On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 at 15:14, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> "I'd like to swim in a small pool with a waterfall".
>
Good spot for one of your hazard tags!
We have Natural Bridge nearby
On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 at 09:00, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 1:25 PM Paul Allen wrote:
>
> I've had one German solemnly assure me that anything labeled a 'creek' in
> English is a minor watercourse, and challenge why I was mapping a riverbank
> for Schoharie Creek.
>
Thanks,
On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 01:49, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> I suggest that, when we get around to looking at pools, we consider
> the possibility of adding other angling considerations
>
Carrying on from those, there are other named river features such as Bend &
Reach, which we currently have no way of
Thanks
Graeme
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 16:44, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> OSMF board is not spending hours on monitoring wiki pages.
>
> I am spending hours on monitoring wiki pages and noticed it only recently,
> and only in a new proposal.
>
> Anyone
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 10:37, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> imagine you were mapping something, and it is legal in the place where you
> are, but illegal in Britain, so you can not do it. Or you are seeing things
> in country A and when you’re in country B you add them to OpenStreetMap
> (from
Just to make sure everybody is aware, voting is now open on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rescue_Stations
proposal.
Any questions or comments are still welcome, either here, the original
Proposal thread (
ame)" to the list.
>
> Many people might not be reading every email in the RFC thread, but do
> want to know when voting is open, so a new thread makes it more visible.
>
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 14:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On S
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 09:35, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> is this referring to British law?
>
Not that I'm aware of (or Australian for that matter!), but I have seen
comments on various pages that it is illegal for people in both Israel &
Russia to map the location of military bases, &, of
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 09:32, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> its presence does not even tell in every case that you can exercise the
> sport at an object with this tag. E.g.
> shop=sports
> sport=surfing
>
What would you suggest then for a shop that sells surfboards eg
There has been concern raised on the talk page over the "If it's illegal,
please don't map" warning that I included in the proposal.
I put it there due to that issue being mentioned on several military
related pages, but also noticed that there are a few different wording of
it eg
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 19:01, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> On 20. Dec 2020, at 05:43, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
>
> The existing emergency <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency>
> =disaster_response
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 17:55, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> How objects tagged now with amenity=lifeboat_station should be tagged
> after this proposal passes?
>
They were a late addition after somebody pointed out that they exist. They
would be replaced
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 02:24, Seth Deegan wrote:
> Those are known as rumble strips.
>
> The wiki has traffic_calming=rumble_strip:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming#Common_values
>
But the description for rumble strip on that page also says "Do not confuse
with
Following discussions, voting has been postponed until the military=bases
proposal is decided, so this has been returned to Under Way only.
Thanks
Graeme
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 13:26, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 13:50, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> The text of the proposal is still confusing.
>
Sorry about that - maybe it should have been broken into 2 separate things?
Is the tag emergency=rescue_stations being proposed?
>
Currently the Emergency page has the heading "Other
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rescue_Stations
>
Moved to voting.
If you still have any comments or concerns, please raise them for
discussion, rather than just voting "No, because ..."!
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Marine_rescue
>
Voting is now open.
If you still have any comments or concern, please raise them for
discussion, rather than just voting "No, because ...&quo
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 09:44, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> for a price:
>
You're not wrong!
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 09:26, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> I have seen some shooting=range but the tag does not make too much sense
> for tagging a shooting range facility.
>
Yes, it does actually, because shooters go to a range to shoot.
We have sport=shooting and the physical nature of the
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 09:32, Paul Allen wrote:
> It calls them speed bumps.
>
Yep, it seems like these are just a variety of speed bump
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming & =bump.
The existing definition is more or less OK in that it includes
Thanks
Graeme
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 08:59, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>
> I think rifle-shooting was a component of a triathlon in a recent
> Winter Olympic, too.
>
Winter Olympics has the Biathlon - cross-country skiing & very accurate
shooting, while the Summer Olympics has several different shooting events
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 08:48, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> The leisure key is generally silly, because we assign these tags also to
> sports facilities for professional sports people, but for shooting ranges
> it seems even less appropriate to add them under leisure when the operator
> is the
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 02:00, St Niklaas wrote:
>
> Your text or proposal seems to be focused on modern times.
>
Yes, that's right, as it's intended for current, active, military
establishments only.
Since every town (vesting) or fortress (fort) has its own barracks in the
> past
>
Yes, but
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 03:59, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> when the term is military „base“ I would guess it will always be intended
> for more than a few weeks?
Yes, that's right.
Even if the label is „temporary“ it probably means years and not days?
>
Usually several months, at the very
Thanks for those edits, Joseph.
They make things a little neater!
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 20:10, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> there are quite different kinds of bases, some are “permanent” and may be
> in the home country of the military, others may be in “allied“ nations,
> with contractual or defacto relationships, and there may be also those in
> conflict
e the military=base tag added.
>
> How should military=base be defined?
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:44 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
> >>
> >&
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
>
This proposal is also getting close to voting.
Precis:
*deprecate*:
- milita
On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 02:33, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
> has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.
>
Here are some examples of tags as "waterway feature" + type=hazard
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 12:43, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> That example certainly looks like a landuse=basin or water=basin feature
> with basin=retention
>
Maybe? But there's an awful lot of them tagged as reservoirs!
Thanks
Graeme
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 6:23 PM Gra
I should have added ...
So really, they're not "natural" in any way (except for the water in them!,
& even that is frequently pumped in).
Thanks
Graeme
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 12:20, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> In an Australian context, the most common are known as T
In an Australian context, the most common are known as Turkey's Nest dams,
because they're mounded up above the ground eg
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/A6T7R0/turkey-nest-dam-on-outback-cattle-station-queensland-australia-A6T7R0.jpg
For a full explanation:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 11:24, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the comments! For the specific linked case (winding road for
> 74(!) miles), it seems that is already covered in the proposal -
> hazard=curves and its sub-tags cover this, and if it truly is 74
> consecutive miles, that
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 14:51, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
>
> Personally I'd usually try to add the operator and operator:wikidata tags
> in combination to give more context.
>
Thanks - I never think of wikidata tags as I don't usually use them.
Added
Graeme
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 09:32, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
>
> Would this be satisfactory to the group in resolving the question of
> reservoir tagging?
>
Good idea to bring it up, but not sure it will resolve anything once & for
all?
Thanks
Graeme
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 23:55, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> 1) Holiday cottages are rarely building=cabin, they are mostly
> building=house.
>
May depend on where you are? I know of a number of places that advertise
cottages / cabins eg http://lyrebirdspringbrook.com/index.html
One around the corner
Thanks
Graeme
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:21, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Marine_rescue & have a
> look.
>
This proposal (which is partly linked to both the Rescue Services &
Military Bases proposals) is also close to movin
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rescue_Stations & have a
> look.
>
Reminder that voting is close to opening on this proposal.
*Precis:*
Amend the heading emergency=other_stations to emergency=re
Thanks Brian.
As far as I am concerned, those changes are fine.
Graeme
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 10:53, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently received late feedback on the hazards proposal. Based on the
> feedback, I felt it was necessary to make small changes to this proposal.
>
On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 21:41, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> What I don't like in OSM is naming for large geographic areas,
Thanks for the explanation, Frederik, but I'd like to make a couple of
points
like "the Alps", "the Black Forest", or "the Bay of Biscay", for two
> reasons:
>
> First, there
On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 21:28, Paul Allen wrote:
> I can't think of an English term, other than "holiday cottages." These
> places
> generally call themselves "Foo Holiday Cottages" or "Foo Holidays" or
> "Foo Farm Cottages" or things like that.
>
I'm with Paul for Holiday Cottages.
How about
On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 16:22, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> Tagging 25 tourism=chalet independently is sill when they form
> single object, not 25 separate ones.
>
Are they cottages number 1 - 25 on the same camp site, or individual
chalets located close
On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 19:17, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> fully spelt out
>
Noted.
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 06:37, stevea wrote:
> This is problematic to my thinking. In California (my state), at an
> UNCONTROLLED intersection (no traffic_signal, stop sign, other traffic
> control device...), for example where the sidewalk "would continue to
> another sidewalk on the other side
On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 12:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> Break - I've just found that there actually are a handful of
> club=army_cadets (8), =air_cadets (5) & =sea_cadets (2) already in use,
> although all are undocumented, so they will be fine.
>
Seeing that these
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 19:30, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Which military service are the Italian Carabinieri? The US Marines?
>
What about the Guardia di Finanza?
>
Yep, as mentioned previously, there will be a number of fine, fuzzy lines
(& yes, both words apply!) to sort out, mainly between
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 08:06, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> do we really need military_service=army given that these services will
> differ according to the country? We can tag operator =United States Army or
> “United States Marine Corps” and keep lists in the wiki for standardized
> names of
Graeme
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 08:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> Does each bog & marsh have it's own name, or are just different surfaces
> inside one big named wetland?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> PS & please don't get frustrated & give up on trying to make progr
Does each bog & marsh have it's own name, or are just different surfaces
inside one big named wetland?
Thanks
Graeme
PS & please don't get frustrated & give up on trying to make progress!
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 02:11, Anders Torger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was on this list a while back
On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 at 11:42, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
>
> Yes, this makes sense in broad strokes, though some thought is needed as
> to the exact set of keys and values would be needed to describe these
> things.
>
Indeed! But we've still got another 10 - 12 days of RFC, so lo's of time
:-)
On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 at 07:41, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
>
>> Services often cross functions; for example, the US Army operates air
>>> fields[2]. Tagging this military_service=army would be accurate, but would
>>> not convey that this is an air force base, but not an Air Force base.
>>>
>>>
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 17:28, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> There are, in fact, military offices which are not within a
> landuse=military area, and there are military=danger_area features which
> are not in landuse=military
>
Offices not on base are possible, but will usually only be recruiting
Once again, thanks everybody for your thoughts & comments! This is great,
please keep them coming!
On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 17:28, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> I agree, and this can be easily fixed by changing the key to describe what
> we are actually specifying: "What military service branch is
On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 23:37, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Kevin Kenny argued (I think convincingly) that the hazard is fallen, not
> falling, rocks. There is a very slight risk that a rock will fall on your
> vehicle but the greater risk, by far, is that you will drive into a fallen
> rock.
>
But not
I've now incorporated all (I think?) the comments from the talk page into
the proposal, if you'd like to check the wording?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
Thanks
Graeme
On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 09:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020
On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 08:37, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> military bases might house intelligence facilities which are known and
> could be tagged.
>
They could, if you can identify them, but as mentioned above, should we be?
Thanks
Graeme
___
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 17:13, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> This is an interesting idea.
>
> But the current proposal only provides a way to tag the military service
> branch of a military=base feature (which is usually also landuse=military).
>
> It might be better if there were a way to tag the
Brian came up with a suggestion that bases also be tagged with an
appropriate admin level (2 / 4) to show at which level of Government they
are controlled.
Just wondering - I know that the US has State controlled forces eg National
Guard, but are there any / many other countries that have forces
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:33, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> I fixed that for you, it should just be status=proposed, and the template
> does the rest of the magic!
>
Thanks, Brian!
Another one to lock away in memory :-)
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> I have just posted a new proposal re Military Bases:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Military_bases
>
But when I look at it, it's saying it's in Inactive status so not sure what
I've done there?
Following on from comments made in regard to deprecating both emergency= &
amenity=coast_guard & replacing them with military=coast_guard:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 02:01, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> This is probably a US-centric viewpoint, but I note that there is a
> general lack of tagging
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 12:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rescue_Stations & have a
> look.
>
Thinking about this further, I'm thinking that Rescue Services may be
better than Rescue Stations?
I've also realised that Stations /
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 15:01, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Please be aware of a couple of other existing tags:
>
Thanks.
Yes I am aware of all those & made reference to the lifeguard tags in the
discussion about the Rescue Stations proposal: "The existing lifeguard
classifications could either
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 04:14, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I cannot remember having seen such signage for places where cyclists are
> using the road.
>
Doing it to you again! :-)
Thanks everybody for positive comments!
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 20:40, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> But maybe (or amenity=marine_recsue) would be better
> than a brand new key rescue in rescue=marine_rescue tag?
>
I've been wondering about that overnight?
Following on from
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-November/056482.html,
I've also put together a proposal to make some changes to the existing
Coast Guard pages.
Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Marine_rescue & have a
look.
All comments welcome either here
Following on from
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-November/056482.html,
I've put together a proposal to make some changes & additions under the
Emergency key.
Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rescue_Stations & have a
look.
All comments welcome either here
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 at 04:22, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> you guys are finding real world examples for every weird situation that
> nobody expected to even exist. Traffic lights for rock fall somewhere?
>
No actual traffic lights, but how about a posted No Waiting zone? :-)
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 at 07:13, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> This will make it easier to fix problems with mappers who want to add
> hazard=curve to every single curve on a long curvy road, or add very
> subjective hazard features which cannot be confirmed or denied even when
> visiting the
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 08:33, Guillaume Chauvat wrote:
> Yes, but this is a node, not a way. Inclined elevators require a way and
> those are not displayed properly.
>
Sorry, didn't get what you were getting at!
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
You can also get rather philosophical about it as well :-)
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cW9iNszeKWU/WDuxft3rVBI/G70/HHEd7-W84k0tG_gakCs78RXXfoBfREfigCLcB/s1600/falling-rocks-dj-homewrecker.jpg
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 23:19, Guillaume Chauvat wrote:
> I used a way tagged with highway=elevator as the wiki recommends, but this
> does not seem supported by any tool (the default editor, the map on
> openstreetmap.org, or osmand).
>
Highway=elevator renders on the main map eg
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 09:11, Paul Allen wrote:
> Maybe drop bears, too.
>
Nah, no trees!
Although there are the telephone pole / ladder things (which I assume are
markers of some form), but no cover for them to hide in :-)
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 22:24, Paul Allen wrote:
> Here is a videoabout a bridleway. Which is also a footpath (by legal
> definition). In fact,
> it's also a Byway Open to All Traffic (BOAT). Most of the time it's the
> ONLY way to visit Foulnes Island. It's also the most dangerous
> path in
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 23:29, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I run into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcoast_guard
> and despite that I have basically zero experience with such objects
> I am pretty sure that this description (and an old
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 06:54, Yves via Tagging
wrote:
> Creating a new tag for this is not a bad idea.
>
Not a bad idea at all, even if just to stop them being marked as paths, but
what would you tag them as?
Footpaths etc are currently tagged as highway=xxx, which really isn't
appropriate for
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 14:28, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Assuming that the boundary of that area is reasonably permanent, my first
> reaction is that this could be described by military=danger_area. However,
> that tag requires landuse=military as the primary tag, which probably isn't
>
Not wanting to create a bunfight, but just reading the news, & wondering if
this sort of thing should be tagged as a hazardous area?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-27/ethiopia-to-launch-final-phase-of-offensive-in-tigray-region/12926606
Thanks
Graeme
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 06:41, ael via Tagging
wrote:
>
> There are a surprising number of abandoned open mineshafts in the far
> West of England which are a hazard, if not an extreme hazard.
But if it's already (presumably) tagged with =mineshaft (+ =abandoned?),
does it also need to be tagged
Sorry, just read further through the e-mail list & saw that this has
already been covered
Thanks
Graeme
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 08:40, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> But if it's already (presumably) tagged with =mineshaft (+ =abandoned?),
> does it also need to be tagge
Thanks everybody for your comments, but, to me, none of them really seem to
cover the situation, although stilts=yes seems to come closest, although it
also sounds rather strange!
Going back to my OP, I notice that I mentioned tagging the area as level=1,
thinking about it, maybe that should be
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 23:27, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Comment is requested on the proposal "hazard", which describes hazardous
> or dangerous features. This tagging was first proposed in 2007, and I have
> adopted the proposal with permission from the original author. Thanks to
> the
On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 at 11:20, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> Is the whole ground level a parking lot or parking structure, perhaps?
>
No.
It's built right beside a Creek, on a flood-plain (yeah, thanks Council!),
so it's done like that so that the apartments are up away from the water
the next time
How do you tag an area, in this case an entire housing estate!, that is
raised up above ground level?
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-28.065772,153.3799853,3a,15y,117.51h,89.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN_TJvFHJyLff1E4GmiCSjQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
(with the usual not mapping from Google ...)
Just
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 at 09:22, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Is there some value in surface=boardwalk tag?
>
> It seems to be a duplicate of surface=wood.
>
Fine distinction I know, but to me =wood would suggest a solid, unbroken
floor eg dance floor or
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 at 08:41, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairn it seems that it is
> something more purposefully constructed than
> "pile of unwanted stones kept in one place"
>
Yes, that's what I thought
I was having similar thoughts just a couple of days ago, about what to call
a pile of rocks that a farmer has cleared from, then piled up in, a field?
natural=bare_rock says it's exposed bedrock
=scree has fallen from an adjacent rockface
=shingle is on a beach or river bed
=stone is for large
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 00:22, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
> https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
>
> It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems obvious
> to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
> are parking cars on the right side that
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 at 20:49, Robert Delmenico wrote:
> Thank you all for the discussion around changing the tag man_made.
>
> After careful consideration I have decided to abandon this proposal
>
Probably the best, because it tried to go too far in one go.
- mostly because the fact that the
On Sat, 31 Oct 2020 at 20:27, Sven Geggus
wrote:
> While the wiki clearly states that capacity means people a lot of mappers
> seem to think that the number of camp-pitches is meant.
>
> The problem is, that both numbers seem to make sense on different types of
> camp-sites. While the (maximum)
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 15:30, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
>
> I think the best option is to deprecate water=pond and suggest using
> water=lake for natural lakes, even small ones,
>
No, I don't agree, sorry.
Same as the difference between rivers & streams, there is a difference
between lakes &
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 06:06, stevea wrote:
> let's take that off-list. Those would be appropriate to discuss ON list,
> it's true, and maybe you publish the RESULTS of our off-list discussion
> here after we've emailed each other. But I feel we have spent a great deal
> of time (and passion!)
A while back, we had a discussion / proposal about mapping steps as an
area, so that each step was mapped.
Would that concept work here?
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Sat, 7 Nov 2020 at 04:34, Anders Torger wrote:
>
> ** Due to limitations in area-based name tagging the map looks empty
> just when zoomed out a little, as names disappear almost directly, so
> despite detailed mapping and tagging the overview map is not as useful
> as it could be. While the
On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 09:43, Supaplex wrote:
> We (or Christian) are talking about areas that must be kept free,
> especially near buildings, so that fire brigade vehicles can stand and work
> there in case of an emergency.
>
Thanks, Supa - it's not a concept that I've ever heard of in
Hi Christian
On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 18:35, Nüssli Christian (SRZ) <
christian.nues...@zuerich.ch> wrote:
> I wanted to ask you if there's a correct mapping of fire service areas.
> That's areas in fire protection guidelines that will be reserved for
> emergency vehicles.
>
Sorry, but what do
Couple of other versions of restricted parking
Customer's only or else:
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-28.0752577,153.4231834,3a,41.8y,100.24h,86.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swWpsJAcwaHpNkJm8KuoXFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
& customers only with a time limit per day!
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 09:12, Robert Delmenico wrote:
> https://www.lexico.com/definition/natural
>
Using your own source to disprove your arguments!
https://www.lexico.com/definition/man-made
"Made or caused by human beings (as opposed to occurring or being made
naturally)"
So nothing to
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 20:14, nathan case wrote:
>
> Indeed, the Handbook of Nonsexist Writing suggests: "artificial, handmade,
> hand-built, synthetic, manufactured, fabricated, machine-made, and
> constructed" as options instead of man-made.
Out of those options, I personally think either
Thanks everyone - all makes sense!
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
1 - 100 of 927 matches
Mail list logo
