Re: [Tagging] building=bank

dieterdreist wrote > I agree JOSM should not issue a warning for it, did you try to open an > issue at josm.openstreetmap.de and see what they say? > > The JOSM validator warnings about unknown tags are helpful to spot typos, > but an unknown tag (unknown to the validator) otherwise does not

[Tagging] building=bank

Hi! I see nearly 1500 ways in OSM with the tag building=bank. Most of them are also tagged amenity=bank or have a node with amenity=bank inside. The wiki doesn't mention building=bank, and the validator in JOSM assumes a typo and complains "Unknown property value - Value 'bank' for key 'building'

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

I think it gets easier when you think of a relation as a data structure that allows to combine links to other objects with tags. That's what it is, nothing more. Only the tags give a hint about the meaning of this combination, and one always has to bear in mind that different mappers might see

[Tagging] Members of route=pipeline relations

Hi all, (Sorry if this was discussed before) I open this thread because I recently learned that we have route=pipeline relations. The wiki (1) seems to say that one can expect that the members of such a relation are pipelines. On the other hand, I find relations with members that are fences

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Dave, reg. a rule for mkgmap: A simple approach would be to add a rule in the relation style so that the tag man_made=pipeline is added to all way members of the relation which don't already have a man_made tag: #pipelines type=route & route=pipeline { apply way { add

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

Hi all, after reading the last comments in this thread I tried again to convince Dave that the rather special rules for multipolygon relations cannot be used for all types of relations, esp. not those with route=pipeline and that he should not remove tags like man_made=pipeline from ways of such

Re: [Tagging] How to tag named group of named water areas?

If we follow Daves idea one might create a relation combining a few things that have the same tag, e.g. all building=residential in a town, name it something like "residential buildings" and finally remove the tags from those buildings. I hope nobody thinks this would be a good idea. Reg. the TAP

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing used on ways

dieterdreist wrote > you could map the kerbs and create a multipolygon pedestrian area or grass > areas etc, for the island with the kerbs as outers. There is also > barrier=guard_rail and barrier=fence for potential barriers. The road will > be split into a dual carriageway and both are connected

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing used on ways

Warin wrote > I note there is no wiki guidance on tagging a traffic island in detail, > such as this island that > spatially separates entry and exit. This is not uncommon where I am. Yes, I think this is really a problem. A lot of mappers seem to want to map the area of the island, others want

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing used on ways

I think I found one reason for the mistagged ways. The wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dtraffic_island proposes to use highway=crossing + crossing=island to map a traffic island. It says that this should be used on nodes but a mapper looking for a replacement of a

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing used on ways

Mateusz Konieczny-3 wrote > How many highway=crossing on ways were added since  November 2015? > How many highway=crossing on nodes were added since  November 2015? > Without that it is hard to say anything. I agree that those are the important questions. I have some old taginfo data from 2015.

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

I think amenity=shelter is well established, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dshelter Gerd Von: Nick Hocking Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. September 2017 05:48:36 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: [Tagging]

Re: [Tagging] service=access

Hi Dave, my understanding is that most hw=service are used to access a specific man_made object, so this tag seems to be superfluous to me. I would simply not use the service tag here. Gerd Von: Dave Swarthout Gesendet: Samstag,

Re: [Tagging] unclassified_link and residential_link

This was discussed before, see for example http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/highway-residential-link-tt5859566.html Gerd Von: Albert Pundt Gesendet: Sonntag, 23. April 2017 01:37:01 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools

Re: [Tagging] How can I display maxspeed on my Garmin?

ng it on your Garmin .. not now. But maybe in the future. On 7/22/2016 6:31 AM, Gerd Petermann wrote: Hi Dave, "there's no known way to simply append that tag to a label or highway name. Correct?" no, I think that should be possible when the way has the maxspeed tag. I re

Re: [Tagging] How can I display maxspeed on my Garmin?

to simply append that tag to a label or highway name. Correct? Dave On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Well, the default style rules in mkgmap evaluate maxspeed to calculate a so called ro

Re: [Tagging] How can I display maxspeed on my Garmin?

Well, the default style rules in mkgmap evaluate maxspeed to calculate a so called road speed value which is used by the Garmin routing algo. But we don't know any way to store the value in the map so that it woud show up in the device when you pass the node. I know that modern Garmin maps

Re: [Tagging] Is it a man_made=mast?

I think in German the words Pylon or longer Werbepylon are used for this, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werbepylon Maybe there is a similar word in BE ? > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mcd_IMGP3581_wp.jpg Gerd Von: Andy Townsend

Re: [Tagging] tributary role in waterway relations: widespread?

I think David talked about the use as a role, so this link should be better: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=tributary#roles It reports a count of 4747 today. Gerd Von: Mateusz Konieczny Gesendet: Montag, 29. Februar 2016

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential road

272932 Best course in my opinion would be to contact directly mapper(s) via OSM changesets discussion to welcome and explain. See you all - althio On Feb 18, 2016 7:57 AM, "Gerd Petermann" <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi a

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing and crossing=*

I am not sure if my answer via GIS made it to the list ? http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/highway-crossing-and-crossing-tp5866832p5866884.html Gerd Von: Richard Mann Gesendet: Samstag, 6. Februar 2016 15:44 An: Tag discussion,

Re: [Tagging] highway=crossing and crossing=*

Richard Mann-2 wrote > Nodes don't have an orientation, so I find it useful to put crossing=* > tags > on the footway/cycleway, so I can render it with a nice set of black and > white stripes. > > Eg: > http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/cyclemap/?zoom=3=51.74075=-1.25238=B0TF > > I also add the

[Tagging] highway=crossing and crossing=*

Hi all, again and again I find roads tagged with highway=crossing instead of highway=footway [+ footway=crossing] or maybe highway=cycleway [+ cycleway=crossing] I think the wiki pages for highway=crossing and crossing=* are too confusing. While the tag wiki for highway=crossing is clear

Re: [Tagging] Formalising shoulder tagging

Thanks, that helps a lot:-) Von: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Januar 2016 11:22 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Formalising shoulder tagging 2016-01-26 10:59 GMT+01:00 Gerd Pet

Re: [Tagging] Formalising shoulder tagging

Hi, As a German I am not sure if I understand what shoulder means. In Germany we have a traffic_sign "Seitenstreifen nicht befahrbar" and one with a pictogram:

Re: [Tagging] Art galleries/museums

althio wrote > It brings too much confusion, I take it for a bad case of duck tagging. > > I would like : > - discourage tourism=gallery > - subtype of tourism=museum, museum=art just like > museum=railway/history, and further art=painting/... > - also redirect towards shop=art for badly tagged

Re: [Tagging] Removing name_1 and alt_name_1 from Wiki

alue, how do you override the default with "no value"? --colin On 2016-01-20 08:50, Gerd Petermann wrote: I don't think that the meaning really depends on the position. My understanding is that the complete value (e.g. "80||" ) is parsed by splitting it into separate string

Re: [Tagging] Removing name_1 and alt_name_1 from Wiki

Colin Smale wrote > The "lanes" tag family uses a different delimiter ("|"), sometimes > together with a semicolon to make a kind of 2-d array. A double pipe > ("||") indicates a missing value there. Wouldn't it be nice if we were > consistent? That is new to me. My understanding of a double

Re: [Tagging] Removing name_1 and alt_name_1 from Wiki

woch, 20. Januar 2016 08:23 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Removing name_1 and alt_name_1 from Wiki I meant that there is a value missing "between the pipes", which at a slightly higher semantic level can mean "use the default". A

Re: [Tagging] landuse=farmland and highway=track

Florian Lohoff-2 wrote > Also there are much more fine grained tags for agricultural land e.g. > meadow etc - Typically when you map farmland and do it right it does not > grow that huge. You have small wooden strips, waterways with > scrub around, roads etc. I typically even break up at field

[Tagging] landuse=farmland and highway=track

Hi all, I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means realigning nearly all existing ways. Whenever I am mapping landuse=farmland areas I wonder whether I should 1) draw one rather large polygon stretching across all highway=track ways and small buildings which are

Re: [Tagging] landuse=farmland and highway=track

Warin wrote > On 10/01/2016 8:55 PM, Gerd Petermann wrote: >> Dave Swarthout wrote >>> Haha, welcome to the club. This is a problem everyone faces. Here in >>> Thailand I spend a lot of time breaking up large wood multipolygons >>> because >>> in the

Re: [Tagging] landuse=farmland and highway=track

dieterdreist wrote > sent from a phone > >> Am 10.01.2016 um 09:21 schrieb Gerd Petermann > GPetermann_muenchen@ > : >> >> I am currently (armchair) mapping rural areas in Japan, that means >> realigning nearly all >> >> existing ways. &

Re: [Tagging] Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Marc Gemis wrote >> >> after a review by local mappers >> >> and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly. >> >> If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page >> >> next sunday. > > That's a pretty tight deadline. Wouldn't it be better to wait at least > 1 or 2 weeks? Perhaps

Re: [Tagging] Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Gerd Petermann wrote > > Marc Gemis wrote >>> >>> after a review by local mappers >>> >>> and that the wiki pages are changed accordingly. >>> >>> If I hear no complains I'll change the english and german page >>> >>

Re: [Tagging] Question reg. wheelchair mapping

Marc Gemis wrote > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Gerd Petermann > > GPetermann_muenchen@ > wrote: >> I'd like to see that the existing highway=access_ramp >> >> are changed to the well known >> >> highway=footway >> >> wheelchair=yes >

Re: [Tagging] Question reg. wheelchair mapping

dieterdreist wrote > 2016-01-08 10:31 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis > marc.gemis@ > : > >> I have a question about this. I think I can recognise an access ramp >> for wheelchair users when I see one. In general I don't know the >> incline %, but I assume that it was designed in such a way that the >>

[Tagging] How to tag the inner part of a roundabout?

I found many places where mappers tried to map the island in the roundabout, e.g. : 1) highway=island or highway=traffic_island 2) traffic_calming=island 3) landuse=traffic_island 1) I'd prefer not to use highway=* for ways which do not describe a means of transportation. 2) The wiki for

Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki

Von: Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. November 2015 18:02 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki On 24/11/2015 16:47, Gerd Petermann wrote: > Gerd Petermann wrote >> Andy Townsend wrote &g

Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki

e argument for traffic_calming nodes. OK? Gerd Von: Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. November 2015 18:02 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki On 24/11/2015 16:47, Gerd Peterma

Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki (was: improve tagging of traffic_calming)

Gerd Petermann wrote > > Andy Townsend wrote >> On 20/11/2015 18:49, Gerd Petermann wrote: >>> >>> What am I getting wrong here? Did someone remove the >>> preferred way of tagging from the wiki and nobody noticed >>> it for years? >>>

Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing

As a co-developer of mkgmap, a software that convert OSM data to Garmin map format, I've looked at this problem quite often now. I think routing itself is not the big problem here, unless we talk about the additional resources needed for the additional ways and junctions. Both tagging schemes

Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing

And this problem is not easy to solve by programs. Up to now I don't know any efficient algo that allows to find the nearest named road that goes parallel to a selected unnamed way. It would be of great help here. Gerd Von: Martin Koppenhoefer

Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing

ff: Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing So has the "street" relation just been born? It could solve some other puzzles as well: dual carriageways, cycle tracks, bridges... On 2015-11-24 11:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-11-24 11:30 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann &

Re: [Tagging] Relevance or otherwise of the wiki (was: improve tagging of traffic_calming)

Andy Townsend wrote > On 20/11/2015 18:49, Gerd Petermann wrote: >> >> What am I getting wrong here? Did someone remove the >> preferred way of tagging from the wiki and nobody noticed >> it for years? >> > > It doesn't surprise me that something document

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Hi Chris, I am not a member of talk-GB, could you please post a link to this discussion and ask the mappers to review the remaining highway=traffic_calming nodes in GB? thanks, Gerd Von: Chris Hill Gesendet: Freitag, 20. November

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Dave Swarthout wrote > *If we move traffic_calming to the "Other highway features"category we > will > probably see more ways segmented into highway=residentialand > highway=traffic_calming bits, and I think that would be a step back.My > conclusion so far: the wiki is missleading and most mappers

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

John Willis wrote >> On Nov 22, 2015, at 12:16 AM, Gerd Petermann > gpetermann_muenchen@ > wrote: >> >> highway=traffic_calming for the small way segments when we tell them >> to use it for nodes. My understanding is that this is not wanted. > > I have

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Dave Swarthout wrote > Sorry all. I'm on Thailand time and had to sleep. > > The highway=traffic_calming key is found on the top level highway page > here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway. On that page a link > to the types of traffic_calming device appears: >

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Paul Johnson-3 wrote >> > >> Most traffic calming features are not pedestrian crossings. >> >> Where traffic_calming is not a pedestrian crossing then >> highway=traffic_calming is the prefered way of tagging. >> > > Where are you getting this impression from? None of the JOSM presets, the >

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Chris Hill-6 wrote > On 20/11/15 16:47, Gerd Petermann wrote: >> >> So you think that every node tagged traffic_calming=* should >> >> additionally be tagged with highway=traffic_calming? >> >> That would mean we have >99% traffic_calming nodes with >&

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

Just to make sure: I've not changed nodes tagged highway=crossing, but I changed some that were tagged highway=traffic_calming to highay=crossing. I see no problem to add a tag like traffic_calming=island to the same node, but I think that e.g. bumps are typically before the crossing, so those

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

So you think that every node tagged traffic_calming=* should additionally be tagged with highway=traffic_calming? That would mean we have >99% traffic_calming nodes with incorrect tagging. Gerd Von: Dave Swarthout Gesendet:

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

"Where traffic_calming is not a pedestrian crossing then highway=traffic_calming is the prefered way of tagging." The wiki doesn't mention this and most mappers seem not to know that, not even in the UK. The vast majority of traffic calmings is NOT tagged highway=traffic_calming. What am I

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

ted tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming Am 20.11.2015 um 18:24 schrieb Gerd Petermann: I found 940 nodes which were tagged with highway=traffic_calming. Most of them were also tagged with e.g. traffic_calming=bump or traffic_calming=table or one of the other well document

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

alming "humps" (a longer bump) that have a crossing on them in Eugene, Oregon, but they are unusual, not the normal case. On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Just to make sure: I

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

ovided by Microsofts outlook.com. If I did it right, this post should appear as "Gerd Petermann" ciao, Gerd (GerdP) -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/improve-tagging-of-traffic-calming-tp5860596p5860661.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archi

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

yes, a missing name should be no reason for a highway=residential_link. During the last days I've reviewed the remaining highway=residential_link roads, a few of them are quite special, so I fully understand that mappers have the idea that residential might not be correct, esp. when they believe

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: effective_hours tag for restrictions

I like the idea to use effective_hours=*. I just wonder if this oneway="Fr-Su 00:-24:00" means something like that: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28865357 I'll ask the mapper, as it may also be a typo for opening_hours, though I doubt that. I assume there is a oneway sign with an

[Tagging] WG: [OSM-talk] highway=residential_link

hell, forgot again to set the list on cc :-( see below. I think tagging is really the better place for it. Gerd Von: Gerd Petermann Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. November 2015 09:46 An: Mateusz Konieczny Betreff: AW: [OSM-talk] highway=residential_link I don't

Re: [Tagging] Named junctions

wow, so the problem is much bigger than I expected. I still think that my suggestion might help to solve the problem. My understanding so far: - In Japan (and maybe other countries), you would prefer to render only those traffic_signals which have a name - Complex junctions often require

Re: [Tagging] Named junctions

ns We already use junction=yes for named junctions. Why is another tag needed? On 06/11/2015, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > wow, so the problem is much bigger than I expected. > > I still think that my suggestion might help to solve the problem. > &

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a fence made with metal bars?

Hmm, in my eyes many fences / barriers are also some kind of art, esp. old ones made of metal are often hand crafted (at least in Germany). They are similar to the main entrances of buildings, they try to express somehow how the owner welcomes you (in case of the entrance) or tries to keep you

[Tagging] Named junctions

I've learned that in some countries each junction has a name/ref and that these are used for navigation. At small junctions you may just find a node with a name tag, but at larger junctions or roundabouts I see all kinds of "tricks" to place an object with a name. I'd suggest to use a node

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ? On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Sorry, I am confused by these terms. What is a "center two-way turn lane " or a "

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

Sorry, I am confused by these terms. What is a "center two-way turn lane " or a "center common bi-directional turn lane" Do you have a picture ? Gerd Von: Paul Johnson Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. November 2015 13:19 An: Tag discussion,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

sendet: Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 09:14 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office sent from a phone Am 04.11.2015 um 07:22 schrieb Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hot

Re: [Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle

thanks for the link to the pdf, I think it shows that OSM is again a bit too close to UK rules ;-) In Germany roundabouts are getting more popular, but they require more space, and unused space is rare here. Gerd Von: Volker Schmidt

Re: [Tagging] traffic_sign:forward=*

Hi Martin, I think you are mixing two things now. I talked about the "As part of a way" part, not the "On a way or area" part, which looks even more weird to me. Besides that: Yes, I also think that we should map a traffic_sign as a node with the position of the sign. Gerd

Re: [Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle

I just notice that center_barrier or center_obstacle would be US spelling, so it has to be centre_* In other words, we should probably not use a key that is different in UK / US spelling, else we'll see many wrong entries. Another problem that I see here is that we allow to map a roundabout as

Re: [Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle

are almost a hybrid between grown-up roundabouts with the central obstacle, and mini-roundabouts with no physical obstacle at all. Colin On 2015-11-03 17:14, Gerd Petermann wrote: Hi all, I think the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout is very clear about th

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Power utility office

In Germany, you probably don't have to care at all. By default, you have a contract with one of the major comanies, if you want, you can chose another via Internet. My understanding is that the network is in the hand of a 4 large companies: E.ON,RWE,Vattenfall and EnBW. I am sure there are

Re: [Tagging] traffic_sign:forward=*

Well, I typically look at the english page, if I don't understand it, I check the german one as well. You are right, the german one doesn't even mention the :backward suffix. Still, there is no example that shows in detail how to use this tagging, and that's probably the reason for the mistakes.

[Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle

Hi all, I think the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout is very clear about this, one has to connect the roads in a single node and add the tag highway=mini_roundabout. However, there seems to be a need to draw a circular way instead. See my discussion with

Re: [Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle

: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re: [Tagging] roundabouts without obstacles in the middle W dniu 03.11.2015 17:14, Gerd Petermann napisał(a): > I'd also be happy with e.g. > > center_barrier=no > > or just barrier=no > > as an attribute on the ways which mak

[Tagging] traffic_sign:forward=*

Hi all, it seems that the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_sign is too confusing. The overpass query node[ "traffic_sign"="maxspeed"]["source:maxspeed"="sign"]; shows 831 nodes. My understanding is that one tag is for the node, the other for the way. Also funny:

Re: [Tagging] Decorative flower fields? (not as a crop?)

My understanding was that John wants to point out that this part of the nature is very beautiful at a certain time and without the "help" of humans. A garden seems to imply that it is man_made. Gerd Von: Marc Gemis Gesendet: Dienstag,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

good points, I should have written traffic_information=* instead of information=* I also like the idea to separate advisory traffic signs from others, presuming that the laws are clear about this. We have several different tags like highway=distance_sign, highway=rock_slide,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

I fear I've mixed two very different probems, so I'll open another thread for my problems with the tagging of junctions/crossings. Gerd Von: Volker Schmidt Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Oktober 2015 19:36 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related

[Tagging] Often seen tagging problems regarding junctions

Hi all, while trying to clean up wrong highway=* tags in the OSM database I noticed a few error patterns. Not sure if I can call it an error when other people are using tags in a completely different way, but I think I should report them: 1) the tag highway=crossing is/was used for ways,

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

I also liked the traffic_sign=variable, but now I think we have to separate those traffic_signs from pure informational displays showing e.g. temperature, wind, or other weather conditions, as well as traffic status (traffic jam, tunnel closed,free parking places and so on) from those which

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

tinguish between mechanical and electronic signs, which can only show a very limited range of signs for which they have been specially constructed? And electronic signs with a more generic capability which can show "anything", possibly with a limited range of colours? //colin

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

off topic: Yes, I also learned that in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Zebra crossing seem to have no meaning, red lights at pedestrian crossings are ignored as long as it possible to cross before or after the pedestrian. Sounds dangerous, but seemed to work fine for everybody ;-) I think there is a

Re: [Tagging] Often seen tagging problems regarding junctions

thanks for this example. I think it illustrates my problem very well. The footways (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372661072) are tagged

Re: [Tagging] Often seen tagging problems regarding junctions

okay, what do you use when there are traffic lights at a zebra crossing? Or let's say what would you recommend? My (current) understanding is that the zebra crossing is a "fall back" in case that the traffic lights are not working, so I'd say they are not important. The problem: Aerial images

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

okay, thanks for all the input. I think nobody said that we should use the word island or traffic island for an area that is just marked with paint. Now what do we call this area? I think it is not a highway=* or a surface=* or a landuse=* I think it is a traffic_calming=* , but I have no idea

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

yes, I also saw them in Germany Von: Philip Barnes Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Oktober 2015 11:41 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs On Sat, 2015-10-31 at 01:31 +0200, Lauri

Re: [Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

Example for keep clear: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13820411 The node also is in such a marked area, no direct relation to "island" or "traffic island" reg. crossing=island: ok, your example shows a simple case where the island is in the middle. What if there are multiple islands?

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

regarding the human readable values: Some mappers add diverse tags like this to the node: bicycle=official foot=official highway=path traffic_sign=DE:240 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3452379412

[Tagging] How to tag traffic islands ?

Hi all, It seems that many mappers associate words like "island" or "traffic island" with an area on a road that is enclosed by a white line and maybe hatched lines ("schraffiert") Also often used: traffic_calming=* Not so often: "keep clear" I don't even remember how to call them in

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

led a "programmable changeable message sign", so I'd probably tag it traffic_sign=pcms On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:32 AM, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: Please see http://www

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

reg. decisions (off topic): I losely follow this list since years without contributing. My understanding of it (the tagging list) so far : It helps to collect different views, that's great, and that's why we need it. It cannot help much finding decisions, as it only represents a few

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

sendet: Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2015 12:17 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ? On 29/10/2015 9:39 PM, Gerd Petermann wrote: Hi all, the wiki documents amenity=weighbridge (taginfo reports 386 uses) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aa

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

erd Von: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. Oktober 2015 12:17 An: tagging@openstreetmap.org Betreff: Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ? On 29/10/2015 9:39 PM, Gerd Petermann wrote: Hi all, the wiki documents amenity=weighbridge (taginfo reports

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

equire to help them stay within the law, for example. The man_made tag is a complete last resort - just about everything we map is man-made. Lets try and get a bit closer to tagging based on function and role. --colin On 2015-10-29 15:14, Gerd Petermann wrote: I agree that I was very sur

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "overhead electronic display" ?

quot; ? I think we'd have to invent a tag. I only know them to be called a "programmable changeable message sign", so I'd probably tag it traffic_sign=pcms On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:32 AM, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmai

[Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

Hi all, the wiki documents amenity=weighbridge (taginfo reports 386 uses) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dweighbridge

Re: [Tagging] when should highway=centreline be used?

I found another often used tag that seem to be (also) used for road markings : barrier=line (> 8000) Gerd Von: Tom Pfeifer Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Oktober 2015 12:18 An: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Betreff: Re:

Re: [Tagging] when should highway=centreline be used?

I think this is why I don't like to cycle along roads with closed white lines. Many car drivers seem to think that it is the larger sinn to cross the white line than to overtake with too small safety distance to the cyclist ;-) Gerd Von: Colin Smale

[Tagging] WG: when should highway=centreline be used?

oops, forgot to cc the list... Von: Gerd Petermann Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Oktober 2015 07:42 An: André Pirard Betreff: AW: [Tagging] when should highway=centreline be used? I think you shoulld also look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:road_marking

  1   2   >