On 9 November 2011 16:12, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
I've run into a curious use of a tag, to map the lack of a thing.
At least that's what I think mappers are doing.
One might normally expect a well, mountain hut, highway rest area, or toilet
to offer drinking water. Some
On 1 August 2011 12:00, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
amenity=car_rental
rental:truck=yes
Works now and in the future.
You could always dual tag and at some point in the future have a bot
clean things up.
shop=rental
rental:plant=yes*
Works in the future.
Steve
* plant
On 31 July 2011 08:50, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
i'll add this alongside car_rental and bicycle_rental unless
someone makes a strong case against it. there are many
truck_rental sites in the US (common brands are UHaul,
Penske, and Ryder).
Or the better question, why should
For those that missed the email that came up on talk this week,
someone has imported a lot of airports and so on for NZ and it looks
horrible because they show at z10:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.243lon=175.014zoom=10layers=M
Looking through the wiki I found this proposal:
On 25 June 2011 20:47, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/6/25 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
Wasn't there some discussion about that before, how important airports
such as LAX should show sooner than regional airports which should
show up sooner than grass airstrips
On 26 June 2011 02:38, Alan Millar grunthos...@yahoo.com wrote:
As has been said a number of times, OSM is a do-ocracy. At this point,
more discussions just aren't going to resolve it.
A little discussion might allow us to harmonise tags, so 10 people
don't go off and do their own thing and
On 12 June 2011 14:04, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll elaborate on why this is a bad idea:
1. It's a lot of tags
Only if you want it to be, just like some people tagging trees, most
won't so this isn't an issue
2. It won't get used in real life
Never assume this, after all
On 12 June 2011 02:33, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem with these types of proposals, of N levels of depth of a
tag, is that they quickly become complex, and thus get unused.
You, Dr. Who, are proposing changing shop=pets to now:
shop=pets
animals:fish=yes
and
On 11 June 2011 06:21, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Hi
Another query...
http://www.crockadoodledo.co.uk/
it's a place where you can create your own design on crockery such as
plates,mugs etc.
it's not really a craft shop as it doesn't sell supplies just the kiln fired
end
On 11 June 2011 06:16, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Hi
Is there a specific tag for pet supplies (food, collars, chew toys etc)
I'm used to pet stores being ambigious, and don' have a problem with
that. But
On 8 June 2011 10:08, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
In Australia, 'going to the club' means (generally) going to a licenced
members-only venue, often associated with sports but generally not where
sports are played. www.clubsvic.com.au and www.clubsnsw.com.au for
example (second
On 5 June 2011 23:58, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:
As a proposal you can almost added it the same way on the wiki as a
approved tag and you can change anything that might not work or find a
better solution while testing.
I've done this in the past and set the status to defacto, rather
On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify
maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing.
The description of emergency=phone includes 'making calls to emergency
services' so it is not necessarily
On 4 June 2011 17:10, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify
maybe in another tag phone=fire_alarm or some such thing.
The description of emergency=phone
On 4 June 2011 17:44, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:10 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 June 2011 17:02, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
I don't know of any, but I would go with emergency=phone, and specify
maybe in another tag phone
On 1 June 2011 01:36, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO both are not really towers. I'd consider the tower John
proposes as a kind of lightning device that is not a tower (although
being cantilevered).
Not my proposal...
___
I propose the following new tag {{tag|tower:type|lighting}} as follows:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tag:man_made%3Dtowerdiff=nextoldid=639593
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
Out of boredom I tried to think up all the non-physical tags currently
in wide spread use:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:historic%3Devent#Why_even_obscure_tags_should_be_documented_if_they_are_likely_to_be_mapped.21
I doubt the list is exhaustive, but these are obviously important
On 11 May 2011 23:04, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
The wiki should be a place to document the various parts of OSM, and for
things like software it can be useful. For tags, however, it is getting
Even if historic=event is removed from the wiki, and even if
historic=battlefield is removed I doubt it will stop people mapping
these locations, they are important to people, and people have already
shown that there are physical places that can be mapped.
In fact the only thing that will be
On 6 May 2011 00:50, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/5/5 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
Even if historic=event is removed from the wiki, and even if
historic=battlefield is removed I doubt it will stop people mapping
these locations, they are important to people
On 6 May 2011 00:59, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
In fact the only thing that will be accomplished by removing
references on the wiki is people will use multiple key/value pairs for
the same type of object because
On 6 May 2011 01:09, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, they already do use it:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/historic%3Aevent#values
No, I meant more like historic=pa
I have no idea what
On 6 May 2011 01:34, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/5/5 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
On 6 May 2011 01:09, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
Unless you are in New Zealand, you're unlikely to tag the same thing:
It's being used for a Maori fortress, see
On 6 May 2011 04:15, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
e.g. there is a place in Rome which is said to be the locus where
Julius Cesar was stabbed by Brutus. I find this interesting and I
I hadn't thought about assassinations, but all it took was an
assassination to kick start
On 3 May 2011 02:02, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
To reduce the danger of edit wars: what about _not_ defining the
events explicitly significant (most of German Wikipedia disputes are
about relevance criteria and I'd rather avoid similar discussions in
OSM if possible). Of
After digging further into this, and with all XAPI servers seemingly
unresponsive I looked toward tagwatch, the following are historic
values of curious note:
yes (5053)
pa (2138)
battlefield (331)
Altstraße (80)
heritage (76)
tumulus (60)
industrial (54)
coat_of_arms (54)
hollow_way (41)
road
On 2 May 2011 06:28, Andrew Cleveland evil.salt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Can the highway=proposed tag apply to highways which were proposed but
are no longer? As in the road was never constructed and the proposal was
abandoned? The wiki says the tag is for roads that are about to be
built,
On 28 April 2011 17:56, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
historic=event and event=event-class?
or historic:event=yes/event-class ?
I like this suggestion. I noticed in JOSM there is a
historic=battlefield, but this and other similar events, like David's
suggestion about the
On 28 April 2011 10:35, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
I agree in part, but this isnt just any news story or photo.
+1
That doesnt detract from the original question, of what to map a site of
historic significance. Im sure the location of the great train robbery
or an the
On 28 April 2011 11:40, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 4/27/11 8:47 PM, John Smith wrote:
If people can tag trees, surely things of historical significants
deserve to be allowed in OSM as well.
identifiable, physical objects that exist today, sure.
That's the catch
Does any one have any thoughts on what to tag a location famous for 2
reasons, first it was a spot where a stage coach was held up by
thunderbolt, secondly because someone did a painting of the event
after the event:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailed_Up
There is no marker at the site or
On 13 April 2011 17:06, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Not the same situation here NE2. There are no traffic lights at
all installed in either place for the inbound direction, just outbound.
Is the 2 directions of the highway have some kind of barrier down the middle?
If you
On 12 April 2011 19:22, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Recently I found this sign which I interpret as access forbidden to
touristic busses:
http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/6610385
It is at a driveway to the local cemetery, near a very popular
monument (unesco
On 12 April 2011 20:01, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
My first idea was tourist_bus=no
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change this standard here
On 9 April 2011 18:22, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to map some named reaches (straight portion of a stream
or river, as from one turn to another;) part of a major river.
To do this I would shift the river specific information to a relation,
which is useful in any
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Map_Features:officeoldid=573918diff=next
That is kind of contradictive, since local authorities are also
government and I don't think there is sufficient need to distinguish
between local, state and federal (where applicable) offices, the
On 30 January 2011 21:05, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
broken by design...
There won't be an invalid polygon, there would be 2 valid but
contradicting polygons.
Which are sorted by smallest first usually so they render on top of
the larger ones.
On 30 January 2011 21:52, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a method of trying to extract useful data from an undefined
state making assumptions, but it is IMHO not how we should design our
data model. This would also mean that even with complete data for the
whole
2011/1/31 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc:
If used with the natural-key then
it should at least be possible to use the same way as natural=wetland
with subtags of wetland=..
natural=rockland :-)
I started a new thread on that.
Not all rocky surfaces are natural, just like sand being used
On 29 January 2011 23:05, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
So there is no overlapping of landcover and natural. Surface could be
used in many cases instead of landcover, but according to the wiki it
is: The surface=* tag is one of the additional properties tags, which
can be
On 30 January 2011 00:36, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
also from a data consuming e.g. rendering point of view I see more
disadvantage then advantage to not separate landcover as a feature
from surface as an attribute to highways.
Can you expand upon that with a less vague
On 30 January 2011 00:32, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
can you point me to this decision? In my mapping I almost never see
http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2873
That was the follow up etc, I can't find the original thread, however
it would have been about the same time.
On 30 January 2011 01:22, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Come on, it was never expanded, you would like it to be expanded.
You are yet to show how landcover=* makes things better. All I see
landcover=* doing is duplicating surface=* and confusing people.
As for expansion, you
On 30 January 2011 03:28, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
It is mainly the meaning, surface refers to the surface while
landcover refers to the general coverage. I agree that sand is a good
value for surface, but at the same time there could be
landcover=trees.
Isn't there
On 30 January 2011 03:34, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/1/29 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
I could
also support surface (there might be space for landcover as well).
Actually surface=sand or bare_rock makes perfectly sense.
even though this creates
On 28 January 2011 21:35, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, IMHO (I'm not an English native) this is not scree. I would tag them
landcover=bare_rock (or depending on the size landcover=pebbles)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wave_Retreating_from_Pebbles.jpg
Why bother
On 27 January 2011 06:22, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
PS: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover
Why keep pushing this instead of just using surface=* which is widely
used and accepted already?
___
Tagging
On 25 January 2011 18:34, Sean Horgan sean.hor...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you referring to SNUBA? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snuba
Nope, they've been line diving a lot longer than that, and dying for
about the same amount of time...
___
Tagging
On 24 January 2011 13:51, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
We don't map only based on legal distinctions.
It's not a bad thing to see how others solved similar problems all the same.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 22 January 2011 07:53, Steve Doerr steve.do...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
On 09/01/2011 00:48, John Smith wrote:
the
centre of the boundary and the centre of the boundary will rarely be
the same thing
?
centre of the boundary and the centre of the town
On 19 January 2011 16:49, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
atlases etc. A town of 50,000 would barely even rate a mention in
France, whereas that's pretty big for Australia. And a town like Eucla
in the nullarbor (pop 50) has very high prominence as it's the only
place for many miles
On 19 January 2011 17:34, rob...@elsenaar.info wrote:
Literally, you are right. In the scuba world rebreather diving and snorkle
diving are a part of what scuba divers do.
Erm no...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuba_diving
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snorkling
On 19 January 2011 04:27, Robert Elsenaar rob...@elsenaar.info wrote:
(scuba_diving is better then Dive_centre because also dive spots can have
filling facilities without having a divecentre nearby.)
My point before is that scuba is only one type of diving, you can also
snorkle or use a
On 19 January 2011 05:41, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/1/18 Robert Elsenaar rob...@elsenaar.info:
Great idea to reactivate is again. New times, new ideas.
I think capitals should be tagged to be Metropolis to also when they do not
have enough inhibitans to be granted
On 18 January 2011 09:18, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
waterway=flood_gate
flood_gate=sluice_gate
...is more usable for non-techie nerds than something like:
waterway=flow_control
flow_control=sluice_gate
usage=flood_gate
So why do we use highway=* for even small tracks?
-1
On 18 January 2011 16:13, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
So why do we use highway=* for even small tracks?
The tagging system as a whole will never be entirely consistent, or
even operate on consistent
On 15 January 2011 04:40, Alberto Nogaro bartosom...@yahoo.it wrote:
Maybe the handycraft value might hint that the craft key is used in OSM
with a broader meaning?
Actually that would indicate to me it was very specific to art works
made by hand which would be a much narrower meaning.
On 14 January 2011 02:06, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
comment on emergency=*, and I oppose treating bridge/tunnel signals
the same as those in front of fire stations.
+1 they aren't emergency signals, they just aren't used all the time,
and you can also get regular traffic
On 13 January 2011 16:10, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 01/12/2011 11:33 PM, James Mast wrote:
I've created a proposal for Emergency Traffic Signals, which are
typically found in front of fire stations and highway tunnels at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Map_Features:sportdiff=prevoldid=583789
I'd be more inclined to use the English and shorten it to just sport=cart
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On 10 January 2011 23:52, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely with a k. I actually tagged this sport recently, I took a
Did I really need to say british english? cart with a k is american english.
punt on sport=go_karting. Either that or sport=karting sounds ok to
me.
On 11 January 2011 00:47, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:03 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 January 2011 23:52, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely with a k. I actually tagged this sport recently, I took a
Did I really
2011/1/11 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc:
From the wiki, I have drawn the conclusion that the key leisure is used to
tag
physical objects.
Can it be used for non-physical tags too?
Is it possible to tag leisure=bathing; swimming; eating; drinking;
eating and drinking are usually tagged
On 11 January 2011 10:28, Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
I wrote this before I realized there were other replies on this topic. Based
on them, it seems the closest fit is office=towing, since that's what such a
place is primarily used for - accounting, answering the phone, etc.
On 9 January 2011 20:54, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
As it doesn't actually matter which words for tags we use, as long as
their use is generally agreed (see highway for instance), I could go
on with craft in the way it is currently defined.
It shouldn't matter, however
On 10 January 2011 09:29, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, that's very interesting - I didn't think of that. Australian towns
tend to be very far apart, so the boundary of two *towns* rarely meet.
(Other administrative boundaries, shires, do...)
There are suburb boundaries gazetted
On 10 January 2011 01:42, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't comment on the rest, but sport=swimming is incorrect unless
the area is for competitive swimming.
-1
Swimming pools don't have to be for competitive swimming, eg kiddy
pools, but they aren't for bathing in either.
On 9 January 2011 10:39, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the difference between these two tags? Only place=town
appears to be documented. Both have ~~4000 usages on ways.
The place marker should be part of the boundary as well, because the
centre of the
On 9 January 2011 13:36, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
I've been looking into this. How does this sound?
waterway=dam and waterway=weir remain unchanged.
I'm still in favour of shifting these into flow control...
The question is, what else would go there? Flood gates don't belong there
On 9 January 2011 13:37, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm starting to be convinced that there is a cultural disconnect with
the word craft. To me (and I suspect most English speakers) there has
to almost be an arts aspect for something to be a craft. Whereas I'm
starting to get the
On 7 January 2011 19:25, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 5:50 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
What about shop=service
Errg, no. All shops provide a kind of service...
Don't forget the key office if it is not really a shop:
http
On 7 January 2011 20:26, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 January 2011 20:19, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:
For me, a shop would be to get in, buy something (or at least get some
service done) and go out. That's not the case here. A towing service will
get
On 8 January 2011 02:52, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess this misunderstanding derives from German ;-)
In German there is a word Laden (m.) which is usually translated as
shop, but the actual meaning is not as broad as shop in English.
Actually it only describes
On 8 January 2011 08:33, Surly_ru p...@isnet.ru wrote:
I agree that shop=workshop, workshop=whatever is a good solution to
this issue.
+1, it could be combined with craft to map the kind of workshop.
I think, craft=* (may be with man_made=works) is sufficient. So
shop=workshop is
On 7 January 2011 01:44, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote:
More organisation would surely help, but this is in contrast with the wiki
principle.
For the most part things could stay as status quo, it's only
existing/well established tags, such as waterway=dam|weir that might
fit
On 7 January 2011 07:03, Simone Saviolo simone.savi...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, but it's a matter of defining a line between chaos and coordinated
anarchy. It seems that many OSMers would not want to go any further than an
anarchy, this may be ok, but for the data to be somehow useful (and not
Things seem to have gotten way off track, I started this thread to get
ideas/feedback on how we could replace an existing tag like
waterway=weir and instead make it a subtag along with other similar
flow control tags like dams, sluice_gates, flood_gates, lock_gates and
so on...
Any talk about a
On 7 January 2011 09:18, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm. It could get increasingly difficult to objectively distinguish between
all the different types of man-made water channel: canal, drain, aqueduct.
(Incidentally, taginfo shows 40,000 uses of waterway=artificial - anyone
know
On 7 January 2011 12:26, Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
I can't find a tag for the base of operations of a towing service - i.e. you
call them to tow your broken car or truck to a repair shop. The basic
definition would be a service that tows cars and other light vehicles.
On 6 January 2011 08:47, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on the basis that it's not possible to move any established
tag. Would be happy to hear suggestions for how to accomplish that, though.
This seems to be an area that OSM *really* lacks, and some people give
usage of
On 6 January 2011 10:16, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
too easily confused with shops selling products made from
babies.
Apart from research facilities using baby stem cells, what products
are made from babies? :)
___
Tagging mailing
On 6 January 2011 13:52, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
How does one tag aqueducts that are not bridges? Examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quabbin_Aqueduct
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicopee_Valley_Aqueduct
Based on those I'd use tunnel=yes
On 6 January 2011 14:07, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
My guess is that this mailing list and talk@ reach a pretty small proportion
of users. Simply announcing we're changing the tag! please tag differently
from now on! is not remotely sufficient.
As I stated I was spit balling and
On 6 January 2011 14:23, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
It would be nice to have a list that map data consumers could subscribe
to that we could poll to verify that they are or are not using a tag, or get
clarification on how they are using a tag. (Just what we needanother
blankin'
On 6 January 2011 14:10, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Or perhaps waterway=drain, if you're not fussed about the distinction
between stormwater and drinking water.
Or subtag
waterway=conduit
conduit=storm_water|potable_water|waste_water|
On 6 January 2011 16:46, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
In your thinking there seems to be the assumption that we run some process
*per tag*. I think it works better to run a process *per schema revision*.
Oh, a regular update schedule, that might be a good idea, however ...
Let's
On 4 January 2011 07:19, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:
BTW: My feeling is, that sluice gates formerly were tagged with
waterway=weir most of the time anyway.
Doesn't mean they shouldn't be updated/added if there is a better tag...
The suggested term floodgate would be more
On 5 January 2011 04:06, Osmisto osmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all
The vote for new tag shop=baby_care has been started. I've removed
section with 'assortment=*' to make it simple and propose one thing in a
time.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Infant_care_shop#Vote
On 5 January 2011 11:38, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm wary of the endless drive to create more high-level tags. It increases
the burden on reusers of the data.
Normally I'd agree with you 100%, but in this case it's a bit
different because as pointed out earlier weirs tend to be
On 5 January 2011 10:39, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
Then you get the ambiguous tags, which can be both. What is a forest?
A place where forestry (timber cutting, etc) happens? That's land
Actually I remember reading this in some other thread a long time ago,
a forest originally
On 3 January 2011 20:04, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:
What's the difference to waterway=weir?
A lot of weirs I've seen don't have any kind of gates, they just
semi-dam a river to provide a water supply for nearby towns, the water
freely flows over the top of the weir.
On 3 January 2011 21:06, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
like this
http://museumvictoria.museum/collections/items/766657/negative-weir-bridge-across-the-murray-river-mildura-victoria-circa-1925
I doubt I've seen such a large weir in person, I was thinking more
along the lines of this:
On 3 January 2011 21:55, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO the difference is that a weir is used to control the water level
(and sometimes used to produce energy) while a sluice gate is used for
ships to navigate in rivers/canals with different levels (it is part
of steps
On 3 January 2011 11:59, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
I've set up a proposal for sluice_gates, which are typically found on small
waterways in agricultural areas at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sluice_gate
You might want to add an example photo for those not
On 8 December 2010 02:22, Kenny Moens street...@functor.be wrote:
Hello,
Hereby I want to invite everyone to comment on the Tree Nursery proposal I
made:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tree_nursery
Is there a reason that you want such a specific tag?
There is also an
On 15 November 2010 06:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm actually already doing this: landcover=tree. There is already 2545
entities of them in the db. You could still use a different surface
there by the way, so it is not superfluous.
Also landcover=scree, grass, ice,
On 16 November 2010 09:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
The whole nature_reserve as an area is broken.
it is clearly an area. What else should it be? All boundaries delimit areas.
I agree, but what does that have to do with surface tagging?
On 16 November 2010 10:03, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/11/16 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
I've already been tagging beaches and other areas as surface=sand, how
does using landcover make this any better?
I agree that in this case it is the same. For trees
On 16 November 2010 10:33, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
problem. Anyway, there is a nice proposal for golf courses and surface
doesn't seem to be in it:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Golf_course
Past tagging discussion updated the surface=* tag to do
1 - 100 of 592 matches
Mail list logo
