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

Erik Johansson schrieb: On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Willi wil...@gmx.de wrote: 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so, why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly? 2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper

Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways

Robert Elsenaar schrieb: Peter wrote: If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear. Yes you are right. But implicite we have accepted several default in our tags. That's right. But the problem is, that already hundreds or thousands of cycleway=track tagged yet - but in reality

Re: [Tagging] boundary=town, place=town

Steve Bennett schrieb: Although...that just raises a different question: what's the difference between a town mapped out as an area (place=town) and a town mapped with a boundary=administrative, admin_level=8 (plus relation). I guess there is no difference, just two different ways of expressing

Re: [Tagging] Equivalence relation

Peter Wendorff schrieb: Am 11.01.2011 04:26, schrieb Steve Bennett: On 11/01/2011 12:20 AM, Richard Mann wrote: I put adjacent=yes on the highway=cycleway, so the user of the cycleway=track tag on the main road can ignore ways with adjacent=yes on them. The user who'd prefer to use

Re: [Tagging] Pls explain?

Steve Doerr schrieb: On 11/02/2011 12:40, Steve Bennett wrote: And, slightly more seriously, man_made=MDF - what's that about? MDF is medium-density fibreboard, so maybe they're tagging what the object is made of rather than what the object is? Even if it is a single-user created and

Re: [Tagging] types of surveillance cameras

Hi, Martijn van Exel schrieb: I am noticing a two major types. There's what I call the dome cameras [1] that live in a dome-shaped enclosure and can probably tilt and swivel to cover a larger area, and there's the static ones that have a more traditional camera shape [2] and are usually fixed,

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

Tobias Knerr schrieb: Erik Johansson wrote: I think turnstiles and full height turnstiles should be the barrier=turnstile, add some extra tag to differentiate them. I'm convinced that this point wouldn't come up if the English language didn't happen to use the term turnstile for both

Re: [Tagging] Best way of tagging split between electronic toll and cash lanes?

Nathan Edgars II schrieb: Many toll plazas now have high-speed electronic toll lanes. Tagging seems haphazard. As I see it, the choices are: *What gets tagged as motorway vs. motorway_link? *What gets the name, ref, and relation membership? [...] So the question is whether to use motorway_link

Re: [Tagging] second_hand shops

Am 05.11.2011 15:49, schrieb Tobias Johansson: I think it would be good with two values. only and both, to make a distinction between purly second hand shops and second hand shops that also sells new items. +1 (maybee second_hand=yes could subbstitute only -1 If you want to

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

Am 11.04.2012 11:35, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: in the case of parallel ways it is impossible to tell whether you can filter them out or not (there could be a separation or they could be on different height levels), especially if people are mapping sidewalks the same as separated footways.

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

Am 11.04.2012 12:47, schrieb p...@trigpoint.me.uk: I am wondering what happens where there are no crossings, or outside of built up areas where there are no sidewalks. That's quite easy: Where there are no crossings - no crossings can be used, any routing will use the nearest point approach

Re: [Tagging] Turn Restriction usage

Am 11.04.2012 15:42, schrieb Simone Saviolo: 2012/4/11 Ross Scanloni...@4x4falcon.com: No. The router should know not to do this. Likewise as below the router should not make u turns at traffic lights. Based on what? How does the router know that the two ways are two carriageways of a single

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

Am 12.04.2012 15:15, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 12. April 2012 08:44 schrieb Georg Fedderno...@bavarianmallet.de: A router that does not consider sidewalks will use the roads anyway. No, a router that doesn't consider sidewalks would with the currently suggested tagging use the sidewalk

Re: [Tagging] highway=services/rest_area

Am 20.04.2012 10:46, schrieb Nathan Edgars II: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservices says that it (usually) has fuel and food, but it links to Wikipedia:rest area. Should the Wikipedia link be removed (and added to

Re: [Tagging] Block names (vs street names) in Brasilia

Am 25.04.2012 08:58, schrieb Elena ``of Valhalla'': On 2012-04-24 at 21:46:35 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 4/24/2012 2:13 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Pieren - thanks for pointing out that area=yes is highway only. How could the documentation for it be clearer [1]? It's not highway only. For

Re: [Tagging] Block names (vs street names) in Brasilia

Am 25.04.2012 12:29, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: -1, place=locality shouldn't be used here, because according to the wiki it is not to be used for settlements or parts of them Objection granted! I abandon this question, Your Honour! ;-) ___

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

Am 26.04.2012 13:07, schrieb Colin Smale: 1) the hard shoulder is sometimes opened to traffic, creating an extra lane on the right this case is used in Germany in several regions e.g.

Re: [Tagging] contact:phone or phone to combine with amenity=telephone

Am 26.04.2012 18:07, schrieb Mike N: On 4/26/2012 8:51 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Can we use the taginfo stats to revert the change made the 2nd may 2010 where phone has been replaced by contact:phone and add a big deprecate notice on the contact: namespace wiki ? (overall, we still

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

Am 27.04.2012 09:23, schrieb Ilpo Järvinen: On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: What do you think of lanes=3.5? I have an example here: Not sure, how many lanes these are, could be 5 or even 5.5? Depends on the car widths and the experience of the drivers: Heheh... :-) ...there's

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

For highway=pedestrian, at platforms and many other things we allow to add area=yes to a feature to turn a circular way (ring) to a circular area (filled area, polygon). If - and that's in fact more or less the result of the discussions we had in the last days - the difference between mini

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

How about diameter=15 on the mini-roundabout node? This is factually correct, verifiable on the ground and (IMHO) non-controversial; routing would not be affected (no need to route over areas) and renderers can draw a bigger blob. Problem solved, simples. +1 (as to Peter) I would prefer

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

Am 06.06.2012 14:09, schrieb Pieren: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote: On the other hand I would propose to add area=yes to avoid confusion both at data consumer side as well as on mapper side (yes, they MEANT it to be a mini roundabout, I guess,

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

Am 31.07.2012 10:33, schrieb Petr Morávek [Xificurk]: Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: 2) A relation exists with member ways without ref tag. This means that the route is essentially mapped and any further editor is correcting errors, that he found. Then someone comes and

Re: [Tagging] Ferry routes, what's the correct approach?

Am 31.07.2012 22:50, schrieb LM_1: Not knowing how different routers use access I believe that ways marked as access=customers should be routed with some sort of warning. The same goes for access=private. Quite commonly the real final destination would be in some limited access area and so

Re: [Tagging] Map for surface/smoothness?

Am 11.09.2012 18:14, schrieb Martin Vonwald (Imagic): Am 11.09.2012 um 16:10 schrieb Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de: http://roads.osm4people.org/?zoom=7lat=49.60305lon=10.72137layers=B0TFF Thanks! This covers surface, but smoothness isn't supported as far as I can see. not yet

Re: [Tagging] Clean-up the seamark landmark tags on the wiki (and perhaps later in the db)

Hi, Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the SeaMap, I'm just a coast dweller. Am 23.11.2012 11:48, schrieb Frederik Ramm: True - a cemetery is a cemetery and whether or not cemeteries are used as landmarks by seamen doesn't change that. I do not see, that the seamark:xxx=cemetery will

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

Am 18.12.2012 07:31, schrieb A.Pirard.Papou: On 2012-12-17 22:16, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2012/12/17 A.Pirard.Papou a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com We badly need precision. . In fact, the only effect of assigning a layer is that upper layer objects hide

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

Am 02.01.2013 18:16, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: +1, the smaller (and more sorted by kind of change action) changesets get, the better the chance that the following mapping will understand easily what it is about. There is really no point in grouping different kinds of edits in the same set of

Re: [Tagging] Names on relations and not component ways

Hello, Am 04.01.2013 14:43, schrieb dies38...@mypacks.net: I recently created a waterway where I put the name of the waterway on the relation but not on the component ways which are grouped by the relation. To me, not duplicating data would seem to be the better overall practice, and

Re: [Tagging] business closed for renovation - tagging best practice

Am 17.01.2013 16:42, schrieb Janko Mihelić: Well then you decide what its status is. Is it an abandoned building (building=yes), or is it a temporarily closed McDonalds (building=yes, amenity=restaurant, temporary:opening_hours=off). If someone says Meet me at the abandoned McDonalds, you

Re: [Tagging] fire_hydrant extensions proposal

Am 11.03.2013 13:29, schrieb Richard Welty: On 3/11/13 7:25 AM, Andreas Labres wrote: Please keep in mind, there already a rather big list of possible tags: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant (only in German) and what the OpenFireMap displays (the diameter):

Re: [Tagging] New Proposal

Am 01.05.2013 12:53, schrieb Philip Barnes: The slip roads are straight ahead, whilst the through route curves to the right. The tag is need to tell the router that straight ahead is not stay on the same road. Hope that explains it. uhm, had you ever considered to tag both following ways

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of local produce

Am 03.07.2013 05:43, schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: Some farm stands actually sell in-season produce direct off the adjacent farm. Others, which look the same from the road, sell imported goods only. A third type offers the goods from various local farms. How could I tag the difference? May be

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

Am 07.10.2013 19:13, schrieb Richard Welty: On 10/7/13 1:08 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: I remember seeing such a cyclists must dismount on the narrow footway of a bridge over the James River, in Richmond, Virginia, USA. Not only was the footway narrow, [...] there's a cyclists must dismount

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

Am 08.10.2013 20:16, schrieb Volker Schmidt: Just for your reference - while for many cases, I agree that bicycle=no is appropriate, there are quite interesting cycleways in the Czech Republic, where using bicycle=dismount for nodes on a path would make things easier for

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

Am 16.10.2013 09:23, schrieb Volker Schmidt: (this thread is so long now, that I don't remember if I have inserted my problem with bicycle=no/dismount) Here in Italy we have heaps of pedestrian-only crossings, which are part of dedicated combined foot-cycle paths or even pure cycle paths.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

Even I am not Pee Wee nor any author of the proposal, but Am 12.11.2013 19:29, schrieb Dave F.: How does this improve mapping/routing over using bicycle=no? How does your proposal distinguish the exceptions to the rule that you gave as an example below? consider a muscular trike, which is

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

Am 14.11.2013 10:13, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 14/nov/2013 um 00:53 schrieb Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com: I don't see why you can't tag the roads you're talking about with bicycle=no (or maybe something like bicycle=restricted for the cases where more

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

Am 14.11.2013 10:47, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 14/nov/2013 um 10:40 schrieb Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de: @Martin: Your reply is only valid for the first line of the citation. An approach which combines 2 tags in a way that the meaning is only true for the combination of both

Re: [Tagging] preproposal : internet webcam

Am 29.11.2013 13:03, schrieb Egil Hjelmeland: On 29. nov. 2013 10:32, Jonathan wrote: I would agree, I think that covers it. A webcam is surveillance, it's a camera that is watching you making it available to anyone. Some would say that is a greater infringement than an official camera that

Re: [Tagging] preproposal : internet webcam

Am 02.12.2013 11:31, schrieb Pieren: Adding a sub-tag will simply move the current 21700 man_made=surveillance elements without subtags in uncertainty. OK, that is a point, I agree here. I still think that a (public) webcam could be tagged differently from a CCTV because it's not the same

Re: [Tagging] noexit

Am 03.12.2013 14:48, schrieb André Pirard: I agree to: This tag is - not necessary for routing - senseless on ways - only useful on nodes (the last one, where no other way is connected) The wiki should be changed, especially the use on ways should be removed. But I do not agree to I

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

Am 19.01.2014 12:06, schrieb Colin Smale: In the UK there is a difference between no cycles and no cycling. Although in general you may be correct that a dismounted cyclist is effectively a pedestrian, there are also footways (or whatever you want to call them) signed as no cycles, which means

Re: [Tagging] Tagging lifeguard watch towers

Am 18.02.2014 14:40, schrieb Fernando Trebien: There's a discussion going on in the Brazilian community on which is the best tag for this. Among the suggestions are: - emergency_service=lifeguard - health_facility:type=first_aid Thinking from the point of view of applications (rendering and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

Am 25.02.2014 16:35, schrieb Robin `ypid` Schneider: On 25.02.2014 16:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I don't know in this specific (british) context, but my guess is that 12:00+ indicates (typically) until curfew, while late maybe has the meaning beyond curfew. All right. Interesting. If that

Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging

Am 25.02.2014 17:08, schrieb Richard Welty: i'm wondering if anyone can speak to where the tagging for fire_hydrant:type came from? AFAIK the Germans are guilty again - and I plea myself for not-guilty. ;-) (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Fire_Hydrant and their

Re: [Tagging] wiki definition for man_made=works

Am 25.02.2014 22:06, schrieb John Packer: Then I think I am confused too. As the description is right now, what is the difference between building=factory and man_made=works ? yes, that is the point of the thread opener: man_made=works does not make sense for one building only. I always tag

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

Am 26.02.2014 09:19, schrieb Philip Barnes: Surely you then need to define when curfew is, does it require a tag law=marshal? :) I don't think so - that's an info you should know or get as soon as you need it - wherever you are. Like the maximum speed without explicit signage - wherever

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

Am 26.02.2014 10:21, schrieb Philip Barnes: This is going off the tagging issue, but it is a bit scarry that you are casually talking about curfews, where outside places like North Korea do they exist? A curfew to me, as a brit equals being arrested/shot for being on the street after a

Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging

Am 26.02.2014 13:23, schrieb Richard Welty: i'm currently tinkering with what will be come a proposal to modify current hydrant tagging. my thinking is to add fire_hydrant:water_source={main,pond,stream,standpipe} and deprecate fire_hydrant:type=pond no objections except 'standpipe' - see

Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth

Am 13.03.2014 15:56, schrieb fly: On 13.03.2014 15:37, Fernando Trebien wrote: But do you think that earth and ground are different kinds of surface? Well, I would consider earth as earth where ground could be earth but does not have to be. All together, I think we could get rid of at least

Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway

Am 03.04.2014 21:43, schrieb Richard Z: On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 06:08:46PM +0100, Dave F. wrote: On 02/04/2014 17:14, Richard Z. wrote: as explained in the rationale the dimensions of the bridge/culvert are frequently only a fraction of the achievable precision. Think of a track crossing a

Re: [Tagging] editing polygons in JOSM

Am 27.05.2014 21:12, schrieb Peter Wendorff: Am 27.05.2014 20:23, schrieb Tom Gertin: 1. Clip a polygon using another polygon 2. Cut a polygon using a line Cutting by a line is easy: [...] Clipping by a new polygon is basically the same - but draw that new polygon first instead of the line,

Re: [Tagging] Rendering change: buildings within highway areas

Am 01.07.2014 12:34, schrieb Matthijs Melissen: On 1 July 2014 11:25, Janko Mihelic' jan...@gmail.com mailto:jan...@gmail.com wrote: If I'm right, this will mostly affect pedestrian areas (highway=pedestrian + area=yes) that have buildings mapped over them. Yes, that's correct. Did

Re: [Tagging] Proposed change to Tag:access=designated page

Am 24.08.2014 12:43, schrieb Friedrich Volkmann: For me, designated means that there's a respective sign, e.g. a cycleway sign = bicycle=designated. yes that is the typically (non native-language?) (mis)understanding of designated - and guided by the phrase A way _marked_ for a particular

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

Am 25.09.2014 11:48, schrieb Pieren: I think the main issue raised in this thread is to decide if each data consumer can decide alone what surface is paved or not (using this surface key and its hundreds values) or if we are able to find a common definition stored in the osm db (using this paved

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

Am 14.04.2015 um 07:28 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 00:08:31 +0200 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Separated_cycle_and_foot_path.jpg I would add also surface (and maybe smoothness) as this one seems to be quite

Re: [Tagging] To tag opening_hours=by appointment

Am 30.06.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Robin Schneider: On 30.06.2015 14:04, Marc Gemis wrote: in the local language (e.g 123 nach␣Vereinbarung http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/opening_hours=%22nach%20Vereinbarung%22 -- German for by appointment) IMHO this means that there is nothing to

Re: [Tagging] tunnel=culvert

Hello, Am 25.10.2015 um 11:44 schrieb Gerd Petermann: I do not fully agree here. In Germany, I often see a traffic sign "Vorsicht Düker" (~ "Attention! Culvert") next to these culverts. I am not sure why I should pay attention, but it seems that some people think that the traffic on the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a fence made with metal bars?

Am 05.11.2015 um 15:59 schrieb Gonzalo Gabriel Pérez: Hi everyone, I'm reading in the wiki ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fence_type ) about the fence_type key and I think that it ambiguous the way that is described how could be tagged a fence made with metal bars like these, see

Re: [Tagging] traffic_sign:forward=*

Am 03.11.2015 um 17:43 schrieb GerdP: I read the wiki a few times and still did not fully understand how this traffic_sign:forward idea should work. If you read (and use) _only_ traffic_sign:forward - I suppose you read only the german wiki page and then I understand your problem, because

Re: [Tagging] manège - area for horse training

Am 15.10.2015 um 22:57 schrieb Warin: On 16/10/2015 7:08 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: What the picture shows is a Carrière, which is to be tagged as leisure=pitch sport=equestrian +1 And someone will now say that it is not a sport... just like for cricket_nets ... Anyone for another key

Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal

Am 27.08.2015 um 18:49 schrieb Philip Barnes: A disused pub, providing it still looks like a pub, is still a useful navigational feature. Pubs have always been the normal way of giving directions. http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/PrKK4Y3JBpdF3jg6fnLM1g/photo Turn right by The White Horse, carry

Re: [Tagging] Pubs with accommodation

Am 28.09.2015 um 14:46 schrieb Andy Townsend: Depends on the pub, I'd say. Some places are both a hotel and a pub, some have essentially separate "hotel" and "pub" bits (for which 2 nodes within a building might work) and some (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/75844692 ) are pubs

Re: [Tagging] boundary relations and the subarea property

Am 27.11.2015 um 15:46 schrieb André Pirard: Have you noticed that some borderlines are *hexaplicated* (that they appear in 6 different relations) and that *that* is unhealthy redundancy that is made unnecessary by subareas? And that, unlike wanting to destroy an enemy, the programs I spoke

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Am 20.11.2015 um 18:24 schrieb Gerd Petermann: I found 940 nodes which were tagged with highway=traffic_calming. Most of them were also tagged with e.g. traffic_calming=bump or traffic_calming=table or one of the other well documented values. A few were not tagged traffic_calming=*. I changed

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Am 20.11.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Marc Gemis: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Florian Lohoff wrote: http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/LeaK3riwsMuv7f0i3Jt3XA/photo I would tag the crossing as a node and the "table" as part of the way, not as a node. If it is really enforced to

Re: [Tagging] nursing homes and group homes

Am 27.06.2016 um 12:17 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: +1 to social_facility=nursing_home Just some days ago I had to change with my father from a retirement home (with ambulant care) to a nursing home with 24/7 care. I looked at the social_facility scheme - stumbled about the disclaimer -

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

At all - what's the matter with the already said "highway=service" only if you can not distinguish the service or if it is a "bigger" service road? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging natural or historic regions

Am 28.03.2016 um 08:28 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 27.03.2016 um 21:59 schrieb Colin Smale : If we can't mark polygons as fuzzy, then we can only allow 'accurate' polygons well, as was proposed above, we could introduce a way to store fuzzy areas without using

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of larger surfaces for rendering and routing

Am 14.08.2016 um 23:24 schrieb Stefan de Konink: On zondag 14 augustus 2016 22:43:04 CEST, Marc Gemis wrote: IMHO, the value of the highway tag should define its use, not the surface from which it is made. So highway=pedestrian (or service or ...), surface=grass; area=yes makes more sense to me

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

Am 26.08.2016 um 14:18 schrieb Kieron Thwaites: I can, however, see the rationale behind tagging "none;slight_right", as well as tagging nothing at all, and as such, I think that this is an issue that we need to find consensus on. That said, I believe Paul is quite correct with his statement

Re: [Tagging] Freeway exit tagging

I consider the visual lane assistance as it is named - as an assistance useful where there are several options. If there is no assistance anybody who get the advice "take the exit" (*) should obviously use the rightmost lane. So even _no_ turn lane tagging would be an option for me in this

Re: [Tagging] Busways

Am 02.11.2016 um 22:57 schrieb Tijmen Stam: On 02-11-16 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: careful with access=no, I suggest to use vehicle=no in this case, because you risk of excluding pedestrians (and other means of transport you didn't think about) as well (happened around here in the

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

Am 27.03.2017 um 17:29 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: 2017-03-27 16:34 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis >: In the case you have added e.g. a stop sign on the way. A second mapper comes in, splits the way on the stop sign, reverts the direction

Re: [Tagging] Anti-slip surfaces

Hi, Am 17.04.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Dave F: What's the best tag to describe an anti-slip surface made from small grit pieces coating a layer of bitumen?. Often used on footbridges, sometimes pre-made & supplied in rolls to the site. Grit/gravel on their own appears inappropriate as they

Re: [Tagging] Bus relation - circular route - report says not closed

Am 19.05.2017 um 04:21 schrieb Warin: P1) JOSM validator reports that the relation is not closed. Yet all elements appear and they are connected. I cannot verify/reproduce the first part/sentence with JOSM (11639 / 12039). As the relation editor indeed does verify and show the 'circular'

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: On 27. Nov 2017, at 13:51, Selfish Seahorse > wrote: Sorry for asking again, but does anyone know if motorcar=no implies that there is no access for all multi-track motor vehicles

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 11:54 schrieb Selfish Seahorse: On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern <o...@bavarianmallet.de> wrote: Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for any double-tracked

Re: [Tagging] highway=service // public road?

Am 23.05.2018 um 22:33 schrieb Greg Troxel: Florian Lohoff writes: I now see increasing usage of service roads as a category below unclassified. People tagging "smaller roads" in the countryside as a service roads. I think this is basically wrong tagging. I find this a little

Re: [Tagging] route/forward/backward members in all types of routes

Am 10.01.2018 um 12:32 schrieb Ilya Zverev: Selfish Seahorse wrote: The course of the route is determined by the order of the stops in the route relation. Therefore forward/backward roles would be redundant. But stops are not mandatory in public transport routes, unlike highways/railways! I

Re: [Tagging] issues with the list of deprecated features

Am 15.10.2018 um 16:38 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am Mo., 15. Okt. 2018 um 14:21 Uhr schrieb Tom Pfeifer mailto:t.pfei...@computer.org>>: On 15.10.2018 10:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 3. amenity=creche and amenity=nursery > For both tags amenity=kindergarten is suggested

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair designated parking space tagging?

Am 04.01.2019 um 23:22 schrieb Warin: Possibly there needs to be a main wiki page for 'disabled' features tagging, toilets, tactile paving, parking, access. On 05/01/19 07:58, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 at 20:44, Richard > wrote: looking through the

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

Am 15.01.2019 um 00:29 schrieb Dave Swarthout: Now, if we could only get rid of tourism_caravan_site and replace it with tourism=campground. Sigh. That'll never happen but it should. whoow - please do not stumble over the next misleading OSM-keys. ;-) I think you mean tourism=camp_site,

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

Am 15.01.2019 um 14:43 schrieb Marc Gemis: On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:55 PM Georg Feddern wrote: tourism=caravan_site is the one where you (at least in Europe) only can stay with motorhomes (selfpropelled) - but not with caravans (towed). but the wiki states on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Link roads between different highways type

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019, 11:52 Saeed Hubaishan wrote: About the subject I used to tag the link with the lowest way class but in: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Link_roads_between_different_highways_types it guides to use the hightest way class.

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

Am 07.01.2019 um 08:20 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick: & here we go: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shop%3Dcaravan :-) Seeing that apparently it's already been used 130 odd times, can I take that we don't actually have to RFC & vote on it? May be not necessary to RFC & vote - but I think to

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Am 17.09.2018 um 16:17 schrieb Florian Lohoff: is it intentional that StreetComplete tags the maxspeed source/type in maxspeed:type instead of the much more used source:maxspeed? If you search the german forum you will find that it is indeed intentional: StreetComplete wird maxspeed:type

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Am 20.02.2019 um 10:22 schrieb Florian Lohoff: So for me retagging residential to unclassified is broken under the assumption that unclassified is something "better" than residential. It is even more broken when there is residential usage in which case unclassified is inappropriate. While

Re: [Tagging] How to tag pedestrian lanes?

Am 20.10.2019 um 23:23 schrieb Clifford Snow: I'm not familiar with the laws of the country the picture [1] listed in the first post on this thread, but the diagonal yellow lines look to me like a don't park here rather than a sidewalk. Even the one pedestrian in the picture isn't walking the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag pedestrian lanes?

Am 20.10.2019 um 11:24 schrieb Markus: On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 23:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: +1, or e.g. sidewalk:right=lane there are a few instances tagged like this: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/sidewalk%3Aright=lane 18 out of 30 are additionally tagged sidewalk=right. I

Re: [Tagging] key, name, long or a partial abbreviation?

Don't ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Are rowboats covered by "boat=*" or "canoe=*"?

Am 23.06.2020 um 06:29 schrieb Joseph Eisenberg: The wiki page Key:boat says that tag is to specify "Legal access restriction for boats. In the sense of OSM these are small boats and pleasure crafts, including yachts." The picture shows a "no

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com hat am 29. April 2012 um 17:39 geschrieben: 2012/4/29 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: http://i46.tinypic.com/2cfqivn.png Which value would people use for the lanes=*? I think I wouldn't tag any lanes explicitly here. Looks like a