Re: [Tagging] Warning traffic signs - Invitation to discussion

On Mar 14, 2012 2:58 PM, "John F. Eldredge" wrote: > > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, OSM user wrote: > > > You can look at these signs here: > > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_feature

Re: [Tagging] Warning traffic signs - Invitation to discussion

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, OSM user wrote: > You can look at these signs here: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Traffic_sign#dangerous_turn_and_dangerous_turns > . > These signs mean: > *) there will be dangerous turn to the right > *) there will be dangerous turn

Re: [Tagging] Preventing traffic signs - Invitation to discussion

On Mar 14, 2012 3:25 AM, "OSM user" wrote: > I want to use some designations for preventing traffic signs: > traffic_sign=dangerous_turn_right, traffic_sign=dangerous_turn_left, > traffic_sign=dangerous_turns_right and > traffic_sign=dangerous_turns_left, Not sure what signs you mean with thes

Re: [Tagging] dispute about center island in a turning circle

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Richard Fairhurst > So NE2's original example isn't a mini-roundabout - it's a roundabout. > Therefore tag it as a roundabout. > > Either highway=roundabout on the node (consistent with > highway=mini_roundabout), or junction=roundabout (consistent with > junction=r

Re: [Tagging] dispute about center island in a turning circle

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Josh Doe wrote: > 1) "Force" everyone to draw a loop around the island (too tedious) Or just silently fix it. That's what I do. JOSM has great drawing tools for making nice, neat circles. ___ Tagging mailing list Tag

Re: [Tagging] dispute about center island in a turning circle

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Josh Doe wrote: > Definitely not a turning_circle. Either map as a loop or mini_roundabout. > -Josh Not a mini_roundabout, either; those typically are painted onto the road surface and don't include a hard island. ___

Re: [Tagging] This needs to be nipped in the bud

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Pieren wrote: > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote: > > Definitely not how to map an intersection. AU list have had several > > discussions on this and it's junk mapping. > > I still believe that mapping each lane is easier than using verbose > a

Re: [Tagging] What is this path surface called?

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > http://i43.tinypic.com/**2moxxjl.jpg > There's a black tarp spread over the ground (tree roots have exposed a > piece here) with dirt, mulch, and other natural materials spread on top. > Does this have

Re: [Tagging] When should a name:* translation be used?

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:24 AM, sabas88 wrote: > Every Main St is a famous road? :) > > I'm reminded of this: http://moonbattery.com/occupy-wall-street-small-town.jpg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/li

Re: [Tagging] When should a name:* translation be used?

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > I ask because someone added a name:vi tag for Orange County, Florida: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/**browse/relation/389011 > As far as I know, there is no large Vietnamese population

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 22:37 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/21/2012 10:30 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 22:23 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> Are there examples of places > >> where there is a one-to-one mapping between neighborhoods an

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 22:23 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/21/2012 9:42 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 20:56 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> On 1/21/2012 8:50 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >>> On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 13:39 -0600, Toby Murray

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 20:56 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/21/2012 8:50 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 13:39 -0600, Toby Murray wrote: > >> Unfortunately I don't have a good picture of this myself so here is a > >> kind of crappy s

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 13:39 -0600, Toby Murray wrote: > Unfortunately I don't have a good picture of this myself so here is a > kind of crappy streetview shot: http://kan.st/yG > > The sign carries the name of this area. It is sitting in the middle of > a short section of split carriageway residen

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Sat, 2012-01-21 at 08:13 -0500, Anthony wrote: > Part of it is set aside legally for putting things like roads and > sidewalks and light poles and gutters. That's landuse=highway, not landuse=residential. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 16:41 +0100, Jo wrote: > For what it's worth. When I start rendering/printing maps based on > OSM, I think it's extremely ugly if the landuse is not 'connected' to > the roads, i.e. that the landuse uses separate parallel ways with a > small space in between for its definition

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 10:18 -0500, Richard Weait wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > 2012/1/17 Volker Schmidt : > > >> it is > >> simply not helpful from a practical point of view. What additional > >> information do I gain from excluding the road from the l

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 15:25 +0100, Volker Schmidt wrote: > Regarding Landuse=residential I do not agree with the approach of the > two examples > http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=35.323225&lon=-119.077089&zoom=18 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=45.301967&lon=8.444596&zoom=18 > > > Ap

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 09:42 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/17/2012 8:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2012/1/17 Nathan Edgars II: > >> Splitting it at roads gives no benefit and complicates editing greatly. > >> This > >> is just ridiculous: > >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=3

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Mapping guidelines

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 08:30 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/17/2012 8:10 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > > I find it useless to map such wide areas as landuses. There's no point > > in tagging a whole village's area as landuse=residential, and there's > > no point in making a sixty-km-wide polygo

Re: [Tagging] psv (was Re: access=no (was Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)))

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 08:34:48AM -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/17/2012 8:32 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >psv=yes (or bus=yes) > > This has been bugging me for a while - why do we group buses and > taxis? Is this a common grouping in the UK? Are there examples of places where taxis

Re: [Tagging] permissive etc. (was Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking))

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 07:24:22AM -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/13/2012 7:17 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: > >When I was adding this: > > > >http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52984927 > > > >which is something that you do need an actual permit to access (on a > >horse) I left the horse acce

Re: [Tagging] Amenity swimming_pool (was Amenity parking)

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 06:30:50AM -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/13/2012 6:07 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > >On the semantics of access=permissive. I used to be confused too (not > >that I'm not anymore; it's just that now I accept the definition). > >"Permissive" sounds like you need a permi

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Variable max speed corridors

On Fri, 2011-12-30 at 12:40 +0100, Ben Laenen wrote: > I'm using these tags: > > maxspeed=variable > > and to specify somewhat to give you a range on what to expect: > > maxspeed:variable:max=50 > maxspeed:variable:min=30 > > It's mostly being used here for zone 30's near schools where the sig

Re: [Tagging] Variable max speed corridors

On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 22:12 -0600, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Variable max speed corridors are nothing new for Europe, but they > apparently are a novelty for the US. > Is there an established tagging convention for this? > > http://www.katu.com/news/local/Variable-speed-limit-signs-are-coming-to-P

Re: [Tagging] Bus pullout?

On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 09:11 +, Richard Mann wrote: > But I haven't tagged any (might be something to do with the negative > value I associate with them...) Curious what negative value this is? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___

Re: [Tagging] proposed routes, state-tag

On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 12:29 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Maybe I was exaggerating. Generally I don't see a big difference > between routes and ways, and tags that change the overall meaning of > other tags significantly should be avoided in favour of more > fail-proof solutions. If a tag st

Re: [Tagging] proposed routes, state-tag

On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 15:17 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > But I'd like to propose to adopt the scheme to that of highways and > change the tagging to: > route=proposed > proposed=bicycle (for instance). Are you sure you're not getting route and way tagging confused here? What's wrong with t

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 17:18 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 11/24/2011 5:10 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Dave F. wrote: > >> That's not what he said,& you know it. Typical Paul "I ignore > >> facts just so I can start an argument" Johnson. > > > > Traditionally I try to act as an administr

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 21:09 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 24/11/2011 18:15, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Well, if we're going to exclude ways from being ways because they're not > > improved for vehicular use, then i have a lot of cattle trails I need to > > remove (desp

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:43 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/11/23 John F. Eldredge : > > Stephen Hope wrote: > >> > What would the correct highway classification be for an Oregon > >> beach? > >> > These fall under the Oregon Department of Transportation's > >> jurisdiction > >> > despite

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 21:59 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 22/11/2011 20:33, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 11/22/2011 09:17 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Surely the road in this case simply has tide-related opening times (and > >> a variable surface?). It may be secondary, tertiary, unclassifie

Re: [Tagging] different access restrictions for different entrances to an area

On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 09:58 -0400, Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> access=destination > > > > "Private Property / Walt Disney World Resort Guest, Cast, and Business > > Invitees Only" > > > >> and access=private mean? > > > > "Service & Authorized Veh

Re: [Tagging] Commuter Rail

On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 14:37 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/10/4 : > > Hello list! > > In the German speaking forum we have been discussing about tagging commuter > > or suburban rail: > > http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=13907 > > I really think it is a necessary tag to di

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 21:02 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 10/1/2011 8:36 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 19:48 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> On 10/1/2011 6:19 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >>> So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 19:48 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 10/1/2011 6:19 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to such tagging is > > creating problems for mapping areas that explicitly assign such ratings > > officially! > > As

Re: [Tagging] rest_area and service road

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 21:46 -0400, James Mast wrote: > > From: a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk > > On Thu, September 29, 2011 04:08, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > On 9/28/2011 3:04 PM, Pieren wrote: > > > > > >> What is our recommendation for tagging the access roads entering > or > > >> leaving motorw

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 11:22 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > On 9/28/2011 12:08 PM, Josh Doe wrote: > > > Width of outside lane (no tags for this AFAIK) > > > Shoulder details (width, surface: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder) > > > > This only applie

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 13:13 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: > This discussion has happened before. I guess it will happen again. > > The argument that more hard-core riders can't judge the bicycle > friendliness of a road is ridiculous. So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to such tagging is c

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 13:16 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 9/25/2011 12:59 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 07:43 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > >>if it's about whether the subway/rapid-transit system is connected to > >>the nat

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 13:15 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: > On 9/25/11 1:01 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Doesn't Amtrak and New York MTA have a couple stations where subways > > and Acela bullet trains share tracks and stations? > Acela goes into Penn Station, the only stop

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 11:43 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/9/22 Chris Dombroski : > > On Thursday, September 22, 2011 07:54:29 AM sabas88 wrote: > >> > How is someone to determine whether something is a railway=station or a > >> > railway=subway_station? > >> If it's on a metro (subway) l

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 07:43 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > if it's about whether the subway/rapid-transit system is connected to > the national rail system That doesn't quite work. For example, the US doesn't have a national rail system. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed m

Re: [Tagging] Mechanism for linking to a traffic_sign object in the source tag?

On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 04:02 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 9/4/2011 3:09 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 00:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> I'm wondering if there's an accepted way of specifying that the sign > >> being used as

Re: [Tagging] Mechanism for linking to a traffic_sign object in the source tag?

On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 00:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > I'm wondering if there's an accepted way of specifying that the sign > being used as a source has been mapped. For example: > maxspeed=45 mph source:maxspeed=sign (node 43920231) > where node 43920231 is traffic_sign=maxspeed maxspeed=45

Re: [Tagging] RFC: place=neighbourhood

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 21:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 8/31/2011 9:27 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Where I live, suburbs are well known, have fixed borders (though they > > can be and are sometimes adjusted), and are part of your address > > according to the post office and lo

Re: [Tagging] short 2nd RFC for additional barrier values

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 19:29 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Yes, I see this basically the same. Someone else put them and I kept > them because it does not really matter to me, if someone bothers to > tag them that way, they can do it. cable_barrier seems to be a variety > of guard_rail but ma

Re: [Tagging] RFC: place=neighbourhood

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 06:43 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: > The same situations occur in the USA. Neighborhood names can also > shift over time. My neighborhood shows up on maps as "Murray > Heights", probably dating back to the original real-estate development > in the 1950's. In the 19 years

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

On 07/20/2011 11:58 PM, Georg Feddern wrote: > 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?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 07:36 PM, Matt wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. > > There is no wikipedia entry for "water play area". I'm not sure what > language convention you are referring to. Can you please explain why the > British term should have precedence? Loosely speaking, it seems we have a bit more o

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 09:05 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 7/19/2011 9:54 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 07/19/2011 02:53 PM, Jason Cunningham wrote: >>> Wasn't sure what a "splash pad" was and it looks like it's a North >>> American term for the Britis

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 02:53 PM, Jason Cunningham wrote: > Wasn't sure what a "splash pad" was and it looks like it's a North > American term for the British "water play area"? We used to call them "wading pools," but then we ended up with a generation of idiot parents who think swimming pools and children

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 07/06/2011 03:35 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/7 Pieren : >> And this case, Cour Delepine entrance, Paris: >> http://maps.google.ch/maps?q=paris,+Cour+Delepine&hl=fr&ll=48.853267,2.376236&spn=0.001272,0.001982&sll=48.853393,2.376266&sspn=0.002527,0.003964&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=48.85327

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 05:35 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > How about lane dividers? This is an example below, though where I'm > thinking of them they actually divide a couple of lanes for about a km > or so - no lane changing allowed at that point. > > http://www.ingalcivil.com.au/reboundable_lane_divider.ht

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 02:50 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > >> On 06/30/2011 10:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >>> Folk, I rediscovered an old proposal which is extending the set of >>> barrier values. >>> >>> Please comment n

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 10:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Folk, I rediscovered an old proposal which is extending the set of > barrier values. > > Please comment now on this, before we can eventually vote to get this > to a more definite status: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features

Re: [Tagging] access=avoid

On 06/13/2011 06:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/83524747/history > No comment. Nice troll. Go back under your bridge. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@open

Re: [Tagging] Transportation center that serves both buses and trains?

On 04/21/2011 08:15 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Using both railway=station and amenity=bus_station gives two labels in > Mapnik. I reported this as a bug but apparently it's not fixable: > http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3478 What should be done? I would continue to tag the locations of the

Re: [Tagging] difference between cycletrack and cycleway

On 04/18/2011 11:20 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 4/18/2011 10:25 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> It has different implications in some jurisdictions. E.g. in Germany >> or Italy you have to use a cycleway if it goes along a road, you can't >> use the road by bike any more, unless the cycleway

Re: [Tagging] difference between cycletrack and cycleway

On 04/18/2011 10:33 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/4/18 Sander Deryckere > : > > > to complete the picture: you can also use > highway=path > bicycle=designated (some are even using official) > > instead of highway=cycleway. I'm not sure given the Google Maps examples provided upthread

Re: [Tagging] difference between cycletrack and cycleway

On 04/18/2011 09:25 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/4/18 Andre Engels : >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Sander Deryckere >> wrote: >> >>> The problem with this tagging method is that the tag "highway=cycleway" is >>> now used for two completely different features. A cycle track next to

Re: [Tagging] difference between cycletrack and cycleway

On 04/18/2011 08:31 AM, Sander Deryckere wrote: > This mail is about the different (and incompatible) usages of the tag > "highway=cycleway" > > When the OSM data is less complete, the tag combination > highway=primary/secondary/tertiary > cycleway=track > is used. For a road with a cycleway. > >

Re: [Tagging] Traffic Lights, but only for one direction on a highway that isn't divided

On 04/14/2011 12:17 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 4/14/2011 1:05 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> 2011/4/14 Paul Johnson: >>>> lanes=2, oneway=yes >>>> it's the same as for cars. Otherwise it would be lanes=2, oneway=no >>> >>> Is lan

Re: [Tagging] Traffic Lights, but only for one direction on a highway that isn't divided

On 04/13/2011 11:25 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/4/13 Paul Johnson : >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4CneWT4ymM > > > nice vid, looks as if the infrastructure planners were focusing on > cars and not on bikes ;-) It should be known that the bridge was shipped

Re: [Tagging] Traffic Lights, but only for one direction on a highway that isn't divided

On 04/13/2011 12:45 AM, James Mast wrote: > So does anybody have any suggestions on how to deal with something like > this? Here's my example: I'm pretty sure that the traffic signal tag as it currently exists is more concerned with whether or not a signal is present, not whether or not it is alw

Re: [Tagging] Retaking the discussion on ATMs

On 04/02/2011 02:42 PM, Noel David Torres Taño wrote: >> On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 20:12 +1100, David Murn wrote: >>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 10:33 +0100, Noel David Torres Taño wrote: We've agreed in the spanish list to add the network tag to the ATM, so if there is no discussion against here,

Re: [Tagging] Long-distance scenic roads

On 02/25/2011 01:18 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 2/25/2011 2:03 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 02/24/2011 07:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> On 2/24/2011 8:26 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >>>> On 02/24/2011 11:30 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>>>> That&

Re: [Tagging] Long-distance scenic roads

On 02/24/2011 07:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 2/24/2011 8:26 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 02/24/2011 11:30 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> That's *one* thing trunk means. Trunk is also used as a higher >>> classification than primary. >> >&

Re: [Tagging] Long-distance scenic roads

On 02/24/2011 11:30 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> That's not what trunk means - it's supposed to have significant motorway >> features, like some degree of limited access, very few lights, and very >> few at-grade intersections. There are bits of Memorial Drive that begin >> to approach that, bu

Re: [Tagging] Long-distance scenic roads

On 02/24/2011 07:18 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Nathan Edgars II writes: > >> In the US there are two long federally-maintained roads, the Blue >> Ridge Parkway and Natchez Trace Parkway, that were built for the sole >> purpose of sightseeing. Since they are surrounded by a narrow strip of >> par

Re: [Tagging] place=city name=Tri-Cities

On 02/23/2011 10:06 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/876536239 > There's no city named Tri-Cities; this is the name of the metropolitan > area that comprises Pasco, Kennewick, and Richland. I assume there's no > defensible reason to keep it tagged as such, but

Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes

On 02/20/2011 08:57 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 2/20/11 8:51 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> >>> Don't we want to break existing consumers if they might route people the >>> wrong way down a one-way high

Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes

On 02/19/2011 08:08 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 2/19/2011 7:24 PM, Paul Norman wrote: >> The Massey Tunnel is currently tagged with oneway=no on the reversible >> section and through the tunnel itself. >> >> For the reversible sections (that lead up to the tunnel) they really >> alternate betw

Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes

On 02/19/2011 06:24 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > The Massey Tunnel is currently tagged with oneway=no on the reversible > section and through the tunnel itself. > > For the reversible sections (that lead up to the tunnel) they really > alternate between oneway=-1, oneway=yes and access=no. For the tw

Re: [Tagging] Counterflow Lanes

On 02/16/2011 11:59 PM, James Mast wrote: > I'm just curious here, but is there a general consensus on how to tag > roads that have 3+ lanes that have 1 or more lanes that change direction > at certain times while still leaving at least one lane going in each > direction? You know, kinda like the

Re: [Tagging] airport vs. aerodrome

On 02/15/2011 07:02 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > Have a look here: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.16&lon=-88.536&zoom=10&layers=M > could you tell which are the more important ones? Not at first glance I guess. Why not map the airports in greater detail? http://www.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/24/2011 02:17 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 1/24/2011 2:53 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 01/23/2011 10:36 PM, John Smith wrote: >>> On 24 January 2011 13:51, Nathan Edgars >>> II >>> wrote: >>>> We don't map only based on legal distinc

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/23/2011 10:36 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 24 January 2011 13:51, Nathan Edgars II > 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. So, how do you propose we arbitrarily distinguish some signals from

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/21/2011 12:40 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> On 01/17/2011 01:38 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Paul Johnson >>> wrote: >>>> Tagging single-aspect s

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/17/2011 01:38 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> Tagging single-aspect signals seems excessive overkill, given the >> propensity of single aspect signals and their standard usage emphasizing >> other traffic contr

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/13/2011 10:06 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:33 AM, 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/wiki/Proposed_features/E

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

On 01/13/2011 12:59 AM, John Smith wrote: > On 13 January 2011 16:10, Paul Johnson > 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 stati

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

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/wiki/Proposed_features/Emergency_Traffic_Signals Oh, and lift bridge signals aren't really

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency Traffic Signals

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/wiki/Proposed_features/Emergency_Traffic_Signals emergency= is already in use for emergenc

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/07/2011 08:55 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> On 01/04/2011 08:46 AM, Anthony wrote: >>> Your statement that bicycles are prohibited from driving on sidewalks >>> in "all states" is not correct. F

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/04/2011 08:46 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> On 01/03/2011 08:11 AM, Dave F. wrote: >>> On 03/01/2011 03:50, Paul Johnson wrote: >>>> On 01/01/2011 07:54 AM, Dave F. wrote: >>>> >>>>>

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/03/2011 08:11 AM, Dave F. wrote: > On 03/01/2011 03:50, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 01/01/2011 07:54 AM, Dave F. wrote: >> >>> Is the adjacent path shared? if so, note that that would be the safer >>> passage. >> Most states prohibit bicycles fr

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/02/2011 10:41 PM, Anthony wrote: > On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> Not having a sense of depth, I'd guess in the narrow spot it's about 4 >> feet wide, which is, believe it or not, the federal minimum width for >> bike lanes (th

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/01/2011 09:15 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Nathan Edgars II > wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Dave F. >> wrote: >>> Is the adjacent path shared? if so, note that that would be the safer >>> passage. >> >> It's a sidewalk, and it's most likely not safer be

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 12/31/2010 04:27 PM, Anthony wrote: > Any suggestions how to tag this? > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IMG_7491.JPG As part of the existing way, just tag it "cycleway=lane" to indicate that there's a restricted lane reserved for bicycles. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/01/2011 10:52 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Greg Troxel > wrote: >> By trying to objectively tag the reality (not entirely possible of >> course), we also avoid all the debates about what is and isn't safe in >> general, and where the dividing line is. > > In this c

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/01/2011 01:28 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Robert Elsenaar > wrote: >> "hazard:bicycle" is the other way round. If there is a key/value e.g. >> "hazard=narrow" then you can easily use "cycleway:hazard=narrow" to tag the >> fact that the hazard tag is specifi

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/01/2011 07:54 AM, Dave F. wrote: > Is the adjacent path shared? if so, note that that would be the safer > passage. Most states prohibit bicycles from sidewalks, or limit their speed to a walking speed on sidewalks, making them useless for bicyclists. That, and nobody expects vehicles to b

Re: [Tagging] designated bike lane

On 01/01/2011 07:08 AM, Ed Hillsman wrote: > On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Anthony > wrote: >>/ Any suggestions how to tag this? > />/ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IMG_7491.JPG/ > > If the "lane" is too narrow to function safely as a

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] "refs" describing routes instead of ways

On 12/22/2010 01:47 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> On 12/20/2010 02:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >>> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Paul Johnson >>> wrote: >>>> the way's ACTUAL re

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] "refs" describing routes instead of ways

On 12/20/2010 02:51 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> >> I'm wondering why we still are trying the whole "describe the route on >> the way" method of handling the ref= tag on ways. > > Because it

Re: [Tagging] New tag?

On 12/17/2010 06:21 AM, Diego Woitasen wrote: > Hi, > I started to contribute to OSM a few weeks a ago. I have question. In > Argentina we have an special car service (I think this exists in other > countries, but I'm not sure) called "remis" o "remisse". It's similar > to taxis but the cars (with

Re: [Tagging] Width of shop frontage

On 11/23/2010 02:08 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: > How will it handle multiple businesses sharing the same street address? And then there's Portland, where anything with a door and a frontage gets an address, so a building might have a dozen addresses on four streets, though the common address p

Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

On 11/19/2010 06:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Richard Welty > wrote: >> On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: >>> >>> I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight >>> limit. I would also not be surprised to find certain roa

Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US

On 11/19/2010 07:40 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > also truck prohibitions are not > intended to prevent > lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new > refrigerator) and > the like from carrying out normal business. This is true only if the "Except Local Deliveries" or similar

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >