Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

2020-12-23 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

2020-12-23 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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,

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

2020-12-22 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Rescue Stations

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 (

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Continuous shoulder rumble strips (CSRS)

2020-12-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 ..."!

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:traffic_calming=hillocky

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-18 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Thanks for those edits, Joseph. They make things a little neater! Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-18 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-17 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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: > >> > >&

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-17 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

2020-12-17 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

2020-12-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

2020-12-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

2020-12-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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:

Re: [Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers --> Hazards

2020-12-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

2020-12-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag entire group of rentable holiday cottages?

2020-12-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Changes to clarify the Hazards proposal during the vote

2020-12-14 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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. >

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

2020-12-14 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag entire group of rentable holiday cottages?

2020-12-14 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] How to tag entire group of rentable holiday cottages?

2020-12-13 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-13 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - crossing=priority

2020-12-13 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-12 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-12 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-11 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

2020-12-11 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

2020-12-11 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 :-)

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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. >>> >>>

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Hazards - 2 Week Update & RFC Summary

2020-12-09 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-08 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-08 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 ___

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-08 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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?

[Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

2020-12-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 /

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Hazards - Pedestrian hazard

2020-12-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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! :-)

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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?

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Military=Coast-Guard & Rescue=Marine_Rescue

2020-12-05 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

2020-12-05 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-12-05 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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? :-)

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards (verifiability - frost heave?)

2020-12-04 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Inclined elevators

2020-12-03 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] RFC Update - Hazard Proposal - rock/land fall/slide

2020-12-03 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Inclined elevators

2020-12-03 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

2020-12-02 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

2020-12-02 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Defining amenity=coast_guard

2020-11-30 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Animal trails

2020-11-30 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-11-26 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-11-26 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-11-26 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-11-26 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Elevated housing estate

2020-11-26 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

2020-11-25 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Elevated housing estate

2020-11-24 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

[Tagging] Elevated housing estate

2020-11-24 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] surface=boardwalk? is it duplicate of surface=wood?

2020-11-21 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] surface=rock

2020-11-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] surface=rock

2020-11-20 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] lanes - is "parking allowed" a parking lane?

2020-11-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

2020-11-15 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Defining the meaning of capacity tag for tourism=camp_site

2020-11-10 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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)

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

2020-11-09 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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 &

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

2020-11-09 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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!)

Re: [Tagging] Mapping terraced, irrigated farmland (e.g. rice paddies)?

2020-11-08 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

2020-11-06 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging from fire_service_areas - landuse:emergency

2020-10-27 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging from fire_service_areas - landuse:emergency

2020-10-27 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

2020-10-21 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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!

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

2020-10-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

2020-10-19 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
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

Re: [Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

2020-10-18 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Thanks everyone - all makes sense! Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >