >>> yes, this is also used for gas stations. >> >> That’s a different thing, I think. >> >> br

Re: [Tagging] branch=* tag to specify the particular branch of a chain of stores/amenities

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:26 AM, David Murn wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 07:34 +0800, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >> According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brand >> >>     "The brand=* is a larger entity that a place advertises itself as part >> of

Re: [Tagging] branch=* tag to specify the particular branch of a chain of stores/amenities

Piñas", and "SM Southmall Express Center". These branch names are prominently displayed in the signboard of the bank outlet. So we put "Bank of the Philippine Islands" into brand=* (or usually name=*) then "Almanza" into branch=*. On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 7:17

[Tagging] branch=* tag to specify the particular branch of a chain of stores/amenities

Hi all, What do guys think of using branch=* to specify the particular branch or outlet of a chain of stores/amenities? Here in the Philippines, the branch name is quite important to note for banks because bank accounts are tied to a specific branch and you need to interact with that branch for a

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-dev] capitals; normalizing true, yes and 1

I think this is OK. Below admin_level=4, there are no coterminous capitals. On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:50 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/2/5 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> I've modified this to capital=3;4 since it is also the provincial capital. > > > I'd only set the

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-dev] capitals; normalizing true, yes and 1

I've modified this to capital=3;4 since it is also the provincial capital. On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:39 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/2/5 Eugene Alvin Villar : >> San Fernando should be capital=3 since it is the admin center for a >> region (which is admin_level = 3

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-dev] capitals; normalizing true, yes and 1

San Fernando should be capital=3 since it is the admin center for a region (which is admin_level = 3). On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 8:00 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/2/2 Daniel Sabo : >> In this specific case it seems safe to convert capital=true -> capital=yes, >> but the other values I'm le

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Site Relation

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > I can support the proposal if (and only if) it is made clear that site > relations are only to be used where simpler tools aren't sufficient. +1 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org ht

Re: [Tagging] Airport subtypes

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > A recent import has highlighted the lack of suitable subtypes of > airport in the tagging schema. > There are some pages of lapsed concepts on the wiki of different > airport subtypes > > A scan through the wikipedia gives me > international

Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?

The problem with that is that a multipolygon relation is for a single entity that may be broken down into several pieces. A group of islands (or an archipelago) is not a single island broken down into several land pieces. It is just that: a group of islands. So we need a different way of tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-dev] Super-relations or not

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:25 AM, Peter Budny wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, the difference in what's required to tag things > is minimal between these concerns.  Therefore, wouldn't it make the most > sense to choose whichever is programmatically the easiest and most > flexible to deal with? I

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] how to tag US townships?

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:06 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > another approach from the same page is titled "dominance" where > dominance expresses the distance to the next "higher" (in terms of > importance / population) place. The higher (in terms of distance) the > more dominant. > > This serv

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar > wrote: >> It is for this reason that I prefer underscores myself. >> >> So service=drive_through it is? > > I think so. > > Could we also start

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Anthony wrote: >> I'm not aware of any hyphens which are converted into underscores, let alone >> that this is "predominantly" the case.  And even if it is "predominantly" > > man_made=pier > power=sub_statio

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

Hello, Going back to this old discussion, which is better: service=drive_through or service=drive-through? The hyphenated version is in the Wiki: , but some people think that we should stick to underscores just like most other OSM tag

Re: [Tagging] Interpreting "One feature, one OSM-object"

Yep, this is how I understood that guideline to be. So if you have a polygon where there was just a node before representing the same thing, you're free to delete the node in favor of the polygon assuming no data (i.e., tag info) is lost. Here's what the wiki says [1] One feature, one OSM-object

Re: [Tagging] 'name' variation tags standardisation

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Cartinus wrote: > On Saturday 26 June 2010 06:18:08 Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > > name:alt:de is the German translation of the alternate name > > name:de:alt is an alternate German name > > You really expect that people can keep somethi

Re: [Tagging] 'name' variation tags standardisation

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > y...@o2.pl: > > Now there is a good trend to use colon in key names. Maybe we should > > move these tags below? > > > > int_name -> name:international > > [...] > > alt_name -> name:alt or name:alternative > > official_name -> name:official >

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:41 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 12 April 2010 22:44, Anthony wrote: > >> If you want to be consistent, use underscores not hyphens, eg > >> service=drive_through > > > > I still vote for drive-through (or, alternatively, drive-thru). I've > never > > seen anyone call one

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar > wrote: > > > > For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at > fast > > food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_th

Re: [Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Pieren wrote: > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Anthony wrote: > >> >> I have indeed tagged a couple of these, using "highway=service, >> service=drive-through, access=private, oneway=yes". >> >> > highway=service + oneway=yes + access=destination > > Pieren >

[Tagging] Is highway=service, service=drive_thru a good idea?

For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at fast food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru (and sometimes also oneway=yes since it seems that the implicit vs. explicit tags debate is not yet done). Does anybody think that this is a good idea that can be

Re: [Tagging] adjacent buildings

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: > Should buildings adjacent to each other be mapped: > > 1) individually, with shared boundaries > 2) individually, with an arbitrarily small gap between boundaries > 3) as one contiguous area? > > An example of a row of adjacent buildings: > htt

Re: [Tagging] Islands in Parking Lots

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 6:27 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Richard Welty > wrote: > > > > a tree may be in a parking area, but how exactly do you propose to park > on it? > > The more important question is "what does amenity=parking apply to?" > a) a parking area, or

Re: [Tagging] Easy question: _link tags for U turn/cut throughs?

I tag these as *_link, like what other people have said. On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > When a divided motorway/trunk/primary/... has a spot for turning or > u-turning, should that be marked as primary or primary_link? The wiki isn't > clear. > > Thanks, > Steve > _

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:59 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > >> Now whether one set of 20 nodes or a different set of 20 nodes better >> represent the shape of a road is a matter of creative subjectivity. Neither >> set i

<    1   2