Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

2022-12-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4 Dec 2022, at 11:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > only for features that are considered of historical significance. intended to say, “of extraordinary historical significance” on the one end, and the opposing direction is more like “generally someho

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

2022-12-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4 Dec 2022, at 10:57, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > "This key can be used on every observable feature that has a historical > meaning, regardless of ... interest to the OSM community." I believe this is in reply to some unilaterally writing on the key:historic page of

Re: [Tagging] Door tag

2022-12-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 3 Dec 2022, at 02:50, Kyle Hensel wrote: > > Can we change the wiki so that it says “An entrance tag” instead of “The > entrance=* tag”? > > > ok, or maybe “door” could simply mean “the type of a door”? Do we even need this qualifier with “entrance” at all?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-30 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 30 Nov 2022, at 18:53, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3586404853 > (and not tagged with anything directly indicating that) fix it :)___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-30 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 30. Nov. 2022 um 01:10 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > 29 lis 2022, 22:55 od dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > > sent from a phone > > On 29 Nov 2022, at 09:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > "no traffic

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-29 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 29 Nov 2022, at 11:06, Minh Nguyen wrote: > > What was the problem with crossing_ref=zebra again? it’s applied to signal controlled crossings as well when they have zebra road markings. > > What you seem to be suggesting is that the definition of crossing=zebra >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-29 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 29 Nov 2022, at 09:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > "no traffic signals" applies also only in some jurisdictions If there are traffic signals the crossing in OpenStreetMap gets tagged crossing=traffic_signals, this is regardless of jurisdiction AFAIK.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 29 Nov 2022, at 00:52, Minh Nguyen wrote: > > Even if it weren't for iD's long-gone preset, I don't think an ostensibly > global tag should be defined based on the narrow provisions of a specific > country's laws. I don’t think this is about a specific country,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 28 Nov 2022, at 23:53, Minh Nguyen wrote: > > If we keep crossing=zebra around based on the argument [1] that it takes > fewer keystrokes or clicks than adding crossing_ref=zebra or > crossing:markings=zebra without using a preset, then this undermines the >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Crossing cleanup and deprecation

2022-11-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mo., 28. Nov. 2022 um 13:13 Uhr schrieb riiga : > With the approval of the crossing:markings=* proposal there is now a > satisfactory way of tagging whether a crossing is marked or not > regardless of the crossing being uncontrolled or having traffic signals. > For signals, there is

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Start moving proposal announcements to the new forum

2022-11-20 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 20 Nov 2022, at 02:27, Matija Nalis > wrote: > > Because, someone has to do that summarizing work for extra channels to make > sense, and it is IMHO only fair that would > be proposal author (expecting that EVERYBODY will do that SAME task is both > extremely

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

2022-11-19 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 18 Nov 2022, at 22:56, Mike Thompson wrote: > >> Energy and power are used quite interchangeably and power is the better word >> for it. >> > > What evidence do you have that is the case? What is being provided is > energy, not power. maybe we can agree they

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

2022-11-19 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 18 Nov 2022, at 22:35, Mike Thompson wrote: > > In a nearby city to where I live, the city owned utility provides > electricity, water, sewer, and internet. yes, it is also common in areas I know to have a single provider for water, sewer, waste disposal and even

Re: [Tagging] amentiy=donation_centre?

2022-11-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
maybe these can be seen as amenity=social_facility? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Relations of type=site + tourism=camp_site

2022-11-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Nov 2022, at 21:24, Sven Geggus wrote: > > Which is just plain wrong as they are not _only_. you could have the sports centre and the camp site overlap, this way it wouldn’t be _only_ A site relation doesn’t magically solve the uncertainty of exclusive vs. shared

Re: [Tagging] Relations of type=site + tourism=camp_site

2022-11-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Nov 2022, at 21:21, Sven Geggus wrote: > All the sites in the above changeset would need one or more additional > redundant tags like restaurant=yes on the main node or way if a site > relation is no longer an option. so a restaurant is part of the camp site, but

Re: [Tagging] Relations of type=site + tourism=camp_site

2022-11-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Nov 2022, at 12:31, Yves via Tagging wrote: > > Site relations are often used to models thing that aren't spatially joined, > like windfarms, universities... > I can easily imagine it's reasonable to use them for campings in some corner > cases where a single area

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - archaeological_site

2022-11-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 7 Nov 2022, at 12:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > deprecating site_type has chance of being a good idea I don’t think so, it is defacto one of the tags used to further specify historic=archaeological_site and moving away from it is on the same level

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Street vendors

2022-11-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
old style: https://www.scattidigusto.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Yaluz-chiosco-mercato-Garbatella-Roma.jpg even older but different structure (single building): http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-J5az9ofXSIQ/UVgQRJwwenI/wu8/vFdrpK5JwC0/s1600/roma-farmers-market-testaccio.jpg new style radical

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Street vendors

2022-11-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Nov 2022, at 08:15, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > I mapped some of similar shop=greengrocer (assigned space on tables) with > shop=greengrocer street_vendor=yes > > Outside their operating hours you will just see empty tables with roofs over > them

Re: [Tagging] Possible merge of marine_rescue & lifeboat_station tags?

2022-11-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Nov 2022, at 08:17, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Having tag name that clearly excludes freshwater water rescue and changing it > in description is highly confusing and I would prefer to avoid it if at all > possible. exactly, it does not work and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Street vendors

2022-11-07 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 7 Nov 2022, at 20:57, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > If we really don't have one already, it might be worth looking at how to map > stalls in general as I cudl see a lot of similarities. I mapped some of them with shop tags, e.g. shop=butcher shop=greengrocer

Re: [Tagging] Proposal process [was: healthcare]

2022-11-06 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6 Nov 2022, at 12:34, m...@marcos-martinez.net wrote: > > Regarding standardization: First of all, I hope we all work on the basis that > we want to improve things. Can you move a ton of sand with a spoon? thing is, we don’t have just a heap of sand, we have hundreds

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Healthcare 1.1

2022-11-05 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 6 Nov 2022, at 01:13, Robin Burek wrote: > > And what do you say to the result of 41 : 9 ? That is not a "consensus"? Then > why is healtcare also considered approved? Ah well, maybe because it is an > approved proposal and therefore the "consensus" for OSM. We can

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

2022-11-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4 Nov 2022, at 13:17, Marc_marc wrote: > > our "sister" project (wikipedia) has no problem defining what is an anecdote > and what is "relevance from a historic viewpoint", > I don't see why we should have any issue doing it. Mappers are working fundamentally

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

2022-11-04 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 4 Nov 2022, at 08:21, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Using a tag for things other than the common meaning of that word (or word > group) is simply confusing and should be avoided. I may be misguided, but from reading dictionaries it seems to me that the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - historic

2022-11-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 3 Nov 2022, at 14:39, Sarah Hoffmann via Tagging > wrote: > > Random example: historic=manor. About 77% of objects tagged with > historic=manor have a building=* tag, which makes perfect sense. A manor > is a building after all. So it looks like historic=manor is more

[Tagging] escaping semicolons in tag values

2022-11-01 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Is there already a proposal and or established method for escaping semicolons in tag values? Like \; or ;;? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 29 Oct 2022, at 00:42, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > Is the water in your "drinking fountains" chilled, or is it just the natural > temperature of the water coming out? there are a few “machines” that distribute chilled and carbon dioxide enriched water for a few

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 28 Oct 2022, at 10:46, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > I do not like the aggressiveness in this comment of yours; I am sorry I wrote it like this, and agree it was not nice. Please accept my apologies. Cheers Martin

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 28 Oct 2022, at 09:58, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > While I could be interested in whether the flow of a fountain might be > stopped or not, I'm not really interested in how I'd have to do that: I can > just go to the fountain and observe what I find. I

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 28 Oct 2022, at 09:58, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > Actuator definitely provides more information and implicitly defines tap=yes. actuator was not proposed so far, handle was, and while it is documented, it doesn’t seem particularly helpful looking at the

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-27 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 27 Oct 2022, at 18:50, Matija Nalis > wrote: > > instead of ad-hoc inventing > new undocumented key without discussion... there was a discussion about this, tap was seen as a distinguishing property that is yet missing. Handle is similar but not the same (handle is

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-27 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 27 Oct 2022, at 08:33, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Water is usually scarce in Australia, all blubbers/drinking_fountains are > controlled. sure, I did understand this, that’s why we should not generalize, the situation is different in different places.

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-26 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 26 Oct 2022, at 21:29, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Drinking fountains are switch or knob operated and shoot at an angle. these are assumptions based on your experiences that don’t hold true around here, most drinking fountains have continuous flow. By the way, I started

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - archaeological_site

2022-10-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 23 Oct 2022, at 22:15, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > personally it seems to me that it has chance of being a good idea which one, deprecating site_type or ignoring the „rejection“ of the voting? Cheers Martin

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of community mailboxes (cluster maiboxes)

2022-10-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 23 Oct 2022, at 02:03, wolfy1339 via Tagging > wrote: > > Here's a picture for reference, > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/CanadaPostCommunityMailboxes15.jpg for this kind, informal=yes should not be added, obviously This looks pretty official

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - archaeological_site

2022-10-22 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 22 Oct 2022, at 12:47, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > > Following the rejection of the crannog proposal with the concern about > the hierarchy above the proposed tag, I now propose to change the key > from site_type to archaeological_type such a retagging would be a

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of community mailboxes (cluster maiboxes)

2022-10-22 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 22 Oct 2022, at 14:16, Marc_marc wrote: > > it's also a real amenity=post_box ? as a tourist, I can find this box > on the postal operator's website and put my letter there? > or is it just a habit that people also put the outbound there ? if it works reliably, it

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

2022-10-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
today I noticed some minor historic ruins and wonder whether you would consider this an archaeological site? https://twitter.com/dieterdreist/status/1582130246769610753?s=46=pMmPcybaZu9zOoWBrbE_Eg Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

2022-10-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 17 Oct 2022, at 20:30, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > > Not in reply to this specific email, but I've done a bit of tidying > amonst keys and values the last three days, and I've documented some of > my findings which might give food for thought: > >

Re: [Tagging] dinosaurs

2022-10-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mo., 17. Okt. 2022 um 10:09 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Oct 16, 2022, 17:30 by annekadis...@web.de:Is there a way to > > implement a warning into the editors not to combine > "archaeological_site" with dinosaurs? I will replace the few I found >

Re: [Tagging] dinosaurs

2022-10-16 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 16 Oct 2022, at 18:05, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > Do you have a feeling how many "archeologic" sites in OSM are in reality > palaeontological? I fear this is a frequent error, but difficult to spot. It doesn’t seem a huge problem, but even if this was widespread my

Re: [Tagging] dinosaurs

2022-10-16 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am So., 16. Okt. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Anne-Karoline Distel < annekadis...@web.de>: > I've come across a few dinosaur footprints, but that is not archaeology, > because archaeology is about man made structures. Is there a way to > implement a warning into the editors not to combine >

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-15 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 15 Oct 2022, at 10:08, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The flow of water is downwards making them difficult to drink from without an > aid e.g. a cup. while it may be true, you have to acknowledge that there are many places in the world that are providing

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 12:10 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > This other fountain doesn't have such wall, thus it is not decorative > and it cannot be tagged as amenity=fountain (assuming we disregard the > recreational utility mentioned in the wiki). > >

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 14. Okt. 2022 um 10:22 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > On 14/10/22 06:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It seems we are seeing different things, I can’t help if you cannot > > recognize that the fountain is

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 13 Oct 2022, at 21:50, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Field is landuse=farmland - also when zoned as industrial area or scheduled > for > residential construction. interestingly not. I never found this particularly logical, but this situation is

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 13 Oct 2022, at 18:35, Davidoskky wrote: > > It is currently tagged as natural=spring, which it clearly is not since it is > not a natural formation and it is way too low altitude to be a spring anyway. ask the mapper who put it, maybe they have more information. If

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 13 Oct 2022, at 18:25, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > It is an old fountain, maybe 100/200 years old, but I don't see how that > could be defined as historic since it has no historic importance, it's just > an old fountain. > maybe I am using the word historic

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Two new extensions for the wiki: Log in via openstreetmap.org and vote via a GUI

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Do., 13. Okt. 2022 um 11:55 Uhr schrieb Martin Fischer : > Sidenote: I am curious how many subscribers the mailing lists each have. > I'd expect tagging@ to have more subscribers than talk@ but that's just > a hunch. I see the potential users less amongst those who already participate here,

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Two new extensions for the wiki: Log in via openstreetmap.org and vote via a GUI

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Do., 13. Okt. 2022 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb Martin Fischer : > Hi everybody, > > I wrote two small MediaWiki extensions for wiki.openstreetmap.org: one > to let you log in via your OSM account and one to provide an easy to use > in-wiki GUI for proposal voting. > > I also set up a small demo wiki

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 20:00 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll : > > This is all 100% new to me. Where is it documented that a "shop" in a > detached house should be mapped as a detached house, and not a shop? > please do not try to create confusion bvy shortening things. There are 2 entities to be

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 17:43 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll : > Some neighborhoods have signs with names, which is great > because you can add value with the name. use place=neighbourhood for these names if they are referring to something bigger than a contiguos property. When you add names to

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel : > Part of the issue is that landuse should more or less follow property > lines, unless there is some reason why not. I would generally agree with this > a several-acre parcel with > a house and some trees is still

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 17:46 Uhr schrieb Evan Carroll : > Landuse has nothing to do with local authorities or zoning. +1 However, as-is unnamed > developed landuse is a function of the buildings inside. > not necessarily, it is about the whole land that has the tag, it could also be land

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 16:19 Uhr schrieb Marc_marc : > On 12/10/2022 09:34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > >> we do not need the historic key to be “approved”, > > you don't need please do not speak for others, it was a way if saying; "the history key cannot be

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mi., 12. Okt. 2022 um 12:03 Uhr schrieb martianfreeloader < martianfreeloa...@posteo.net>: > So then what's the point of approving tags anyways? there is not much sense in the act of "approving", the meaningful part has happened before, the main benefit lies in the process, improving the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

2022-10-13 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 11:39, Illia Marchenko wrote: > > Of course. Hierarchical tagging. leisure = pitch & sport = *. or leisure=swimming_pool, track, golf_course, fitness_centre, sports_centre, climbing, mtb routes, landuse=recreation_ground, piste=* etc The situation

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 19:58, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > tap=* and water_tap=* are currently being used to tag the presence of a water > tap in a building. > > tap=* is used in Dominican Republic and the values used are "yes", "no" or > the number of water taps

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 12 Oct 2022, at 07:11, Evan Carroll wrote: > > Let's say you're in an industrial zone: do you tag as such > (landuse=industrial) if half of the buildings have been converted to lofts? I would see landuse=residential on the parcels where people live and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

2022-10-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 12 Oct 2022, at 04:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > I would love to be able to move the vast majority of military= to > historic=military, as they are no longer military installations. > > Yes, they certainly were, but they aren't any more. are all military tags

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

2022-10-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 17:32, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > Nobody commented during RFC and then everybody voted against; which is not > nice. I was one of them. particularly because the no vote didn’t offer any meaningful contribution, the only reason given was a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

2022-10-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 15:37, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > Do you have a suggestion how to fix this? it is not broken, unless your proposal gets approved ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote: > > If there is no name, what is the value? it is a property that helps understanding how an area is structured. If there is a name you should use “place” Cheers Martin ___

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote: > > No value. There is no reason to call neighboring w1101484649 "Commercial > Zone". Why is a car wash and a vet commercial, and the gas station is retail? this seems completely in line with what I would expect for

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > How would you tag this fountain I photographed the other day? > > The water is not potable, the stream of water cannot be interrupted and > definitely is not a decorative fountain. > >

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > If I have a fountain that is not decorative, doesn't have a tap and doesn't > provide drinking water, this fountain cannot be tagged. why are you sure it is a fountain? And what has it to do with it having a

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > This is problematic, since if you only tag amenity=fountain it will fall back > to a decorative fountain since amenity=fountain appears to be defined in that > way. those fountains that supply drinking

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 12:06, Davidoskky wrote: > > I do agree, and that is also my objective; but I do like the idea of having a > very generic value you can fall back to when no other value applies. I don’t like the idea, because it will only slow down development of

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 12:06, Davidoskky wrote: > > Some are indistinguishable from drinking fountains, some have drinking water > and can be used to wash clothes as well. all drinking fountains can be used to wash clothes, although it may not be legal in some instances,

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 11:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > Nobody is tagging the specific model type, such as distinguishing nasone from > the 1960s and nasone from the 1990s. > > Should we introduce another key for the style and then tag the specific model > of the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Illia Marchenko < illiamarchenk...@gmail.com>: > Unification of tags allows more simple usage source data, e.g leisure = > pitch allows rendering of all pitches, but lots of tags as > leisure=tennis_court, leisure = baseball_playground, leisure = >

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Di., 11. Okt. 2022 um 10:24 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > Is it possible that drinking fountain in a given style has multiple models? > absolutely yes. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 09:53 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > I do not believe > anymore that man_made=water_tap should be deprecated but rather > redefined to only describe the tap of a fountain and not the whole > fountain. > this is not a redefinition, it

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-11 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 12:07, Michael Brandtner wrote: > > The proposal includes advice to only use this tag in shops that don't accept > all denominations in Italy, one and two cent coins have been abolished, they are not accepted any more in shops, and while prices are

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 15:34, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do we tag > > the waste receptacle > > or > > the tap > > or > > the drinking fountain > > ?? Which is the feature primarily there for? To me that is the drinking > fountain. I'd leave out the tap

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 09:12, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > I like this, but I'd remove amenity=drinking_water rather than > drinking_water=yes, because you _should_ add the tag amenity=fountain. this would be completely inconsistent with the usage of the

[Tagging] relevance of water taps as opposed to fountains

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
I see the wiki yesterday has received some more question marks regarding distinction of water taps and drinking fountains, claiming that the drinking fountain tag has fewer usage as the water tap and “many fountains also qualify for the water tap tag”. IMHO this is the result of loosing focus.

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > I started this thread to confirm/reject listing > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg as > man_made=water_tap > fountain=bubbler > drinking_water=yes > amenity=drinking_water replace

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Which one? > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg > ? yes, this one is not very clear, although the sticker they added makes it clear it is fine for

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 01:31, stevea wrote: > > I suppose somebody figured "well, the drainage is good" (or even improved, > as here with a grate to a wastewater system, apparently) yes, these are always connected via a grate with the sewers > and "well, it doesn't make

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:26, Marc_marc wrote: > > but it's certainly not forbidden to pay for 500€ with a 500€ note, > even though some shops refuse to let you do so I heard it was forbidden in this case not to accept the 500 bill as it is legal tender

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 00:15, stevea wrote: > > If this water is potable, it's amenity=drinking_water. yes, it is potable, and if you look closely you’ll notice that the tube has an upper hole, so when you tap the flow it will create a vertical spout in the curve, so

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:40, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > As an American, I would not consider "fontanella bolsena" > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fontanella_Bolsena.jpg) to be a > drinking fountain, it appears to be a public drinking water "tap" (though in >

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > If yes - why > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg > would not be a water fountain? looking again at this, it really is a poor construction and will not

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Or lets take > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fontanella_Bolsena.jpg > illustrating fountain=drinking and seemingly without upward flow: > is it a drinking fountain? IMHO yes, it is near a

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Let me know if this edit was right or wrong (I am quite confused here, > and this is why I want to document this to make situation less confusing). IMHO saying it _is_ a water tap is confusing, I’d say

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > As the next part of drinking water linguistic journey I documented at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tap#Examples > (bottom example) that bubblers are mostly water taps,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:01, m.brandt...@posteo.de wrote: > > voting has started for the proposal Payment denominations. question: is it legal in the EU not to accept certain types of Euronotes? ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
113.pdf#page=30 > [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MUTCD-CA_PS-013.svg > [3] https://forms.iapmo.org/email_marketing/codespotlight/2017/Aug3.htm > > -- > m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us > > > > > ___ > Tagging mailing li

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 08:43, stevea wrote: > > Tags must capture these differences, and more. and ideally they should do it in a way to reduce confusion Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

2022-10-09 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 08:50, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'll be voting no. me too, it is trying to deprecate a handful of tags I am using for fountain classification. Why do people have to “deprecate” other people’s tags when they introduce new ones with

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Sa., 8. Okt. 2022 um 19:26 Uhr schrieb michael spreng (datendelphin) < m...@osm.datendelphin.net>: > - It seems we have more specific terms in German for fountains. >Springbrunnen, Laufbrunnen, Brunnen... it confuses that in English, >everything is mapped to the same term (I'm not a

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Sa., 8. Okt. 2022 um 16:04 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky : > > That’s why we decided some years ago to record additional detail about > the structure in the fountain tag. > I wish to add more sense to how these structures are described. The > current tagging scheme has a lot of problems with

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 14:23, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > It feels strange to me that the same exact structure might belong to three > different primary tags according to whether the water provided is potable or > not or if animals can use it or not. this is the

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 12:43, Enno Hermann wrote: > > It does not make sense to me to use different tags for the same kind of > feature, so I generally use amenity=fountain for these with appropriate > subtags. it’s not the same kind of feature if the water is drinkable in

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 12:43, Enno Hermann wrote: > > One thing I keep wondering about on this topic is how to tag very simple > fountains that are widespread in Switzerland along hiking paths > (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adlisberg_-_Gockhausen_IMG_4215.jpg) >

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 07:55, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Example Tom Bass Wall Fountain, Sydney, Australia 1963. Nicknamed "The > Urinal" for obvious reasons! according to a british mapper, this is not a fountain but a water feature 路‍♂️

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

2022-10-08 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 06:43, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I note that settlements are already on the values for the key historic, e.g > farm, manor, monastery, castle ... all places where people lived. none of these are necessarily settlements on their own

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >