Re: [Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

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 enclosure. sounds reasonable to me When it is a bit of green space aroun

Re: [Tagging] Satellite visibility of archaeological sites

Bjoern Hassler wrote on 2016/08/23 14:02: Hi Martin, hi Marc, thanks for the response. I suppose another way of looking at it would be to say that the site's existence is verifiable from satellite images. Is there a tag for that? It could always be added to the note tag, but a structured tag m

Re: [Tagging] Playgrounds/Play zones in forests

playground:theme=* is somewhat established already. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:playground#Themes Janko Mihelić wrote on 2016/09/10 17:28: Maybe just add playground_type=forest_playground, nature_playground or something like that. Dana 10. ruj 2016. 16:43 osoba "Marc Gemis" mail

Re: [Tagging] Proposal : amenity=baking_oven

On 13.10.2016 13:18, markus schnalke wrote: [2016-10-13 13:05] Yvan Masson Hi list, I just proposed the introduction of the "baking_oven" tag on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dbaking_oven I would be pleased if you could have a look on this draft and give your

Re: [Tagging] Differentiating streets with official name from non-official yet name

On 07.11.2016 13:03, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 09:57 -0200, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: Situation: there is a city where all the streets are named (using the "name" tag). Some of the names are official (recognized by the city hall, by law, etc) and some are not yet officially

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 07.11.2016 17:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2016-11-07 17:34 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić Here is an example of a not-a-roundabout without lights: https://goo.gl/maps/TVuMRZs59Kk It even has a roundabout sign, but the right of way is clear through

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 07.11.2016 17:09, Dave F wrote: Hi Daniel Second example: Which junction has priority? From a quick look on Streetview all junctions appear to be light controlled. In Berlin, from where the examples are taken, you have unlit give-way+main-street signage even when the junction is light cont

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 08.11.2016 11:58, Dave F wrote: Why would you want it to "issue special instructions"? Are you askingus to add a 'this is not a roundabout' tag to fool OSRM into thinking it's a roundabout? This is exactly the question we need to ask first, what should the driver experience be? For a small

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 08.11.2016 12:07, Daniel Hofmann wrote: querying for (junction!=roundabout) and (note~"roundabout|Kreisverkehr") The routing engine could do the same parsing note tags. This would allow us to classify probably all popular ones at least. But it's a hack and that's exactly my point: there shou

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 08.11.2016 12:53, Tom Pfeifer wrote: However it needs to be a positive tag describing the situation, and a negative what it is not. I meant, of course: However it needs to be a positive tag describing the situation, and _*not*_ a negative what it is not. tom

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 08.11.2016 14:35, Dave F wrote: On 08/11/2016 11:07, Daniel Hofmann wrote: In the second example "Skalitzer Straße" has right of way. ... Reichenberger Straße appears to be mapped incorrectly as No. it joins directly into Kottbusser Tor That's what it does in reality. And it's oneway

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

On 08.11.2016 16:26, Dave F wrote: I think you're looking at the wrong bit: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172425897 Indeed, as we were talking about circular structures, I was looking into the road in the north-west of the circle, you refer to the roads in the southeast. http://tinyurl

Re: [Tagging] Proper Tag for Not-a-Roundabout

We had plenty of discussion over three days, unfortunately without a resolution. We were discussing specific roundabouts, and what the best router announcements would be in various cases. We did not decide about a value. Currently, OSM defines junction=roundabout with two conditions fulfilled

Re: [Tagging] How might we best map emergency helicopter landing zones?

aeroway=helipad should be used only for built-up infrastructure, not for emergency places that have a different use normally. An emergency landing place is nothing but a predefined clear space, it could be a soccer pitch or a big lawn in a park in normal situations. There is already "emergenc

Re: [Tagging] How might we best map emergency helicopter landing zones?

On 22.11.2016 15:52, Alberto Nogaro wrote: I had always thought that "a large H painted on it visible from the air" was enough to mark the spot as aeroway=helipad, even if the place is mainly conceived for emergency purposes. As we just learned from the Korean mountains example, some light

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - flight route

On 28.11.2016 11:27, Michael Tsang wrote: The consensus is that the flight path should not be mapped, but we are interested the airport (Stop positions and platforms) where the flight serves. Platforms, a.k.a. Gates, can already be mapped. Which flight they serve changes every day, this is nei

[Tagging] Coworking space: amenity vs. office ?

There was a recent wiki [1] edit that triggers me to bring this question to the list. Should a coworking space be tagged as an amenity or an office? Pro office == - amenity is overused for anything. - coworking space is work-related, office seems to be a good fit. - the office key is we

Re: [Tagging] Coworking space: amenity vs. office ?

On 05.01.2017 10:31, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 5 Jan 2017, at 04:58, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: Coworking spaces are targeted towards white-collar office desk jobs +1, this is also what comes to my mind when I hear coworking. I propose to use office=coworking for those that are offices

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

On 09.01.2017 01:19, Warin wrote: landuse=grass is for the PRODUCTION of grass - Grass is grown here, harvested (with a little soil) and transported somewhere and planted. Then more grass is grown etc. In the same way landuse=forest is for the Production of things from the tress grown there.

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=grass - boots on change to wiki

On 09.01.2017 12:03, Dave F wrote: On 09/01/2017 09:16, Volker Schmidt wrote: Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common use is, not what the common use should be. If you want to change the common use please use the available discussion channels before changing the wi

Re: [Tagging] What about a disused quarry and historic surface mining?

On 09.01.2017 13:15, ael wrote: This thread has reminded me that I have encountered problems with mapping disused quarries and surface mining. The quarries that I have in mind are major geographical features - they have not been filled in. I tried tagging them as landuse=quarry and disused=yes.

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=grass - boots on change to wiki

On 09.01.2017 21:03, Warin wrote: On 09-Jan-17 08:16 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: Please remember that the wiki is intended to document what the common use is, not what the common use should be. If you want to change the common use please use the available discussion channels before changing the wi

Re: [Tagging] What about a disused quarry and historic surface mining?

On 09.01.2017 21:23, ael wrote: On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 02:00:58PM +0100, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 09.01.2017 13:15, ael wrote: Please do not use "disused=yes" as it is considered troll-tagging, first saying it is simething, and in the next line negating it. I don't think th

Re: [Tagging] What about a disused quarry and historic surface mining?

On 09.01.2017 22:56, ksg wrote: Am 09.01.2017 um 22:15 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: On 10-Jan-17 07:56 AM, ksg wrote: You might use man_made=embankment for them. Don’t use natural=cliff, as these features are not of natural origin. The 'natural' key is used for both 'natural' a

Re: [Tagging] What about a disused quarry and historic surface mining?

On 10.01.2017 10:47, Zecke wrote: Artificial rock faces in quarries and open pit mines, called berms, are created due to blasting. The faces are typically inclined 60-70° with drops of max. a few tenth of meters. This fundamental difference might be best taken into account by using man_made=emb

Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

On 12.01.2017 10:27, Warin wrote: On 12-Jan-17 07:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2017-01-12 1:19 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout: I honestly don't see the need for another top-level tag for this purpose. +1, IMHO we can use landuse for all kind of surface use, be it "land" or "water" or su

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

On 12.01.2017 02:19, Warin wrote: So I have added 3 tables to the wiki produce page; aquaculture, farm and forestry. I see no problem with defining these values. (hm, corn is AmE and should be maize for clarity and BrE). Question remains if there is a need to proactively add so many values to

[Tagging] Non-geometrical ways in boundary relations

Boundary relations [1] can have members that are the boundary itself, thus the geometrical part of this boundary, as well as further details, in particular an admin_centre and a label, which are both extremely well accepted, and (disputed) a subarea. The valid geometrical members are 'outer' (

Re: [Tagging] Non-geometrical ways in boundary relations

Colin, there is a separate discussion on the wiki page about multiple admin centres, as you said below. It is a valid point, but IMHO a separate issue from technically tagging the admin_centre role on a way. On 26.01.2017 13:02, Colin Smale wrote: Tom, I think we need to have consensus about w

Re: [Tagging] Non-geometrical ways in boundary relations

On 26.01.2017 14:00, Dave F wrote: admin_centre added to a town/villages place node is sufficient as local authorities often use multiple buildings. If that is a solution to your situations, fine. It is insufficient for mine. On 26/01/2017 11:46, Tom Pfeifer wrote: There is no logical

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Carport

On 04.02.2017 21:25, Warin wrote: I see no difference from building=roof with amenity=parking... and I would think rendering would be the same. No. building=carport describes a particular building style, which is common enough to justify a more special tag than =roof. Amenity should not be u

Re: [Tagging] Harmonising source tag values.

On 08.02.2017 02:47, Warin wrote: One mapper has taken on themselves to 'harmonise' some local source tag values. .. the major example would be Bing, bing, BING, bing and bing It is not possible to normalise them once you go beyond the simple example of Bing, and when you combine di

Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge

On 13.02.2017 22:28, Volker Schmidt wrote: A dead hedge is not to be confused with a hedge woven from pieces of wood. It's function is much less that of a barrier than that of a natural habitat for some animal species, especially in the context of organic farming [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On 08.03.2017 00:01, Johan C wrote: make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should also be met I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem with the node being at the physical separation, in particular if the turn:lanes are tagged correctly. OsmAnd will give advance adv

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

On 08.03.2017 15:18, François Lacombe wrote: frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power networks (among others, see wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:po

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On 08.03.2017 10:38, Marc Gemis wrote: On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem with the node being at the physical separation, in particular if the turn:lanes are tagged correctly. OsmAnd will give advance advice to turn and displa

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On 08.03.2017 19:40, Johan C wrote: 'Add a highway =*motorway_junction* tag at each node Node along a highway with named or numbered junctions where a driver can legally exit'. Haven't investiga

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

On 13.03.2017 16:57, Andy Townsend wrote: I'm a native English British English speaker, and to me brownfield does not mean just "scheduled for development". It just means "was used for some development but is no longer". It _may_ then be used for something else in the future (you often hear "re

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On 05.04.2017 23:19, Warin wrote: Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane Do _not_. Separate ways are used when the roads are physically separated, not when a white line is painted. Lane mapping would get you reverted. this way routing engines will regard them as separ

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On 05.04.2017 23:42, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane this way routing engines will regard them as separate roads and stop trying to get

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

There was a longer discussion about this topic in January this year already: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-January/thread.html I think the conclusion was to keep landuse=forest and the dicussion forked into subtagging of crops. On 07.04.2017 20:56, Mattias Dalkvist wrot

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city). The standard layer doesn't show it but every other layer does, and it appears no

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

On 16.04.2017 11:54, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city). The standard layer doesn't show i

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

On 17.04.2017 01:27, Tom Hardy wrote: The closest I've come is http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780 where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created the relation. Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later were gone. I looked into it and found someone had move

[Tagging] Disaster response

There was a discussion recently, though I cannot find it, about 'civil defense'-like services, responding to major emergencies. They still lack an internationally suitable tag. There is an Australian attempt (emergency=ses_station) that gains some international interest, though it is an incompr

Re: [Tagging] Disaster response

On 18.04.2017 01:26, Warin wrote: On 17-Apr-17 09:55 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: emergency=disaster_response The specific national service could be subtagged, such as disaster_response=* Why not use the present operator tag to specify the organisation? Yes of course, good point. ... for the

Re: [Tagging] toilets:wheelchair or wheelchair_toilet (Both iD presets)

One of them, I think wheelchair_toilet, was caused by an implementation error in the wheelmap system, which was fixed last year. Correcting it was under discussion mainly on the German list, and a mechanical fix is envisaged. On 14.05.2017 15:41, Dave F wrote: Hi toilets:wheelchair 64875 (iD

Re: [Tagging] many tiny zoo

On 29.05.2017 18:13, joost schouppe wrote: A mapper in my area added several tiny zoo's: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49005889?#map=19/50.74418/4.28134 They are probably some enclosures where you can see animals, but these are just some cages in an otherwise non-zoo leisure area. I t

Re: [Tagging] Truck Parking

On 03.06.2017 05:05, Warin wrote: What to use tagging wise on areas presently tagged amenity=parking, name=Truck Parking. I think the name tag should be deleted. But I don't want to loose the information "Truck parking" is the human-readable description, thus you can use the description=* tag

Re: [Tagging] man_made=tunnel

On 11.06.2017 02:23, Tijmen Stam wrote: I propose a man_made=tunnel, analogous to man_made=bridge . This is meant to show a tunnel outline for tunnels that have multiple separate ways in them. There is a draft proposal already from w

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

Reading the recent wiki-talk by Dieterdreist, the proposed "driver_training" goes in the right direction, however I would drop the "area" suffix and the "children" prefix to keep the value compact. The age group can be described with additional tags such as min_age= or max_age, the vehicle with

Re: [Tagging] Beautified JSON presets for natural=tree

On 22.07.2017 20:51, Simon Poole wrote: [...] Which in turn implies that if you are using more than one third party data source and it is not clear what you have been deriving from which source, you should be creating separate changesets. Separating changesets would be a rare case in which the

Re: [Tagging] source tag on object <> changeset

On 23.07.2017 01:28, marc marc wrote: JOSM ctrl-h ctrl-h give the whole history and you need to diff manually it is what i already do :-) i'm talking about the history/source of ONE/EVERY tag for exemple a object have a ele tag. witch changeset create/modify it ? it parse the history, find tha

[Tagging] amenity spamming?

There is a user creating a large amount of strange wiki pages for "amenities" like television, microwave, washing machine, stool, seat, plant, fridge, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dstool or tiny perishable objects like natural=flower https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:n

Re: [Tagging] Names containing abbreviations that are the official name

On 27.07.2017 13:14, Adam Snape wrote: As long as it was clear from the tag (as it is in your example) that it was a spoken rather than written form of the name then I wouldn't have a problem with it. To be most useful such a tag should not just exist for TTS software, it could also be of use w

Re: [Tagging] Names containing abbreviations that are the official name

On 28.07.2017 11:39, Adam Snape wrote: On 27 July 2017 at 21:20, Tom Pfeifer mailto:t.pfei...@computer.org>> wrot There are pronunciation dictionaries for different languages, which are not thicker than spelling dictionaries. In electronic form they would measure in kilobytes,

Re: [Tagging] How's this parking lot on top of a building?

All fine. Personally, I would make the parking outline a bit smaller than the building, thus excluding the wall thickness and the roof installations, and draw exactly around the space markings. That also has the advantage that the amenity is clearer recognisable for the next mapper. t. On 14.08

Re: [Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

On 18.08.2017 02:30, Clifford Snow wrote: On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Javier Sánchez Portero > wrote: * In the wiki [1] says that the outline should be tagged with building:levels and height, but this, if the parts cover the whole outline, is a duplicati

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

Number 2 and 3 are fine for me. However I could not find 'piper' as a synonym for the spice in my English dictionaries. A piper is a player of a bagpipe or sometimes a flute, thus that is highly confusing. IMHO it would be sufficient to clarify that produce=pepper means the https://en.wikipedi

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

[2] in OSM, where you can use the latin name. Beside these exceptions, tagging language is British English, and in all varieties of English this spicy crop is 'pepper'. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:genus [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:species On 20/08/201

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

On 20.08.2017 22:48, Kevin Kenny wrote: The English word 'pepper' also applies to several plants in the genera Aframomum, Capsicum, Pimenta, Schinus, and Zanthophylum (plus others that are used in traditional herbal medicine but not for the kitchen). > I think that the original poster wanted to

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

On 21.08.2017 01:57, marc marc wrote: Le 21. 08. 17 à 00:07, Tod Fitch a écrit : e.g. black pepper corns could be “produce=pepper”, “variety=black_corn”. subtab is very useful to have usable datas with a level of detail that depends on the need. While I am generally in favour of subtagging,

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

On 21.08.2017 17:41, Tobias Zwick wrote: Any reason why you would prefer produce=chilli_pepper over produce=chili? I'd prefer the double-L for the more BrE version. chilli_pepper vs. chilli would give a focus on the spicy plant opposed to the dish "Chilli con/sin carne", and a clear contrast t

Re: [Tagging] farm schools?

On 04.09.2017 22:01, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 4. Sep 2017, at 21:45, José G Moya Y. wrote: In Spanish it is farm_school. in italian it's "fattoria didattica" (didactic farm), in German there are different terms in use, e.g. Jugendfarm, Kinderbauernhof. Hm, in Berlin we have some tagged

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

On 06.09.2017 06:56, André Pirard wrote: I'll suggest this to JOSM and they'll probably do it. They're the best. Found your ticket opened here: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/15250 Looking into iD, I browsed the tickets for 'phone', https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/search?p=1&q=phone

[Tagging] contact:* for review websites

I have seen a few mappers recently adding contact:[ yelp | tripadvisor | foursquare ] to businesses. IMHO these are not means of contact, instead these are review websites. While I personally think that we do not need them in OSM at all, they certainly do not belong in the contact:* namespace.

Re: [Tagging] Swimming pool facilities

On 17.09.2017 20:08, marc marc wrote: Le 17. 09. 17 à 18:20, Selfish Seahorse a écrit : a sub-tag swimming_facility=outdoor/indoor existing indoor=yes/no is not enough ? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/indoor#values Both are in use: * indoor=yes/no * outdoor=yes/no They are in use fo

Re: [Tagging] Mapping hotels on buildings or areas around buildings

On 29.09.2017 17:18, Bryan Housel wrote: AFAIK (from memory) the notable exceptions are schools/universities, hospitals, gas stations, and power substations. There is no reason to treat that as exception, vice versa, if any facility has a campus, the tag describing the facility belongs on the

Re: [Tagging] Mapping hotels on buildings or areas around buildings

On 29.09.2017 21:03, Janko Mihelić wrote An item is a building only if it has a tag building={anything other than no}. It's pretty simple. Absolutely. On 29.09.2017 20:40, Kevin Kenny wrote: > ... update the Wiki to indicate that an area > feature should represent the hotel's entire facility

Re: [Tagging] Proposed deletion of wiki pages about motorcycle_friendly=*

On 03.10.2017 11:34, Thilo Haug wrote: Please describe which 'problems' you fear to appear if it's not deleted. As you ask so directly - the core problem is your attitude towards the community. On 10 January 2017‎ you propose "motorcycle_friendly", but don't discuss it in the community. On 1

[Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

In the wake of the discussion about the methods used to push the "motorcycle_friendly" tag, I found that the tag "proprietor:motorcyclist=yes/no Whether the proprietor rides himself (and therefore got expertise)" being described [1], and used 12x in the database. In my understanding, we would

Re: [Tagging] Not mapping personal preferences and details

On 06.10.2017 03:22, Dave Swarthout wrote: IMO, this sort of information does not belong in the OSM database. If a shop owner is expert in the field, fine; let them say so in a website specific to the business and we can add the "expertise" information in that way. OSM cannot be a database of al

Re: [Tagging] Multiple offices at the same address - (Multiple values for one key)

On 26.10.2017 23:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Would an easy solution be to just call them Unit 1, Unit 2 & Unit 3, even though the actual offices may not be physically designated that way? Absolutely not. Please do not invent identifiers that do not exist in reality. Further, it would not sol

Re: [Tagging] building=stands or building=grandstand?

On 27.10.2017 15:31, Marco Boeringa wrote: "building=grandstand" is unfortunately undocumented, fixed Since the new tag has only a tenth of the usage of the old tag, and the building=grandstand tag is likely quite a bit older, I would suggest to keep the old tag, and change the building key p

Re: [Tagging] building=stands or building=grandstand?

On 27.10.2017 22:16, Warin wrote: discouraging the new tag preferably, done Object. No contact with mappers using that value. The usage was discouraged for this purpose, neither forbidden nor deprecated. No tagging in the database was changed (by myself). What was intended by the use of 'st

Re: [Tagging] Dog-friendly cafes

On 29.10.2017 16:44, Andrew Hain wrote: How should an establishment that bills itself as “the dog friendly cafe” be tagged? dog=* is used 8615 times, of which 1875 are dog=yes. 5498 uses are on highways, 854 on amenities and 1114 together with opening_hours https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/k

[Tagging] Keep tagging mistakes documented in Wiki?

What do you think, should typical misspellings and deprecated tagging continue to be documented on the respective Wiki pages, or should they be removed once they do not appear in the OSM database any more? IMHO, such a section is useful not only to reduce the misspelling, but also prevent new e

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating of leisure=common and leisure=village_green

On 01.12.2017 12:47, Marc Gemis wrote: There was a long discussion on the Dutch forum awhile back [1] I tried to convince them not to use landuse=village_green for hedges, plants, flowers etc. in town centers. On 01.12.2017 11:03, Simon Poole wrote: > A large number of landuse=village_green se

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating of leisure=common and leisure=village_green

On 05.12.2017 20:40, Marc Zoutendijk wrote:> Martin, did you see the pictures I have added to the wiki? [1] Nice pictures, but they belong onto the discussion page, as it is _not_ an 'alternative' use, it is a use _against_ the original definition. For me landcover=urban_green (maybe: urban_ve

Re: [Tagging] "building=college" tag missing from building key page

The method just to copy the amenity value onto the building value dilutes the idea that the building tag should describe the building typology. An educational campus often consists both of purpose-built buildings, e.g. with a large lecture hall, as well as re-dedicated buildings such as a villa

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating of leisure=common and leisure=village_green

On 07.12.2017 17:34, Marc Zoutendijk wrote: My view (and not mine only, read the discussion) is that a wiki should describe how a tag _is_used_ and not how it should be used. In principle, but not to the extreme to use it for something different. landuse=village_green was approved by voting as

Re: [Tagging] New tag for major recipient postcodes

As these postcodes are kind of a virtual address that is not tied to a particular pysical location, my opinion would be _not to add them to OSM_, which is a geo database and not primarily a post code reference database. Typically for those companies in DE, there is an additional physical addres

Re: [Tagging] New tag for major recipient postcodes

directory, or a worldwide compendium of everything. No benefit for OSM adding those. El 17/12/2017 13:58, "Tom Pfeifer" mailto:t.pfei...@computer.org>> escribió: As these postcodes are kind of a virtual address that is not tied to a particular pysical location, my opinion wo

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:lanes? (specific signal types for certain lanes)

On 27.12.2017 00:04, yo paseopor wrote: In this case I think it would be more useful and accurate to separate the left lane a couple of meters before it really does and put a traffic signal for this new way with one lane that turns left. I think it would be unusefull to put a traffic signal on t

Re: [Tagging] No U turn restriction in a roundabout

On 16.01.2018 22:39, OSMDoudou wrote: Hello, I was fixing incorrect restrictions tagging in the area, when I noticed restriction=no_u_turn on the highway segments forming the roundabout (not talking about the junctions with the roundabout, but really the roundabout itself). [1] Indeed the re

Re: [Tagging] religious place for any religion/multiple religions

On 19.01.2018 19:37, marc marc wrote: Le 19. 01. 18 à 14:40, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : There are religious places that are not for any specific religion I would expect that religion=multifaith is used for the first purpose. in this case, why adding a "fake" religious ? if it's not related to

Re: [Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square

I fully agree with Martin here. The place=* key is used in OSM to indicate that a particular location is known by a particular name, and that is independent of details of the usage. It might be that Joseph's perspective is driven by his intense work on the Carto style, where it has to be decide

<    1   2   3   4