Re: [Tagging] emergency=lifeguard

> On Jun 18, 2018, at 3:18 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > No, this will have to be a manual check, but there's only ~900 worldwide so > not impossible. Some should be pretty straight forward - if a building > beside the beach is marked as a base, then that's fine, but an apparently > empt

Re: [Tagging] The endless debate about "landcover" as a top-level tag

> On Jun 7, 2018, at 11:13 AM, Michael Andersen wrote: > > For many years now I've been pretty happy to use landuse=forest pretty much > everywhere I found a group of trees. Yes, in some cases the semantics irked > me > a bit, but landuse=forest always rendered fine. I used what worked for me

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - scenic

> On Jun 1, 2018, at 1:08 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 31. May 2018 23:50 by pame...@web.de : > > Hi there, > > > I would like to propose an new map feature and would like some comments. The > page can be found here: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Propos

Re: [Tagging] Seasonal, intermittent, and ephemeral water tags

> On May 29, 2018, at 4:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > >> On 29. May 2018, at 12:50, Andrew Davidson wrote: >> >> assuming that people would think that natural=wetland + stream=ephemeral >> would look odd--otherwise no need for a new key). > > > on which

Re: [Tagging] Seasonal, intermittent, and ephemeral water tags

> On May 26, 2018, at 12:02 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My take for water bodies: > > Perennial: I expect to find water here at any time. Exceptions: drought > > Seasonal: I expect to find water here on a yearly cycle, usually for months. > Exceptions: drought > > Intermitte

Re: [Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings

> On May 26, 2018, at 5:42 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > >> On 24. May 2018, at 05:47, Tod Fitch wrote: >> >> By the way, I don’t see a way to tag the accuracy or confidence level for a >> measurement. Seems like

Re: [Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings

> On May 23, 2018, at 7:57 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Tod Fitch <mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com>> wrote: > >> On May 22, 2018, at 12:48 PM, Paul Johnson > <mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org>> wrote: >> >> In the cas

Re: [Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings

> On May 22, 2018, at 12:48 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > In the case of your typical bog standard American residential street, I'm > strongly disinclined to agree that this is a two lane situation. I'd be > inclined to mark unpainted lanes in the cases where channelization regularly > occurs

[Tagging] Sample tagging for highways with no lane markings

In reviewing the wiki in preparation to fixing some of my older mapping, it seems there is an inconsistency in how to tag a road that is wide enough to two lanes of traffic but is lacking lane striping. In the lanes description [1] it says "the lanes=* key should be used to specify the total nu

Re: [Tagging] Seasonal, intermittent, and ephemeral water tags

> On May 18, 2018, at 7:33 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I seek comments and thoughts on > > - > > Seasonal: > > The seasonal tag in well established. I don't think there is much confusion > with it. > > > --- > > Intermittent: > > The inter

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> On May 13, 2018, at 11:58 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 1:36 PM, Johnparis > wrote: > Back to this again, Paul. It is getting tiresome. If you don't like how the > tag is defined, create a new one. Don't vandalize the old one. > > Improvemen

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> On May 11, 2018, at 8:40 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Why the almost religious doctrine level of resistance to change? Even the > Linux kernel rewrites entire subsystems from time to time when a superior > approach comes around. The difference between having a small group of core developers

Re: [Tagging] complete tagging of all 'right of way'-cases

> On May 10, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Ruben Kelevra wrote: > >> 10 May 2018 19:37:11 Martin Koppenhoefer : >>> On 10. May 2018, at 19:12, Ruben Kelevra wrote: >>> >>> Well, both tags are combined with a direction tag: >>> >>> direction=forward/backward >> >> >> which is intrinsically flawed, as

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

Reminds me of an earlier career where I sometime had to deal with sensitive documents. All documents had to classified: “Top Secret”, “Secret”, “Confidential”, etc. But if a document did not require clearance to access it was classified as “unclassified”. Basically anything that was not classifi

Re: [Tagging] Is it possible to have highway=unclassified with ref tag?

I sometimes think those of us who speak a dialect of English other than that of the UK should simply view tag values as “code words” and not worry about the definition is. We already have wiki pages dedicated to helping translate local road levels into OSM/UK road classifications. Just accept t

Re: [Tagging] Route members: ordered or not

While I’ve mapped a number of trails most of them are not part of a designated larger route so I am not 100% sure, but I think hiking routes are much like highway routes: The ways in the relation should be ordered. Not sure why you’d need a node in there, especially without an explicit role. If

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Seems like tagging “noise” to me. I’d expect a router to use the roundabout itself because exiting, making a U turn and then re-entering the roundabout will be longer and thus slower. Since the no U turn relations are there to make routing work and a reasonable router won’t need them, I’d say th

Re: [Tagging] red housenumbers

ote: > > and it's colour, not color. > > Le 19. 03. 18 à 23:10, Tod Fitch a écrit : >> So now a generic geocoder/decoder would have to know to look for color=* >> tagging in addition to addr:housenumber=* to evaluate addr:housenumber=* >> >> Sounds lik

Re: [Tagging] red housenumbers

So now a generic geocoder/decoder would have to know to look for color=* tagging in addition to addr:housenumber=* to evaluate addr:housenumber=* Sounds like a really bad idea to me. > On Mar 19, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Erkin Alp Güney wrote: > > color=background:red; may work. > > __

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

> On Feb 19, 2018, at 5:06 AM, John Sturdy wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:12 PM, Paul Allen > wrote: > In my part of the world, an artificial waterway used > for conveying water is almost always referred to as an aqueduct > > I think of an aqueduct as being a

Re: [Tagging] Default values for residential roads and living streets

> On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:02 PM, Selfish Seahorse > wrote: > > Hi > > There were quite a few additions of cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 tags > to residential roads and living streets recently, which makes me > wonder if it might make sense to define cycleway:both=no and lanes=1 > as default value

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

> On Jan 16, 2018, at 9:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > On Jan 16, 2018 05:36, "Stefan Nagy" > wrote: > Am 16.01.2018 12:10 schrieb marc marc: > we probably need to work on "default values". > but no one seems motivated to work on the proposal. > > Is 'defau

Re: [Tagging] Water source types

Boxed springs like the one you show in your first photo I typically tag as a spring (natural=spring). The photo on the wiki page for natural=spring is much like the one you posted. I usually add a direction=bearing|north|south|east|west so that my topo map rendering can show what way the spring

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > The problem is OSM is a map of the physical world, not a map of the > world's databases. If Wikidata wants to create links between OSM and > other databases that is great but so far i think no one has made a good > case why this lin

Re: [Tagging] winter tyres

> On Oct 31, 2017, at 7:50 AM, Micah Cochran wrote: > > > Please check your spelling of tire. > > tyre is the correct British English spelling. > > A tire (American English) or tyre (British English[...]) is a ring-shaped > component that surrounds a wheel's rim to transfer a vehicle's load

Re: [Tagging] Route=* for ways ?

I would feel free to correct: Individual ways shouldn’t have a route=* on them in my opinion. Tod > On Oct 15, 2017, at 11:51 AM, yvecai wrote: > > I have a concern with this page: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dpiste > > Somebody found it useful to document the usage o

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: "slogan" tag. Opinions?

It is my understanding that corporate slogans are usually trademarked and written permission is required to use or reproduce them. I think that would rule them out as acceptable items to include in OSM. On September 19, 2017 12:13:21 AM PDT, SwiftFast wrote: >The slogan tag would contain a com

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

Sounds like tagging for the renderer to me. There is a elevation tag already defined and in wide spread use. And it is pretty easy for a renderer to show that in addition to the name. And even convert it from meters to feet when doing the rendering. I do this when rendering my personal use Topo

Re: [Tagging] phone validity - phone "preset"

I would not be too hard to make a validity checker for any phone:*=* field. By the wiki [1] we should be formatting the number per ITU E.123. That requires a leading “+” and a space delimiter between digits groups. [2] More over, all international telephone numbers need to conform to ITU E.164 [

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > > Tod, > > Can you clarify what residential and rural roads mean to you? Is a > residential road corresponding to the osm tag? When is a road rural? Can you > determine this for each osm way? > > Regards > > m > > Op 1 sep. 20

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Defaults are paramount, abandoning Proposed_features/ is a HUGE mistake

I take exception to the comment that “there will be too many exceptions to the rule”. In the country I live in each state has a set of “prima facia” speed limits for various types of roads. Those are basically default speed limits to be enforced unless otherwise posted by sign. Virtually no res

Re: [Tagging] Pepper: Chili, piper, bell pepper

I am bemused by this thread. I know that when I am sent to the grocers to get peppers I’ve never been asked to get a “chili pepper”. Depending on the desired dish it might be a “Anaheim”, “Chipotle”, “Jalapeño”, “Serrano”, “Habaneros” or other type of the spicy peppers. Those are just a few of

[Tagging] Highway turn outs

In mountainous areas the highways here often have a wider spot signed as a “turn out” where slower moving traffic is supposed to pull over to allow following vehicles to pass. These are scattered along two lane roads were the sight distance is too short to allow passing other wise. For examples,

Re: [Tagging] Traffic training area ("Verkehrsübungsplatz" in German)

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 3:33 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > According to WP, a proving ground is the AE word for a training area > (military). > Probably "proving_ground" is highly misleading and not sufficiently specific > as a word for these. > I have found "driver training area" as a w

Re: [Tagging] siphon underpass

> On Jun 8, 2017, at 6:40 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > I am looking into how to tag a frequent feature in my area, i.e. a siphon > underpass, known in Italian as "botte a sifone" or "botte sifone" and in > French as "pont siphon". This is a non.connecting waterway crossing where the > lower

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - meadow=wooded_meadow

> On May 1, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Mattias Dalkvist wrote: > > Hi all, please comment. > > meadow=wooded_meadow > : > A vegetation complex consisting of small copses of trees and shrubs and > patches of open meadows.

Re: [Tagging] historic=tank and surprises with tags like car-sharing

> On Apr 17, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Mark Wagner wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 01:31:45 +0200 > "André Pirard" wrote: > >> And what's the problem with tank anyway, is there anything like a >> historic liquid container anyway? > > Yes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/428396108 > > (Should proba

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign's relevant direction: direction=* vs. relation [Was: traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*]

> On Mar 24, 2017, at 7:04 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:15:41 +0100 > yo paseopor wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: On 23 Mar 2017, at 17:23, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: - highway=stop+direction=forward node

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*

> On Mar 22, 2017, at 4:51 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > > Anyone else with an opinion ? Two of us might be the very beginning of a > consensus but we need a little more before even putting a proposal > page up on the wiki... > > I think to include direction inside the tag with a subkey :forward :ba

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*

Quoted sections have been edited down to only show parts I am responding to: > On Mar 22, 2017, at 5:37 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > For highway=traffic_signals, the normal situation is that it's on a > node, and affects all ways entering the node. Or it's on a way and > affects both directions -

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

opaseopor > > [1] http://imgur.com/RFVKLGZ <http://imgur.com/RFVKLGZ> > [2] http://imgur.com/9tCwVBT <http://imgur.com/9tCwVBT> > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Tod Fitch <mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com>> wrote: > If micro mapping, then the stop sign is usua

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

If micro mapping, then the stop sign is usually not in the center of the traveled way (though I have occasionally seen some there). For micro mapping, place a node for the sign where it exists on the side of the road and then use the compass direction to indicate how it is facing. As it is detac

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

ting mailing list, or open an issue in > osrm-backend. > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Tod Fitch <mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com>> wrote: > From a data consumer point of view, what type of tagging would be reasonable > to indicate the, for lack of a better work, directi

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

s://www.openstreetmap.org/user/daniel-j-h/diary/40554 > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/daniel-j-h/diary/40554> (de) > > Cheers, > Daniel J H > > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > 2017-03-16 5:13 GM

[Tagging] The direction=* tag

The “direction” tag [1] has different uses that seem disjoint to me. To specify the orientation (compass point or degrees from north) of an object (adit or cave entrance, etc.). To specify direction (clockwise/counterclockwise) around a roundabout (not sure why this is needed as it should be app

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

t using both maxspeed (45 mph) and maxspeed:conditional > (40 mph @ dusk-dawn). > > W dniu 13.03.2017, pon o godzinie 09∶40 -0700, użytkownik Tod Fitch > napisał: >> Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it >> might be tagged as: >> >>

Re: [Tagging] Day/night speed limits

Based on the conditional restrictions pages on the wiki, I think it might be tagged as: "maxspeed:conditional”="45 mph@dawn-dusk;40 mph@dusk-dawn” Is this correct? (I seem to have a comprehension issue with the conditional tagging syntax). Thanks! > On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:27

[Tagging] Day/night speed limits

There are a number of roads in Arizona, and perhaps elsewhere, that have different speed limits for night vs day. You can see some examples with this search [1]. These are not based on wall clock time as they vary with the time of sunrise and sunset. Suggestions on how to tag the speed limits on

[Tagging] Tag for mining "prospect"

Fresh from correcting tagging on some adits, I realize that I have probably miss-tagged some other features as mine shafts. In the semi-arid area with a history of mining that I am trying to add details to, there are man made features the old USGS topo maps called a “prospect”. These are places

Re: [Tagging] Orientation of an adit?

> See also: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:direction > > Regards, > Carsten > > Am 10.03.2017 um 14:48 schrieb Tod Fitch: >> There are a number of abandoned adits and mine shafts in an area I’ve done >> some mapping in. When looking at old USGS topogra

[Tagging] Orientation of an adit?

There are a number of abandoned adits and mine shafts in an area I’ve done some mapping in. When looking at old USGS topographic maps of the area, I’ve noticed that they used to align their symbol for an adit to show its orientation. I’d like to duplicate that rendering on the topographic maps I

Re: [Tagging] Mapping freeway stub ends?

> On Mar 2, 2017, at 12:40 PM, Tijmen Stam wrote: > > +1 on highway=construction + construction=* + access is no if non-accessible > If accessible (such as > https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=delta%2C%20be#map=18/50.81538/4.40527&layers=N > / > https://www.google.nl/maps/place/P%2BR+

Re: [Tagging] Beef fattening stations

That is a neat [1] idea. [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/neat#English > On Feb 8, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > Along with landuse=farmland and farmland=feedlot, how about produce=beef? > That sidesteps the issue of steer vs bull, etc. > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:14 AM, Mar

Re: [Tagging] Beef fattening stations

I have a hard time accepting "amenity", a term acceptable for park benches, restaurants, etc., being applied to a feedlot. Of the suggestions made so far, landuse=industrial industrial=feedlot (or some other equivalent) makes more sense to me. On February 8, 2017 10:42:12 AM PST, Viking w

Re: [Tagging] Harmonising source tag values.

Is there any reason to use a source tag now that comments are required on commits/edits? On February 7, 2017 5:47:46 PM PST, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi, > > >One mapper has taken on themselves to 'harmonise' some local source tag > >values. > > >There are many more that could be d

Re: [Tagging] Beef fattening stations

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 2:32 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > @Martin: there are two relevant Wikipedia articles: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedlot > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_animal_feeding_operation >

Re: [Tagging] Beef fattening stations

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 4:47 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > 2017-02-06 12:32 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt >: > Hadn't done my homework: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_animal_feeding_operation >

Re: [Tagging] How should golf ball protection be tagged?

> On Jan 10, 2017, at 1:05 AM, Rory McCann wrote: > > On 09/01/17 16:59, Tod Fitch wrote: >> Here is a footway adjacent to a golf course that is being protected >> against people being hit by golf balls. [1] >> >> What is the best tagging for this protective st

[Tagging] How should golf ball protection be tagged?

Here is a footway adjacent to a golf course that is being protected against people being hit by golf balls. [1] What is the best tagging for this protective structure? The lower part on the right could be considered a fence, but it extends over the top of the footway which makes it un-fence lik

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

> On Jan 8, 2017, at 10:59 AM, Marc Zoutendijk wrote: > > Hello, > > Some mappers use landuse=village_green to tag those spots on the map that are > combinations of grass, plants, bushes, flowers and sometimes a few small > trees. > The size can vary between 1m2 to maybe 100m2-500m2. > Areas

Re: [Tagging] shop=estate_agent and office=estate_agent

For what it is worth, in the regional dialect of American English I speak and the area I live in, realtors (“estate agents” or “real estate agents”) work out of an “realty office” or a “real estate office”. It might be a “store front” office, but the office is very likely to only be open during

Re: [Tagging] fixme -- by a specific date

> On Nov 28, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > > Bill, > > The seasonal tag[1] already exists for very general 'seasonal availability' > of features. This works for a very rough approximation of actual > availability which may be enough for some use cases. This could (should?) be

Re: [Tagging] railway=rail vs. railway=subway

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 7:45 AM, Michael Tsang wrote: > > I should clarify that the level crossing of light rails should be not > actively > protected, i.e. do not have fences which come down before the train passes. > One of the major criteria between tram / light rail and metro / full-size >

Re: [Tagging] service:car for car shops and repair

> On Nov 3, 2016, at 7:30 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > > On Thu Nov 3 08:52:59 2016 GMT, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> >> >> sent from a phone >> >>> Il giorno 03 nov 2016, alle ore 00:41, Dave Swarthout >>> ha scritto: >>> >>> Also, there is a fourth very strange value offered for repair an

Re: [Tagging] tagging floodplain

> On Sep 25, 2016, at 3:30 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > There is a draft to tag floodplains using the key natural. > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/floodplain > > > My thinking is that this would lead to conflicts with other 'natural' tags ..

Re: [Tagging] Help required on tagging a "wadi"

> On Sep 5, 2016, at 1:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 05 set 2016, alle ore 20:00, yo paseopor ha >> scritto: >> >> also I would add the tag ford=yes, because instead is not a ford itselfs it >> has the same conditions. > > > ford=yes is fo

Re: [Tagging] Roads with no speed limits

> On Aug 28, 2016, at 12:35 PM, Hans De Kryger > wrote: > > Here in Phoenix Arizona more than half the freeway off ramps have no listed > speed limit. Does (maxspeed=none) work? I've worked hard here in the valley > adding speed limits and when you look at the ito map it looks like no one >

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

> On Aug 26, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:44 AM, yo paseopor > wrote: > If you know which turn:lane it is you can specify it instead there's no > marks. In Spain, with administrations in crisis some of them don't paint all >

[Tagging] Water in bays, harbors, etc.

During a day kayaking I noticed that the OSM map in the area was less than perfect so I thought I’d see what I could do to improve it. But I have not worked on this type of feature very much and am a little uncertain of some tagging details. The area is a “back bay”, a tidal area with some chan

Re: [Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

> On Aug 9, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2016/08/09 22:20: >>> Il giorno 09 ago 2016, alle ore 18:54, Kevin Kenny >>> ha scritto: >>> >>> What I'm thinking is to put amenity=prison on the whole area and then >>> barrier=wall or barrier=fence on the en

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for palapa

> > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 25 lug 2016, alle ore 16:23, Tod Fitch ha >> scritto: >> >> And I wonder what the two instances of shelter:type=seaside_shelter are >> representing > > > depending where they are, could look like this: > htt

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for palapa

The wiki has no entry that I see for a key value of “shelter:type”. But I think you are correct that it seems to be more logical and in keeping with current new tag standards to use the hierarchical form. I suppose we could change this “how do I tag” thread into a “should we revise the wiki to

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for palapa

shelter_type=palapa ? > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Alejandro S. wrote: >> Loos like building=roof + new tag for refinement? >> >> Atentamente, >> Alejandro Suárez >> >> On 24 July 2016 at 22:22, Tod Fitch wrote: >>> >>>

[Tagging] Tagging for palapa

There are some structures on a beach I’d like to tag which I believe are called a palapa [1]. Not my photos, but there are images of others on the web, for instance [2] and [3]. I don’t see anything under ‘palapa' in the wiki. And while there are some things I see in taginfo that have “palapa”

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

> On Jul 19, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Mikael Nordfeldth wrote: > > On 2016-07-19 22:38, Tod Fitch wrote: >> A map for hiking is greatly enhanced by letting its users know, in advance >> of arriving at the trail head, that there are permits required. Even better >> if

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

> On Jul 19, 2016, at 1:17 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > > Your examples feel like private land to me. Except for the one with the > bull... > > > Maybe this would help me see the distinction: > > How much trouble are you in, if you enter without explicit permission? Are > you (in theory at le

Re: [Tagging] "no right turn on red" tagging?

Been shot down already a year or two ago that I know of. I still think defaults per administrative area/boundary with inverse hierarchical nesting (more local overrides less local) makes a lot of sense. Example 1: The default speed limit assumption for a city take precedence over that of a stat

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

> On Jun 13, 2016, at 6:39 PM, John Willis wrote: > > . . . > The second idea of grading trails, similar to track type I am less sure of. > > Trail conditions vary so wildly, I think it is difficult to define - and > people's perceptions of what is "needed" for a hike vary wildly. Some people

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

I haven’t seen “none;slight_right” as a value and am not sure how that should look different than “slight_right” by itself. However “none” is a value listed in the wiki [1] and I use it a lot as I find multiple vertical bars hard to manually count/edit but I can see and count things like “left|n

Re: [Tagging] furniture maker

> On Mar 31, 2016, at 3:36 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 1/04/2016 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> >> I m sure there are even more professions that work with wood to construct >> something, e.g. specialized in building yachts etc. >> > - wood turner .. for a person doin

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

> On Mar 26, 2016, at 4:56 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > Tom Pfeifer writes: > >> The qualifier service=parking_aisle was originally introduced [1] to >> structure car parks with a few main access ways and lots of small aisles, >> to avoid clutter in lower zoom levels. >> >> It is highly succ

Re: [Tagging] Do-it-yourself versus hardware stores

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > >> how do we tag "do it yourself"-shops where you can buy material (e.g. wood) >> and use their tools and space to build something? > > That's totally different. I know of only places to do painting/make >

Re: [Tagging] Discussion about Multivalued Keys

> On Jan 27, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Malcolm Herring > wrote: > > On 27/01/2016 16:36, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> One thing that I would like to see discussed is ordering. > > There should be allowance for both ordered and unordered multiple values. > Whether this is left to the producer/consumer tool

Re: [Tagging] Discussion about Multivalued Keys

Seems like the mapper should simply report what is there. The data consumer should decide, based on its focus, what is more important. > On Jan 27, 2016, at 7:52 AM, Matthijs Melissen > wrote: > > Hi Colin, > > Thanks for getting this discussion started. I agree it's fine to use > the proposa

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Remove name_1 and alt_name_1 from wiki)

> On Jan 26, 2016, at 9:24 AM, Éric Gillet wrote: > > 2016-01-26 17:52 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale >: > So how ARE we going to represent multi-valued attributes from real life in an > OSM context? > > > I believe that if a multi-value tag system is added to the OSM AP

Re: [Tagging] Tagging scrap yards, junkyards

> On Jan 20, 2016, at 9:19 AM, Matthijs Melissen > wrote: > > On 20 January 2016 at 02:03, Dave Swarthout > wrote: > > I'm trying to decide how to tag what we in the U.S. refer to as junkyards. > Mostly these are where old automobiles go when they are discarde

Re: [Tagging] Elevation and height on vertical features

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:51 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > Tod Fitch writes: > >>> On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Mike Thompson wrote: >>> >>> But I get it that the USGS surely publishes mountain heights >>> somehow. >>> I have ask

Re: [Tagging] Elevation and height on vertical features

> On Jan 8, 2016, at 10:04 AM, Mike Thompson wrote: > > But I get it that the USGS surely publishes mountain heights > somehow. > I have asked, and so far I have not gotten an answer as to where I can find > the data. > Is this the type of data you are looking for? http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/c

Re: [Tagging] highway = track vs. residential

My parents house is in a pretty rural part of Arizona and distinguishing between tracks and driveways or even residential roads can be difficult there. So my initial instinct was to say leave the ways in that part of Colorado as tracks as it can be hard to tell on the imagery. But looking at th

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

A raised area several feet across with a marked crosswalk on top is not uncommon in Silicon Valley and more of them seem to appearing in residential areas. I suspect that it is one of the newer ways to address the combined issue of traffic calming and pedestrian crossing. On November 20, 20

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

That is exactly the type of place I’d consider using a highway=residential_link tag. > On Nov 10, 2015, at 10:31 AM, Bryan Housel wrote: > > Please consider the one I just added today: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/379558356#map=19/40.68812/-74.38970 >

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

I am pretty sure that I am one of the mappers that have used residential_link as a highway value in cases where there was a separate way for making a right turn from one residential road to another. If the two roads the connecting way links are tagged as residential I don’t see any other choice

Re: [Tagging] Buildings mixing residential and commercial use

In my area there are a number of new buildings either recently completed or still under construction that can only be described as a mixed use type: The street level is steel and concrete construction and designed specifically for retail. Above that are 3 to 5 wood framed floors specifically des

Re: [Tagging] works_as_highway=primary

> On Jul 28, 2015, at 8:29 AM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: > > One routing error that came up recently is a trunk with a lower than > typical maxspeed, and a trunk_link without a maxspeed tag. The router > used its default idea of maxspeed for that link, and tried to use it > as a shortcut. The rou

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

> On Jun 4, 2015, at 9:11 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > > On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: >> The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position where >> you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one >> vehicle but has passing bays along it's le

Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?

JOSM’s validity checking will warn against a highway=* going through a building=roof but it accepts it if you add a layer=1, so in this situation I’ve been using the following tagging: building=roof layer=1 (and typically other things like amenity=fuel). Often, but not always, there is a small

Re: [Tagging] Wiki: Key:level: proposed rewrite

I believe that level=* is not intended for direction finding but for 3D rendering. So, yes, it is an “internal value” which needs to be uniform through out the world. And for building rendering numerical values make much more sense than text. Pretty much like lanes=* or width=* need to be unifor

Re: [Tagging] Airport power and USB stations

> On May 24, 2015, at 2:07 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> Am 24.05.2015 um 06:18 schrieb Dave Swarthout : >> >> @Martin, I think the two words connected with a colon is the best choice. >> It's already in use: socket:USB=* > > > there're different types of USB sockets so I'd be more spe

Re: [Tagging] Estate agent

> On May 17, 2015, at 9:01 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: > > On 17/05/2015 16:52, Paweł Marynowski wrote: >> Hi all, >> it looks like since 2010 there is no consensus about how to tag estate agent >> - shop vs. office. Quick look at taginfo gives clear information, that >> office=estate_agent is much

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

Just exactly how can a data consumer be “abstracted from our tags”? Where in a typical rendering process could this abstraction be placed where it would be automatic and transparent to the people maintaining the data consumers? For example, I generate PDF/paper trail maps for an organization usi

<    1   2   3   4   >