Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

So, no signage? Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there. Fr Gr. Peter Elderson Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 23:01 schreef Mike Thompson : > One of the trails was > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667 > highway <https://wiki.openstreet

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

How did you find out what these paths are? Any kind of signage there? Fr Gr Peter Elderson Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 19:08 schreef Bryce Nesbitt : > > I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd. We ended up planning a > route > that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long s

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-GB] Fords and how to provide information to help with routing apps

Fr gr Peter Elderson Op vr 7 jul 2023 om 03:58 schreef Matija Nalis < mnalis-openstreetmapl...@voyager.hr>: > On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 18:00:26 +1000, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 5/7/23 03:38, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > >> ford=impas

Re: [Tagging] navigational aid relation

Trying to understand. If I read this right you want the router/navigator to replace the target address of a routing request with a different object or location, then start routing, right? Why not simply tag the object_id or other identifier of the replace-destination on the source object (in your

Re: [Tagging] Picnic_table with barbecue table extension.

barbecue=support ? Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 22 mei 2023 om 20:06 heeft Dave F via Tagging > het volgende geschreven: > >  https://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpghttps://snipboard.io/H5FYGT.jpgHi > I've a leisure=picnic_table but has an extended table top made of metal to > acco

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - EV Charging Station Mapping

I think: A charging_station has one or more chargers. You cannot count the number of chargers by counting charging_stations. Since you can't assume that all charging_stations have their capacity (number of chargers) in a tag, nor that chargers are separately mapped (in addition, or standalone),

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=trailhead

Martin Koppenhoefer : > I believe setting up voting to approve a tag with "de-facto"-status is a > waste of time, particularly if you do not intend to refine the definition, > and an approval will only "downgrade" the tag from "de-facto" to > "approved". People have already voted on the tag by

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=trailhead

. But I trust it'll pass. So far, no criticism on the mapping itself has been posted. (If I had tried the same with landcover=trees|grass don't worry, I won't) Peter Elderson Op vr 24 feb. 2023 om 11:51 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > > > Am Fr., 24.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=trailhead

Sorry, I wasn't clear. The current status of the tag is de facto (was: in use, but someone, not me, amended that). The proposal intends to alter that from de facto to approved, by voting. Fr gr Peter Elderson Op vr 24 feb. 2023 om 09:24 schreef Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > O

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=trailhead

I would like to change the status of this established tag to approved. I have altered the previous proposal to match the established practice. Any comments are welcome, but please note that I am not proposing changes in mapping. I

Re: [Tagging] tagging the diameter of a mini-roundabout

The mini-roundabout just adds priority on the MR to the general keep left rule, that is my understanding. Peter Elderson > Op 29 jan. 2023 om 00:37 heeft Florian Lohoff het volgende > geschreven: > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 09:12:11PM +, Philip Barnes wrote: >>

Re: [Tagging] tagging the diameter of a mini-roundabout

Op za 28 jan. 2023 om 23:38 schreef Colin Smale : > A form of roundabout common in the Netherlands has an inner ring which is > often distinctly coloured and slightly raised, thus making it clear that > traffic is intended to avoid it and use the outer ring, while keeping it > perfectly usable by

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Announce proposals on the community forum

I get the tagging list mails and the forum messages in one inbox labeled "Forums". If you were to sent the next message to the forum instead of the mailling list, it would land in exactly the same position in my inbox. Fr gr Peter Elderson Op za 7 jan. 2023 om 23:14 schreef Marc_ma

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a hole in the ground

If you cannot see what it is or what it is, it's just a hazard. Peter Elderson Op zo 1 jan. 2023 om 12:51 schreef Troels Arvin : > Hello, > > When I was trekking south of Olympos in Tyrkey, I came across some ruins > which were not on OSM. Within the ruins there is a hole i

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

an be a different story. Which means you can't correct naming errors without additional verification, preferably local survey. Peter Elderson ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Route names being applied to tracks/paths

I have seen some paths which actually had the same name as the hiking trail running over it. Normally this is not the case, the path usually has is own local name or no name at all. So most of the time this would be an error, but you can't be sure without survey.Fr Gr Peter EldersonOp 29 dec. 2022

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

, but in no way do they define the crossing, so they have to be mapped as separate objects or attributes. * Traffic experts may have many more names, just none that the general public knows. Fr gr Peter Elderson > Op 29 nov. 2022 om 11:06 heeft Minh Nguyen het > volgende geschreven: > &

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

I would say the lighting is slightly outdated. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 4 nov. 2022 om 17:06 heeft Brian M. Sperlongano het > volgende geschreven: > >  > I'll offer a well-known example from my country: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Fabulous_Las_Vegas_sig

Re: [Tagging] improve the proposal procedure

I agree that it got a little out of hand, but there were some good proposals and votes as well. Proposing and voting should not be hard, so you always get some lesser quality stuff. Let's not throw away the baby with the wash water. Peter Elderson Op do 20 okt. 2022 om 14:28 schreef Marc_marc

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

be decorated, or fitted to a decorative object, but still is an amenity. The BE word fountain, I understand, primarily means the decorative structure including the decorative waterflow. So, to me, any tagging using amenity=fountain sounds like a contradiction. Peter Elderson Op vr 14 okt. 2022 om 12

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

Keeping the status as de facto, avoids confusion about approval status of the values. I think it's best to pick another battle. Peter Elderson > Op 11 okt. 2022 om 17:14 heeft martianfreeloader > het volgende geschreven: > > I've reduced the proposal to the historic=* key itsel

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

I have the impression that slow running water points in Europe rapidly are fitted with a push button fot a limited amount of water or a limited tap time. Would that turn them into water taps? Peter Elderson > Op 8 okt. 2022 om 19:26 heeft michael spreng (datendelphin) > het vo

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

a separate vote for that, fine. If the current vote is postponed till after, fine, it is the royal way I think, but I think it is not necessary. I think we can be practical about this, not principal. It's just not big enough. Peter Elderson Op vr 7 okt. 2022 om 13:10 schreef Andy Townsend : > > On

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

primary feature" does not seem to have any other meaning then just feature. Peter Elderson > Op 3 okt. 2022 om 23:17 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer > het volgende geschreven: > >  >> Am Mo., 3. Okt. 2022 um 12:40 Uhr schrieb martianfreeloader >> : >&g

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

bject type (the value). So, equivalent to main tag. I think the term secondary tag(s) and secondary key(s) are often used for the extra attributes of a feature, implying there should be a main tag first, to give the secondary tags meaning. Peter Elderson Op ma 3 okt. 2022 om 12:40 schreef martian

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

I guess Primary key and Main key are the same. Peter Elderson > Op 3 okt. 2022 om 04:06 heeft Minh Nguyen het > volgende geschreven: > > Vào lúc 10:36 2022-10-02, martianfreeloader đã viết: >> Hi, >> I'm unsure if I'm using correct terminology. I have come across th

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

of an object, as opposed e.g. to an attribute of a changeset. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 3 okt. 2022 om 04:06 heeft Minh Nguyen het > volgende geschreven: > > Vào lúc 10:36 2022-10-02, martianfreeloader đã viết: >> Hi, >> I'm unsure if I'm using correct terminology. I have

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

. uses smaller "people", some mappers might amend it but most mappers will tolerate the estimate, as will walkers. Adaptive bunch, walkers. Peter Elderson > Op 2 okt. 2022 om 22:21 heeft Raphael het volgende > geschreven: > > Until very recently, the wiki said th

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

the road. Or, a new railway intersects the road and no crossing is provided. In those cases, usually the road is still seen as an unclassified road. Peter Elderson > Op 30 sep. 2022 om 17:48 heeft grin via Tagging > het volgende geschreven: > > Hello, > > To open it for

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

or estimate the capacity different, as long as they don't remove my capacity tag. Peter Elderson Op do 29 sep. 2022 om 14:10 schreef martianfreeloader < martianfreeloa...@posteo.net>: > Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion > that my proposal is not consi

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

to offer better routes for relevant profiles. If one community does this and creates, publishes and maintains e.g. a specialised map and router for the region, it's worth it. Then other communites will follow. if not, no harm done, the data is still valid and nothing is broken. Peter Elderson >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 20 sep. 2022 om 13:49 heeft martianfreeloader > het volgende geschreven: > > This would mean that there is a new primary tag `highway=scramble` which > makes some currently existing primary tags obsolete: > 1) `highway=via_ferrata` gets replaced by

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

Wouldn't scramble=yes with highway=path do the trick? Hurts nobody, and carries the exact information you want. Peter Elderson > Op 15 sep. 2022 om 23:26 heeft Asa Hundert het > volgende geschreven: > > Am Do., 15. Sept. 2022 um 00:09 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

, that is a better indication, but it still does not say it's a scramble. Peter Elderson > Op 15 sep. 2022 om 20:53 heeft Janko Mihelić het volgende > geschreven: > >  > čet, 15. ruj 2022. 19:57 Peter Elderson je napisao: >> I know, but the scale does not indicate specific thing

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

could argue a scramble is not a thing, or it is not important enough to warrant special mapping, but complex categories and side attributes do not a scramble make. Peter Elderson Op do 15 sep. 2022 om 18:53 schreef Yves via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Peter, the sac_scale d

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

em. Peter Elderson Op do 15 sep. 2022 om 17:43 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 15 Sep 2022, at 17:34, Peter Elderson wrote: > > > > If you specifically want to know where the scramble sections

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

čet, 15. ruj 2022. u 14:52 Peter Elderson napisao > je: > >> Which combination(s) of highway values, sac scale values and hazard >> values would exclusively represent a scramble (Dutch verb: klauteren, i.e. >> going up or down there using hands and feet) to a grown-up, non-c

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

then a cane, hiking shoes and gloves? Peter Elderson > Op 15 sep. 2022 om 14:07 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer > het volgende geschreven: > >  > We are having this discussion despite we already have the necessary tags to > describe all relevant aspects, only because some map

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

. If a sign says a path will make you scamble somewhere, map the sign and the actual scramble(s), that's what I would do. Peter Elderson > Op 14 sep. 2022 om 23:47 heeft martianfreeloader > het volgende geschreven: > > In the real world, you will *always* find borderline ca

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr:interpolation on closed ways and nodes

and - is never a range indicator. Error to be expected: people just copying the housenumber plate may use 2-250. When using the explicit addr:range tag, the format error may be detected because .. is missing. Peter Elderson Op do 24 dec. 2020 om 15:12 schreef Paul Allen : > On Thu, 24 Dec 2

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:traffic_calming=hillocky

I'd say they are small mounds. Hillock sounds too, er, hilly. Peter Elderson Op zo 20 dec. 2020 om 11:39 schreef ael via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > I'm uncomfortable with hillock/hillocky as a value. > > "Hillock" is quite common in British Englis

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

I'll tag both ways then, or better map none at all? Shirt, another dilemma. I need something stronger than tea. Peter Elderson Op wo 16 dec. 2020 om 17:04 schreef Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Dec 16, 2020, 16:49 by tomasstrau...@gmail.com: > >

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

stevea : > (Personally, I find JOSM’s relation editor to be one of its most elegant > features for a data structure as relatively complex as a relation. > I am not qualified to judge elegance, but I find JOSM's relation editor the best there is. I don't think relations are very complex data

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - crossing=priority

Colin Smale het volgende geschreven: > >  >> >> On 2020-12-13 21:53, Peter Elderson wrote: >> >> Just to clarify: >> >> > crossing=priority Indicates that the node is a pedestrian crossing >> when applied to highway=cycleway, should

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - crossing=priority

s applied to a cycleway? And with segregated=no, do motorists get a warning that horses may cross on the cycleway? Peter Elderson Op zo 13 dec. 2020 om 21:08 schreef ipswichmapper--- via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Yes, most likely this won't be required. However I have kept

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

layouts, you would need a different type of relation. Maybe an existing type can be used, or a specialised type can be defined. I would think a pilot project could test the concept for mappers, renderers and other data users. If succesful, showcase. If not, document and delete. Peter Elderson Op

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

Actually, there is no Rijn in Rotterdam. But that does not change the argument. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 11 dec. 2020 om 18:11 heeft Christoph Hormann het > volgende geschreven: > >  > >> Anders Torger hat am 11.12.2020 17:07 geschrieben: >> >&g

Re: [Tagging] RFC: vaccination / COVID-19 vaccination centres

ponse" plans. Peter Elderson Op do 26 nov. 2020 om 21:07 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > Am Do., 26. Nov. 2020 um 18:35 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson < > pelder...@gmail.com>: > >> Well, mass testing did not stop the virus anywhere, it just cos

Re: [Tagging] RFC: vaccination / COVID-19 vaccination centres

facilities will disappear. OSM-forums will carry on the debate whether they should be tagged as historic or abandoned until the next pandemic. Peter Elderson Op do 26 nov. 2020 om 15:59 schreef Paul Allen : > On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 02:35, stevea wrote: > >> I'm in California, where

Re: [Tagging] RFC: vaccination / COVID-19 vaccination centres

the yelling at each other. Then it will become a standard yearly vaccination and we will all return to normal. O, the stories we will tell our grandchildren when they really just want to hang out with each other and play games... Best, Peter Elderson Op wo 25 nov. 2020 om 22:33 schreef Paul Allen

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

). I would rate this information: sometimes useful but not very reliable. Technical improvements will not fix this. What the mappers put there could do with improvement. The challenge is how to get the mappers to do it. Peter Elderson Op wo 18 nov. 2020 om 19:09 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Cycle Route Relations vs. Ways

g each one with name=Polygon Alley. No normalization applies, just tag it. Best, Peter Elderson Op ma 16 nov. 2020 om 18:17 schreef Seth Deegan : > Honestly I think I'm just confused. > I guess ways *do have* official names, it's just that I keep on thinking > about the possible *conceptual* co

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

Ah, profiling! Hadn't thought of that yet. Best, Peter Elderson Op vr 13 nov. 2020 om 10:18 schreef Michael Patrick : > > I am surprised nobody has suggested a pondness or lakicity scale yet. >> > > It isn't unusual outside of OSM for relative percentages of the di

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

I am surprised nobody has suggested a pondness or lakicity scale yet. Best, Peter Elderson Op do 12 nov. 2020 om 02:46 schreef stevea : > If we're going to do "this:" > > So perhaps we could create a new tag water=natural_pond for small, > natural or semi-natural lak

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

y"(except where it's not), "in most countries" (but not everywhere) etc etc. I don't think most bodies of water can be tagged as pond or lake by any common standard, in a way that all agree. Nor do I think that is a problem. Best, Peter Elderson Op wo 11 nov. 2020 om 19:51 schreef Bria

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

I am getting a foot vs hiking feeling. Everybody knows a difference, nobody has the same difference. In the end, it does not matter. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 11 nov. 2020 om 16:02 heeft Brian M. Sperlongano > het volgende geschreven: > >  > If the consensus is to go with

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

finition would not help at all in this case. Peter Elderson > Op 10 nov. 2020 om 06:30 heeft Joseph Eisenberg > het volgende geschreven: > >  > The tag water=pond was added with a large number of other types of "water=*" > in 2011, but it has a poorly defined description.

Re: [Tagging] religous bias - Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

people do not die on schedule one at a time. Peter Elderson > Op 5 nov. 2020 om 19:56 heeft Joseph Eisenberg > het volgende geschreven: > >  > I'm not able to find any website which clearly talks about a specific > "mourning room", though it is certainly documented th

Re: [Tagging] religous bias - Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

> rate the following "favourable", "acceptable" or "unfavourable"? > > amenity=mourning > acceptable, though I think an amenity should be a feature, not an activity > amenity=place_of_mourning > favourable. Secondary tags could add details if necessary > amenity=mourning_room >

Re: [Tagging] religious bias - Re: Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

by objects and decorations, and often actually presumed present. The deceased may also be just represented. Peter Elderson Op wo 4 nov. 2020 om 23:30 schreef Paul Allen : > On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 20:50, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > >> I was surprised that this tag is rushed into voting despite t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

woll...@posteo.de: > > Dear all, > > ...someone who has died before their funeral I should hope so > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

towing_penalty=no means your car is towed away for free? In Nederland, towing always comes with a penalty, even if you don't want your car back. Maybe a tag for consequences should be introduced. I suggest or_else=cargone. Best, Peter Elderson > Op 21 okt. 2020 om 10:32 heeft stevea

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

Or, let's acknowledge that many distinctions are pointless because an awful lot of primary keys just mean "thing", so the key does not really matter, only the value counts. Who cares what the * in *=bus_stop says, it's a bus stop. Peter Elderson >> Op 19 okt. 2020 om 19

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

Another illusion shattered... where is this world going to? Best, Peter Elderson > Op 19 okt. 2020 om 13:48 heeft Jo het volgende > geschreven: > >  > It would be best to first consider the consequences of such a change. Weigh > the benefits against what we lose i

Re: [Tagging] Battery swapping spot in a charging station or being an individual tag?

Would that be a new sub-tag or a value of an existing sub-tag? Best, Peter Elderson Op di 6 okt. 2020 om 09:27 schreef Jez Nicholson : > Myself, I would prefer *not* to have a new tag. Swapping a battery is a > form of recharging and can be detailed in a subtag. > > On Tue, 6 Oct 2

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (shop=direct marketing)

Is it private sale? Vr gr Peter Elderson Op za 3 okt. 2020 om 23:37 schreef Graeme Fitzpatrick : > > > > On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 at 00:39, Paul Allen wrote: > >> >> More important is if there is a sign, >> > > Hand-painted signs saying "Horse manure&

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (shop=direct marketing)

I think for tagging it should be more than the occasional road-side sale? Best, Peter Elderson Op za 3 okt. 2020 om 14:38 schreef Paul Allen : > On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 at 13:22, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> >> shop=* seems ok for me. > > > And for me. There

Re: [Tagging] "width" on streets: Time for a recommendation

What about the many streets and roads where the kerb or lining is bended and curled to cut the parking lane into sections? Best, Peter Elderson Op di 29 sep. 2020 om 11:40 schreef Supaplex : > Now I am a little confused. > > As I understand Pieter, you used "width:carriage

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Large fire perimeter tagging?

Clifford Snow : > I'm not sure there would be a consensus agreement to revise the wiki to > indicate landuse=forest should be used for timber production. Thoughts? > I am sure there would not. landuse=forest just means the area has trees. I think there is some consensus about that.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Chapel of rest)

Funeral viewing room sounds like a room where you can view the funeral. I suspect modern ones have very large screens and nice sound effects. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 27 sep. 2020 om 19:39 heeft woll...@posteo.de het volgende geschreven: > > "In any case, the proposer seems to fe

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Chapel of rest)

I would suggest respectorium, but I do not want to start a new hype in the funeral branch. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 25 sep. 2020 om 17:10 heeft woll...@posteo.de het volgende geschreven: > > "Wake rooms" was at one time my favorite, but then I was told that some >

Re: [Tagging] Linking Sidewalks to Highways

Jeroen Hoek : > I have been applying highway=cycleway + cycleway=link as well to see how > this feels. Some early documentation I have been preparing: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:JeroenHoek#cycleway.3Dlink > Why the diagonal link to the center intersection node? Wouldn't it be

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Chapel of rest)

I have heard mourning chapel, mourning room, funeral chapel, funeral room. Chapel of rest does not seem right to me, though I understand how the funeral business would like that term better. But I'm not a native speaker. PCMIIW. Peter Elderson Op ma 21 sep. 2020 om 21:14 schreef : > Dear

Re: [Tagging] Linking Sidewalks to Highways

exceptions. Currently I do map short footways/paths where I know pedestrians will cross the road, even when no physically marked crossing exists. Opposite lowered kerbs or the fact that nearby dirt paths exists at both sides, not too far apart, already is a luxury. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 21

Re: [Tagging] Powerbank Sharing Systems

Wouldn't that just duplicate the location systems they offer? And on top of that, a sizable maintenance burden to keep up with the changes? Who is going to want this on OSM after committing to a chain? Best, Peter Elderson Op za 19 sep. 2020 om 13:02 schreef Jake Edmonds via Tagging < tagg

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

> > Maybe crossing=marked + marked=??? > where ??? is the "type" of crossing - UK_zebra (as well as all their other > birds & animals!), US_zebra, EU_zebra & so on, so if you know exactly what > it is you can specify, but if you can only see a crossing marked there, you > can just call it a marked

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

In Nederland, the zebra is a very clear and specific type of crossing with legal rules including yield to pedestrians walking on or even toward the zebra. I think this will continue to be the case even after Europe leaves the British Union. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op do 17 sep. 2020 om 20:12

Re: [Tagging] automated edits seem to remove crossing=zebra drastically

=pathtocrosstheroadmarkedwithstripeslikeazebratograntprioritytopedestrians? Peter Elderson >> Op 16 sep. 2020 om 23:47 heeft Graeme Fitzpatrick >> het volgende geschreven: >  > > >> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 20:01, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> while the very generic crossing=marked, which was quite unp

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for board games themed pubs

. I'm not sure how to tag solar terrace orientation and terrace cover type, though Vr gr Peter Elderson Op za 12 sep. 2020 om 11:01 schreef Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > > > 12 Sep 2020, 00:50 by graemefi...@gmail.com: > > > >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for board games themed pubs

Focus? Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 11 sep. 2020 om 20:40 heeft Paul Allen het volgende > geschreven: > >  >> On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 19:09, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: > >> > Themed implies that is the raison d'etre for the pubs existance and you >>

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

rail to be followed exactly. I don't think roles in fixed route relations will solve the instant routing challenge! > On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 09:53, Peter Elderson wrote: > >> Jo: >> >>> I added that it's not needed for ferries in the proposal on the wiki. >>> It's

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

Jo: > I added that it's not needed for ferries in the proposal on the wiki. It's > alright if we have more than 1 way to do it and leave it up to the mapper > to decide whether to map as a single route relation or split them and use a > superroute relation. > Wouldn't this apply to other

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

combine this? Multiple roles are currently not defined. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op ma 31 aug. 2020 om 08:16 schreef Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > On 31/8/20 8:25 am, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > Keep it simple, if the simple solution does not limit you. > > > > Agreed

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

is in the child relation, you don't need to specify that in the role. This is valid for many route types. I would suggest not to present it as a complex bicycle route, but as a way to incorporate transfer sections of different types in routes of any transport type. Best, Peter Elderson Op zo 30 aug

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

Elderson Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 12:47 schreef Peter Elderson : > True. In that case, a transfer relation in a superroute is necessary. Like > all the other roles: do not combine these roles on ways with with > forward/backward, use a relation instead. > > Vr gr Peter Elderson > > &g

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

I think the transfer section only needs the role transfer. The exact way of transport there is tagged on the child relation which is a route in itself. (type=route, route=*). Peter Elderson Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 13:11 schreef Jo : > I was in a hurry to go and eat and forgot to

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

True. In that case, a transfer relation in a superroute is necessary. Like all the other roles: do not combine these roles on ways with with forward/backward, use a relation instead. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 12:06 schreef Jo : > Hi Francesco, > > I will create the s

Re: [Tagging] Rail segment in a bike route

by the tags of the ways. editors, QA-tools and datausers would have to handle the role. It fits in nicely with the accepted roles for recreational routes, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roles_for_recreational_route_relations Best, Peter Elderson Op zo 30 aug. 2020 om 11:26 schreef Francesco

Re: [Tagging] Network-tag needs extension

> > how could you change the definition of an undocumented tag? > Easy. It happens all the time, you just never hear about it. ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >

Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

Wouln't it be more osm to describe visible and verifiable attributes of features, rather than architectural design principles or supposed intentions? Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 24 aug. 2020 om 12:11 heeft Florian Lohoff het volgende > geschreven: > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 01:2

Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

The British really call bench construction "architecture"? Amazing. I can see this going the same way as village green. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 23 aug. 2020 om 22:59 heeft Andy Townsend het volgende > geschreven: > > On 23/08/2020 21:22, Joseph Eisenberg wrote

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

render canopy_walkways specifically. Best Peter Elderson Op za 22 aug. 2020 om 11:16 schreef Jake Edmonds via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Should the key be bridge? > I feel like canopy walkways are more like bridges than boardwalks. > > Sent from Jake Edmonds' iP

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

Do we tag highway=motor ? Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 22 aug. 2020 om 00:37 heeft Andy Mabbett het > volgende geschreven: > > On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 at 21:44, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >>> highway=trunk_hghway > >> these are different because it would

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - kerb=regular

Nederland: stoeprand (/stooprund/); officially: trottoirband (/trotwharbund/) I wonder what it is in Burundi and Iceland. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op vr 21 aug. 2020 om 09:39 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > > > sent from a phone > > > O

Re: [Tagging] Canopy Walkways

footway on bridge construction, so highway=footway, bridge=yes seems ok. Canopy walkway is the term I see used everywhere, not canopy bridge. Makes sense to attach the canopy detail to the footway then. So footway=canopy_walkway sounds right to me. Best, Peter Elderson Op vr 21 aug. 2020 om

Re: [Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges

Two dots are used in some circles to indicate inclusive range. eg 21..27. Best, Peter Elderson Op wo 19 aug. 2020 om 00:25 schreef Tod Fitch : > > On Aug 18, 2020, at 2:29 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > > > Maybe we should use a different character to indicate a range, su

Re: [Tagging] new page for tree_lined=*

Martin Koppenhoefer: > I think we can assume that a line of trees in the middle is sufficient to > make mappers use 2 highways instead of 1!? How can we distinguish between > the following sections > tree - road - tree - road - tree > and > tree - road - tree - tree - road - tree > and > tree -

Re: [Tagging] new page for tree_lined=*

on a separate tree_line page. Best, Peter Elderson Op vr 14 aug. 2020 om 01:08 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > I’ve set up an initial documentation page for the tree_lined attribute > (used mainly in conjunction with highways and waterways) and welcom

Re: [Tagging] new page for tree_lined=*

I can see how an area such as a parking, a churchyard or pedestrian area can be tree lined. A node feature, not so much. Best, Peter Elderson Op vr 14 aug. 2020 om 01:08 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > I’ve set up an initial documentation page for the t

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 25 jul. 2020 om 22:43 heeft Allroads het > volgende geschreven: > > The earlier mentioned, > bicycle=leave > This is for me, leave the bicycle behind at the sign. > More native English speakers can give a comment on that? If you're not with

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >