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

[John Sturdy]

How about "holiday park"?  A google search for that brings up some caravan
parks but also some with chalets / "lodges".


On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 8:53 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Dec 15, 2020, 03:33 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
>
> 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 tagging the whole area as tourism=chalet + name=Foo Cottages +
> capacity=25
> then tagging each individual cottage / cabin as either
> building=cabin / bungalow + name=xxx?
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dcabin
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dbungalow
>
>
> I am fine with that and I plan to restore this tagging recommendation
> unless someone will proposed a better one.
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Intermittent highways?

[John Sturdy]

I've been adding some detail to a site that is used annually for a festival
(not happening this year because of Covid-19), where there are paths in the
same place year after year, but the paths are not there when the festival
is not happening, although increased wear on the ground around them is
probably visible much of the time.

Does it make sense to map such paths, perhaps borrowing the "intermittent"
tag from waterway tagging?

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Annual Shows

[John Sturdy]

I'd call such a place a "fairground" or "showground", but I'm not sure
whether it would come under "tourism", "leisure", or "amenity".  I'm not so
keen on "landuse" for it, as the land may also be used for something else.
A particular example is the Cappamore Agricultural Show in Ireland; its
location is given as "Showgrounds, Ballyvoreen, Cappamore, Co. Limerick"
but it looks like for most of the year it is normal farmland.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 2:37 PM Jarek Piórkowski 
wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 05:01, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > These shows do take place at a permanent site.
> >
> > They take place annually, floods, fire, droughts and wars excepted.
> >
> > The dates may vary depending on various things, but usually around the
> same time each year.
> >
> > They are part of Australian culture, and it would seem British culture.
>
> I also wish for a settled tag for a regular, locally important event
> that is repeatedly or always held at a given site.
>
> I have tagged location of one such in Canada with landuse=fairground
> but this doesn't seem perfect and landuse key doesn't logically lend
> itself well to specifying details about the events that might be
> taking place there. A lot of fairgrounds in Canada end up being tagged
> as a park for lack of a better description.
>
> See also related discussion in
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/leisure%3Devents
>
> --Jarek
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging the presence or absence of signs for surveillance cameras

[John Sturdy]

On the ones I've noticed in Cambridge, they are either on the lower part of
the pole supporting the camera, or, for building-mounted cameras, on the
wall below the camera.  (The cameras are well above head height, and
notices on them would not be readable unless very large.)

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:48 AM Jez Nicholson 
wrote:

> In general, are these signs physically on the camera, or are they in the
> vicinity? If so, should they be tagged objects in their own account?
>
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020, 10:54 John Sturdy,  wrote:
>
>> Whatever the concensus in another discussion was, I think that double
>> negatives will risk confusion, and that *:signed=yes and *:signed=no seems
>> to be a reasonable proposal.
>>
>> I have noticed that some but not all of the surveillance cameras (city
>> council, I believe) in Cambridge (UK) have signs.
>>
>> __John
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 10:13 AM marc marc 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Le 19.02.20 à 04:29, Victor/tuxayo a écrit :
>>> > Coincidentally there was a recent discussion[2] about these signs in
>>> the
>>> > french mailing list (talk-fr) which lead to adding the following
>>> section
>>> > in the page
>>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=surveillance
>>>
>>> I warn that this addition does not reflect the discussion that took
>>> place on talk-fr, but is "self-declared as consensus"
>>> more than half of the opinions are that a regulatory sign of this kind
>>> is not tourist information (imho I think it is closer to a sign that
>>> announces a pedestrian crossing or a maxspeed zone)
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging the presence or absence of signs for surveillance cameras

[John Sturdy]

Whatever the concensus in another discussion was, I think that double
negatives will risk confusion, and that *:signed=yes and *:signed=no seems
to be a reasonable proposal.

I have noticed that some but not all of the surveillance cameras (city
council, I believe) in Cambridge (UK) have signs.

__John

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 10:13 AM marc marc 
wrote:

> Le 19.02.20 à 04:29, Victor/tuxayo a écrit :
> > Coincidentally there was a recent discussion[2] about these signs in the
> > french mailing list (talk-fr) which lead to adding the following section
> > in the page
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=surveillance
>
> I warn that this addition does not reflect the discussion that took
> place on talk-fr, but is "self-declared as consensus"
> more than half of the opinions are that a regulatory sign of this kind
> is not tourist information (imho I think it is closer to a sign that
> announces a pedestrian crossing or a maxspeed zone)
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unremovable bollards

[John Sturdy]

I think that by default bollards are not removable, and that if a bollard
is not tagged as removable, it is reasonable to assume it's not removable.

On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 6:54 PM Hauke Stieler  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> there's the "bollard" key with documented value "rising" and "removable"
> [0] but I often encounter also bollards which cannot be removed easily.
> I would love to see the "unremovable" value in the documentation. Should
> I open a proposal page for this one value? That sounds a bit of an
> overkill to me.
>
> My suggestion is the value "unremovable":
> A bollard which cannot be removed without destroying it or at least
> cause severe damage to it. A bollard which can only be removed by
> authorized people with some sort of key is still "removable".
>
> I would not use the value "fixed" or "irremovable" for two reasons: The
> "unremovable" value is used more often [1] and would be a good
> counter-value for "removable".
>
> Hauke
>
> [0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bollard
> [1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/?key=bollard#values
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Foot or foot.cycle crossing

[John Sturdy]

I think of highway=path as referring to a standalone path, such as a hiking
trail, and not part of a set of parallel ways.

__John

On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 3:13 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> I do have a topological problem with the mapping of a junction of two
> roads one of which has parallel cycle lanesa and sidewalks
> Both are correctly mapped: the sidewalk as a separate highwy=footway and
> the cycle lanes as cycleway:left|right=lane.
> How to you tag the foot-cycle crossings.
> See this Mapillary photo
>  to make things
> clearer.
> Two possible options:
>
> (1)
> way with:
> crossing=uncontrolled
> footway=crossing
> highway=footway
> plus node with:
> crossing=uncontrolled
> highway=crossing
>
> (2)
> way with:
> bicycle=designated
> foot=designated
> highway=path
> path=crossing
> segregated=yes
> plus node with:
> bicycle=yes
> crossing=uncontrolled
> highway=crossing
>
> Both are "incorrect" in some aspects.
> Which one is less incorrect?
> Is there a better tagging solution?
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Service road - Can it be a driveway if serving multiple houses?

[John Sturdy]

I think of a driveway as typically leading to only one house, and would
generally call the shared ones something else, probably "service roads".
I'd make an exception for the access to a pair of houses e.g.
semi-detached, or adjacent but linked by their garages/carports.

__John

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:26 PM Philip Barnes  wrote:

> Sections of shared, non-public service road, are certainly a common
> feature of modern housing developments.
>
> I have considered them to be private driveways.
>
> Private does not require a sign, walk down any suburban street in Europe
> or North America and you will see hundreds of driveways, without signs or
> gates and nobody will assume there is a public right of way there.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> On Tuesday, 5 November 2019, Jez Nicholson wrote:
> > Personally, I would only call the short bits of tarmac that spur off that
> > service road as 'driveways' because they each go to a single house. I'm
> > sure that there are examples of shared driveways in the UK but I would
> > consider them rare.
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:52 PM Dave F via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > In the UK, Amazon Logistics are adding useful data from their GPS'd
> > > delivery vehicles. Mainly highway=service as the last part of their
> > > journey to a destination.
> > >
> > > However, one of their contributors removed service=driveway from a
> > > highway=service road. In the changeset comments they said it was
> because
> > > it served multiple residential properties.
> > >
> > >
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/76576604#map=19/51.33398/-2.27945
> > >
> > >  From memory, it wasn't signed as private, but it appears to be
> > > unadopted by the local authority (There are no raised kerbed pavements,
> > > drainage or lighting). I'm assuming it's shared ownership.
> > >
> > > For indicative purposes only. (The image is ten years old):
> > >
> > >
> https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3343975,-2.278377,3a,60y,185.39h,67.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5I6ruGYQsgQv4cC0iLM6SA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
> > >
> > > Personally I see no problem tagging this as a driveway even if it's
> shared.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > DaveF
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Tagging mailing list
> > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my Sailfish device
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Campsite properties

[John Sturdy]

Or if there are steps into the river or lake, or a ladder, that could be
marked.

On Mon, 9 Sep 2019, 03:21 Joseph Eisenberg, 
wrote:

> Creeks and rivers are tricky, since it's hard to confirm whether or
> not they are good for swimming. Tagging sport=swimming on certain
> nodes of a river or stream is sort of like a review or recommendation,
> and these are not good for the main OSM database.
>
> The linked page says 'leisure=swimming_area' is for an "enclosed
> natural water area inside a facility" and the main wiki page for the
> tag says "an officially designated place where you can swim in natural
> water reservoirs such as rivers, lakes or the sea. It could be marked
> by e.g. signs or buoys and/or may be supervised by lifeguards"
>
> So if there is an area for swimming in a lake or pond (or river?) that
> is delimited by floating buoys and ropes, that would be good to map.
>
> If there's a natural=beach you can also map that.
>
> -Joseph
>
> On 9/9/19, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
> > Looks good Joseph.
> >
> > One question, thanks, which has just come to mind while I was updating
> > details on a camp ground.
> >
> > You have swimming_pool=yes/no to say whether the camp ground has a pool
> or
> > not.
> >
> > The place I'm working on (& others that I know) doesn't have a swimming
> > pool, but is on the banks of a creek, to which there is access to swim.
> >
> > Would that also be included under the camp ground in some way, or would
> it
> > be best to just draw the creek in, & possibly mark sport=swimming, or
> > leisure=swimming_area alongside the camp ground?
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Swimming_and_bathing#Natural_water_where_swimming_is_possible
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Graeme
> >
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging sockets

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:05 AM Michael Brandtner via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I'd like to separate the discussions about* amenity=power_supply* (my
> proposal) and the enhancement/merging of the *socket:* and *power_supply*
> key.
>
> On topic: I think it is important that information can be added by looking
> at the device. This means that in my opinion *socket:cee_blue= *and*
> socket:cee_red= *should be valid tags. The amperes, if known, could be
> added with socket:[type]:current= like suggested in the wiki.
>

There are two different senses in which "current" can be used in describing
cee socket outlets: the one I had in mind refers to physically (and
visually) distinct designs of sockets with that colour code: they are
produced in several different sizes, rated for different maximum currents,
16, 32, 63, and 125 amps being common.  The other, which has also been
mentioned, is that the maximum current available from a specific
installation may be lower than the maximum for that design of socket.

Also visible from looking at the device is the number and arrangement of
holes / pins, but I think that at least for single-phase supplies it's
probably reasonable to assume the default.  I guess the notation shown in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_60309#Common_plugs may be suitable.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

[John Sturdy]

I've seen such a station powered by solar panels on its roof; I didn't
investigate whether it has internal batteries for use outside of sunlight
hours, but it might be worth adding a tag for the power source for cases
like that.

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 8:49 AM bkil  wrote:

> This is what you are looking for, it has been used 160 times:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddevice_charging_station
>
> Although, I'd probably just unify this with amenity=charging_station
> and always specify the socket type and voltage. You should only
> navigate to a charging station that has a compatible socket anyway.
>
> I usually mark the available sockets using power_supply=* on cafes and
> pubs where I can charge my computer or phone without guilt. It can be
> useful for both mapping parties and drone photography.
>
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 6:59 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 22/06/19 11:24, marc marc wrote:
> > >> waiting areas often have specific locations
> > >> to charge electronic devices.
> > >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Ddevice_charging_station
> > >
> > >   >  amenity=charging_station <> amenity=power_supply
> > >
> > > some normal electrical outlets allow cars to be charged
> > > and some charging terminals use normal outlets.
> > >
> > > I think we're gonna to do it in two proposals:
> > > - get amenity=power_supply adopted
> > > - try to harmonize how the type of socket/plug is described.
> > > socket key is probably the most successful but for charging stations,
> > > the information is missing if it is a plug or a plug at the end of a
> > > cable on the terminal side.
> >
> > What is really being tagged here?
> >
> > The socket.
> >
> > So tag "electrical_socket=USB/*"??
> > That clearly says what it is, not a power generating station or some
> other thing that could be construed in to a 'power supply'.
> >
> > Add tags access=customers/* fee=no/yes/* and
> > for the detailed types of mappers voltage=*, frequency=*.
> > The type of socket will usually determine the maximum current/power so
> I'd not tag that.
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=power_supply

[John Sturdy]

For the "socket" key: I suggest putting the current rating onto the
cee_blue sockets (cee_blue_16a, cee_blue_32a, etc) rather than limiting it
to one rating; this will also make it consistent with the cee_red_* sockets.

Also, BS1363 (UK, Ireland, and quite a few other countries --- see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power_plugs_and_sockets:_British_and_related_types#International_usage_of_Type_G)
is missing.

__John

On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 2:45 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 23/06/19 01:39, Michael Brandtner via Tagging wrote:
>
> Thank you for your comments so far. I've now written a proposal.
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/amenity%3Dpower_supply
>
> The definition (wording can surely be improved):
> " A place where you can get electrical power."
>
>
> This could be applied to an airport that provides USB charging ports at
> table/desk/chair .
>
>
> I've not taken into account your discussion about different socket types.
> This would be the topic for a different proposal about improving the
> power_supply= sub-tag. But this proposal is only about establishing the new
> main tag.
>
>
> Unfortunately the connection will be a vital detail for most. e.g. Some
> items can be charged from a USB post others cannot.
>
> I would think that there needs to be one tag for the connection 'detail'.
> It needs to be able to be applied to any tag where the connection detail is
> to be tagged.
>
> At the moment there are 2 keys for this detail
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:socket
> and
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:power_supply
>
> These should be combined into one universal sub key that could be applied
> to any feature.
>
> --
> I think most map users will be after a USB power port to charge their
> phone! So that should be a priority and something that should be mentioned
> on your proposal as it will then get a lot of attention.
> I think you will find that the socket type is a vital detail and needs to
> be addressed.
>
> Minor detail: The order of the 'usefull combination' can be better.
> Access, fee and socket type should be at the top.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

[John Sturdy]

I think it's also comparable to mapping the pylons of a power line and the
line itself.


On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 7:16 PM Tobias Knerr  wrote:

> On 09.02.19 15:23, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> > "Tree rows ... This approach can also be combined with individually
> > mapped trees for further details."
> [...]
> > IMHO this violates the one object - one OSM element principle. Either I
> > choose the coarser approach to map a way for the row, or I refine it to
> > individual trees, but should not use the row anymore.
>
> Because the two feature types exist at different levels of abstraction
> (a tree is *part* of a tree row), I do not see this as a violation of
> one feature, one element.
>
> Instead, I consider it comparable to mapping building:part areas within
> a building=residential outline within a landuse=residential, or mapping
> amenity=parking_space areas within an amenity=parking.
>
> > If a renderer wants to cluster any trees that can be done
> algorithmically.
>
> Writing an algorithm to reconstruct tree rows from individual tree nodes
> is probably possible, but it's more complex than what OSM renderers
> usually bother with – even for features that are much more significant
> than tree rows. Checking whether a tree node is part of a tree_row way,
> on the other hand, is far easier and only requires relatively standard
> OSM tooling. So the latter seems like the more practical solution to me.
>
> Tobias
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Slow vehicle turnouts

[John Sturdy]

I think of a lane added on the nearside (kerb side) of the road for slow
vehicles going uphill as a "crawler lane", and to me "passing place" is
meant for waiting for oncoming traffic to pass on a road too narrow for
two-way simultaneous use (and is typically short enough to represent with a
node).  I think what Dave describes is closest to a crawler lane.

__John


On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 5. Sep 2018, at 12:40, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> >
> > The wiki should be changed to allow passing places to be mapped as ways,
> not sure why the node restriction was added but it seems unnecessary.
>
>
>
> if the property that a road has a passing place, is added to the road it
> means fragmentation of the road (we do it elsewhere, it’s not a showstopper
> but it isn’t beautiful either)
> For long passing places a way would make more sense
>
>
>
> >
> > The photo shows a wider bit of road, not a signed passing place. I would
> only map a signed passing place using the passing place tag.
>
>
> according to the wiki there is no requirement of a sign: “location of a
> widening on a road allowing oncoming vehicles to pass each other, or
> allowing slower traffic to be passed if said slower vehicle halts at the
> passing place. Also known as a turnout.”
>
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging suggestions for electricity

[John Sturdy]

The tag "power" is already specifically for electrical power (see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Power), so I would suggest putting it
under that.

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 5:48 AM Dolly Andriatsiferana <
privatemaj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was searching for a tag to indicate if a building has electricity or
> not, and if possible to specify the electricity source. I've found no
> documented tag, but a search on taginfo [1] led me to the key
> electricity=*. Currently it's being used mostly with values
> solar/none/generator/yes/always.
>
> On OSM Help [2] someone proposed the following tagging which seems better
> in my opinion too:
>
>- electricity=yes/no/intermittent - to indicate the presence of
>electricity
>- electricity:source=solar/generator/distribution_company/windmill...
>- to specify the electricity source
>- electricity:voltage=* - the electricity voltage
>- other details using namespaces...
>
> What do you think? Has someone here used the electricity=* tag before?
> Afterwards we might be able to start documenting the tag on the wiki.
>
> Cheers,
> Dolly
>
> [1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/electricity
> [2]
> https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/65477/indicate-if-a-building-has-electricity-or-not
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] horse mounting/dismounting steps

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 2:55 PM Philip Barnes  wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-08-28 at 14:25 +0100, John Sturdy wrote:
>
> Or, like bus stops, perhaps they could come under "highway", as they're a
> starting / ending point for a journey which is typically along a highway
> (such as a bridleway).
>
>
> They are not beside bridleways, they are typically part of the front
> structure of buildings of an age that means they are automatically grade II
> listed buildings. Standalone ones are also of an age that they will be
> protected. They are invariably within conservation areas.
>
> The one I was thinking of as an example is beside Queen's Road, Cambridge,
near the back of Clare College (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3792612#map=19/52.20522/0.11216) --- I'll
try to remember to add it when I next see quite where it is, unless someone
else gets there first.  That is, if we've decided how to tag them by then.


> I would maintain they are historic features of interest and not a part of
> modern horse riding.
>
> I'm pretty sure the one I mentioned is not in regular use now.


> Phil (trigpoint)
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:54 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 2018-08-28 13:36 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :
>
> I was almost persuaded by "leisure."   Mostly they will be used for
> leisure and we can live with the few cases where
> they are professional accessories.  And then I remembered that we have
> amenity=bicycle_parking and not
> leisure=bicycle_parking.  Both bicycle parking and mounting blocks seem to
> me to be accessories to the leisure
> activity of riding and not intrinsic to the activity (unless you get
> particular pleasure from parking your bike).
>
>
>
>
> I would not equate horse riding with cycling. A lot of people are using
> bicycles as a means of transport, for horse riding it was stated above by
> Philip that it has lost this function a long time ago (and I agree for the
> european context). There is no infrastructure any more for horses in the
> cities. There are no stables or spots where you may lock them, you won't
> get food easily and hardly find spots where to let them water, etc. It
> simply isn't practical any more to use horses for transport. I would use
> amenity= for horse parkings, e.g.
> https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3591/3609176621_a7ef6a55e5.jpg
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing 
> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] horse mounting/dismounting steps

[John Sturdy]

Or, like bus stops, perhaps they could come under "highway", as they're a
starting / ending point for a journey which is typically along a highway
(such as a bridleway).

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:54 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> 2018-08-28 13:36 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen :
>
>> I was almost persuaded by "leisure."   Mostly they will be used for
>> leisure and we can live with the few cases where
>> they are professional accessories.  And then I remembered that we have
>> amenity=bicycle_parking and not
>> leisure=bicycle_parking.  Both bicycle parking and mounting blocks seem
>> to me to be accessories to the leisure
>> activity of riding and not intrinsic to the activity (unless you get
>> particular pleasure from parking your bike).
>>
>
>
>
> I would not equate horse riding with cycling. A lot of people are using
> bicycles as a means of transport, for horse riding it was stated above by
> Philip that it has lost this function a long time ago (and I agree for the
> european context). There is no infrastructure any more for horses in the
> cities. There are no stables or spots where you may lock them, you won't
> get food easily and hardly find spots where to let them water, etc. It
> simply isn't practical any more to use horses for transport. I would use
> amenity= for horse parkings, e.g.
> https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3591/3609176621_a7ef6a55e5.jpg
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] When was the deprecation of location=kiosk for power=substation discussed?

[John Sturdy]

To me, as a native British-English speaker, "kiosk" doesn't seem to be the
right word for these.  A kiosk is normally something that *is* large enough
for a person to enter (typically, someone selling something through a
hatch).

__John


On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:53 PM, José G Moya Y.  wrote:

> It was François Lacombe on this list 9n Jan 2, 2018.
> El mié., 3 de enero de 2018 0:14, François Lacombe <
> fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> escribió:
>
> Hi,
>
> Regarding this location=kiosk topic, a discussion was opened on talk page
> of power=substation key.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:power%3Dsubstation#Kiosk_
> substations_in_street_cabinets
>
> Since no big issue has been raised, I've updated mentionned wiki pages
> (with French version when available) with man_made=street_cabinet.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%
> 3Dtransformer#Location_values
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:location
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:substation%3Dminor_distribution
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dsubstation#Location
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dstreet_cabinet
>
> location=kiosk is not a recommended value anymore and it's encouraged to
> replace it manually and carefully with man_made=street_cabinet +
> street_cabinet=power
>
> location key can now be used everytime to give the right
> substation/transformer's location, in cabinet or not.
> We can have underground or indoor cabinets like this :
> man_made=street_cabinet
> street_cabinet=power
> power=substation
> substation=minor_distribution
> location=underground or indoor or ...
>
> All the best
>
> François
>
> 2017-11-04 11:45 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe :
>
> Hi
>
> The man_made=street_cabinet key sounds suitable to map items described
> with power=substation + location=kiosk.
> They are actual small cabinets like those where no technician can enter to
> work (opposite of building) : https://wiki.openstreetmap.
> org/wiki/File:10kV_trafo_kiosk.jpg
>
> Street cabinet is the container while substation is the function.
>
> Wiki example on this page gives follwing tags:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dsubstation#Examples
> power=substation
> substation=minor_distribution
> location=kiosk
>
> I propose to update it as such :
> man_made=street_cabinet
> street_cabinet=power
> power=substation
> substation=minor_distribution
> location=pavement (or wherever the cabinet is located)
>
> It works both for nodes or areas.
> Additionnal advantage is to get location=* back to give cabinet position
> instead of substation design (there was issues to tag underground kiosks
> for instance)
> There are 7k objects in db:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/location=kiosk
>
> Pages to update are :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%
> 3Dtransformer#Location_values
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:location
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:substation%3Dminor_distribution
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dsubstation#Location
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dstreet_cabinet
>
> How do you feel about it ?
>
> There are no need of a time consuming formal proposal to deal with this
> question.
> Without further coments, i will update wiki pages in 15 days.
> No automated edits.
>
> Thanks for your time
>
> François
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> El mié., 25 de abril de 2018 21:32, Michael Reichert <
> osm...@michreichert.de> escribió:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> while adding a substation to OSM yesterday I looked up the possible
>> values of location=* and missed kiosk. A short glance in the history
>> showes that it removed location=kiosk from the page on 2018-01-02. The
>> edit description mentions man_made=street_cabinet+street_cabinet=power
>> as a replacement.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:
>> power%3Dsubstation=1542685
>>
>> location=kiosk was introduced by the approved Substation Refinement
>> Proposal in 2013.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/
>> Substation_refinement#Substation
>>
>> man_made=street_cabinet was introduced by the Street Cabinet Proposal in
>> 2014.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Street_cabinet
>> This proposal does not mention substations or transformers at all.
>>
>> I think that small substations are not street cabinets because they are
>> much larger than street cabinets and are usually not located on the
>> sidewalk but next to it on a separate area.
>>
>> I don't remember a discussion of this change, do you? If no, I propose
>> to revert this change on the wiki.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> --
>> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
>> ausgenommen)
>> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not 

[Tagging] Non-live cables for bracing power lines?

[John Sturdy]

I guess this is micro-mapping and probably OK by just about anyone to leave
unmapped, but I'm feeling thorough... near where I live, there's a power
line running along the edge of a byway, and an apparently non-powered cable
leading from the top of one of the poles (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1465951159) to the top of a pole the
other side of the byway, from which a guywire goes down to the ground.  I
guess the idea is to avoid having the sloping guywire obstruct the byway.

Any thoughts on how to tag this?  I'm sure it's not unique, so might be
worth documenting, although pretty uncommon.  It's not actually a power
line itself, as far as I can tell.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] barrier=rocks?

[John Sturdy]

Thanks!  Yes, I can see that now.

On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 1. May 2017, at 14:13, John Sturdy <jcg.stu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > barrier=block is listed in taginfo, but that looks like it refers to
> manufactured (concrete) blocks rather than natural boulders or quarried
> stone.
>
>
> You can use barrier=block for these, it covers both, concrete and natural
> stones, the wiki also mentions it: "Sometimes natural boulders are used for
> the same purpose."
>
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] barrier=rocks?

[John Sturdy]

Hi,

At various points around where I live, there are barriers made by a row of
large rocks, evidently intended to keep vehicle out of an area (particulary
where there are concerns about long-term Traveller encampments, I think).
Would barrier=rocks be suitable for this?  barrier=block is listed in
taginfo, but that looks like it refers to manufactured (concrete) blocks
rather than natural boulders or quarried stone.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping leats

[John Sturdy]

In terms of the tags as defined on the wiki, the most relevant bit is
probably: "For a smaller artificial waterways used for irrigation consider
waterway =drain
 or waterway
=ditch
." but it's not
for irrigation (spreading water over fields) and neither "drain" nor
"ditch" are words I'd naturally use (as English words) for that --- I'd
call it an irrigation channel.

In terms of its function, a leat is effectively an open-topped pipeline for
water, taking it from one or more water sources to a specific place (such
as a water purification works for a settlement).

__John

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Friday 21 April 2017, Chris Hill wrote:
> > A leat is a very specific thing. It is certainly not a canal, but
> > neither is it a ditch nor drain. I would favour waterway=leat. That
> > describes, unambiguously, exactly what it is.
>
> I guess from your perspective it is but please try to define the meaning
> of waterway=leat for non-native English speakers from a completely
> different part of the world in a way that clearly tells them when to
> use this tag and when to use a different one.
>
> For native English speakers this is often much more difficult - you try
> to synchronize your use of waterway=canal/ditch/drain with your
> understanding of these terms in your language - and inevitably fail
> with that attempt.  I just use these tags as defined on the wiki or as
> they are used by other mappers and don't concern myself with the
> inherent meaning of the value outside OSM.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping leats

[John Sturdy]

To me (native British-English speaker) "ditch" carries connotations of
being dirty (muddy) and being used either for drainage (to get water out of
somewhere, the destination not being important) or as a barrier.  So it's
more like a drain.

A leat is to take the water to a specific place, with the emphasis more on
the destination than on where it's getting the water from, and as it's for
a water supply, the water in it will generally be reasonably clean (or at
least not as muddy as ditch-water).

In terms of size, and of being made artificially, it is quite like a ditch,
but I think it's likelier to have an artificial lining e.g. concrete.

I'm inclined to think it doesn't really fit any of the existing waterway
tag values, and that I should make a proposal for it.

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 21. Apr 2017, at 13:26, Chris Hill  wrote:
> >
> > A leat is a very specific thing. It is certainly not a canal, but
> neither is it a ditch nor drain.
>
>
> I would have thought it was a kind of ditch from the description in WP but
> if it isn't I agree that waterway=leat seems suitable to describe
> accurately the feature
>
>
> cheers,
> Martin
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Mapping leats

[John Sturdy]

I've been armchair-mapping some rural places in Albania, and have found
what appear to be quite long leats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leat);
I've mapped them as canals for now, with a note explaining that they're for
water delivery, and marking boat=no.  Any thoughts on:

  waterway=canal
  canal=leat

vs

  waterway=leat

?

Example at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7152352#map=13/41.5165/20.0794

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water control valves/gates

[John Sturdy]

This sounds like a sluice gate to me:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sluice_gate

Or is there some significant difference?

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:43 AM, John Willis  wrote:

> this object is what I am interested in tagging:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/488358755#map=19/36.22843/139.30731
>
>
> Along the hundreds of KM of levees surrounding the large river near my
> house, each stream, drain, canal, storm drain, etc has a culvert through
> the levee, controlled by a manual or electrically controlled “gate” valve.
> similar structures are seen all over Japan, so there are conservatively
> thousands of these gate valves mappable from imagery just here in Japan.
>
> some are very small (50cmx50cm for a drain) and some are very large (1x3m
> for a stream), but all share some common traits:
>
> - control water from a small waterway going into a larger waterway, often
> through a culvert under a levee.
>
> - easily mappable from arial imagery.
>
> - Valve structure is on the inside edge of the levee, not on the sides of
> the embankment nor the top.
>
> - the control structure for the gate valve sticks up out of the the ground
> to the height of the adjacent levee.
>
> - some are human operated, some have electric motors, but there is always
> mechanical mechanism on top for opening and closing the gate valve.
>
>
> some also have related items:
>
> - a second valve on the outside of the levee for safety redundancy or flow
> control for pumps.
>
> - a footbridge out from the top of the levee to the top of the valve
> control mechanism
>
> - a building on top of the gate structure to cover the valves (not a
> pump-house)
>
> - a small reservoir to hold water if the gate is closed. (easily tagged)
>
> - the valve structure on the inside of the levee is protected by concrete
> erosion protection along the sides of the levee and the bottom of the
> floodplain. (man-made erosion protection has no tag)
>
> Rarely:
>
> - a pumphouse adjacent for forcing water into the river.
> (man_made=pumping_station)
>
> - a landuse that is fenced and surrounds the valve if there are buildings
> and a reservoir. usually these have no surrounding land - they just sit out
> in the open with no protection or additional structures.
>
>
>
> waterway=flow_control has 200 overall uses  https://taginfo.
> openstreetmap.org/tags/waterway=flow_control ( my first time to see it).
>
> and waterway=valve has 10 uses
>
>
>
> I would like suggestions for:
>
>
> is waterway=flow_control a good node value to use for these valves on a
> waterway? It seems okay to me.
>
> for valve structures that are very large (some are the size of a large
> truck) and easily mappable as a structure, what to use for that? I used
> building=yes + man_made=valve for the building.
>
> I put a waterway=flow_control node where the culvert exits through the
> gate valve.
>
> a landuse for some water control complexes - landuse=industrial?
> man_made=umping_station on the area rather than the building?
> man_made=water-works seems really wrong.
>
>
>
> here is a pumphouse site I tagged with the valve above.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/36.22858/139.30654
>
> https://www.pref.saitama.lg.jp/a0906/gijutukanri/documents/h26.pdf (pictures
> on the 5th page).
>
> - it has 2 gates valves, one on either side of the levee.
> - a reservoir
> - a building for the pumphouse.
> - a fenced area around the site.
>
>
> Please give me some advice on the gates.
>
> Javbw.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Spillways

[John Sturdy]

I suppose  waterway=weir plus intermittent=yes  would describe it, but I
don't think that's as good as a specific spillway tag.

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

> On 22 March 2017 at 16:56, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> > Weir does not seem appropriate for this type of thing. There is a tag,
> > waterway=spillway, that seems like a good fit - 81 uses so far.
>
> I've seen these tagged as waterway=drain which is close but agree that
> waterway=spillway is better. Would be great to have this documented on
> the wiki.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge

[John Sturdy]

To me (native British English speaker), "dead hedge" is a fairly normal
English term for a barrier made of cut branches, although I think it's
slightly obscure.  I've not heard the term used for anything.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 4:44 PM, John F. Eldredge 
wrote:

> In the USA, those would commonly be referred to as a brush pile or brush
> row. They are commonly seen at the edge of a field that has recently been
> cleared of bushes and saplings. Sometimes they are left to decay in place,
> sometimes they are burned, and sometimes they are ground up by a
> wood-chipper and hauled away.
>
> On February 20, 2017 8:19:04 AM Jerry Clough - OSM 
> wrote:
>
>> I've many such things: the material is called brash (sometimes brush) in
>> the UK. It is often just collected in piles or in longer rows (typically at
>> the edge of the area being worked on) and these are usually referred to as
>> brash piles.
>>
>> Brash is also used to deliberately fill gaps to discourage people (&
>> their dogs) from accessing places.
>>
>> Dead hedge is just not a term that I recognise: it certainly isn't
>> standard British English in the conservation sector. Some hedgelaying
>> techniques of interweaving can be used, but these are in the main to reduce
>> the size & profile of the pile. When used as a barrier brash is usually
>> used to plug small gaps rather than to create a continuous barrier. Note
>> that sometimes brash is simply not cleared after chainsaw or brush-cutting
>> and this may appear to a deliberate rather than a transient & accidental
>> barrier.
>>
>> I would therefore suggest barrier=brash_pile or brush_pile, and despite
>> Wikipedia not dead hedge. Like every other native English speaker on this
>> list dead hedge means a hedge where the plants have died.
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* Andy Townsend 
>> *To:* tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> *Sent:* Monday, 13 February 2017, 21:02
>> *Subject:* Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge
>>
>> On 13/02/2017 20:46, Chris Hill wrote:
>> >
>> > It's a fence.
>> >
>>
>> +1 to that.
>>
>> Despite both of the refs on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hedge
>> being English ones, it's not an English term I recognise at all, and it
>> could have been designed to confuse.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] wetland=bog, why only "receive their water and nutrients from rainfall"?

[John Sturdy]

There's an explanatory notice in Cambridge University Botanical
Gardens, indicating that fens are fed with water from limestone /
chalk springs, which is relatively alkaline, whereas bogs, being fed
by rainwater, are relatively acidic.  The different pH means that
different ranges of plants will grow there.


On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:59 AM, David Marchal  wrote:
>
>
> 
>> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 15:59:24 +
>> From: ajt1...@gmail.com
>> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org; tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: Re: [Tagging] wetland=bog, why only "receive their water and 
>> nutrients from rainfall"?
>>
>> What does "fen" means to you?
>>
>> I've a fairly good idea what I think it means, and I'd never or almost never 
>> tag it as a natural feature (though it may have a name, and the natural 
>> features within it may have names).
>
> In my current understanding, the main difference is that fens at least partly 
> receive water from groundwater, like springs, flow and streams, while bogs 
> are isolated from groundwater and only get water from rain.
>
> Hope I'm not saying you something stupid here, but, if that can help you…
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

[John Sturdy]

I think it would be good to mark these, with a suitable description;
prohibited, no, or closed perhaps?  If it's still a landmark that
people will recognize as a campsite, it can be useful for navigation,
and it may help to implement the prohibition, in that people turning
up there will have some kind of indication that it is not to be used
for the purpose that, on the ground, it looks like it's meant for.

__John


On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 What to do with places where one cannot camp?


 Sure

 camp_site=prohibited or camp_site=no  [for an icon: a tent with a slash
 through it :-) ]

 or even

 camp_site=disused


 --
 Dave Swarthout
 Homer, Alaska
 Chiang Mai, Thailand
 Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] courtyards

[John Sturdy]

Here's another variation: the courtyard of Limerick's Milk Market:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115572313


It was originally open at the top, but now has a canopy that covers
most of it; and it's not a leisure facility.


__John

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote:
 On 08.02.2015 22:17, Warin wrote:

 From a technical point of view they are typically associated with fire 
 protection (way to leave the building, access for firefighters),

 If the courtyard is fully enclosed by buildings or by one building .. they
 are not part of a fire escape (protection), those require exit to an open
 area - not one that is fully enclosed. So the use as fire protection will
 depend on  the courtyard. And my thinking is that a true 'courtyard' is
 fully enclosed?

 We need to be able to map partially enclosed courtyards as well, e.g.:
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/48.17839/16.34189
 (The courtyards are named Hof 1 ... Hof 7.)

 But I agree that a courtyard *typically* is fully enclosed by buildings,
 thus not an emergency feature. There's an approved tag entrance=emergency
 for emergency exits, and I'd suggest a tag like emergency=access for spots
 and alleys designed to be accessible for fire fighters.

 I think that, from a technical point view, the main function of a courtyard
 is to yield sunlight to building rooms that are not adjacent to the
 building's outer margin. All other uses, such as recreation, parking or
 emergency access, are subsequent.

 --
 Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
 Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

[John Sturdy]

Wouldn't it be simplest to leave the religion or denomination tag
out, if the facility isn't specific to a particular religion or
denomination?

__John


On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
 On 09/01/2015 01:53, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-01-09 00:56:


 denomination=none
 ;-)


 Nice, but we need to stay on the religion= level

 But couldn't the sharing be inter-denominational, rather than
 inter-religion?

 As I see it:

 1. No specific religion, such as rooms at hospitals, airports etc.
 2. Shared places where different religions/denominations preach/perform
 services at separate times.
 3. Shared places where different religions/denominations preach/perform
 services at the same time. I'm guessing this would more likely be
 denominations than religion.

 Dave F.

 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 http://www.avast.com



 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Truckage company

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Andreas Labres l...@lab.at wrote:

 Any suggestion how to tag a transport company (a company forwarding goods, 
 don't
 know how you call these guys from the Güterbeförderungsgewerbe like DPD etc.
 in English)?

The companies often refer to their sector as logistics, although I
think that's probably the marketing people trying to sound clever, and
that the people actually driving and loading the trucks will call it
transport.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forest vs Wood

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote:

 landcover=forest
 anywhere there's trees on the ground

This doesn't agree with my (British English) understanding of the
terms; a wood can be small, but a forest is always large.  Small and
large being loosely defined, but for something to be called forest
I'd expect it to be many times larger than a typical farm field.
Trying to pin down my intuition on it: a forest would be big enough to
have one or more villages within its boundaries.   However, the term
woodland can be used at any scale, I think.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping cave tunnels passable by human

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:

 Maybe not completely obvious, but I would agree with Janko. In my opinion, a
 tunnel is man-made, while a cave is not.


On the whole, yes, but there are some artificial underground cavities
that are referred to as caves, I think, such as large chambers in salt
mines.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Jesse B. Crawford je...@jbcrawford.us wrote:
 As a perhaps helpful example, near my old home in Portland, OR, USA there
 was a retreat facility operated by the catholic diocese. It featured
 extensive grounds that you might call a park, except that they were fenced
 and intended for religious or reflective use, with shrines and such placed
 throughout.

I think that landuse=religous would be appropriate for this.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

[John Sturdy]

Some monasteries have quite extensive grounds which are within the
monastic enclosure, that is, private to the monastic community and
subject to the same rules as the monastery (e.g. if it's a silent
order, that area of the grounds will be silent).

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Aerodrome types

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
 I don't like this way of mapping. There might be some overlaps, what if one
 aerodrome has a military and a public part?

Agreed -- I know at least one that is.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Native English speakers: locker or lockbox?

[John Sturdy]

British English: locker.  I've never before encountered the word
lockbox; I'd use safe deposit box or perhaps safebox for the
ones in a bank.

__John (native British English speaker)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Fireplace, Fire Pit, BBQ Grill

[John Sturdy]

As a native English speaker, I's only use fireplace for an indoor feature
of a building: and a fire pit would be sunken into the ground, whereas a
BBQ grill is a structure above the ground, either a portable metal one or a
permanent brick one.

__John
On 23 Jun 2014 11:44, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote:

 Can anybody explain the difference, because there seems to be a lot of
 confusion.

 I often found fireplace=yes. See also fire pit: leisure=firepit in the
 Wiki. Why use different words to say the same thing?

 I guess it was gain due to someome from Germany writing those Wiki
 pages... after looking a bit into it this is my understanding:


 Fireplace:
 A fireplace is an architectural structure designed to contain a fire.
 Fireplaces are used at the present time mostly for the relaxing ambiance
 they create.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireplace
 (Usually not used for BBQ?)

 Fire Pit:
 (Spelling already seems wrong)
 Outdoor, open to all sides
 http://img.diynetwork.com/DIY/2005/04/19/droc104_after_shot_05_lg.jpg
 Used for BBQ??? (Like is this a fire pit? http://www.
 grillplatzverzeichnis.de/images/Grillplatzbilder/
 Grillplatz-NaturSportPark.jpg)

 BBQ Grill:
 -http://www.my-barbecue.com/content/images/thumbs/0002116_
 barbecue-fixe-en-pierre-pr4220f.jpeg
 -http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/BBQ_Food.jpg

 Is there anything I'm missing? Maybe a template would be good for the Wiki
 to avoid confusiong in the future.

 __
 openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Fireplace, Fire Pit, BBQ Grill

[John Sturdy]

I'd call that a barbecue, as it's above ground.

__John
On 23 Jun 2014 13:37, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote:

 a fire pit would be sunken into the ground


 Could that also sometimes (often?) be used for BBQ?

 What would you call this: http://www.grillplatzverzeichnis.de/
 images/Grillplatzbilder/Grillplatz-NaturSportPark.jpg
 __
 openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] No abbreviations in names edge case

[John Sturdy]

I reckon that if it isn't an abbreviation for any extant longer name, it is
no longer an abbreviation, and has become the full name in its own right.
On 18 Jun 2014 10:06, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:

 After a quick search:

 http://web.archive.org/web/20011218005945/http://www.kwtv.com/news/strange/ixl.htm

 it seems that the name **is** an abbreviation (and for what is
 lost), in which case you don't have to expand it. (perhaps add a tag
 note to explain the case...)

 Pieren

 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote:
 Byway looks like a highway=service + service=byway + surface=unpaved to me.

They're not necessarily service roads --- they don't have to lead to
any premises at all; they're simply minor roads, usually unsealed.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:44 PM, John Willis jo...@mac.com wrote:
 Since OSM uses British English, what word would you pair with road, as in 
 dirt road?

 Earthen road?

 Inquiring minds want to know.

Either compacted earth road (more specific) or unsurfaced road
(which I prefer); or green lane which generally means a public
vehicular right of way which is typically not deliberately surfaced
and is certainly not asphalted.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_lane_(road),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Laning#Green_laning, and
http://www.glass-uk.org/

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 09:34:24AM +, jonathan wrote:
 Here's my take from an Englishman!

 While the term dirt road is used here, it is much rarer as all

 From another English person, I would say that dirt in British English
 is understood to mean the substance which causes something to be not
 clean. That is it is much wider in meaning than soil or earth.  But it
 is almost never used to mean soil or earth under your feet, although
 that might be described as dirty or even dirt if telling a child to
 avoid rolling in it.

Agreed --- I think of dirt in this sense as the American English
equivalent of what in British English is usually called earth or
soil.

__John (native British English speaker)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tag man_made=campanile to be replaced with man_made=belfry?

[John Sturdy]

On 2/7/14, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
 Or perhaps belfry:bells=8 to indicate the number of
 bells in the peal, or belfry:tenor=1000 for the weight of the largest
 bell in kg (typical UK)?

The weight of the tenor is significant to ringers (I'm a lapsed ringer
myself) but giving it kg would be very alien to (British) ringers; the
convention is to give it as hundredweight, quarters and pounds.

That being said, I see that Dove's Guide (the publication listing
change-ringing towers) now gives kg as well; for example,
http://dove.cccbr.org.uk/dove.php?searchString=Cambridge%2C+OLEMSubmit=+Go+

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: tag for cel phone credit selling places?

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:

 If I get you right, these shops are not mainly telephone card shops, but
 other shops that also sell telephone cards and/or phone credit. In this case
 I'd use an attribute, e.g. sell:telephone_card or
 sell:mobile_phone_prepaid_credit / sell:mobile_phone_credit (admittedly not
 quite elegant).

There are two different things that the term telephone card might be
taken to mean: mobile phone topup cards, and the scratch cards that
give you the PIN for a pre-loaded disposable account with a cheap
international carrier, so we should make our terminology clear on
which one of these it is.  (I expect many shops that sell one kind
will also sell the other, though, but still I'd prefer to distinguish
them clearly.)

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Remote controlled devices

[John Sturdy]

Sich devices could be mapped using a relation to link them to their
control centre; this would be enough to imply that they are remote
controlled.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wind turbines: big and small

[John Sturdy]

We could also tag whether they are horizontal axis (windmill-style) or
vertical-axis (Savonius rotor) turbines.  This could be helpful for
people looking for landmarks, as the two types look very different.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] mapping qanats

[John Sturdy]

I'm not sure whether this should have its own tag; how different is it
from either an underground pipeline or an underground canal?

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] owner vs operator

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:59 AM, François Lacombe
francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu wrote:

 Operator could be given by operator=* and the effective owner by a new
 owner=* tag.

What about when a business is owned by one entity, but operated on
their behalf by another, in a building that they lease from yet
another one --- does owner= refer to the business, or the building?

If people feel a need to tag things like this, I have no objection,
but I do think it's getting to the edge of what really belongs on the
OSM database.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ace Hardware

[John Sturdy]

+1 for franchise=; that covers all types of franchises, and keeps
clear of operator=.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] bicycle barriers open issue: bicycle trailors

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:58 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
 One can tag the maximum width that can fit through, given zero length, and
 can tag the maximum length that can fit through, given zero width, but a
 trailer that has BOTH the maximum length and maximum width will not fit
 through. You can't readily predict in advance whether a real-life trailer
 that comes close to either maximum will fit through without examining the
 chicane.

Yes, even if you micromapped the whole geometry, it's hard to tell how
large an object you can get through the restrictions --- see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_sofa_problem for an open
mathematical problem related to chicanes!

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:35 AM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
 But what if the pole has both telephone and power on it? ;)  That's what's
 common here in my neighborhood.  I can look out my front door and see a pole
 with both of them using it.

For that, I'd suggest man_made=pole with power=yes and telephone=yes,
or something like that (maybe communication instead of telephone,
as telephone lines are also used for ADSL etc).

Really I'd prefer a top-level tag utility=* e.g. utility=pole, as
I think that's a distinct domain like leisure, amenity and so on,
but I think it's probably a bit late for that, and man_made is
probably the best existing tag to include them in.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)

[John Sturdy]

I recently found that a way I'd marked as a minor power line (from
Bing) is actually a telephone line (from survey), which we seem to
have a convention of not mapping.  Should I just delete it, or tag it
just so that no-one else seeing it on Bing will map it as a power line
in the future?

More generally, should we tag things that we don't normally map, that
on aerials can be confused for things that we do map, to avoid
spurious mapping by others?

(In this case, I should have been able to recognize it as a phone
line, by the layout of the area.)

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] telephone lines (and marking other things we don't map)

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi wrote:

 People map what is of interest to them. Just use a tag that doesn't already 
 mean something different.

 Threre is also people who doesn't want mapbesity or overload of
 details when they want to edit the map like mapping every leaf of
 every tree, even with the right tag.

Yes, I'm specifically avoiding suggesting that we routinely map
telephone lines (they are very common in some places, and probably
rather hard to map consistently from aerials, compared with power
lines).  I'm just concerned with what to do with things that have been
tagged incorrectly once, and, if simply deleted, might be re-mapped
incorrectly again; in this case, leaving a reminder effectively saying
this is not a power line although it looks like one on Bing.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Power poles tower : power vs man_made

[John Sturdy]

I'd prefer to indicate a transformer mounted on a pole with either:

power=transformer
layer=1

or

power=pole
transformer=yes

with a preference for the former.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Power poles tower : power vs man_made

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:14 PM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
 I'd prefer to indicate a transformer mounted on a pole with either:
 power=transformer
 layer=1

 You didn't catch that the node is primarily tagged with power=pole
 (or tower). Then you cannot add a 2nd power tag
 power=transformer. Or you plan to add a 2nd node exactly on top of
 the power=pole node which is something I would not recommend.

No, neither of those; I meant to use just exactly those two tags, on
just one node, and have the presence of the pole be implied by the
layer=1 indicating that the transformer is not on the ground, rather
than being mentioned explicitly.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Power poles tower : power vs man_made

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:53 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
 If you have the layer=1 on the node, renderers may decide that the entire 
 node, including the pole, are on layer 1.

Good point!  Agreed.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] historic=vicarage

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 6:07 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:


 I'm currently mapping the protected monuments in Belgium. One of the
 buildings you encounter are vicarages. I looked at taginfo, but couldn't
 find an appropriate tag.
 or presbytery ?
 ...
 It's for roman-catholic pastors in case that matters.


In British English, I think that would usually be presbytery (for Roman
Catholic).  For Anglican (Church of England etc) it's rectory if the
occupant historically received tithes, and vicarage if the tithes went to
someone other than the priest.  Parsonage isn't really in current use.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Childcare Tag

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

 On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 11:04 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



 Pubs that are over foodie, tables laid etc, should in my opinion be
 tagged as restaurants. Those have lost their primary focus as a place to
 go for a drink, to meet people and to network.


Or possibly as gastropubs, since they're still (at least slightly) a
distinct kind of establishment, and that's a term that's commonly used to
refer to them.

Also, they still look like pubs on the outside.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Childcare Tag

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:07 PM, alyssa wright alyssapwri...@gmail.comwrote:

 Again, thanks for all the discussion. I'm following most of it. ;) I
 think...

 Could I attempt to articulate what I consider the major confusion in the
 existing kindergarten tag? Perhaps this is already known, but perhaps an
 explanation could inspire a graceful resolution.

 In the US, (and according to the Oxford dictionary Australia and Britain),
 kindergarten is legally defined for 5 and 6 year olds. There are cases
 where parents have attempted to enroll a child of below 5 into kindergarten
 and have been legally refused. Instead there are a number of facilities
 that accommodate children below the age of 5.
 ...

It is my understanding that kindergarten means something very different in
 other places of the world. How does OSM account for such cultural
 differences? Perhaps the childcare proposal should not try to replace
 kindergarten, but instead try to disassociate childcare from the
 kindergarten umbrella?

 But I am not sure I know enough about tags to propose something
 appropriate.


I think the clearest is to use amenity=childcare, and document that the
age range taken should be tagged (either with an age-range=a..b or with
age_start=a and age_end=b), and document that amenity=kindergarten
should be processed as an alias for this.  (I don't *regard* it as an
alias, but I'm happy to *process* it as one. particularly when the age
range is made explicit separately.)  This avoids using different words for
age ranges, that might be interpreted differently in different places /
cultures; and also avoids multiple-valued tags for facilities which cover
what someone regards as several named age ranges.

Apart from that, I'd generally go along with the proposals in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/childcare2.0,
particularly pedagogy= as I'm sure adherents of a particular system (e.g.
Montessori) will be looking for that information.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Childcare Tag

[John Sturdy]

It would probably be good to re-open discussion (and add your voice to
it, particularly as you have an interest in using such a tag); after
that, I think this one could be ready to vote on.

__John

On 7/9/13, alyssa wright alyssapwri...@gmail.com wrote:
 Thanks. I'm beginning to get a better sense of how things operate.
 Appreciate the patience. That said -- how does one move a proposed tag to a
 vote? Like can I call one right now?

 Best,
 Alyssa.


 On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

 Hi,


 On 09.07.2013 19:13, alyssa wright wrote:

 Yes, people keep saying that. But as a new editor, my inclination is to
 use approved tags and not ones that are in the proposal stage.


 Most new editors (in the human being sense) tend to use the tags
 offered
 by their editors (in the software sense).

 Which tags are offered by the editors is entirely up to the editor coding
 teams, and different editors will differ in their presets. There is no
 automatism that promotes approved tags to editor presets, and there are
 many non-approved tags in editor presets.


  This is
 consistent in what I've seen anecdotally with new members. This tag has
 yet to go up for a vote. How can it go up for a vote? But then why even
 have a voting process if you're saying extensibly saying it doesn't
 matter?


 Personally, I'd say that a tag going through a successful vote process at
 least means that it's not just something that a lone madperson has come
 up
 with without talking to others; it's a somewhat-discussed idea, and
 therefore more likely to grab the attention of mappers and editor
 writers,
 and therefore more likely to become used.

 I wouldn't say the process is useless, It is suitable for shining a light
 on a perceived need and possible solutions. The process does not,
 however,
 have the weight that some people attribute to it; just because 20 people
 voted on a new convoluted rule how to code opening times, doesn't mean
 every editor writer will now eagerly implement a new preset for that -
 and
 just because a proposal was shot down, doesn't mean that the tag won't be
 rendered.

 Bye
 Frederik

 --
 Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33


 __**_
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/tagginghttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] type for natural=tree (leaved - leafed)

[John Sturdy]

On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Hey

 Could an BE-speaking person please tell me what the right spelling for
 broad_leafed is. Numbers are almost even in the data. Probably, a nice
 task for a bot.


I'm pretty sure it's broad-leaved.  The other sounds only slightly wrong
to me, though.

__John (BE-speaker)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] type for natural=tree (leaved - leafed)

[John Sturdy]

On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 5:47 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Am 07.07.2013 18:33, schrieb fly:
  Hey
 
  Could an BE-speaking person please tell me what the right spelling for
  broad_leafed is. Numbers are almost even in the data. Probably, a nice
  task for a bot.

 Sorry, numbers are towards leaved.

  On the other hand, I wonder if it is useful to use type=* and not
  tree_type=* or tree:type=* as type is the key for relations and it is
  not that good to use different meanings of one key.


On further thought, I'd go for type=deciduous, rather than
broad-lea[fv]ed.  Not quite the same thing (I think larches are deciduous
but not broad-leaved) but I think it's the normal technical term (the
others being evergreen).

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - gross weight

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Peter Wendorff
wendo...@uni-paderborn.dewrote:


 With this it would be:
 - max_weight: the maximum weight of the complete vehicle (including
 truck and trailer, in the German traffic rules (Straßenverkehrsordnung,
 StVO) that's a Zug; if I interpret my dictionary right, in English
 it's a road train.


In the UK, this is called gross train weight or gross combination
weight --- see https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Catering trailers

[John Sturdy]

How should we map roadside catering trailers, that are either left at a
fixed location, or brought to the same location every day (or every
weekday)?  They're a regular part of UK road culture.

Typically, they serve bacon rolls, sausages, etc, and tea and coffee, and
are usually open from breakfast time until lunchtime; there are also some
that serve kebabs, only in the evening.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Catering trailers

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:

 Could we avoid moving features in OSM ? Otherwise the same object, a
 trailer, will be mapped in several places.


The ones I'm thinking of mapping are either physically in the form of
trailers, but static (i.e they have wheels but don't use them, or may even
have had the wheels removed), or are trailers/vans that are taken to the
same place every day over a long period (there's one in Cambridge,
nicknamed The deathburger van, that's been using the same pitch every
evening since I was a student three decades ago, for example).

I'm inclined to agree that fish-and-chip vans are too mobile for OSM,
although I think we could perhaps map their scheduled stopping points (like
a catering version of bus stops).

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Catering trailers

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 1:44 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote:

 Perhaps we need a tag to indicate a catering vehicle location, as opposed
 to the vehicle itself?


The idea of highway=bus_stop with cuisine=hot_dogs amuses me, but I
don't think it's really the right tagging.

:-)

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Reviving pitlatrine proposal from 2011

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:22 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:

 Looking at the old proposal page for
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pitlatrine

 I see a an alternative of:
 toilets:type=[flush,pit,chemical,bucket]

 Thus we might have:

 *amenity=toilets*
 *toilets:type=pit*
 *drinking_water=yes*
 *fee=no*


I prefer your alternative to the proposal page, although I think the
:type is unnecessary, and toilets=pit would be better.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Last call for comments on Proposed features/childcare2.0

[John Sturdy]

I think we should be able to make the age range explicit, via an age=
tag, e.g. age=1-4 rather than only making it implicit through terms such
as kindergarten.

Otherwise, looks good to me.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tagging cannons

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote:


 +1, e.g. there is a cannon in Rome on the gianicolo hill that is fired
 once every day at noon (but I guess they don't put a ball in) in
 remembrance of the Italian unification.


I suspect most fixed cannon still in use have fixed firing times; see also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_O%27Clock_Gun#One_O.27Clock_Gun and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noon_Gun

Perhaps a good way of indicating such continuing use would be to indicate
firing-time=* ?  More informative than simply indicating it is still in use.

__John
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] cinema service_times

[John Sturdy]

I think that as many cinemas vary the showing times, and I expect most
have websites now, a link to the cinema's own web site would be more
suitable.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Amenity=shelter for field shelter?

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
 2013/2/6 Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com:
 The other problem with mapping some of these is they are often designed to
 be mobile to get round planning rules.

 Correct!

 I'm not sure I'd map this mobile type as it will probably/should move in the
 next year!

 I only think about field shelters that are _not_ mobile. In the UK
 they are more often - but not always - mobile because of some legal
 reasons. In other countries they are often fixed. I'm only concerned
 with the fixed ones.

I think the UK ones that are technically mobile aren't necessarily
actually moved --- it's just that they have to be moveable within a
set period (I think less than 24 hours) if there's a complaint about
them.  So it may well still make sense to map them.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is the difference between power station and sub station clear?

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:33 PM, François Lacombe
francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu wrote:
 So we have the same opinion so far, that's great!

And from me, to.

 Just a question about the OSM sense of deprecated.
 Why can't we directly display a big message on each never use this tag to
 inform mappers that they would not use this key/value any more?
 = May administrators could build a template?

Because there is no one point at which that could be displayed, just
several different map editor programs, each maintained by different
people.

Perhaps it would be good to have in the database a way of making a tag
as deprecated, that editor software could read dynamically, but then
it would be stuck if something it assumed was available became
deprecated, and its programmers would have to intervene after all.

And also, there are several renderers (some with multiple stylesheets)
which can each have different rules about what to display and what (by
not having a rule to display it) to ignore.

 For me, deprecation don't imply a mass and automatic retagging. It's just
 removing some links on wiki and freeze the page.

Yes, but it also matters for editors and renderers to stop using the
old one and start using its replacement.

 Thus, changes will be done on the fly, with all the attention expected of
 the knowledgable persons for each planet areas and new objects won't be
 described with deprecated stuff.

Yes, that's good.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - roller_coaster key

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Rob Nickerson
rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:

 One point that jumps to mind: I would imagine that you will find the
 layer=* tag to be better than level=*.

+1

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Fuel, additional tags

[John Sturdy]

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

 Have never seen it sold alongside normal petrol or diesel however, it is
 illegal to drive on a public road when using it.

It's widely available at filling stations in rural areas of the
Republic of Ireland (where it takes the form of green diesel ---
different colouring on each side of the border helps to identify
cross-border misuse as distinct from normal misuse); I'm not sure of
the details of the regulations but farm tractors may use it even when
on a public road.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Exclusive access rights

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

 It is rare to prohibit hgvs as such, the way this is achieved is by weight
 or length. The most common is to prohibit vehicles over 7.5t, the historic
 breakpoint between a vehicle that could be driven on a car license and one
 requiring a hgv licence. At some point that weight was reduced, not sure
 what to or when. I can still drive a 7.5t truck due to when I passed my
 test.

I can't remember when it changed, but it changed to 3.5t.  (The range
3.5t to 7.5t is covered by the C1 driving licence.)

One common weight restriction is 17.5t.  I think the idea behind this
is that the axle weight limit is 10t, and hgv designers have to leave
a bit of leeway for how the load is positioned on/in the vehicle, so
in practice the rated gross tonnage of a lorry is 8 times the number
of axles.  So, in effect, a 17.5t limit really means no vehicles with
more than two axles.

Also, width restrictions may in effect mean no hgv or psv, with
except for access to allow the dustcart in.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Obstacle

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:

 There is already a specification, to whom it is an obstacle
 (obstacle:car, ...) maybe we could have an additional
 obstacle:waterway for all waterbased transport (or more
 differentiated, it is probably important whether you go in canoe or
 with a big freight ship, this should be discussed with the marine
 mappers how it would be best done).

Where an obstacle is at the crossing of two ways, it should be made
clear which of the ways it is an obstacle on.  In particular, a bridge
might be an obstacle to the way passing under it (if it's a low one,
or has a narrow arch) or to the way passing over it (by being narrow
from parapet to parapet).  But this shouldn't be a problem if the
object tagged as obstacle is a way rather than a node.  What would
be the best way to tag a low bridge carrying a canal over a river, for
example? (I'm pretty sure there are some examples of this.)  Tag a
short section of the river as obstacle, where it passes under the
bridge?

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag railroad named control points?

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:53 PM, David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com wrote:
 My employer is a contractor for a few railroads, and through that experience
 I have gained personal knowlege of several named control points for one
 railroad in particular.  A control point typically consists of signals
 facing both ways, switch tracks to transfer between multiple mainline tracks
 if applicable, and often signs displaying the name of the control point.
 While the extents of a control point are not sharply defined (as far as I
 know) they can be roughly described as a few hundred feet long and as wide
 as the railroad right-of-way in most cases.

 How should such a feature appear in OSM?  A single node? An area-way around
 the associated physical features? A relation with several nodes as members?
 And what tags are appropriate?  Does this count as a new feature I should
 propose?

I think a relation is probably better for this than an area.  Further
details would depend on whether the railway has been traced as
separate ways for each track, or as one way with a track count.

I think it's worth documenting as a feature type.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Uses of parts of buildings

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Martin Vonwald (imagic)
imagic@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 A quick question how you would tag this:
 * one building (looks from the outside mostly like a residential building)
 * the building is used for three different things: an office, a riding ground 
 (just assume it's a pitch) and a stable.
 * the building is not separated - it's just one building
 * I'm not interested in the detail- tagging, just how you would tag three 
 different uses.

 My idea right now is:
 * building=yes for the whole building. Or should it be residential?
 * for each part draw a separate polygon and tag with building:use=whatever.

 What I'm missing here is the connection between the building and its parts. 
 So I thought I could use the 3D-extensions for this, namely 
 building:parts=yes on the main polygon and building:part=yes on the parts.

You'd certainly need 3D for many such buildings, as flats / apartments
over shops are quite common; the different uses will be in the same 2D
location.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] amenity=kennel

[John Sturdy]

Martin wrote:
 Actually I just revived an old proposal for stables [1]. My first thought
 was to simply use stables=animal until someone with much better english
 language skills pointed out that stables usually only refer to horses. I
 would also like to see one common tag for some place where animals are kept
 and taken care of. Any suggestions from native speakers?

I'm a native speaker...

Only few types of animal have specific names for where they are kept;
the rest would come under farm, zoo, wildlife park, animal
rescue and perhaps nature reserve.  Also, some countries have
animal quarantine facilities.

The only ones that I can think of at short notice are:
 horse, donkey: stable
 dog: kennel
 cat: cattery
 birds: aviary, dovecote
 bees: apiary

There are several types of kennel, including boarding (for looking
after pet dogs while you are away) and hunt kennels for hounds; also
other working dogs e.g. police dogs, military dogs.  (Catteries are
for boarding.)

Historically, rabbits were kept in artificial warrens that people
built for them!  But now, commercial rearing of rabbits probably comes
under farm.  There's probably a special word for where working
ferrets are kept (English tends to have words like that), but I don't
know what it is, and it might vary between dialects anyway.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ferry lines, ways or relations?

[John Sturdy]

There may be more than one duration of trip on the same route --- for
example, conventional ferries and fast catamarans / hydrofoils sharing
a route.  (Fishguard --- Rosslare used to do this, for example.)

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Planters

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc wrote:
 Andy Carter osm@... writes:

 Good idea!
 I had to check up on the word planter
 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/planter
 Seems absolute spot on as a large flower-pot used as decoration or as a
 barrier. Since we do not have a key for this kind of less noticeable
 decorations (as I know of) lets use barrier.

 barrier=planter

But they're not always barriers!


 Alternative:
 A planter, especially the ones built in bricks from the ground is quite
 similar to a flower bed in a park/garden. Maybe one could think of something
 like man_made=flower_bed/planter

I prefer this one, in particular man_made=planter (I think flower beds
should be land_use=flower_bed).

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Ford = depreciated?

[John Sturdy]

 Why has Ford been depreciated? It is the correct definition, and the
 word used on road signs.

 A google search revealed this wiki page
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:ford

 Why has it not been discussed in this mailing list where it will be seen
 by someone who is not searching the wiki for Fords today.

I missed the discussion, because it wasn't on the mailing list (I
think it would have been a good idea to raise it on the list, though).

Having had a look at the page, I think it's reasonable.  The
deprecation is on highway=ford, in favour of adding ford=yes to a
something which already has highway=whatever, so the highway keeps
its existing type.

As covered in the page, it works just like adding bridge=yes or
tunnel=yes to a stretch of road.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] landuse=residential in rural areas

[John Sturdy]

I'd include houses' gardens in the residential land use area
associated with the houses --- if they're large rural gardens, it
helps to distinguish them from fields.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Advice clarification of the railway tracks=* tag required.

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:

 Are we agreed that tracks=4 on each individual
 way to indicate the total number of tracks running side by side is wrong?

I think it's wrong (I think tracks=n on a way indicates how many
tracks that way represents).

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

[John Sturdy]

 [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Names_localization

+1, generally; but I'm not keen on deprecating the bare name=* tag,
because for many (perhaps most) named features, there is only one
name.  For example, a minor rural road in England will probably have a
name (in English), but it won't have names in other languages, and
no-one will really describe its name as its English name --- it's
simply its name.  Multiple names are really an issue for
multilingual countries and for major features (typically large cities,
rivers, and perhaps mountains) in monolingual countries, and I suspect
those are well under half of all the features that will ever be
mapped.

Having just suggested keeping it simple, I'll suggest a complication
as well: multiple scripts for the same language.  In particular, I'm
thinking of mainland China, as it opens up more to interaction with
the West; and, when I did an introductory course on Chinese language
and culture, my teacher said the Chinese people begin learning to read
and write using pinyin, rather than in Chinese script, so maybe we
should ask Chinese mappers whether they're interested in it being
convenient to have names in both.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:48:37 John Sturdy wrote:

 It's also not true that in a 'monolingual' country that there is only one name
 for something.  For example, London is 'London' to a British person,
 but 'Londres' to a French person.

This is what I was referring to in the second part of this sentence:

 Multiple names are really an issue for
 multilingual countries and for major features (typically large cities,
 rivers, and perhaps mountains) in monolingual countries,

i.e. London may be London to an English person and Londres to a
French person, but Stourport-on-Severn is Stourport-on-Severn to
both of them (just picking a smallish town randomly; no potential slur
intended).  And a lot of names in OSM are street names; as far as I
know, it's rare for people from another country to have different
names for a country's streets.  (I thought I had found one example,
Via Devana as the Latin name for Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, but
when I searched to check that, I found it's 18th-century Latin and not
actually Roman.)

 I still think it's simple enough to have name=* to be the 'default' name you
 get if you don't specify a language, or the name you get if your selected
 language is not available.

Agreed.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Brickworks

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote:
 I would like to tag a brickworks.
 Maybe it's the heat (30 centigrades indoors), but I cannot find a specific
 tagging for a brickworks (large site, heaps of finished bricks, well visible
 chimney).

How about:
land_use=industrial
industrial=brickworks
and mark the buildings where the bricks are made
building=factory
and the chimneys
man_made=chimney
?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Synonym handling

[John Sturdy]

Rather than long discussions about renaming or merging tags (e.g.
drinkable, potable), perhaps we should accept that there will be
things for which more than one tag name is in use, and decide on a
format and a URL at which a synonym table can be stored, for renderers
and other tools to use?

Perhaps we should use something cleverer such as JSON, but I'll
start with a very simple suggestion: a text file in which each line
represents a meaning, and the (space-delimited) words on the line are
the synonymous tags.  Or perhaps we could comma-delimit them, making
it a CSV file, but I think we don't allow spaces in tags so that makes
them naturally a delimiter.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:

 All of them showed 100. And under
 normal circumstances they will always show 100.

 The tag maxspeed=signals doesn't carry any useful information in this
 situation

How about the default_maxspeed tag, which is already in use?

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:

 In the US, the most common variable speed limit scenario is a school zone.
 Rules for when the lower limit applies varies.  Some are certain hours of
 the day and only on school days, others are year round whenever children are
 present, and others still are based on signal indication.

Those sound fairly predictable, although not necessarily easy to parse
and use in routing applications.

 On Jun 26, 2012 5:47 AM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:

 As far as I know, variable speed limits tend to be used in areas prone
 to heavy congestion, so routing applications should probably assume
 it's a slow road (at least during the daytime).

The ones I'm thinking of vary according to traffic conditions,
attempting to slow down traffic that is approaching a congested
section of road, apparently in the hope that rather than arriving at
the congestion and adding to it, the approaching traffic will arrive
after the congestion has dispersed.  (See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_wave)

So, this is only coarsely predictable.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Update of article highway=mini_roundabout

[John Sturdy]

On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
 On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:

 If there is only a single vehicle, or two vehicles traveling in
 opposite directions, it is common to drive straight across the middle
 rather than going around.

 Isn't this illegal?

I think it is illegal, but that doesn't stop it being common!

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag the area of a (public) outdoor swimming pool ?

[John Sturdy]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:58 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:

 By the way, how do I tag a pool which is only for women ? Do we have a gender
 access tag so far ?

 women=only ?

Probably access=women

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Auctioneer

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM, D4RK-L3G10N d4rkl3g...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Dear fellow mappers,

 I have created a proposal to map an auctioneer

Note that in Ireland (at least in the southwest, which is the only
part I've lived in) the term auctioneer is used to refer to what in
the UK are called estate agents, i.e. people selling real estate,
not necessarily by auction.  So I think that, at least in Ireland,
shop=auction_house is less confusing.

(also added to talk page)

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] addr

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
 To be a city it would require a cathedral.

Or a charter... Cambridge is a city without a cathedral, for example.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] addr

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
 I believe there is an address locallity which can be used in this case.

Yes, and this is consistent with rural Irish addresses which don't use
street and housenumbering, but divide parishes into townlands, which
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocoding#Rural_Areas suggests
tagging with locality.  (For example, my address when I lived in
Ireland referred to all the houses on a particular hill, despite the
two populated sides of the hill being reached by different road
networks which only connected some distance from the hill!)

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] addr

[John Sturdy]

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

 That is very true, although I had assumed that on recieving a city
 charter a church is normally made a cathedral

No, that's a completely separate matter, handled by the Church of
England --- the charter is from the government.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

[John Sturdy]

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
 Am 10. April 2012 22:01 schrieb Komяpa m...@komzpa.net:
 It's possible to have pedestrian routing without separate ways for
 sidewalks, but it's nicer when it shows you where you can actually
 cross the road.
 The thing is that you can generally cross any road at any spot, as
 long it is not impossible or too dangerous ;-), i.e. in most of the
 cases you can simply cross the road if your destination is right on
 the other side for example.

I think that in some countries this is illegal.

 With explicit footways your router will
 send you to the next crossing and tell you to cross the road there and
 then come back.

This is probably useful information for blind people.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Extension of the payment:* keys

[John Sturdy]

I recently found myself inconvenienced by turning up for lunch at a
pub that only took cash, when I had only card money on me (something
that I gather a growing number of people make a habit of doing), and
immediately thought that would be a good thing to be able to warn
about on OSM.  So now I've had a look at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Payment, and there's no concise way
of doing this: I'd have to mark it as payment:whatever=no for
every type of card.  So I'd like to suggest either:

(1) a payment:cards key, intended specifically for use with the
value no, to indicate that a shop / pub / whatever doesn't take
electronic payment;

or

(2) a payment:other key, intended specifically for use with the
value no, to indicate that a shop / pub / whatever takes only the
forms of payment that have been listed with other keys.

I think I prefer (2), as being more flexible, but would be interested
to hear others' opinions on this.

__John

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging