Re: [Tagging] Verifiability wiki page: "Geometry" section added

2019-04-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Paul Allen writes: > On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 21:23, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> I cannot imagine houses that are several kilometers away being part >> of a hamlet, in a settlement sense. Can you give an example please, >> maybe this can occur in very low density areas? > > Remote farms

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

2019-04-18 Thread Greg Troxel
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > On 18/04/19 09:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> >> >> >> But if a locality represents only a historic location that has no >> physical presence today, it is debatable if this is a “real and >> current” feature that is appropriate for OSM rather than a >>

Re: [Tagging] what is the meaning of bicycle=yes on highway=path

2019-04-13 Thread Greg Troxel
Volker Schmidt writes: > Another thing: > Greg writes: > " "highway=footway" has exactly the same > semantics as "highway=path foot=designated". ...Note that both leave > bicycle and horse as > implicit" > I think this is wrong: highway=footway excludes bicycle, or at least the > footway wiki

Re: [Tagging] what is the meaning of bicycle=yes on highway=path

2019-04-12 Thread Greg Troxel
Richard Fairhurst writes: > Volker Schmidt wrote: >> "highway=path" implies "bicycle=yes" (in most jurisdictions) - see the >> proposed Default-Access-Restriction for all countries > > That's not a default that I feel enormously comfortable with. Whatever the > wiki might say, "bare"

Re: [Tagging] what is the meaning of bicycle=yes on highway=path

2019-04-12 Thread Greg Troxel
Joseph Eisenberg writes: > "an armchair mapper should add access=unknown to the tagging" > > I certainly don't do this when mapping from aerial imagery, and > neither of the editors that I've used (ID and JOSM) have suggest > adding "access=unknown" to a newly mapped path. I only add

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

2019-03-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > On 3/23/19 6:04 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> I find the implicit rules really problematic, as we don't have a >> machine-readable repository of them that can be used to processs tags as >> they are to the full logical set of what they mean. >

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

2019-03-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > On 3/23/19 5:28 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> Jean-Marc Liotier writes: >>> So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the >> I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be >> present. It seems th

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

2019-03-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be present.It seems that all land used for religious purposes should have that tag, whether it's a smallish lot that just contains

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

2019-03-05 Thread Greg Troxel
leisure=common seems wrong for two reasons: the original notion of town common was land that could be used by all and was owned by the town or somehow public. A bit of land that is grass in an urban area does not fit this. town commons were about grazing or perhaps a meeting place;

Re: [Tagging] Fixing import

2019-03-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Paul Johnson writes: > Honestly wouldn't be a bad idea for highway=road to be the default type for > bulk imports, especially after the TIGER fiasco. Another view would be that if an import seems like it should be highway=road, then it isn't good enough data to import.

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-03-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Mateusz Konieczny writes: > Mar 1, 2019, 8:48 PM by ba...@ursamundi.org: > >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019, 13:57 Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com >> > > wrote: >> >>> Feb 27, 2019, 7:31 PM by >> ba...@ursamundi.org >>> >> : >>>

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

2019-03-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Sergio Manzi writes: > The typical roles of the Coast Guard (/or whatever is called in > different countries/) is maritime borders control and maritime law > enforcement. This is why it's hard. Border control is sort of military and law enforcement is mostly police.

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

2019-03-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Graeme Fitzpatrick writes: >> The Border Patrol and other immigration people I would >> sort into police. They arrest people, rather than treating them as >> prisoners of war (Geneva convention again). > > So would a Border Patrol / Customs office be tagged as a Police station? That's a hard

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

2019-03-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > I wonder what we call "police" in OSM. > > The wiki does not offer a lot of guidance (France aside): "A police station > is a building where police officers and other staff work and are dispatched > from, and where suspects and evidence are collected and processed."

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-02-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Peter Elderson writes: > I was thinking further about the idea that came up here: deduct road type > from the landuse=residential. It's different than current usage, and I dont > think it is feasable. I did not mean "deduce road type". What I meant is that if a road is at the lowest level of

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-02-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Florian Lohoff writes: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified > "Public roads of low importance within town and cities that are not > residential may also be highway=unclassified." > > Residential roads are by definition: > >

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-02-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Jan S writes: > Am 22. Februar 2019 17:59:28 MEZ schrieb Paul Allen : >>Residential areas, to me, are >>named localities. > > That may be true in Western Europe, but in many places in other parts > of the world there may be areas of residential use that are not named > or only have, sometimes

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-02-20 Thread Greg Troxel
Sergio Manzi writes: > One thing I'm quite sure, anyway, is that "unclassified" should mean > just that: "/it doesn't fall in any other classification OR we don't > know cr.p about it (we know there is a road there, but we don't know > how it is)/". But it doesn't mean that in the UK. It means

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

2019-02-20 Thread Greg Troxel
The real problem is that if unclassified is more important than residential, what to do with roads that do not merit unclassified but do not have primarily residential landuse? As I see it, in the United States unclassified and residential are equally important. However, this is likely to be

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

2019-02-15 Thread Greg Troxel
Tobias Wrede writes: > Think of all the residential roads in cities that get a higher class > tagging because of their function in the road network. They are mostly > not different from hw=residential in regards to foot=y/n. And also the > many roads outside built-up areas have mostly no

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

2019-02-14 Thread Greg Troxel
Joseph Eisenberg writes: >> The question asked is "Is this street accessible for pedestrians here?". >> It doesn't ask for the user's opinion on how safe it is. >> > > I believe this is the wrong question. It should be “Are pedestrians legally > prohibited from walking along this road?” Agreed.

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

2019-01-20 Thread Greg Troxel
Here's a perhaps-radical set of comments and suggestion: in any building, there is a set of names (which often but not always look like numbers) for levels. These are evident in the elevators (buttons inside, matching values outside) and in things painted on walls, on room numbers. etc

Re: [Tagging] Highway=*_link roads at Y-junctions and roundabouts?

2018-12-16 Thread Greg Troxel
Joseph Eisenberg writes: > While checking the rendering of highway link roads (eg motorway_link, > primary_link, tertiary_link), I noticed that in some cases these tags > are used when a road splits in a Y-junction, for example before a > traffic circle / roundabout. In some areas these are the

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Population during mandatory evacuations

2018-11-12 Thread Greg Troxel
Minh Nguyen writes: > (Crossposted to the talk-us and tagging lists.) > > Due to the ongoing Camp Fire in Northern California [1], the place POI > for the town of Paradise got tagged with population=0 before the > change was reverted. Following some discussion about this changeset in > OSMUS

Re: [Tagging] New rag to draw node name with rotate angle

2018-11-10 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave F writes: > On 10/11/2018 14:46, Greg Troxel wrote: >> Dave F writes: >> >>> Every tag is for the renderer, otherwise all maps would be black lines >>> & dots. As your link clearly states: >>> /"Don't deliberately enter data *incorrec

Re: [Tagging] New rag to draw node name with rotate angle

2018-11-10 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave F writes: > Every tag is for the renderer, otherwise all maps would be black lines > & dots. As your link clearly states: > /"Don't deliberately enter data *incorrectly* for the renderer" > / > > The tag 'layer' is purely to aid renderings. That's not true. It represents things being

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-26 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 26. Oct 2018, at 01:57, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >> for all things which are not buildings and basically exist to support >> antennas, and avoid the tower/mast word choice, which is pretty clearly >> co

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-26 Thread Greg Troxel
SelfishSeahorse writes: >> For an example of something used in communications (an American thing, >> but totally normal and other countries surely have equivalent things >> with the same characteristics): >> >> http://www.rohnnet.com/rohn-65g-tower >> >> which says right there can be up to

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-25 Thread Greg Troxel
Graeme Fitzpatrick writes: > A mast is a tall, slim structure supported by guys, usually with external > access only This reliance on guys does not align with engineering reality. guys are needed depending on forces/loading, and there can be unguyed masts, that are exactly like guyed masts

Re: [Tagging] Power=cable for low voltage lines?

2018-10-19 Thread Greg Troxel
marc marc writes: > Le 18. 10. 18 à 15:01, Greg Troxel a écrit : >> the idea that people that don't understand the >> power system can tell the difference doesn't really seem right to me. > > so how can my wife add a "this electrical cable" despite she has >

Re: [Tagging] Power=cable for low voltage lines?

2018-10-18 Thread Greg Troxel
François Lacombe writes: > Le mar. 16 oct. 2018 à 00:20, Greg Troxel a écrit : > >> So I don't see how we can make "insulated" a big deal in tagging, >> defining the top-level tag, rather than being a detail to add when >> known. > > I agree with

Re: [Tagging] Power=cable for low voltage lines?

2018-10-18 Thread Greg Troxel
Mateusz Konieczny writes: > In my case I am interested in differentiating major power lines and > minor power lines without further details. > > Given power=liner and power=minor_line scheme existed before I joined > OSM and is really popular I guess that I am not alone. I find the wiki sort of

Re: [Tagging] Power=cable for low voltage lines?

2018-10-15 Thread Greg Troxel
François Lacombe writes: > Basically in power language, a line is not insulated while a cable actually > is. A difficulty here is that mappers cannot tell a protective covering from insulation. I was at an open house of my power company recently and they had a mockup of a distribution line, of

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

2018-10-09 Thread Greg Troxel
Graeme Fitzpatrick writes: > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 03:58, SelfishSeahorse > wrote: > >> There is a risk that towers and masts are defined differently in >> English, but perhaps Martin's idea to combine the two definitions >> would make sense nevertheless. Part of the issue is UK English vs US

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

2018-09-19 Thread Greg Troxel
Philip Barnes writes: > And if the default actually applies, or has it been overriden by local > signage. > > I am not convinced that a default limit helps, if no speed limit has been > surveyed I would prefer that box not to be displayed in my app. > a. It will not give me wrong and possibly

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

2018-09-19 Thread Greg Troxel
Colin Smale writes: > A "maximum" speed does not mean an "advised" speed. If you are driving > at an unsuitable speed, below the posted maximum, in Europe you will not > get a ticket for "speeding" as such but you may get one for "dangerous > driving" or something similar. The obligation to

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

2018-09-19 Thread Greg Troxel
Tod Fitch writes: >> On Sep 18, 2018, at 6:19 PM, Joseph Eisenberg >> wrote: >> >> So on the boundary=administrative admin_level=6 for Rogers County, we could >> have something like maxspeed:type:default=45mph > > Except that more typically there will be different default speed > limits on

Re: [Tagging] Slow vehicle turnouts

2018-09-12 Thread Greg Troxel
> Again, I emphasize, this is not a crawler lane or a hill climbing lane. It > is a lane into which one pulls over to allow faster moving traffic to pass. > In fact, Alaskan law demands that any vehicle being followed by 5 vehicles > must, at the first opportunity, allow those vehicles to pass. I

Re: [Tagging] Slow vehicle turnouts

2018-09-12 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave Swarthout writes: > Same here. I don't have any objections to either the abbreviation or the > longer form. "smv" just seemed to fit well with the other abbreviations > already in heavy use. > > Does anybody else have input on this? I have significant discomfort with smv and a bit with

Re: [Tagging] delivery areas?

2018-08-24 Thread Greg Troxel
seirra writes: > I was thinking more to the tune of specific things like charity shops > or smaller stores where it may not be standard I think this doesn't belong in the OSM database. If you could get shops to publish an API endpoint with a geojson of their delivery area, we could add that

Re: [Tagging] residents only after hours

2018-08-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 21. Aug 2018, at 19:31, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >> If it's private, then access=yes is arguably not right, as permission is >> granted to the public, vs the public having a right of access. > > &g

Re: [Tagging] residents only after hours

2018-08-21 Thread Greg Troxel
Jmapb writes: > access=yes > access:conditional=destination @ (Oct-Apr: 20:00-07:00; May-Sep: > 22:30-07:00) (ignoring foot/bicycle as that's not the point) If it's private, then access=yes is arguably not right, as permission is granted to the public, vs the public having a right of access.

Re: [Tagging] highway=service // public road?

2018-05-26 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 26. May 2018, at 10:41, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> >> I don’t mind, but it isn’t necessary for tag consistency (only if you want >> service to be private) > > > the highway page

Re: [Tagging] highway=service // public road?

2018-05-25 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: >> and track (for - due to history - public accessible rural driveways) is >> simply driven by reality. > > track is about agricultural and forestry usage, I did not know it required > public accessibility, does it? In my usage (and US

Re: [Tagging] highway=service // public road?

2018-05-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Florian Lohoff writes: > I now see increasing usage of service roads as a category below > unclassified. People tagging "smaller roads" in the countryside > as a service roads. I think this is basically wrong tagging. > I find this a little disturbing and now got into an argument

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

2018-05-07 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave Swarthout writes: > But when a highway has an officially assigned ref doesn't that define it as > "classified"? I don't have a large stake in this discussion but it would You would think. But no. In the UK, there is a notion of A/B/C roads, and then unclassified.

Re: [Tagging] Nursing homes

2018-03-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Graeme Fitzpatrick writes: > The other thing is that the tag that renders in map edit & also on OSMAND+ > shows someone in a wheelchair? Yes, there will be a number of people in any > nursing home confined to a wheelchair, but there are also a *lot* who > aren't! Are we

Re: [Tagging] Additional sub tags for survey mark

2017-12-02 Thread Greg Troxel
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > Triangulation (or 'trig point') that are visible over quite some > distance (say over 2 km), used to triangulate a position without > having to go to the mark. Usually a pole standing on top of a > rise/hill. > > Benchmarks that are visible on the surface

Re: [Tagging] [Proposal] Boundary=marker

2017-11-09 Thread Greg Troxel
henkevdb writes: > Proposal to change > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dboundary_stone into > Boundary=marker and if it is historic, simply add historic=yes and/or > add marker as value on this wikipage -> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boundary

Re: [Tagging] Setting a preferred routing

2017-09-24 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave Swarthout writes: > I came across an interesting routing problem the other day. A section of > the Richardson Highway in Alaska was relocated in 2015 by the Alaska DOT in > anticipation of erosion or flooding by the nearby Delta River. However, the > old highway is

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

2017-09-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Kevin Kenny writes: > The last few messages in this thread seem to have quieted much of the > discussion. Let me summarize my position, and see if we've achieved > rough consensus. > > access=permit (and (transport mode)=permit): > > Symbolizes that the

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

2017-09-10 Thread Greg Troxel
Nick Hocking writes: > t seems that the Emergency shelter situation for Hurricane Irma is very > dynamic with over 200 new shelters being opened in just one day. Do you mean "places for which there has not previously been a plan to use them as a shelter"? > Apparently

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

2017-09-08 Thread Greg Troxel
Eric Christensen writes: > On 09/07/2017 11:24 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> do you recall why emergency:social_facility=shelter was chosen as a tag, >> rather than a simple "emergency=shelter"? Because social_facility >> shelter in osm is used with a different

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

2017-09-07 Thread Greg Troxel
Nick Hocking writes: > Do we have a tagging scheme for emergency shelters to be used in times of > natural disasters? > > Off the top of my head I could see tags such as > > emergency=shelter Around me, there are almost no places that would be described like this as

Re: [Tagging] Landuse and Zoning and Licensing (CC BY SA)

2017-04-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Hardy writes: > On Tuesday, April 18, 2017 1:37:51 PM CDT Ralph Dell wrote: >> Although I don't often reply to these threads I am going to give >> it a go and hope to be constructive in the attempt. > >> If Tom Hardy you are suggesting that >>

Re: [Tagging] Disaster response

2017-04-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> writes: > On 18.04.2017 02:24, Greg Troxel wrote: >> ... Having a functioning command and >> communication structure is key in modern emergency management. >> >> Or perhaps you see emergency management as different from

Re: [Tagging] Disaster response

2017-04-17 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Pfeifer writes: > There was a discussion recently, though I cannot find it, about 'civil > defense'-like services, responding to major emergencies. > > They still lack an internationally suitable tag. There is an > Australian attempt (emergency=ses_station) that

Re: [Tagging] Protected areas and nature reserves

2017-04-13 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > leisure=nature_reserve is a quite generic tag and suitable for any nature > protected area, boundary=protected_area can be added additionally with > subtags. That's true for areas where humans are allowed to walk. If it's a protected area

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

2017-03-31 Thread Greg Troxel
Kevin Kenny writes: > I tag boundaries when there are boundaries. In many places in suburban > New York, the hamlets (not self-governing in any way) have well known > boundaries, and the locals can tell you with some consistency who does > and does not live in the

Re: [Tagging] named spots in settlements (toponyms)

2017-03-29 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 29 Mar 2017, at 01:39, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: >> >> a name for a particular location, generally known to the inhabitants >> of surrounding areas,

Re: [Tagging] named spots in settlements (toponyms)

2017-03-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > This question is about toponyms. Usually these are tagged within the > place-tags (some might be found in "natural" etc.). Someone wants to map > named spots in the city, although there are no signs, these names are > commonly known in the

Re: [Tagging] Tagging town/village/hamlet - am I misunderstanding something?

2017-03-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > 2017-03-27 16:38 GMT+02:00 Kevin Kenny : > >> But now I see that the places - for example, Fort Montgomery, NY >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/175462 - no longer have their names >> rendered on the map.

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

2017-03-25 Thread Greg Troxel
Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> writes: > Quoted sections have been edited down to only show parts I am responding to: > >> On Mar 22, 2017, at 5:37 AM, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: >> >> For highway=traffic_signals, the normal situation is that it'

Re: [Tagging] Spillways

2017-03-22 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 22 Mar 2017, at 09:15, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: >> >> I answered too fast... Later in the thread John offers >> waterway=spillway + emergency=yes + surface=* which seem even better >> because it

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

2017-03-22 Thread Greg Troxel
-- Dave Swarthout writes: > This is embarrassing but relevant to this conversation. I've been mapping > intensely for several years but adding stop signs was something I rarely > did. I only started adding stop signs within the last year. Probably I started because

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

2017-03-14 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Pfeifer writes: > On 13.03.2017 15:55, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: >> "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something. >> Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing. > > Yes that is a form of troll tagging, negating the key. Thus

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

2017-03-13 Thread Greg Troxel
I favor "landuse=disused". That implies that there was previous significant human use, and now there is no real use. As to "if no use, no tag", the point is that there is a difference between knowing that an area is essentially abandoned, vs it being forested or meadow or whatever and being left

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for Pipe Line Reserves

2017-02-09 Thread Greg Troxel
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > That tags the pipe line itself. > > The request is to tag the area set aside for a pipe line ... a reserve. I would avoid the word "reserve" as it has lots of connotations, at least in en_US, that don't really fit. Here, we have strips of land, sometimes

Re: [Tagging] zero waste

2017-01-20 Thread Greg Troxel
joost schouppe writes: > While this all makes sense, I wonder why something like fair_trade doesn't > follows that logic too. That's a good point. I don't think there is any justification for it being different. But, "fair trade" is obviously a political point of

Re: [Tagging] Representing "altimetric quotas" in OSM

2017-01-17 Thread Greg Troxel
"Nelson A. de Oliveira" writes: > I really don't know if the proper term is "altimetric quota" in > English, sorry. > > What we have are some places where the elevation at some points were > measured. It's similar to man_made=survey_point but without any > physical objects or

Re: [Tagging] zero waste

2017-01-17 Thread Greg Troxel
joost schouppe writes: > Hi, > > We had an OSM meetup at a bar yesterday, and while we were able to add > several tags [1], we didn't find any documentation on how to tag their > "zero waste" policy. I think it's self evident what that means. Except that when you look

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

2017-01-05 Thread Greg Troxel
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: >> Arguably, if the coworking space intened to accomodate professional >> carpenters who worked for different companies, maybe that would be >> coworking. But really coworking is about something that feels like an >> office with coworkers and support

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

2017-01-04 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Pfeifer writes: > Pro amenity > === > > - not all coworking spaces need to be offices, and the current wiki > definition does not demand this, it just says "where people can work". > > Indeed I know a do-it-yourself carpentry where you can bring your wood >

Re: [Tagging] 'ongoing' U-turn restriction

2016-12-08 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> On 8 Dec 2016, at 12:25, Colin Smale wrote: >> >> Martin, your interpretation is jurisdiction-dependant. There is >> sometimes a distinction between single and double lines as well >>

Re: [Tagging] highway=primary/secondary/tertiary - tag according to quality or usage?

2016-11-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Michael Tsang writes: > There are some highways which the quality isn't up to the usage, resulting in > congestion. Those highways connects high-quality motorway/trunk/primary > highways together for long distance traffic, but they only have a single lane > per direction,

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

2016-11-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Michael Tsang writes: >> I don't follow this. light rail is about the cars being lighter and >> perhaps the rails being built to a lower weight limit, and it isn't >> about grade crossings. Around me there is real rail with fll-sized >> enginers and is fully freight capable

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

2016-11-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Bill Ricker writes: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Michael Tsang wrote: > >> > Oh really. Boston MBTA green line is a subway line that extends onto >> > surface streets. Not full rail gauge iirc (though other lines are) and >> > neither surface or

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

2016-11-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Michael Tsang writes: > - Railway with long distance and commuter trains: railway=rail ok > - Railway with metro services only: railway=subway +0 > - Railway with street intersection: railway=light_rail I don't follow this. light rail is about the cars being lighter and

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

2016-11-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Blake Girardot writes: I think issues of does the data belong in OSM are separate issues, I am just interested in how to map it and tag it well. I would be mapping nothing but ground truthed data that we already map every day, trees and

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

2016-11-22 Thread Greg Troxel
>> On Nov 22, 2016 8:41 PM, "Blake Girardot" wrote: >> >> I have worked with folks doing ground surveys of helicopter landing >> zones during emergency response. >> >> These are ground truthed locations, observed by active search and >> rescue helicopter

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

2016-11-22 Thread Greg Troxel
jc86035 writes: > Should a commuter rail system with rapid transit frequency but main > line-standard tracks be tagged as railway=subway or railway=rail? =rail. What you describe is a real train that has an old-fashioned timetable. > In Hong Kong, the MTR metro

Re: [Tagging] Retail but mail order only

2016-11-07 Thread Greg Troxel
Dave F writes: > I've a site of warehouse units containing retail outlets selling goods > (such as cheese & bathroom/household items), but by mail order > only. Should these be still tagged as 'shops'? Mail_order=only? Anyone > have any examples? Places that do

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

2016-10-21 Thread Greg Troxel
Craig Wallace writes: > I think this is wrong. A nature reserve an area to protect wildlife, > not to allow it to be shot. A nature reserve is managed for the > purposes of conservation. So if an area is primarily for hunting, it > is not a nature reserve. I think you are

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

2016-09-29 Thread Greg Troxel
Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: > >> I agree with the "what does it feel like" part, but not "what the locals >> call it". One of the central

Re: [Tagging] Roads with no speed limits

2016-09-03 Thread Greg Troxel
Colin Smale writes: > These maxspeeds derived from highway type are perfectly verifiable - by > checking the highway laws of the territory concerned. A motorway in the > UK has a maxspeed of 70mph, and you don't need a speed limit sign to > tell you that. In Europe when

Re: [Tagging] Mapping amenity=prison

2016-08-09 Thread Greg Troxel
Kevin Kenny writes: > If I have the cadastral information for the lands (which are usually posted > to forbid entry, so visible "in the field"), what's a recommended way to > tag? What I'm thinking is to put amenity=prison on the whole area and then > barrier=wall

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

2016-07-20 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> writes: > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 20 lug 2016, alle ore 15:06, Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> ha >> scritto: >> >> There >> are many shopping malls near me, and the ways have no access tag

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

2016-07-20 Thread Greg Troxel
Colin Smale writes: > If you need explicit permission, it's access=private, even if there are > loads of people with that explicit permission. The notion that all places that need permission are equivalent is technically true in a non-useful way. > To gain access to

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-11 Thread Greg Troxel
Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> writes: > Greg Troxel wrote on 2016/07/02 01:08: > >> Almost no one moves to a "group home" because of age-related mobility or >> cognitive issues. > > Hm, maybe that is not so visible as a facility, but certainly lots

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-04 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > How would you call this: > http://www.berkretirement.com/LivingOptions/RetirementLiving ? That looks like two related facilities, one that is probably "independent living" (meaning own appt, meals/housekeeping provided), and one nursing

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-03 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > sent from a phone > >> Il giorno 02 lug 2016, alle ore 01:36, Colin Smale >> ha scritto: >> >> So if you think both a retirement home and assisted living >> accommodation are the same thing, it doesn't matter much

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-03 Thread Greg Troxel
Colin Smale writes: > A commercial website is not the same as a dictionary Commercial > entities can have an interest in not using generic terminology, whereas > a dictionary is all about ensuring a common understanding. Agreed. > A "group home" is, to me (UK

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > Wikipedia also seems to confirm that this is a specific service > (although I don't buy the "too young for a retirement home" part): > > "Assisted living as it exists today emerged in the 1990s as an > eldercare alternative on the continuum

Re: [Tagging] amenity=retirement_home and social facility

2016-07-01 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > AFAIK assisted living is a more specific term then it might seem at > first sight, a kind of residence within apartments and assistance on > demand, as opposed to a retirement home with less privacy and more > institutional character, but

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

2016-06-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Andy Townsend writes: > In OSM whenever there's been a choice between "making things harder > for routers/renderers" or "making things harder for mappers" it's the > former that tends to be chosen, because map consumers can at least > automate what they do, and new mappers

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

2016-06-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Colin Smale writes: > It's not a question of common sense, it's a question of > law... Agreed. I was just refuting the notion of "there should be one international default". > Countries and states may differ, but they will all have a > default plus a way of indicating

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

2016-06-28 Thread Greg Troxel
Michael Tsang writes: > I agree on the point that mode:learner_driver=* is better, but, however, > isn't > it common sense that learners are not allowed on motorways? Can you give me > some regions where learners are, by default, allowed on motorways? I don't think it's

Re: [Tagging] nursing homes and group homes

2016-06-27 Thread Greg Troxel
Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > Recently we have discovered (in a thread on the Italian ML), that someone > has deprecated amenity=nursing_home by putting a disclaimer on the wikipage > [1] to use > > amenity=social_facility > social_facility=group_home > > because the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

2016-06-24 Thread Greg Troxel
Michael Tsang writes: >> And, it would be good to first thing about how access rights for learner >> drivers differs from regular drivers. I can't think of any difference >> around me (although learners are required to have an adult real driver >> with them, and not

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

2016-06-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > On 6/24/2016 2:00 AM, Michael Tsang wrote: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/learner_driver >> >> The proposed feature *learner driver* is to tag the legal access of >> a highway by a vehicle driven by a learner driver. It is similar

  1   2   3   >