visibly designed to start
hiking or riding on one or more routes.
Let’s talk additional and localised tagging after this basic step. Did I hear
you menton “consensus”?
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 14 jan. 2019 om 17:24 heeft Tobias Wrede het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>> Am 11.01.2019 u
I agree. I never meant to exclude any significant path to a trail, even if it’s
‘ just’ a path, it can of course be significant because it’s the only access
point in miles, even if it has no official name, and that’s precisely why I
keep saying it’s up to the mappers.
Mvg Peter Elderson
>
This is great, thanks! It doesn't have to be a wikitable. I am already
using it!
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 15 jan. 2019 om 00:45 schreef Jan Macura :
>
>
> (...) Next step: creating a webpage which lists (a selection of ) walking
>> route relations sorted by survey:date
At what size is it that a ditch turns into a drain?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 15 jan. 2019 om 14:28 schreef Eugene Podshivalov :
> The confusion is mainly in the difference between irrigation canals vs
> irrigation ditches and drainage diches vs drains.
>
> In practice wid
arily,
and if there is a flow it can be either way.
Bonne chance, mappers!
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 15 jan. 2019 om 17:11 schreef Tod Fitch :
>
> On Jan 15, 2019, at 7:28 AM, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 15:22, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
>> At what size is
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 15 jan. 2019 om 00:41 schreef Dave Swarthout :
> Kevin said:
> I'm therefore going to stick with 'designated or customary place to
> begin or end a trip on a trail.'
>
> Me too. I've mapped many such trailheads in Alaska and almos
trailheads explicitly named Trailhead, so I
assumed that these are called trailheads in at least one flavour of the
English language. None of those are Dutch. I plan to add one Dutch example,
as soon as I find out how to add a photo to the gallery.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 16 jan. 2019 om 19:06
this moment, I see no basis for recommended further tagging,
just the one basic node.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 16 jan. 2019 om 20:25 schreef Jmapb :
> On 1/16/2019 12:56 PM, EthnicFood IsGreat wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 4:28 PM Peter Elderson
> >>
be mapped in the near future.
--
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 16 jan. 2019 om 22:16 schreef Graeme Fitzpatrick <
graemefi...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 20:07, Dave Swarthout
> wrote:
>
>> Your proposal looks good. I would vote "yes" on it.
Most trailheads I have seen mapped have a name that contains the
trail/track/route name. See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:trailhead#Photos
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 16 jan. 2019 om 22:50 schreef Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> > in my experience,
Op 17 jan. 2019 om 01:14 heeft Kevin Kenny het
volgende geschreven:
>
> I'd say, by all means you should map the name if the trailhead has a
> specific name that refers to it. Putting the name of the trail, the
> name of the park, or the name of a nearby geographic feature on the
> trailhead nod
Currently, 1188 trailheads have a name tag in OSM. A few hundred have no
name tag.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op do 17 jan. 2019 om 01:35 schreef Peter Elderson :
> Op 17 jan. 2019 om 01:14 heeft Kevin Kenny het
> volgende geschreven:
> >
> > I'd say, by all means you sho
fy in
Nederland.
Other countries, different guidelines, I'm sure.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 18 jan. 2019 om 11:54 schreef Tobias Wrede :
> While you clearly
> also have to enter a node network somewhere I see them more as a general
>
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Landcover tag now approaches 100 000 occurrences. Still growing despite not
being rendered. I would think rendering the top three landcover values is
not out of place. The github issues are still there. Initially:
landcover=trees same rendering as natural=wood and landuse
y.
I would gladly see the landcover key recognised and rendered for the three
main values.
Only then, discuss the main landuse key values and modifyers again.
Else, we're just repeating the same discussion over and over.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 23 jan. 2019 om 04:50 schreef Warin
se of the landcover
key for the three main values: trees, grass and scrub. Then, bump the
issues with the main renderers and editors. How to do that is not for this
list, you are absolutely right about that.
Only after that step, rediscuss the landuse key.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 23 jan. 2019
ing. No single dedicated use.
The consequence of mapping all ditches as ways is that in z19 on OSM carto
the land look almost water-less, while in z14 the amount of water looks
much higher than it actually is.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op do 24 jan. 2019 om 12:24 schreef Eugene Podshivalov :
&g
To map drains that are not ditches?
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 1 feb. 2019 om 02:50 heeft Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende
> geschreven:
>
> It appears in the descriptions that a 'ditch' can be used as a 'dr
I
think it’s worth mapping.
I will not systematically retag drains to ditches unless the national community
decides to do so. Automated edits: no way.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 2 feb. 2019 om 14:22 heeft Hufkratzer het volgende
> geschreven:
>
> If we were discussing a proposal I
Who is to decide?
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 2 feb. 2019 om 15:38 heeft EthnicFood IsGreat
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
>> Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2019 14:22:20 +0100
>> From: Hufkratzer
>> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>>
renderer? Well. Rendering is about the only use case for
tagging tree rows, so how could it be anything else?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 12 feb. 2019 om 06:01 schreef Mark Wagner :
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:55:50 +0200
> Tomas Straupis wrote:
>
> > Two things to add:
> > 1
It's an existing issue.
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1753
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 12 feb. 2019 om 12:36 schreef Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> > Better rendering of tree_row on OSM Carto
>
> Please go to http://
+1
I would even go for highway=fairway to route over an area, instead of the
currently used invisible highway=path.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 12 feb. 2019 om 13:49 schreef Dave Swarthout :
> The seamark definition in the supplied link is very general. I cannot see
> how anyone
I'm afraid countries differ with respect to legal imlications of sidewalk.
This discussion, I've seen it 5 times now ande it never ends with
consensus. It never ends at all.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 18 feb. 2019 om 00:49 schreef Dave F via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. Non-conflation is
unrealistic.
(wow, 5 negs in a row, respect!)
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 18 feb. 2019 om 01:45 heeft Dave F via Tagging
> het volgende geschreven:
>
> True. Primarily because there's a false conflation of
ntial.
Routing cannot rely on this. I would not rely on a router if it relies on
this tag.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 20 feb. 2019 om 12:08 schreef Florian Lohoff :
>
> Hi Georg,
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:03:15AM +0100, Georg Feddern wrote:
> > Even the english wiki say
impaired by that, except where there are crossings and
traffic signs.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 20 feb. 2019 om 13:45 schreef Paul Allen :
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 12:25, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
>>
>> Residential just means it has housing along the road.
>>
>
> Tha
This will not suit the situation in Nederland, as explained earlier in this
thread. We would have tons of exceptions on all the ‘ usually’s’ and ‘
typically’s’.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
> Op 23 feb. 2019 om 00:09 heeft Graeme Fitzpatrick het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>
>> On F
In this scheme, a highway=road (no classification) within a residential
area would (after long dicussions and heavily debated pull requests) be
displayed and routed as (currently) a highway=residential?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op za 23 feb. 2019 om 09:46 schreef Jan S :
>
>
> Am 23. Feb
wrong sense i.e. no classification.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op za 23 feb. 2019 om 12:05 schreef Andy Townsend :
> On 23/02/2019 10:11, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > In this scheme, a highway=road (no classification) within a
> > residential area would (after long dicussions and he
I was thinking further about the idea that came up here: deduct road type
from the landuse=residential. It's different than current usage, and I dont
think it is feasable.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op za 23 feb. 2019 om 14:02 schreef Andy Townsend :
> On 23/02/2019 11:36, Peter Elders
roads actually are of class unclassified.
Meaning that correction is a herculic task and a huge incentive is needed.
Since there is little impact on rendering and routing, no crowds are lining
up to take this on.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op do 28 feb. 2019 om 13:44 schreef Fernando Trebien <
ferna
Can't do that - would destroy too many corrections since.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 1 mrt. 2019 om 11:00 schreef Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
>
> Maybe highway=unclassified added in this import should be retagged to
> highway=road
> (the actual "
values are mentioned less often, these three would do nicely
for now.
Many small areas of grass, trees and scrub within residential areas can be
tagged as landcover patches, without breaking up the landuse or tagging
landuse over landuse.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 5 mrt. 2019 om 13:08 schreef
If it's an import (not zutomated edit) and the import is ok then it's
regular usage.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 6 mrt. 2019 om 09:55 schreef Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
>
>
>
> Mar 5, 2019, 1:47 PM by pelder...@gmail.com:
>
> Landcover
cks on
all kinds of maps, including OSM.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op do 7 mrt. 2019 om 09:41 schreef Volker Schmidt :
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019, 08:57 Richard Fairhurst, wrote:
>
>> They don’t belong in OSM for the reasons you state,
>>
&g
You are right about the landuse. Mostly farmland, sometimes meadow/pasture,
sometimes for crop, and that may rotate constantly. INitial tagging is from
an import, I hear. I guess many mappers are content with the green colour
on the map.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 11 mrt. 2019 om 03:16 schreef
dcover show up, just remember that the standard OSM Carto map does not.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 11 mrt. 2019 om 15:16 schreef Lorenzo Stucchi <
lorenzostucch...@outlook.it>:
> Hi all,
>
> I’m Lorenzo, the vice-president of PoliMappers, the YouthMappers chapter
> in Poli
Sorry, 2000.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 11 mrt. 2019 om 18:18 schreef Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com:
>
> you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users
>
> 6000 use
.
It’s a movement, not a conspiracy. It’s growing despite not being rendered.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 12 mrt. 2019 om 00:19 heeft Christoph Hormann het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>> On Monday 11 March 2019, Peter Elderson wrote:
>> Sorry, 2000.
>
> IIRC the saying is
ered with.
Where landuse implies a landcover and the above two use cases are not
applicable or foreseen, adding landcover is redundant.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 12 mrt. 2019 om 01:02 schreef Peter Elderson :
> Organized mapping is ok mapping. Mapping of landcover has been pretty
>
your case needs just rendering or also data
use/routing/navigation.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 13 mrt. 2019 om 15:05 schreef Paul Allen :
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
>> On 13/03/2019 13:18, Paul Allen wrote:
>> > I've hesitated to ask
tem based on systematic review according to satellite imagery.
Of course, other datausers will be able to use the data for rendering if
they see fit.
Since it's about changes in the course of time, how do you plan to record
and display the changes? Yearly datasets?
Fr gr Peter Elderson
You may want to look at this project:
http://geacron.com/the-geacron-project/
The tool can display/browse historical geo-data as year-to-year browseable
maps. There probably are other tools out there, mayebe even osm-based.
(This is where the real experts kick in...)
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op
t;
It's useful for longer routes through walking/cycling node networks, using
the network signposting.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Taggi
by Sarah's idea, but I would like to see
that solved too.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 15 mrt. 2019 om 14:26 schreef Richard Fairhurst :
> marc marc wrote:
> > imho nearly no routing tools (nor foot nor bus) is currently
> > able to use a relation type=route with relations as
OsmAnd.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 15 mrt. 2019 om 15:24 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 15. Mar 2019, at 14:43, Peter Elderson wrote:
> >
> > I like Sarah's proposal too, especially for walking ro
f you would need any special tag to indicate it's shared. If
it's used more than once, it's shared, right?
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 15 mrt. 2019 om 15:38 schreef seirra blake <
sophietheopos...@yandex.com>:
> I can see *a lot* of shared routes in my area because most of t
The just-a-chain-of-ways relation doesn't have to be shared. It's
shareable, but the sharing really is of no consequence.
I think software needs a tag to control the selection for the purpose it
serves, OR allow any route relation without a type within all route types
it supports.
I would indeed
Looks good.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 15 mrt. 2019 om 21:05 schreef seirra blake <
sophietheopos...@yandex.com>:
> key: *almost all tagging should occur here* | *data may be reused in
> parent* | *data may be reused in parent and any 'adjacent' (with the same
> le
the higher relation(s), the mapper doesn't know that (s)he was the
last user, so will not modify the segent relation.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op za 16 mrt. 2019 om 08:25 schreef Sarah Hoffmann :
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 02:43:03PM +0100, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > I like Sarah&
e that up to them. I for one would be very interested to compare
your data against the current landcover mapping of The Netherlands. For
deforestation, sure, but more so for urbanization.
If you push different use of current tags, mappers will turn against it,
revert your changes, and your project wil
all areas have been processed. In that case I would want
to map "no landcover" as opposed to "not mapped yet". Alternatively, I
would mark areas with a separate tag as "not yet included in the project".
d. In all cases, other mappers can and will alter the tagging if
s also not part of a route. It just happens to be near.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op za 13 apr. 2019 om 20:52 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 13. Apr 2019, at 12:06, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > But your examp
So where a cycleway crosses a road with a dedicated crossing:
* the crossing section has nodes on each side indicating where the crossing
physically begins and ends;
* the crossing section is tagged highway=cycleway, crossing=yes
Correct?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 17 apr. 2019 om 05:50
I reacted to the comparison with a bridge.
I guess there will be no consensus.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 17 apr. 2019 om 12:19 schreef Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
>
>
>
> Apr 17, 2019, 11:21 AM by pelder...@gmail.com:
>
> So where a cycleway crosses
tional=yes, approach=yes. A tag that covers all the variants, I can't
think of a suitable word.
the other way around: main_route=no?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
tcuts and alternatives for bird breeding season, for
highwater, for people with dogs, closure after dark, and wheelchair
alternatives. Most of these were not usually waymarked and mapped, but the
operators are increasingly waymarking those so I want to map it.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 23 apr. 2019
ation, and route_segment
should indicate what is so special about this route relation.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 23 apr. 2019 om 09:47 schreef Sarah Hoffmann :
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 11:47:35PM +0200, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > Long walking routes often have a main route
Whenever the quali ...-reducing is used, I know the stuff or thing actually
produces ... where ... is bad.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 2 mei 2019 om 23:52 heeft Paul Allen het volgende
> geschreven:
>
>> On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede wrote:
>
>> I w
ong.
I'm at an asphalt road. The asphalt looks fine to me, nice and
smooth. There is no label attached to the surface. What would the noise
level be? Mm can't tell. Don't have a noisometer. Next!
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 10:14 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer
+1
Id and Potlach edits damage routes. JOSM edits damage the routes as well,
but JOSM allows the user to prevent/detect/analyse/repair the damage while
editing. Still, it's a shaky system, can't rely on it for data use.
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 12:59 schreef :
>
>
> Hufkratzer skrev den 02.05.2019 12:
ve ways in the route relation as first and
second.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 13:44 schreef Andy Townsend :
>
> On 03/05/2019 12:21, s8evq wrote:
> > But what's the alternative then?
> >
>
> Explicit start and/or finish nodes?
>
> As previously m
did...
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 14:55 schreef Andy Townsend :
> On 03/05/2019 13:36, Peter Elderson wrote:
> > Routers look at the ways, not the routes.
>
> Immediately I can think of at least one major exception for that
> (cycle.travel). I suspect that th
Also, it does route to produce a track, but then to use it for navigation
you transfer the gpx to your device, which then does the actual routing.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 15:13 schreef Peter Elderson :
> This one seems to map routes to ways, and it knows the attributes of
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 15:55 schreef :
> cycle.travel appears to try to follow cycle routes as much as possible.
> It respects road attributes
>
> Peter Elderson skrev den 03.05.2019 15:13:
>
> This one seems to map routes to ways, and it knows the attribut
You prefer routes to stay unordered? Or that edits damage routes?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 16:08 schreef :
>
> >>> For a non-roundtrip route consiting of two consecutive ways the route
> >>> direction can be deduced from the order of the ways in the
altogether. If an edit breaks something important, it shouldn't be
accepted, or it should be automatically repaired.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 16:31 schreef :
> I prefer that those complete newbies get to mess with only 1 or 2 members
> of route relations, at the
ofiling. I
would say you need at least 95% correct.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 18:39 schreef Sarah Hoffmann :
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 01:24:49PM +0100, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > Seriously, hoever wrote that section of that wiki page
> https://wiki.openstr
I guess one problem has been fixed, but many still remain.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 3 mei 2019 om 19:04 schreef Paul Allen :
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 17:39, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
>
> Most editors are quite good at keeping route order these days (iD has
>> looong ago been fix
edestrians over a legal restriction.
I'm perfectly fine with oneway=yes, and determining the direction from the
order of ways in the relation.
Remains the problem that the order in the relations is unreliable, many are
unsortable, so in many cases the direction cannot be determined.
Vr gr
bejct a could have
many navaid relations? Or one relation containing all nodes, with roles for
transport mode?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 22 mei 2019 om 10:02 schreef Florian Lohoff :
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 08:31:03AM +1000, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 0
ately
(which I am not even allowed to do on many of them). Moderating a forum is
also much easier.
So I would be very much in favour of moving to the forum.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.o
> Op 3 jun. 2019 om 15:02 heeft Florian Lohoff het volgende
> geschreven:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 11:11:50AM +0200, Peter Elderson wrote:
>> LS
>> I agree that email is not the best tool for discussions. The main thing for
>> me is that the world of
ts wastewater.
usage=* does not have meaning for most of these waterways. Flow direction
vary. You do want to know if it's accessible/allowed for
rowboats/motorboats/canoes.
And maybe if you can cross them with a jumping-pole. Very important in some
areas.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 4 jun. 2019
ystem
irrigates. If it rains exactly the amount that evaporates and leaks, the
system just holds water. In the meantime you can use the bigger ditches and
canals for human things like boating, fishing and small transport.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 4 jun. 2019 om 16:36 schreef François La
other
editor or just ignore it.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op di 11 jun. 2019 om 11:49 schreef Tomas Straupis :
> > I find very strange that reservoir is a landuse by itself
> > it would be a bit like putting landuse=rest on a bench
> > or landuse=stop on a parking lot.
> >
+1
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 18 jun. 2019 om 16:38 heeft marc marc het
> volgende geschreven:
>
>> Le 18.06.19 à 16:28, Andreas Lattmann a écrit :
>> mountain trails for disabled people
>
> map the mountain trails as usual (way and/or relation)
> and add wheel
almost all
crossings have a route with lowered sections.
So I think wheelchair=yes is not very useful over here. Wheelchair=no would
make more sense, although I think most people would take their chances
anyway.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 19 jun. 2019 om 10:26 schreef Mark Wagner :
> On Tue, 18 J
It’s a case for wheelchair mappers then?
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 20 jun. 2019 om 09:27 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> Am 20.06.2019 um 08:32 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> If
You can use your OSM account to access the osm-forum
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 21 jun. 2019 om 06:26 schreef Graeme Fitzpatrick <
graemefi...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 20:01, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>
that
there is data and that the data is complete, correct and verifiable at any
given time.
How will you go about that?
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 21 jun. 2019 om 04:43 schreef Emily Eros :
> Hi mailing list,
>
> Kerb/curb management has become a hot topic for city governments and
&g
tourism=register looks fine to me!
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op wo 26 jun. 2019 om 11:25 schreef Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
>
>
>
> 26 Jun 2019, 10:54 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
> Hi,
>
> On some hiking trail there are log books, usually at the star
I'm fine with leisure=garden for private/common/public gardens
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 12 jul. 2019 om 07:24 schreef Pee Wee :
> Hi all
>
>
> I would like your opinion on the next issue.
>
>
> On the Dutch forum (googletranslate
> <https://translate.google.c
he gardens
different than the residential area. Access and use is mostly restricted,
but that doesn't change the leisure function. You could discern types and
qualities. I wouldnt go that far myself.
When planning recreational routes, this would help me decide which areas to
include.
Vr gr Peter E
That's what I meant.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op zo 14 jul. 2019 om 15:29 schreef Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 14. Jul 2019, at 10:15, Peter Elderson wrote:
> >
> > From the air you commonly see rows of h
function as "village green" in the neighourhood. Let's join the
countries that already do this.
I would also gladly help retagging areas wrongly tagged as village_green.
It's used a lot but nothing we couldn't fix in a project, if we agree on a
clear convention.
Vr gr Pete
Hm.. village_common still says village, where often these areas are no
longer in a village.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 19 jul. 2019 om 00:42 schreef Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> As Kevin Kenny says.
>
> The key 'landuse' is big misused for land covers.
>
I would say some indication of the purpose of the terrain should be
present. E.g. Power infra, lineage, a stage area, signs, lots of things can
indicate that the area is often used and/or dedicated to a variety of
events.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op vr 19 jul. 2019 om 15:21 schreef Marc Gemis
Nederland: not Kreek, but Mui. Suatiegeul is officially correct but I have
never heard or seen it IRL.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 24 jul. 2019 om 04:31 heeft Joseph Eisenberg
> het volgende geschreven:
>
> The voting period has ended for
> Proposed_features/Tag:waterway=tidal_
ym to document the date when total disagreement was reached, the number of
days that took and how many mails were sent?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 29 jul. 2019 om 08:49 schreef Tobias Zwick :
> One or several wiki edits should stand at the end of every tagging
> discussion, to docume
’.
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 4 aug. 2019 om 16:23 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 4. Aug 2019, at 15:37, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>>
>> A residential is also an unclassified road.
>
>
> IM
nary though. Would probably solve the issue.
Of course this will never happen. No consensus, too much work.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op zo 4 aug. 2019 om 20:58 schreef Dave Swarthout :
> Peter wrote:
> My research tells me ‘unclassified’ means classified as ‘unclassified‘,
> which is a cla
of three levels to move
around the country, and a lot of other public roads, brushed together as a
rest category of "other roads". If we classify in the database, that's
'unclassified' or quaternary for me. Then residential roads/areas are
mostly entered through those.
As it s
I agree, but it also says don't expect it to be rendered or routed, it's a
fixme error. Mappers have used and will use 'unclassified' because they
want rendering and routing without bothering about the classification.
Fr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 5 aug. 2019 om 09:56 sch
s are
separated from the road by e.g. broad pedestrian pavements, parking lanes,
stretches of greenery, a row of trees, kerbs, and/or separate cycleways.
If e.g. a bus uses such a road I will retag it as unclassified. I would use
quaternary if I could be sure of rendering and routing, which I a
Peter Elderson
Op do 8 aug. 2019 om 13:43 schreef Paul Allen :
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 12:18, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
>> To be practical, I think I will retag the clearly residential roads now
>> tagged as 'unclassified' in my town, to 'residential'. Some road
Good luck with that!
Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 10 aug. 2019 om 11:59 heeft Julien djakk het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Hello !
>
> I've been thinking about this for a long time.
>
> Classifying roads should be the same all over the world ! :O
>
> The highwa
OT
"If we were to redesign the human body from
scratch it wouldn't have a recurrent laryngeal nerve, the epididymus would
take a
different route and the eyes wouldn't be wired backwards,..."
...and we would be born with wheels, wings and wifi...
traight in a few OSM-significant countries, I'm sure renderers,
mapping tools and checking tools will consider implementing it.
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op zo 11 aug. 2019 om 19:40 schreef Paul Johnson :
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 3:26 AM Joseph Eisenberg <
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> w
401 - 500 of 634 matches
Mail list logo
