[Tagging] State parks and state forests: specific tagging question, general mapping philosophy

The immediate question: I have the boundary multipolygon for a large state park. The park has several stretches of waterfront. In some places the boundary of the park follows the high tide line. In others, it's set back from the shore (and the waterfront may have another owner). And in other cases

Re: [Tagging] State parks and state forests: specific tagging question, general mapping philosophy

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 7/27/2016 5:11 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > >> But all right. I'll settle for either "landuse=forest" or >> "leisure=nature_reserve" as something that at least does not misre

Re: [Tagging] State parks and state forests: specific tagging question, general mapping philosophy

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:34 PM, David Bannon wrote: > Might be worth your while looking at how others are using the data, OsmAnd > do a great job of rendering some of the detail found in the database. And > make a pretty attractive looking map at the same time. There

Re: [Tagging] State parks and state forests: specific tagging question, general mapping philosophy

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I don't see (a) that everything is ready for it > nor (b) that it would require any downtime. For example I'm running > osm-carto with hstore and using views so I don't have to modify the > style; but it hasn't been

Re: [Tagging] State parks and state forests: specific tagging question, general mapping philosophy

On Jul 28, 2016 9:49 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote: > From the older scheme there is also the boundary=national_park tag in use with 18000 occurences: wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dnational_park There's some reluctance in the US to use that tag for things

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > yes, it fits well if you know what the situation is, but without > documentation you don't know whether this is only supposed to be used for > places where permits are generally granted, or if it is also used

Re: [Tagging] reviving an abandoned proposal

The mountains around here have seen several waves of unsuccessful settlement. The soil is just too poor to sustain a substantial human presence. The scars of old abandoned roads have continued to erode. I'd use the proposed feature for abandoned tracks like https://flic.kr/p/oNCZVD where the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

On Jul 29, 2016 3:50 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote: > this tagging only works with one type of permit at a time, if motor_vehicle=permit was also set (with different rules and phone numbers etc.), you would need something like > foot=permit > motor_vehicle=permit > foot:permit:website=* >

[Tagging] Formal proposal: access=permit

Given the length of the thread about how to tag lands accessed by permit, and the fragmentation of the ideas therein, I've decided to advance a formal proposal for an 'access=permit' tag. I've placed a draft at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/access%3Dpermit I'll wait a

[Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

Many of the correctional facilities in my part of the world own land that is much larger than the area enclosed in their walls. Sometimes it's simply open space used as a buffer zone. Sometimes it's operated as a 'prison farm'. Sometimes it's simply inhospitable woodland that it was too much work

Re: [Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > When it comes to farmland, I would not consider it part of the amenity. > It might > > be operated by the facility, fine. But as we do not tag ownership, the > fact that > > is owned by the institution would

Re: [Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > in the case of a prison farm I would think it is part of the prison. This > is not about ownership. By the way, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-prison-horses-idUSKBN0ET1RA20140618 is one of the prisons

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Yep. I asked a similar question at > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-February/028504.html > but there was no particular consensus. > > access=permit seems to have moderate usage (slightly

[Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

Gentlebeings, In a discussion today on 'imports,' Martin Koppenhoefer raised a concern that appears to have no answer in current tagging practice. I suspect that it's yet another case where a fairly common case in the US violates a hidden cultural assumption in OSM's data model. The case in

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com > wrote: > > 2016-07-19 22:01 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: > >> The High Peaks Wilderness is a lot more like a public park than it is >> like your driveway. Sh

[Tagging] Fwd: How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

Oops - sent this message from the wrong mailbox and it either bounced or got flagged for moderation. -- Forwarded message -- From: Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 4:42 PM Subject: Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Il giorno 19 lug 2016, alle ore 20:41, Colin Smale ha scritto: >> >> If you need explicit permission, it's access=private, even if there are loads of people with that explicit

[Tagging] Fwd: How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

Oops, accidentally sent this from the wrong mailbox again. On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Also, we aren't being consistent with such a strict definition. There > are many shopping malls near me, and the ways have no access tags. > That's wrong, as they

Re: [Tagging] Beef fattening stations

It's rare (only 9 uses), but the Wiki also shows farming_system=feedlot as a possibilty, On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > I would almost prefer landuse=industrial. To call such places farmyards is > IMO a bit too generous. They are industrial in a

Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: > * John Willis [170219 09:53]: > > If someone was looking to wash a giant bedspread or duvet, knowing there > is only one laundromat in town with a giant machine would be very useful. > > Then we

Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:53 AM, John Willis wrote: > > On Feb 17, 2017, at 1:51 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > > > > I guess the preferred unit will depend on the country where you are > mapping. > > I would prefer drum volume (as it is actually measureable), but

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power pole extension

I think I've seen two-phase power once, in a commercial building in Philadelphia, built around 1905. All the high-power uses (HVAC, mostly) in the building were actually driven off 208 or 480 volt three-phase, provided by phase-converting transformers and switch gear. There were a handful 240-volt

Re: [Tagging] Mapping freeway stub ends?

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > For the above situation, I'd tag it as highway=construction, > construction=* and abandoned=yes since it was abandoned under > construction... > Hmm. I'm reluctant to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mountaineer's mailbox

or GPS tracks of the routes on the peaks without established trails.) -- 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:20 PM, ksg <ks...@web.de> wrote: > > > Am 06.09.2016 um 19:55 schrieb Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com > >: > > > > I would thin

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mountaineer's mailbox

I'm a mountaineer in one of those English-speaking countries that you mention, and I've certainly encountered the practice, which varies from having a climber's log ('register' is another keyword) at the summit, to a 'letterbox' such as you describe, to a 'geocache' where people leave trinkets.

Re: [Tagging] Water in bays, harbors, etc.

I'll be following this discussion with interest, because I suspect that a good many mappers have the same approach that I do in estuarine areas: "don't mess with the coastline, you're too likely to break something." My understanding is that the coastline is *supposed* to follow the high-water

Re: [Tagging] Water in bays, harbors, etc.

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > In other words: if you are aware of the problem you are unlikely to > create a formal error while doing normal editing of the coastline even > if you don't shy away from coastline edits. > I've actually learnt

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mountaineer's mailbox

en 06.09.2016 20.56, skrev ksg: > >> Am 06.09.2016 um 20:38 schrieb Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> OK, that sounds good as well. Maybe still have some sort of tagging for >>> the type so that we can show a letterbox as Mr Díaz

Re: [Tagging] cave_entrance. ref and name

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Why? Is there a new trend to avoid relations at all cost? > > it's actually an old rule. Relations, being expensive, should be avoided > where not necessary. They are also less reliable, because you can

Re: [Tagging] Amphitheatre or outdoor non-sports venue

Thus saith Wikipedia: > In modern usage, an amphitheatre is a circular, semicircular or curved, > acoustically vibrant performance space, particularly one located outdoors. > Contemporary amphitheatres often include standing structures, called > bandshells, sometimes curved or bowl-shaped, both

Re: [Tagging] tagging floodplain

There was a proposal a while back for a 'water=intermittent' tag, which might be revised for the situation, perhaps with some additional tagging to describe whether the area is inundated seasonally or only sporadically. For the 'official' flood control boundary, there are also

Re: [Tagging] Snowmobile routes

t; [0], and IMHO makes a lot more sense than route=road! > > [0] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=snowmobile > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I thought sure that I had raised this question before, bu

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > I agree with the "what does it feel like" part, but not "what the locals > call it". One of the central issues in tagging in OSM is that words are > used for a specific meaning (usually UK usage, as we know) and the point >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging memorial sites

This exchange reminds me of a question that I had recently and forgot to ask: do we have specific tagging for a cenotaph? (Since the one in question was for a departed general, I tagged it war_memorial and moved on.) On Sep 19, 2016 5:22 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Cenotaph WAS Re: Tagging memorial sites

tomb=cenotaph sounds perfect, if unusual. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steuben_Memorial_State_Historic_Site#/media/File:Baron_von_Steuben_Monumental_Tomb_Jul_10.jpg is the cenotaph that I was mapping when the question arose. Baron von Steuben's remains are in an unmarked grave somewhere nearby.

Re: [Tagging] Cenotaph WAS Re: Tagging memorial sites

Oops - sent originally from wrong mailbox: The Titanic musicians' cenotaph in Southhampton is a plaque set in a wall, but even it is made to look like a tomb set in the same wall. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/RMS_ Titanic_Musician's_Memorial,_Southampton.jpg The Archibald

Re: [Tagging] Cenotaph WAS Re: Tagging memorial sites

Be as pedantic as you please. I'll be happy to tag a cenotaph or three if a consensus ever emerges. On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20-Sep-16 06:30 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > Il giorno 20 set 2016, alle ore 08:59,

Re: [Tagging] Cenotaph WAS Re: Tagging memorial sites

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Steve Doerr wrote: > And the word actually *means* 'empty tomb': 'ancient Greek *κενοτάϕιον* < > *κενός* empty [...] + *τάϕος* tomb' (Oxford English Dictionary). > > > I became familiar with the word because of my family's history. Two

Re: [Tagging] Cenotaph WAS Re: Tagging memorial sites

, 2016 6:31 PM, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20-Sep-16 12:51 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > tomb=cenotaph sounds perfect, if unusual. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steuben_Memorial_State_ > Historic_Site#/media/File:Baron_von_Steuben_Monumental_Tomb_J

Re: [Tagging] Snowmobile routes

on't meet my >> standards of data quality. Just to begin with, they are digitized at an >> inappropriately small scale. >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Brad Neuhauser < >> brad.neuhau...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It may not be "offi

[Tagging] Snowmobile routes

I thought sure that I had raised this question before, but a quick troll through the archives doesn't seem to show it. New York State has an extensive network of designated snowmobile routes, intended to be long-distance continuous paths. In some cases, they follow highways, or logging roads on

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] non-temporary usage of highway=road

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Andy Townsend wrote: > I'd suggest talking to the users concerned - the easiest way is via a > changeset discussion comment. If they're unsure what road category to use, > you can point at other nearby examples in the imagery and say "I'd map

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of Country Names

For names of countries, I'd suggest that they should be in whatever the local mappers to a country consider the predominant language to be. For users in other locales, presumably we have active enough English-speaking, German-speaking, and so on communities that name:en, name:de, etc. would be

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of Country Names

It gets even more complicated in places of disputed sovereignty, where the choice of name makes a political statement and speech is not as free as it usually is in the West. In the PRC, it would actually be unlawful to put the name 中華民國 (or 中华民国) on a map, while in Taiwan, it might be lawful to

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Forgive me if this is a duplicate. I was typing from my phone, and used the wrong 'From:' address, causing the message to drop into the moderator queue. We don't generally try to encode all the details of local law. I'm perfectly happy with saying that licensing, seasons, hours, permissible

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

For the benefit of USAians - Polo mints are shaped enough like LifeSavers to have been the subject of much trademark litigation among Kraft Foods, Mars UK and Swizzels Matlow. On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > For the benefit of USAians - P

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of Country Names

This is kind of straying, but 'dependent nations' are a case that is not well handled at all. There are a number of cases (e.g. most Native American reservations) where all parties agree on the boundaries - at least of the current state of control, if not the 'rightful' borders, but most

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Since nobody else has stepped forward to answer this, as far as I can tell, let me take a whack at it: I think that the best tagging for a hunting reserve that the current renderer knows about is 'leisure=nature_reserve". That's how the state wildlife management areas in New York, the State Game

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Yves wrote: > Puting aside the pleasure to debate over landuse and landcover, what about > defining hunting = as a permission tag, and invent a new polygon type > dedicated to define a hunting area boundary where no other polygon is > suitable

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

That's rather a simplistic view. Hunting reserves exist to protect the land from development so that there will be places where it is possible to hunt and game available to harvest. The important distinction isn't the one between 'hunting reserve' and 'wilderness'; it's the one between 'reserve

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: > > > But that is different from an area is managed primarily to benefit > hunting. eg if they are keeping deer numbers artificially high (feeding > over winter, or breeding), just to allow as many as possible to be shot.

Re: [Tagging] How might we best map emergency helicopter landing zones?

That sounds good for the wooden (!) helipad visible in https://binged.it/2gdSX38 , too. That's no longer in regular use, and the H has been removed from it, because the fire tower visible to the southwest is no longer staffed. It's still viable for an emergency (and sees an occasional flight to

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

; > Il giorno 26 ott 2016, alle ore 19:39, Kevin Kenny < > kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > > In my part of the world, game animals are abundant enough, and public > forest lands are also abundant enough, that most hunters either hunt on > their own property

Re: [Tagging] Proposal : amenity=baking_oven

As a native speaker of US English, I'd surely be perplexed to see a bakery oven called a 'kiln'. Kilns are for making goods like bricks, pottery and quicklime. The word is essentially never used for an oven for baking breads or pastries. On Oct 13, 2016 7:59 AM, "Tom Pfeifer"

Re: [Tagging] better mapping for embankments / slopes

vecorsara.it/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ > Stirone_argine_1-580x435.jpg > [3] http://bur.regione.veneto.it/resourcegallery/photos/465_ > Guarda%20Veneta_ro_Panorama%20con%20argine.jpg > > 2016-11-29 23:28 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: > >> '

Re: [Tagging] better mapping for embankments / slopes

'Embankment' is frequently used for a built-up structure on a steep hillside that keeps a road, railroad, or similar feature from sliding into a gorge or river. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embankment_%28transportation%29#/media/File:Embankment_1_%28PSF%29.png for an illustration from

Re: [Tagging] fixme -- by a specific date

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Bill Ricker wrote: > ​Seems to me that seasonal roads should have some sort of seasonal > availability tag, similar to how a park gate might have dawn-to-dusk > availability, so that a router (possibly using a Lambertus Garmin map) to > get

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > As a side note, your example Fort Montgomery, NY, to me doesn't look like > a hamlet, there's an elementary school, shops, a fire department, gas > station, hotel, cafe, sports grounds, and a significant

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > Two issues: > > 1) Recommended OSM tagging for place=* on smaller settlements is on the > wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Populated_ > settlements.2C_urban_and_rural You can see it's based

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

On 03/30/2017 07:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>> wrote: Obviously, if we are using the node for other purposes, we may need to disambiguate with st

Re: [Tagging] how to care about different seasonal road close?

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 5:35 PM, Micah Cochran wrote: > You might use the "seasonal" key, which seems like it might already be > used to indicate if a highway is open or closed seasonally. I can't find a > proposal for that use. > > This could be

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > This is definitely messy. Legally, in Massachusetts we have cities and > towns, both admin_level=8; they are the same thing, but (slightly > oversimplifying in a way that doesn't matter for this dicussion) > governed by city

Re: [Tagging] Stećci - Bosnian medieval tombstones

A tomb without a body, built to commemorate dead whose remains lie elsewhere, is a 'cenotaph'. There's an earlier, inconclusive, thread on the topic: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-September/030196.html On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Michal Fabík

[Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

Over the last year or two, I've imported or revised or conflated a lot of public recreational facilities (parks, recreation grounds, nature reserves, etc... ranging from urban sites of less than 1000 square metres up to massive wilderness areas of hundreds of square km). In many cases, I've found

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

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Kevin Kenny > <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm having a hard time picturing any case where this couldn't work. > > In the case you have add

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay on areas

is 'seacoast', even if it has a tide and ships of considerable size can navigate the river as far as the Port of Albany. A hydrologist would say, "well, technically, that's correct" and the locals would roll their eyes. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> w

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

I still think that for the overwhelming majority of STOP and YIELD (give_way) signs, the tagging scheme of a node either on the intersection or near the intersection on the approaching way makes sense. And in fact, I think that a fairly simple rule of interpretation actually answers those who

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > Given how widely used the direction tag is for highway=* signs, why > isn't it also applied to highway=traffic_signals ? Does > traffic_signals:direction=* bear additional meaning that direction=* > does not convey ?

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Mattias Dalkvist wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Michael Patrick > wrote: > >> >> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an >> inventory is is a non-trivial task >>

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > landuse =forest. areas used to grow and log trees (actual current human > use of land), a pond would not be included but a clearcut area still > dedicated to growing trees would. > In beaver country, there's

[Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

Near where I live, there are several places where lane restrictions continue for several city blocks. These 'advance' turn restrictions are confusing to human drivers, and so far it seems that navigation systems can't cope with them at all. I'm wondering if it's even possible under our current

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On 04/16/2017 06:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a government run service with international links to other 'Post

Re: [Tagging] how to map simple buildings

covered=yes is exactly what I was looking for, thanks! On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com > wrote: > > 2017-03-03 14:36 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: > >> Oops - I thought I'd copied and pasted

Re: [Tagging] Invalid voting of proposed feature motorcycle_friendly=*

I think I'd chime in with the people who are saying that the tag is quite subjective, except that I can think of a few cases where it isn't: http://www.newstimes.com/local/article/For-hikers-no-clean-laundry-in-Kent- 4738977.php#item-38493 in particular comes to mind. But in the absence of signage

Re: [Tagging] amenity=recycling & recycling_type=dump

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Thorsten Alge wrote: > > Well, to tag the supervision it would be ok. But how shall small places > where residents are allowed to dump their green waste to rot tagged. is > amenity=recycling with recycling_type=centre correct or is there

Re: [Tagging] Orientation of an adit?

On 03/10/2017 08:48 AM, Tod Fitch wrote: There are a number of abandoned adits and mine shafts in an area I’ve done some mapping in. When looking at old USGS topographic maps of the area, I’ve noticed that they used to align their symbol for an adit to show its orientation. My inclination, at

Re: [Tagging] Orientation of an adit?

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Mike Thompson <miketh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> I can just now hear, nevertheless, a chorus asserting that the >> information is avai

Re: [Tagging] Improve toilet tagging

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I'm wary of tagging too many business details. I fear a toilets > namespace would lead to people adding all sorts of observations about > toilets that they used in some shop or other and that might at best be >

Re: [Tagging] Orientation of an adit?

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Mark Wagner wrote: > Thing is, the information *isn't* available by other means. Adits > don't always go straight in -- of the two I'm aware of, both are at > rather sharp angles to the (very local) slope of the hill. > OK, you've

Re: [Tagging] Mapping time zones as geometries (relations)

The timezone database does not map the geographic extents of timezones. Rather, it lists them by name and gives the rules for what time they keep. The geography is explicitly out of scope, so the tzdata maintainers really shouldn't have anything to say about OSM mapping time zones! There are

Re: [Tagging] Mapping time zones as geometries (relations)

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > On 03/07/2017 02:06 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > There are reasonable use cases for wanting to take a timezone name and > > get back a multipolygon > > Question is, does (the core database of) O

Re: [Tagging] how to map simple buildings

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-03-03 3:36 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>: > >> On the campus of GE Research in Niskayuna, New York, there's a fairly >> substantial building that

Re: [Tagging] how to map simple buildings

I'm hijacking the thread a bit here, but the discussion of "bridge buildings" in Martin's message made me think of this: On the campus of GE Research in Niskayuna, New York, there's a fairly substantial building that is on a bridge across a ravine. >From the way it renders, I think that I've

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane > > this way routing engines will regard them as separate roads and stop > trying to get you from one lane to another. > But then, won't routing engines announce

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> wrote: > On 06-Apr-17 04:09 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: >> >>> Do we have a scheme for tagging such a beast? >>> >> > You can combine turn:lanes [1] with change:lanes [2], the first descr

Re: [Tagging] Names containing abbreviations that are the official name

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > I agree that tagging pronunciation is a good thing for unusual situations, > and the examples that were cited before already use the IPA [1], which would > be my recommendation as well. > [1]

Re: [Tagging] admin_level with office=government

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2017-07-21 15:26 GMT+02:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira : >> It seems a good start :-) > I have copied some information over from the boundary page and removed the > redirect, feel free to amend: >

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 9:28 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> there are always exceptions. not far from me, there's a traditional >> hydrant of the type normally used with pressurized systems, but >> it's sourced from a pond. the reason is that the pond is elevated, some >> distance

Re: [Tagging] Pepper: Chili, piper, bell pepper

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 20.08.2017 21:50, Tobias Zwick wrote: >> >> And here is the wikipedia article for Piper (plant): >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_(plant) > > > Well that is the Genus of 2000 different species, of which one is

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1, these cases should all be addressed and differentiated. Additionally > it could be needed to separately address letters and parcels. The proposals > I have seen so far didn't solve this in any way, they

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is correct that "perfect is the enemy of the good", but if you don't > even try to make it good, it will very likely be bad ;-) > I don't often see that happen in the 'tagging' mailing list. But I've seen

Re: [Tagging] [Imports] Importing fuel stations in UK and future similar imports

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Ilya Zverev wrote: > * "The general view seems to be against IDs like this": what has happened > with the principle "any tags you like"? Did we saturate the key space and > not accepting new keys anymore? Can I read that "general view"

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Tobias Wrede wrote: > In that respect UPS is not any different from a supermarket or a dry > cleaner. You go to the shop=supermarket or shop=dry clener but not Tesco's > warehouse or the central dry cleaning facility. Exactly. This is what

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

On Jun 17, 2017 2:30 PM, "Robert Koch" wrote: Moreover how useful is "pillar" if there is "dry_barrel" and "wet_barrel"? How would non-fire-fighters or non-local fire-fighters tag such pillar hydrants? "Pillar" is "I don't know which." There are a few hydrants near me

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

Going over old ground once more: The proposal is abandoned based on strong opposition from the community. I am told that access=permit is the same thing as access=private (which, as far as I can determine, is also no different from access=no). I accept that. Warin's opinion is an obvious

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:37 PM, joost schouppe wrote: > That said, even if this hivemind of ours (and let me add to that "one of > us, one of us, one of us") maybe does not like an extra value for the > access key, I see no reason why you would need to use another

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

The last few messages in this thread seem to have quieted much of the discussion. Let me summarize my position, and see if we've achieved rough consensus. access=permit (and (transport mode)=permit): Symbolizes that the landowner requires permission for access, but has a policy that

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:34 PM, marc marc wrote: > you do so much slalom to avoid the categories access=private and fee=yes > that I persist in believing that it would be easy to add tags to these 2 > functions that already work to explain the conditions in which

Re: [Tagging] Setting a preferred routing

On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > I came across an interesting routing problem the other day. A section of > the Richardson Highway in Alaska was relocated in 2015 by the Alaska DOT in > anticipation of erosion or flooding by the nearby Delta

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > I'm trying to tag some stocked fishing ponds that reside on a military > reservation in Alaska, Fort Greely. The ponds are stocked by the > Alaska Department of Fish & Game but require a special permit for access.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >