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] [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] 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] 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] 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] [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] 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 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] [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 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] 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] 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 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 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 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] 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] 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] 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] 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] 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] 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 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] 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] 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] 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 Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 8:05 AM, OSM user wrote: > "At least with the US versions, they simply indicate the presence of a > curve, not a particular additional danger" - so, I understand, that we > should think, that these US "curve"-signs are not analogous to > "dangerous turn"-signs in other coun

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am 11. April 2012 10:49 schrieb Komяpa : >> First, there are road behaviour rules, that basically disallow that. >> You MUST go to crossing to cross a road here. > > you can't asume this to be a global law. In other countries (e.g. > Ge

Re: [Tagging] Turn Restriction usage

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Stephen Hope wrote: > In one case there is a road where a two way section comes to a divider and > becomes two one way sections for a while. The suggested route came along one > of the one way sections, then turned about 340 degrees to go down the other > side of t

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Philip Barnes wrote: > The term motorway implies a lot of rules, > No Pedestrians. > No Cyclists. > No Learner Drivers. > No Tracked Vehicles. > No Agricultural Vehicles. > No Motorcycles under 50cc. > Horses > Mobility Scooters Not universally true by any stret

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Pieren wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> With trunks and motorways, as with any other way unclassified and >> larger, it's best to explicitly define restrictions rather than expect >> them to be impli

Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?

On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On the other hand, private says "Only with permission of the owner on an > individual basis". But the owner is the homeowners association, and the > individual residents can allow people in. And so could the security company. But the HO

Re: [Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?

On Apr 20, 2012 9:04 AM, "Alan Mintz" wrote: > I would go with name:en-PH=* or name:en:PH=* to mimic the standard IETF language tag format. en-PH feels more correct, since it's specifying dialect in a standard format. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@o

Re: [Tagging] highway=services/rest_area

On Apr 20, 2012 7:18 AM, "John F. Eldredge" wrote: > In the USA, you have the same distinction between service areas and rest areas. In addition, there will sometimes be "parking areas", meaning that there will be a parking lot but no restrooms or other amenities. Fortunately, "parking areas" a

Re: [Tagging] highway=services/rest_area

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > What's the correct tag for something like this, on a surface road and > operated by a private company (chain)? > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/99634310 I don't think there's a single tag that covers a truck stop, though I wouldn

Re: [Tagging] How to tag disputed names in the same language?

On Apr 21, 2012 2:29 PM, "Eugene Alvin Villar" wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > On Apr 20, 2012 9:04 AM, "Alan Mintz" wrote: > > > >> I would go with name:en-PH=* or name:en:PH=* to mimic the standard IE

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

On Apr 23, 2012 3:57 PM, "Alex Barth" wrote: > Brasilia and its satellites do not use street names, but an elaborate block numbering system. Before we start entering data, I'd like to propose a proper way to enter blocks. I would strongly consider taking a look at towns and cities in the America

Re: [Tagging] area=yes on polygones (was Block names)

On Apr 25, 2012 1:54 AM, "Pieren" wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > Because a railway platform is usually drawn as a single line (as is a pier). > > Omitting area=yes gives a hole in the middle. > > Sounds "tagging for the renderer"... If it's not incorre

[Tagging] lanes=* on cycleways

How do we handle lane counts where there's more than one bicycle lane? How do we count lanes on cycleways? Since these lanes are narrower than what cars can fit down, things like Gresham segments of the Springwater Corridor (4 lanes) and situations like 12th Avenue (which has a couple spots with

Re: [Tagging] lanes=* on cycleways

On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Sander Deryckere wrote: > Can you give a picture of multi-lane cycleways (or coordinates, so we can > see it in aerial pics or via streetview)? http://g.co/maps/eyfz7 (Westbound Hawthorne Bridge, the passing lane for bikes is the left one; that lane ends at the to

Re: [Tagging] Waterway directionality in drainage canals

On Apr 28, 2012 8:43 PM, "Alan Mintz" wrote: > oneway=no would make sense, since the (unusual) default assumption for this type of object appears to be oneway=yes. It's possible that there are places where the waterway is legally restricted to travel in one direction. oneway:flow=* may be bette

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

On Apr 29, 2012 10:44 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote: > > 2012/4/29 Kytömaa Lauri : > >>police doesn't enforce the official rules, then there are factually > >>more lanes on the ground than painted on the road. > > > > Isn't that equal to cycling on sidewalks: we shouldn't tag > > sidewalks with

Re: [Tagging] roundhouses tagging

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote: > Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Droundhouse) > or as building=roundhouse? Or both? > And how would you tag an old roundhouse that is nowadays used for

Re: [Tagging] roundhouses tagging

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote: >>> >>> Should railway roundhouses be tagged railway=roundhouse (as suggested on >&

[Tagging] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

This one surprised me, was pretty sure that the US didn't have real mini roundabouts, but I just spotted one in Burien, WA. http://g.co/maps/afh8m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:51 AM, Ian Dees wrote: > I've mapped dozens of these as miniroundabouts in the midwest: > http://g.co/maps/w7mnr That's not a mini, though, since you can't just drive over the island. Here's an eponymous example of a mini roundabout: http://goo.gl/6Qswf

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Same here. I'm ignoring this "wiki-fiddling": > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundabout&diff=747981&oldid=689543 Both edits you mention seem to agree that the island is traversable in a mini roundabou

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On May 7, 2012 7:06 AM, "Nathan Edgars II" wrote: > > On 5/7/2012 9:59 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 6:51 AM, Ian Dees wrote: >>> >>> I've mapped dozens of these as miniroundabouts in the midwest: >>> http://g

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > It vaults right over any supposed definition of mini-roundabout. I suppose if you ignored the whole traversability or vertical clearance requirements the wiki's had since the tag was created in the wiki, sure. ___

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 5/7/2012 12:41 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Nathan Edgars II >>  wrote: >> >>> It vaults right over any supposed definition of mini-roundabout. >> >> >

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 5/7/2012 1:02 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> Still, the diverging use overlaps improperly with the actual >> roundabout correctly as a ring using junction=roundabout. ;o) > > > You're assuming that eac

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

>> So, you're suggesting we stop mapping nontraversable, hard medians? >> Because that's what it sounds like. > > > Get your ears checked. Not necessary, I'm not the one suggesting node tagging is a substitute for mapping a nontraversible median. ___ Tag

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: > So this is not/should not be a mini_roundabout? It seems a little silly to > call it anything else, since the city just dug a hole in the center of the > existing intersection, built a circular curb, and planted a tree: > > http://g.co/maps/e2g

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: > On 5/7/2012 3:30 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Nathan Mills  wrote: >>> >>> http://g.co/maps/hnbp9 >> >> All three are roundabouts, yes. > > How are y

Re: [Tagging] Relation Junctions used for roundabouts

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:56 AM, fly wrote: > On 10/05/12 10:16, Martin Vonwald wrote: >> Hi! >> >> On the wiki page of junction=roundabout the Junctions proposal >> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Junctions) is >> mentioned and it is claimed, that we have to use a relation

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on highway=mini_roundabout

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray wrote: > Well as I pointed out in the previous discussion, it isn't just his > view. Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK) > his edit does reflect how users have actually used this tag. > > Maybe this isn't ideal but it is wha

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on highway=mini_roundabout

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray wrote: > Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK) > his edit does reflect how users have actually used this tag. This also isn't an exclusively UK object, there's at least one in the US as well (and probably more, but so far only

Re: [Tagging] Dispute on highway=mini_roundabout

On May 10, 2012 10:32 AM, "Josh Doe" wrote: > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Josh Doe wrote: > From a quick unscientifically-randomish > review of nodes tagged as highway=mini_roundabout, the majority in the > United States are NOT tra

Re: [Tagging] Two lane expressways

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Hi, > > Two-lane expressways. I came across one of these when running an > analysis on OSM data in Vermont, USA. I didn't even know they existed. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-lane_expressway#United_States > The one I looked at is ta

Re: [Tagging] Two lane expressways

On May 11, 2012 2:41 PM, "John F. Eldredge" wrote: > > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Two-lane expressways. I came across one of these when running an > > >

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

Should also be valid for a closed way like the junction= key so detail wouldn't have to be removed in situations where such an island was mapped as a roundabout. On May 15, 2012 5:58 AM, "Anthony" wrote: > If not, maybe we could add a sentence such as "Unlike at a roundabout, > it is legal to dri

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 10:30 -0400, Anthony wrote: > > >> 2) entering traffic must yield; and > Not always. In France there are still a few where traffic on the > roundabout gives way to traffic joining the roundabout. Isn't the Arc De > Trio

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

On May 16, 2012 12:35 PM, "Toby Murray" wrote: > There is highway=stop and highway=give_way but their use is kind of > awkward. The wiki says to put it on a node before the intersection > which makes some sense but then anyone who actually wants to use it > has to do some calculation to figure ou

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

On May 16, 2012 4:47 PM, "Nathan Edgars II" wrote: > I'd expect to be told "take the nth exit from the roundabout/circle". How is the satnav to know if an angle of 135 degrees is straight or left? Same here, especially given situations like Ladd's Circle in Portland, which is a large, eight exit

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Whoever the hell "Gnonthgol" is on the wiki has blocked me to get his way in > an edit war. Why do you keep starting the wars? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.op

Re: [Tagging] (Mini)Roundabout: examples

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 5/17/2012 5:39 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II >>  wrote: >>> >>> Whoever the hell "Gnonthgol" is on the wiki has blocked me to get hi

Re: [Tagging] proposing a page on the wiki: "tag names do not always correspond to their definitions"

On May 17, 2012 3:22 PM, "Nathan Edgars II" wrote: > > I'd like to propose a page that basically says that just because a tag is named X, that does not mean that something should be tagged as such only if it meets the real-world definition of X. This would only confuse things worse than they alre

Re: [Tagging] Merge cycleway=asl/advanced_stop_line/bike_box/...?

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/5/22 Andrew Chadwick (lists) : >> Any other suggestions? > > > maybe we can also include traffic_lights for bicycles? Sometimes there > are traffic lights for bicycles that usually get green some seconds > before the one for cars.

Re: [Tagging] Update of article highway=mini_roundabout

On May 24, 2012 4:45 PM, "Nathan Edgars II" wrote: > > I'd register my disapproval, but it would simply be ignored, so I'll just ignore the new guidelines and continue tagging as I have been. How is not against the cooperative spirit of the project? ___

Re: [Tagging] Update of article highway=mini_roundabout

On May 26, 2012 10:43 AM, "Anthony" wrote: > > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > > I'll just want to let you know, that I reworked the article about > > mini-roundabouts and want to update it within the next days. You can > > find it here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki

Re: [Tagging] round and round about:how to map this?

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > i count 5 mini roundabouts in the perimeter of the larger roundabout: > > http://thereifixedit.failblog.org/2012/05/28/white-trash-repairs-well-thats-a-roundabout-way-to-make-an-intersection/ > > i wonder what drugs the traffic engineers were

Re: [Tagging] New access tag value needed?

On May 31, 2012 5:41 AM, "Martin Vonwald" wrote: > > 2012/5/31 Richard Mann : > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17530125 > > > > (lorry stuck on very tight corner) > > > > This is tagged hgv=unsuitable in OSM > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/69590803 > > In my opinion thi

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Stephen Hope >Can we use a way marked as mini-roundabout? > > Photo of one of these here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/21448164/IMG_0169C.jpg I would map that as a mini-roundabout node, since the center median doesn't pose a navigation risk. __

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Colin Smale wrote: > How about diameter=15 on the mini-roundabout node? This is factually > correct, verifiable on the ground and (IMHO) non-controversial; routing > would not be affected (no need to route over areas) and renderers can draw a > bigger blob. Problem

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

On Jun 26, 2012 5:41 AM, "Martin Vonwald" wrote: > Why do I think that maxspeed=signals is a bad idea? Because it doesn't > carry a lot of useful information. The speed limit is especially > important to routing applications. For such an application > maxspeed=signals is no information at all and

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

On Jun 26, 2012 5:47 AM, "John Sturdy" wrote: > As far as I know, variable speed limits tend to be used in areas prone > to heavy congestion, so routing applications should probably assume > it's a slow road (at least during the daytime). In the US, the most common variable speed limit scenario

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

On Jun 26, 2012 6:03 AM, "Peter Wendorff" wrote: > I would prefer to allow (not require) an additional unit information (mph, km/h), simply to encourage data consumers to deal with them as they are usually added by users. > On the other hand no data consumer can be sure about a (global) default u

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote: > Am 26.06.2012 16:55, schrieb Paul Johnson: > > >> It seems like tagging for the lowest, highest and default limits would >> be useful. >> >> What's the purpose of a "lowest speed limit"? &

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

On Jun 28, 2012 2:04 PM, "John F. Eldredge" wrote: > A "lowest speed limit" means that, under normal circumstances, traffic is supposed to go at least that fast, and someone going slower can be cited for obstructing traffic. It doesn't get enforced when heavy traffic, road construction, severe w

Re: [Tagging] Tagging u-turn restriction with continuous painted line

On Jul 3, 2012 8:07 AM, "Pieren" wrote: > Hmm, look at the wiki first: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divided_road > > and consider this assumption: > "By default, when a divided way has a junction with a non-divided way, > the division is unbroken." This is something tha

Re: [Tagging] Tagging u-turn restriction with continuous painted line

On Jul 7, 2012 2:00 AM, "Philip Barnes" wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 16:36 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: > > >> >> However, whether or not U-turns are allowed at all varies from place to place. Some >> towns categorically forbid U-turns; some allow them only where signs state they are >> all

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Jaakko Helleranta.com < jaa...@helleranta.com> wrote: > > Why not use drinking_water=official/yes/no (and perhaps /seasonal, which > is true for some natural surface sources), which would use the already > widely known and most_used(?) drinking water text string --

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

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > > Obviously you haven't used it enough otherwise you would know better. > It had so many bugs over time the list of broken relations is endless. > Read the archives and you will see. > It has been improved over the years but still far fr

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Andrew Errington wrote: > > In Korea we use ko_rm (not ko_ro), which is intended to mean Romanised > Korean, > i.e. Korean spelled phonetically using Roman characters. > > If there is an ISO (or similar) code for this, what is it? > en_kr? > Also, what is the code

Re: [Tagging] Advice & clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Dave F. wrote: > On 08/08/2012 16:41, Pieren wrote: > >> >> The relation would say "these 4 tracks belong to the same railway". >> > > I still don't see the point/benefit of this. In the quasi-nationalised UK > rail system all tracks across the country are owned to

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 36, Issue 12

On Sep 8, 2012 8:37 AM, "Jaakko Helleranta.com" wrote: > > Pls change the Subject of your replies when replying to a digest. _At least_ have the topic in the body text... > But there's no reason not to have the subject of the email, well, in the Subject line. Preferably split the digest into indi

Re: [Tagging] Trail intersection markers

On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Lars Ahlzen wrote: > Around here (Massachusetts, USA), it is very common to assign > numbers/codes to trail intersections - particularly in areas where trails > are dense (such as nature reserves). Intersection numbers are typically > posted on small signs at the

Re: [Tagging] Coastline around a bridge?

Wouldn't they be seas due to their size? On Wednesday, October 3, 2012, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > The Great Lakes in North America are freshwater lakes that are tagged as > coastline. > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Frank Steggink > > > wrote: > >> No, the bridge, called Hollandse Brug, is no

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – Dynamic maxspeed

I think that misses the point a little. maxspeed=signals/variable is useful, but becomes more useful with maxspeed:maximum=n and maxspeed:minimum=n. North American school zones are probably the best example. maxspeed:maximum=65 mph, maxspeed:minimum=45 mph, maxspeed=signals would be a fairly acc

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

I'd go with option b. Despite being a single way, you're committed to taking the ramp by that point (due to the double-white solid lines), making it functionally an extension of the ramp. On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Hi! > > Some kind of short how-would-you-tag-this-s

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 9:28 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > The emergency vehicles in the USA are also allowed to disobey traffic laws > in an emergency. They have to have the flashing lights and siren on, and > take precautions to watch out for regular traffic. For example, a police > car, fire

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > Hi (again)! > > Thanks for all the answers. I would like to ask three more (the last > one for this week - promised!): > > Same image as before: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Lanes_Example_2.png > > Now consider part 4 to 6. At w

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

On Oct 17, 2012 5:35 PM, "Johan C" wrote: > > good thing to have this discussion. Too often I've seen OSM discussions end up in 'everything is possible' which in the long run will prevent OSM to ever grow-up and eventually become competitive to the commercial boys and girls. (why the f... are mill

Re: [Tagging] Tag ref on motorway_link

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Andrew Errington wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:47:40 Martin Vonwald (imagic) wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I'm wondering what ref should be used on slip roads/ramps of a motorway > > (not the junction node, but the way tagged with motorway_link). Up to now > > I've seen

Re: [Tagging] Tag ref on motorway_link

On Oct 23, 2012 8:32 PM, "Richard Welty" wrote: > > On 10/23/12 9:15 PM, David ``Smith'' wrote: >> >> If a motorway link is part of a route (one needs to actually drive on the >> link to continue on the route) then I put the ref for that route on the >> link. Otherwise, no ref tag. >> > i agree. >

[Tagging] Tribal boundaries: How do we map them?

I'm trying to get a grasp on a better way to tag tribal administrative regions. In places like Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona and the Dakotas, these are often well marked, and generally represent significant changes in legal sovereignty, anywhere from less than that of a county (such as Grand Ronde

Re: [Tagging] Fuel, additional tags

You can find it at rural pumps throughout the midwest. Whether or not you can use farm diesel on the highway seems to vary somewhat, at least in Oklahoma and the tribal regions within it's multipolygon, you need to have state- or tribe-issued FARM plates to use it on the highway, since these vehic

Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

What about relations? I seem to recall relations exist for this. On Nov 18, 2012 2:12 PM, "Colin Smale" wrote: > Johan, I agree with your statement that "destination" is much more > universal than "exit_to". I would prefer to see "destination" brought into > wider use and "exit_to" deprecated.

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: expanded address tags for US

On Tuesday, November 20, 2012, David ``Smith'' wrote: > Also, the street name in addresses doesn't always match the name of the > street. For example, there are houses on Old Walker Road which retain > Walker Rd addresses. And the name Lilly Chapel Opossum Run Road is so > long, the local post o

Re: [Tagging] Stop sign?

Can we start using relations for this already? Really seems like that provides the specifics we want for this. On Tuesday, November 20, 2012, Jo wrote: > I'm mapping them as highway=stop as a node of the way, just before where > it crosses the main road. I would map a traffic_sign=stop as a node

Re: [Tagging] Stop sign?

Are there examples of traffic signals that don't control all the ways they're located? With stop signs, typical application only applies to one or two of the intersecting ways, not all. On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Pieren wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Jo wrote: > > > What I n

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >