On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:56, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> > If your country's government indicates with signs
> > that a road as a primary route then that is what it is.
>
> no government says „primary“ road, they might say „A road“, or
> „Bundesstraße“ but the latter is only telling that
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:31, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> TL;DR;
> Just because you only see a simple system for road numbering on the ground
> (like motorway, national, regional, local) doesn’t mean your government
> doesn’t use much more complex mechanisms to plan, build and maintain roads
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 14:07, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> if I don’t interpret this wrong, in Germany and Italy we are using the
> motorroad=yes qualifier for what appears to be called autovia in Spain
> (motorway like access restrictions).
Sounds about right. Wikipedia's generic term for
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 01:20, yo paseopor wrote:
>
> trunk: 4,3,2-lane new roads (newer than twenty years, with new track),
> with only interlevel crossings and exits, average speed of 80/100, and wide
> lanes. It is possible bikes or agricultural vehicles would be prohibited in
> these kind of
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 at 22:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> In Australia, it's not uncommon for a Primary (& in some cases, Trunk!)
> road to be a single lane dirt road!, & it would be nice to be able to show
> them with the importance that they are to local residents of that area.
>
There
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 21:22, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> or in other words if highway=primary always means a=x and b=y then all you
> would have to add to the scheme is c=z/w as a qualifier for
> highway=primary, no need for a completely new system
>
That's true. But I was simplifying.
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 17:27, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
> The decision to use the import=yes tag wasn't mine nor that of other
> experienced Thailand mappers. The Facebook crew "invented" this use, for
> whatever internal reason(s)of their own and we local mappers simply went
> along with it because
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 17:27, Julien djakk
wrote:
>
> The "old" highway tag can give default values to the 5 new tags, so it
> is not necessary to re-map everything :)
>
If it is a guaranteed 1:1 relationship then there is no point doing it.
Maybe if the
semantics became clearer (like migrating
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 15:32, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Paul, thank you for clarifying the situation in England, as much as it
> can be clarified.
>
As with OSM tagging, it evolved. So we have things that are not ideal
simply because of
historical accident. If the UK were to come up with an
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 12:38, marc marc wrote:
> Le 10.08.19 à 07:24, Warin a écrit :
> > the key produce=* could be used to detail what was sold
>
> a shop produce nothing. better to use vending=*
>
In English "produce" as a verb has a different meaning to "produce" as a
noun (and
are
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 09:27, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
However, in England where the tag originated, highway=trunk is used for the
> main,
>
non-motorway highways in the country.
>
Erm, no. It's not like that. Almost, but not quite.
There are A roads (known in OSM as primary routes) which are
On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 11:42, Julien djakk
wrote:
>
> Classifying roads should be the same all over the world ! :O
>
In an ideal OSM, tagging ANYTHING should be the same all over the world.
Sadly, people
sometimes insist on fitting square pegs into round holes instead of coming
up with a new
On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 15:23, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> f.s.v.o. "simple", a relatively foolproof method on a Linux machine is
>
> 1. download indonesia history pbf,
> 2. run osmium command line tool to convert into ASCII "opl" format,
> 3. grep how many ways with highway=* and v=1 are mapped by
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 14:51, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> +1, historically (say pre-1960ies, I’m not old enough to tell from own
> experience and may be wrong) you wouldn’t have found pavements in German
> hamlets and villages (or likely anywhere in the countryside), and although
> most will
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 12:18, Peter Elderson wrote:
> To be practical, I think I will retag the clearly residential roads now
> tagged as 'unclassified' in my town, to 'residential'. Some roads are now
> tagged as residential, but the main function is getting through the
> village. These tend to
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 03:18, Michael Tsang wrote:
If the "primary purpose" of the road is through traffic, and the "driving
> experience" is like on a major road (e.g. straight, fast, no obstruction,
> no
> give way, etc.), that part of the road is still red / pink.
>
> However, if that road is
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 15:16, Philip Barnes wrote:
[Back alleys]
> They have these where I used to visit my grandmother in South Wales,
All over the UK, I suspect. If you're old enough to remember the early
days (late 60s/
early 70s) of "Coronation Street" the houses on the street had a back
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 13:31, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
I may have been misguided here, but to me any narrower pathway in a
> settlement would be suitable for the alley tag. Like those in the pictures
> here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alley
>
I agree. But they may not have names. The
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 08:49, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> > On 5. Aug 2019, at 07:06, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> >
> > Which of those do carry names typically? I cant see any?
>
> alleys
>
Typically? In some parts of the world, maybe. In others, not so much. Of
the three I
can think of in my
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 13:41, Kevin Kenny wrote:
[Class 26]
> I have no good examples to offer.
Me neither. But I can't say no such objects exist. It could happen that
some place
becomes a protected area because it was once occupied by colonialists, but
even
then I'd expect it to fall into
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 04:09, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And if you read the wiki you can add another 3 opinions to that.
>
I just edited the wiki. Make that four.
--
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 05:24, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> I had earnestly hoped to avoid the pain of coming up with a tagging
> proposal
I'm sorry to have been amongst those who caused you that pain.
> Suggestions are, of course, welcome, bearing in mind the above caveats.
>
Class 26 appears to
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 06:26, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 12:30:48AM +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> > I just reverted it. And added some clarification (some may disagree and
> > think I've murkified it)
> > based on why I think those words were removed
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 00:12, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
this should be reverted, and I would be glad if someone did it now, because
> I cannot do it myself at the moment. Thank you.
>
I just reverted it. And added some clarification (some may disagree and
think I've murkified it)
based on why
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 15:51, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> Where do you take this assumption from? I have never heard before that
> residential may not be used for through traffic?
>
Many residential roads are cul-de-sacs. Dead ends. Not classed as through
roads because
they don't lead anywhere
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 15:43, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> This is also my general understanding although there are situations where
> the meaning can differ, e.g. housenumber = 1-3 can mean either 1;2;3 or 1;3
> (depending on the local numbering scheme for this road).
>
There are several
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 10:29, Lanxana . wrote:
>
> I have looked in taginfo and approximately in 15000 cases the semicolon
> (;) is used, in 3000 the comma (,) and in 1000 cases the hyphen (-). It
> would seem therefore that the general criteria is to use the semicolon.
>
See
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 at 12:52, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Agreed, there are enough tags for public transport already. I don't
> think anything new is needed.
>
There's something I haven't found a way of mapping. That's a bus stop
where there's a bay
inlet into the pavement (aka sidewalk, aka
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 at 08:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Err the wiki could state the default is kW.
> There is no present default unit for power - see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features/Units#Default_units
> Adding a default would be good, and kW is probably the
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 at 07:47, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Based on current practice, it seems that most people are ok with
> adding new values to certain keys that already have a long list of
> documented values in map features, as long as the tag is frequently
> used and well-documented?
>
It
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 23:33, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
> 30 Jul 2019, 21:03 by pla16...@gmail.com:
>
> However, if standard carto makes any rendering decisions based upon lanes=n
>
> It is not used at all.
>
That's one potential problem disposed of.
How about routers? Although I'd expect them
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 20:27, Paul Johnson wrote:
Maybe quit fighting against a good idea just because it's hard?
>
I'm not fighting against a good idea. I agree that the current situation
is broken. But I've
been on this list long enough to understand that there are problems in
changing the
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote:
Besides, just because something is hard to fix doesn't mean it shouldn't
> be fixed.
>
Yes, but modal verbs are tricky. :) I agree it SHOULD be fixed, but that
doesn't mean that it
CAN be fixed. And even if it CAN be fixed, that doesn't mean
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 12:21, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
if lanes is about the total amount of marked "2-tracked-vehicle"-lanes (as
> it is according to my understanding), then lanes=0 means no marked lanes.
>
That's logical but not particularly useful. Around here there are a lot of
minor
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:52, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> We return to the original idea proposed at the very start of this
> thread: 'protect_class=21 protection_object=recreation' for these
> features. Except for the ugliness of using numeric values for
> protect_class, it sounds as if you might
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:54, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
Is there a case where making it visible would actually be useful?
>
Yes, I would argue that disused physical objects should be rendered. A
disused:building=house
is still a house. An abandoned:building=house is still a house. Even
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:43, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 29/07/2019 13:05, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>
> It applies to more than just quarries. The problem is that the namespaced
> version, when
> applied to physical objects, renders them invisible (on standard carto).
>
>
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 00:08, Kevin Kenny wrote:
There are no sizable cities in the park, but dozens of towns and
> villages of a few thousand inhabitants each.
>
I can think of only one city in the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park (but
I'm not that
familiar with it) and that's the
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 11:18, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
However, I don't see much benefit from mapping private household
> satellite antennas: the dishes in the linked picture above are only 90
> cm across, and they are on just about every house.
>
> Maybe there are more useful things to map in
On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 07:24, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> I see that there was just a mention added that landuse=quarry plus
> disused=yes might be more sensible than disused:landuse=quarry.
>
It applies to more than just quarries. The problem is that the namespaced
version, when
applied to
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 at 21:25, Kevin Kenny wrote:
But this doesn't really address the problem. We can't fix State Parks
> by making them 'boundary=national_park admin_level=4' because they
> don't function as 'national park' in the IUCN deffinition of the term.
> Instead, the typical State Park
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 at 15:42, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> I dislike the numeric classification as well.
>
That's good. We agree on something. :)
I dislike 'leisure=state_park' for two reasons.
>
> First, it preëmpts the 'leisure' tag. It turns out that there are
> State Parks that are also
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 at 15:36, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
we do have an established numbered scheme for admin_levels, it could be
> reused to tag the administrative level that instituted the protected area,
> for a state park it would have the value 4, the key could remain
> “admin_level” also in
On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 at 02:36, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I'm on board with a state park specific tag. I find protect class to be a
> clunky answer and not entirely humanly intuitive compared to something like
> leisure=state_park
>
+1
I have no objections to protect_class as supplemental
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 02:29, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> An eroded remnant of a volcano in Germany which hardly looks like a crater
> should not be tagged natural=volcano, since the classification as a volcano
> is based on fieldwork by professional geologists and can’t be confirmed by
>
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 03:04, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> I don’t usually map such small features; there are so many villages, roads
> and rivers still missing from Indonesia.
>
I wouldn't generally map a shrubbery either. A shrubbery in somebody's
back garden is just
a garden. And I generally
On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 09:18, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
It isn’t a linear feature by shape, agreed, but it still is in the same
> scale range than a linear hedge, and hedges are explicitly defined for
> areas as well
>
You're right, the wiki does say that. I didn't notice that when I looked
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 at 22:13, Alan Mackie wrote:
>
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 at 12:05, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Using natural=shrub doesn't cut it if you want to map a shrubbery like
>> this:
>> https://goo.gl/maps/LwNZ2Sk1X8fKxt3j9
>>
>
> I'd use barrie
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 at 10:46, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Back to landcover=greenery.
> Is there a proposal for this?
>
> landcover=plants looks like a better tag to me.
>
Better, because not ot all plants stay green all year round.
However, it doesn't cover all common situations.
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 at 08:06, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> swimming pools don’t, golf courses don’t, running tracks don’t.
Race courses (horse) and race tracks (cars/motor bikes). There are
probably others.
> I find it questionable to have shooting ranges or ping pong tables tagged
> as
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 09:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Should this not be tagged leisure=pitch with sport=soccer_golf ???
>
> Or are any sports related to golf to be tagged leisure=* only???
>
Going by
https://www.worldfootballgolf.com/en/s2106/WFGA/c2243-What-is-Footballgolf
it
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 10:51, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/07/19 19:02, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>
> Public toilet: amenity=toilets
> Private toilet: not tagged (so not tagged
> like a public one)
>
> I am unable to link to well tagged private
> toilets as in this case private
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 08:13, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
> Why would a private garden require a different key?
Indeed. A private garden is often used for leisure and is a garden. One
might perhaps
argue for different tagging to describe a private garden used for growing
vegetables and
which the
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 00:47, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> So how do we go with creating a page for a tag that is "in use" but has
> apparently never been discussed?
>
Same way you create any page. Search for the key, or key=value and if it
doesn't already
exist the Wiki offers to let you
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 19:19, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> Oh, and at the other end of the spectrum, this one is also a grade2
> (compacted mixed gravel and fines), two lanes wide and smooth as a
> baby's arse. I saw people riding racing bikes on it.
>
Are you suggesting we add smoothness=babys_arse?
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 16:44, Tobias Zwick wrote:
> I always thought that there is no norm for standard sizes of windows, so
> every window is made to measure. (And in case of a larger construction
> project, then 1000s of windows are made with the same measure)
> Is this not true after all?
>
A
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 15:43, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 09/07/2019 15:27, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Not really. They don't get rendered (on standard carto).
>
> ... but depending on the feature, they may do elsewhere.
>
Indeed. That's why I added the proviso about standard car
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 15:10, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 9. Jul 2019, at 15:57, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > Where an object is no longer physically present, such as a telephone
> booth that has
> > been removed, then removed:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 14:11, marc marc wrote:
>
> some prefix all tag with was: or similar
> it allows the next contributor who sees it in a photo to avoid making
> the mistake of adding the object you deleted
>
I've used was for things that are still there but have changed their
functionality.
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:42, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
It is not feasible to do for a typical mapper to record "light level in
> lux".
>
Sadly, however, it is the only objective way of specifying the light
level. And even then, it's
easy to do it wrong if you don't account for the angle of
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:26, Philip Barnes wrote:
> Unladen is certainly the used, and understood, way of expressing such
> restrictions in the UK.
>
> https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained
>
>
Off topic, and not your fault, but that is an explanation that isn't
entirely free from
On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 19:40, Jmapb via Tagging
wrote:
> On 7/5/2019 12:18 PM, joost schouppe wrote:
>
> > Operator is actually "a specific private citizen"
>
> What's the source of this definition? On the English wiki, operator is
> "a company, corporation, person or any other entity who is
On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 10:42, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
I added it to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/street_vendor%3Dyes=1874089=1871846
> but I still prefer street_vendor
>
I found out yesterday there are also mobile post offices. I was
surprised. Comes
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 16:16, marc marc wrote:
> Le 03.07.19 à 16:55, Paul Allen a écrit :
> > What "unsigned" doesn't do is identify how the mapper came to any
> > conclusion about the weight
> > limit or how other mappers may verify it.
>
> unsigned just sai
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 14:56, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> "unsigned" means there is no sign on the ground, this would not avoid
> noname=yes or nohousenumber=yes because they state there is no name or
> housenumber, not that it isn't signed.
>
Surely "unsigned" means that the weights can only
On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 16:27, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
>
> Do you have any idea for tag name that would overall be better?
>
Nope. Not one that works in all situations. Even street vendor is pushing
it, a little. I'd
normally thinks of a street vendor being somebody with a glorified barrow
On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 11:54, marc marc wrote:
>
> somes mapper use street_vendor=yes
>
Reasonable for the mobile chip shop and mobile burger shop near me. Both
vehicles that are
towed by car into place before they open and towed away when they close.
Reasonable to the
ferry ticket both near me
On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 11:37, Tobias Zwick wrote:
> Maybe mobile-but-usually-stationary (or with a fixed schedule) amenities
> and shops could get an extra tag to denote that property. For example
> mobile=yes or something.
> POIs with this tag set could be resurveyed more often than others.
>
On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 09:49, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> For example there are boats used as restaurants, they could move, but they
> don’t (in some instances at least).
Got one of those near me. I've mapped it.
> Or mobile fruit or ice cream vendors, which may be there only during the
>
On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 at 23:17, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> If we were to map them as a separate object on the ground, what would we
> call them? Have had a play, & about the best I can come up with is
> area:highway=pedestrian + surface=concrete, which doesn't really cut it?
>
It's close,
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 at 23:58, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> What is an "important object?"
>
> Going by the examples, I can only assume that "important" means "large."
Large in extent,
large number of nodes, therefore a lot of effort to fix if somebody breaks
it.
--
Paul
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 00:19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
Connectors too are not necessary fixed.
> When mapped in OSM they are fixed by the location given. So I see no
> problem with OSM defining the socket/connector as being in a fixed
> location.
>
Don't fixate on "fixed." In
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 12:35, Michael Brandtner via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I've now rewritten the whole proposal. To prevent overlap, the idea is now
> to incorporate all devices that provide electrical power under the same
> main tag. A problem I have not solved yet is how
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 11:28, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, 25 June 2019, Colin Smale wrote:
> > On 2019-06-25 11:33, John Sturdy wrote:
> >
> > > For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the
> cee_blue sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 11:05, Michael Brandtner via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I'd like to separate the discussions about* amenity=power_supply* (my
> proposal) and the enhancement/merging of the *socket:* and *power_supply*
> key.
>
It would make things simpler. Simple
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 18:26, Philip Barnes wrote:
> On camp sites in the UK and France the hook-up is a CEE 17 blue
> single-phase in my experience.
>
I think that's what the UK wiring regs mandate for new installations. And
have done for many years.
But there may be older installations
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 13:40, François Lacombe
wrote:
>
> Le dim. 23 juin 2019 à 14:20, Paul Allen a écrit :
>
>> On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 13:01, François Lacombe
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Le dim. 23 juin 2019 à 13:49, Paul Allen a écrit :
>>&
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 02:02, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
Aircraft too can have an external electrical power connection.
>
Aircraft power is rather specialized. Three phase 115 VAC @ 400 Hz and/or
28 VDC
(14 VDC for some light aircraft). The connectors are rather specialized
too.
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 02:28, marc marc wrote:
socket key is probably the most successful but for charging stations,
> the information is missing if it is a plug or a plug at the end of a
> cable on the terminal side.
>
Terminology gets messy. Different parts of the world and different
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 01:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> Wow, what a nightmare!
>
Yep. New tag needed: nightmare=*.
Here, if a camping ground / caravan park has power to a site, it will be a
> standard layout Oz plug, but rated at 15A, not 10, so you will need a 15A
> lead to connect to it,
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 23:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 04:53, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Having power_supply=yes indicates that the socket type is unknown,
>>
>
> But wouldn't that default as the country you're in? If you're in Britain,
>
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 19:44, Colin Smale wrote:
> There is also this tagging scheme for the same thing:
>
>
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:socket
Now how did that happen???
It arose via a different route, supporting amenity=charging_station. We
probably
need to harmonize the
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 19:00, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2019-06-21 18:33, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 17:06, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> When it comes to tagging the socket type, please use an existing standard
>> such as the IEC type letters. Make sure to use
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 17:06, Colin Smale wrote:
> When it comes to tagging the socket type, please use an existing standard
> such as the IEC type letters. Make sure to use the code for the socket, not
> for the plug; some combinations have a measure of cross-compatibility, and
> you don't want
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 01:33, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Oxford Dictionary says
>
> Toll : A charge payable to use a bridge or road.
>
Yep. Also, in the UK, carries legal implications. Legislation is required
to require tolls on a
public highway.
Fee : A payment made to a
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 01:50, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18/06/19 08:50, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> hitching_point=dog|cat|horse|yes if you really feel a need to specify what
> can or cannot be hitched
> there.
>
>
That was silly of me. It would be better
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 15:32, Andreas Lattmann
wrote:
I don't know if it's the right mailing list.
>
It is.
I would like to propose a new tag (if it is not already there). The new
> tag is wheelchair = hiking because in Italy many associations are creating
> mountain trails for disabled
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 02:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For the 'centre' of place I tend tot go either for the post office or the
> railway station.
>
I have a vague memory, which a brief search with google is unable to
confirm, that milestones in
Britain gave their distance from
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 23:35, Manuel Arteaga via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I've tried to look up how to tag these “dog parking spots”, but I don't
> know a concise name for them.
>
Me neither. We have them here, but without signs.
Do you know of any accepted scheme? If
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 19:13, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
>
> Furthermore, in the U.S. normal pharmacies do not, AFAIK, sell cannabis.
>
Yet. I'd expect that in some jurisdictions pharmacies will eventually sell
medicinal cannabis,
if only on prescription. I'd expect that eventually, in some
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 03:04, John Willis via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2019, at 4:22 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > Conversion of farm buildings to residential buildings is not only
> possible, it's frequent in
> >
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 02:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Usually they won't be used for residential purposes .. unless they have
> been demolished.
>
Around here a LOT of farms have converted at least one outbuilding to a
holiday cottage.
Most are still working farms. In some
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 01:35, Yuri Astrakhan
wrote:
> Paul, as a programmer, I'm sure you know the difference between a keyword
> and the text shown to the user.
>
I'm aware that such things can be done but not that such a mechanism was in
place for
status keywords.
German translates "inuse"
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Yuri Astrakhan
wrote:
> There is currently 267 key & tags on OSM wiki with mismatching STATUS
> field, as seen in http://tinyurl.com/y62j5m5e - e.g. amenity=fast_food
> has status=defacto in 10 languages, except German where it is marked as
> status=in use. Clearly
On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 23:46, yo paseopor wrote:
>
> Whats is the tag for a IT school like this?
> http://www.mecabit.com/
>
If it's an educational facility then it looks like amenity=college. If
it's more of a "get people into
employment by various means" thing then social_facility=outreach +
On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 15:11, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Any additional comments on this updated proposal to use
> tourism=camp_pitch to tag individual pitches within a campsite or
> caravan site?
>
How do you handle sites that accept both caravans and tents on different
pitches?
There are quite
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 03:59, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
>
> * iD had trouble in the past with tags where single key was used
> for many purposes (it was AFAIK triggered by service key)
>
I think there were several triggers. The discussion on github I
encountered was with
covered=* being used for
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 14:17, Simon Poole wrote:
Am 02.06.2019 um 14:40 schrieb Paul Allen:
>
>
> As I already said, I understand your frustration.
>
> No, obviously you don't.
>
Really? You looked inside my head and determined that I do not understand
your frustration.
And h
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 13:39, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> On 6/2/19 13:17, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> > Note there have been in the past opinions that documenting a new tag
> > without creating a proposal is not desirable
>
> That is also my opinion, however, I don't see anything wrong with
>
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 09:49, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> In the interest of keeping the list at least half usable, I would
> suggest that we all, starting now, voluntarily submit to:
>
[...]
I don't doubt your frustration or your good intentions, but it seems
possible that this thread
will generate
801 - 900 of 1514 matches
Mail list logo
