[Tagging] landcover vs landuse

overlap the old landuse will be extremely confusing for the non-experts. And this will be endless, like the footway vs path story. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting camp_type=*

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure about the typo : is it non-designated or non_designated ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo

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

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Pieren, I have mapped those myself only in cases other reasons existed to map than. But this is not what the first section suggests: Beautiful place in the mountains, desert or at the beach - no facilities

Re: [Tagging] Increasing voting participation (Was Accepted or rejected?)

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

Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?

logic in the process. -1 The main criticism about votes is the approved status and the small amount of participants, not percentage of approvals. So change the status name and increase the quorum, not the opposite. It's also not a problem to keep the vote open for a long time. Pieren

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

means potentially everywhere... imagine a similar proposal for pissing on trees tagged as informal toilets ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Current status of the key smoothness=*

the controversy section will just give the false impression that there is no controversy at all. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Super-keys are evil

burden it would put on the database system. However, it might be something to think about for the future. I think that after 10+ years of discussions, you are not the first who came with this idea. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating aerialway=goods

for the average contributors, not to simplify routing software dev's life. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating aerialway=goods

it could be replaced by fork or container or container_for_goods, just enhancing the existing list following the same principle. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Basic philosophy of OSM tagging

would say we already have two committees for tagging scheme: - the JOSM presets maintainers - the DWG Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

, it will be tagged with amenity=drinking_water. And for the same water tap inside or near a cemetery, it will be tagged with man_made=water_tap. How can we explain that to newcomers ? why amenity in one case and man_made on the other ? what is implied about potability ? etc Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

blocks more general tagging scheme for water sources. I never said that. Although very hard, it is not impossible to deprecate a tag in OSM. We just need real good arguments for it. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

or a fountain (functionality more important than the shape). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

of the amenity=drinking_water but I think the current proposal is not clear enough compared to the existing tags. Pieren [1] https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/27869/how-to-tag-water-taps-not-intended-for-drinking-water ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Boundary Relations. What's a subarea used for?

of standard operating procedure in some areas has to be interpreted carefully. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Defining genre for public bookcases

coming after the vote) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] New openstreetmap-carto version: please check country and state boundaries

for Croatia either. But anyway, here is what is documented on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative and we see several countries with a level 3. Anyway, you speak about a name and a ref for the relation. Since when do we need a ref for an admin boundary ? Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Main Distribution Frame added to man_made template

mistake in the wiki ;-) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

or residential=garage or residential=toilets_in_the_garden Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:29 PM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: it is a subkey for the buildings, to go with building=civic. My concern is about splitting a landuse polygon just to refine information that could be stored on buildings themselves for instance. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 62, Issue 31

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote: No, unknown should be tagged as unknown. Even better - not tagged. +1 We don't tag what is unknown. Pierre ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Rooftop parking - new parking=rooftop value?

will have to invent a new tag for that. I would prefer something like level=roof or level=3. Just where the parking(s) is in the building. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

this bridge. Of course, anyone is free to come back and add more tags like the physical height or the material and 3d shape of the bridge, etc. But the most interesting information for apps checking clearance (e.g. for routing) is there = no legal restriction here. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

native English speaker). Although maxheight is the legal value (like all tags in the category access), none is suggesting that there is no height limit at all. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

don't. So the simple maxheight=unsigned or unmarked or whatever is easier for the average contributor. What you suggest is possible and could be automated. But it could be done by the data consumers as well. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging

[Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways

and the default km/h remains for highways and railways ? Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways

with the SI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knot_%28unit%29) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways

, both MPH and knots are used. Usually MPH on canals and knots on rivers, though even this can depend on who the navigation authority is and how far back in history their statutes were written. Okay, if the unit is not generalized, then my idea doesn't make sens. Sorry for the noise. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - relation type=person

a link to wikipedia because they are already an encyclopedia and check people notability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29). And once you create a link to wikipedia (or wikidata), you don't need the relation anymore- Pieren

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

that we have to follow him... Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] man_made=bridge

and never reused. Or that your tag is used for something else. Or that your description is too vague and open for wrong interpretation. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - relation type=person

to be careful about creating a database of named people (and their relationship) when they are not celebrities. Even for dead people, it can be conditioned to local legislation. I will be more than happy to find better solution to map graves like this not using relations. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

and the traffic signals are also using their own nodes (thus different osm elements). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tagging for graves?

as a free access database, bypassing the restrictions of wikipedia. Something that could be deleted without regret on both database and wiki. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

this paved key). With the first option, the paved attribut can be inconsistent between applications. With the second option, the paved attribut is subject of personal interpretations from the contributors but this could be moderated when the surface key is also present. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] name and brand tags

the data-consumer/renderer. Most of the contributors don't care about the real oil station (or hotel or bank) name/brand/operator refinements. We should consider the tag name as the main key and tolerate that name duplicates brand/operator until someone updates it with the real station name. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] (Soapy) Massage Parlour

=brothel_even_if_it_is_not_legal_to_say_it_is_one or brothel=dont_tell_anyone Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Personal Keys for WikiProject, Survey Data for Import

objects - use wikipedia / wikidata links Who can decide that wikidata is not an external ID which shouldn't be stored in OSM ? Why wikidata couldn't link to OSM objects ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] landuse=grass = natural=grass

wouldn't agree to draw different polygons or use several key to make such small subtleties. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com wrote: For the junction! For a named junction with a (not named) traffic signal: junction=yes + highway=traffic_signals. (Quite common on Korea – on the ground, not in the database.) Ok, I improved the wiki about this

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tagging for complex junctions or traffic signals that are named

? highway=traffic_signal + junction=yes + name=* means that name is for the junction or for the traffic signals ? And can we imagine a case where the junction and the traffic signals are both named (and possibly differently) ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] default value for oneway

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

Re: [Tagging] Archway

be ok +1, I have in the past used for (much smaller and older) arches man_made=arch +1 for man_made. landmark is too vague. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] include smoothness=* in JOSM presets?

maxspeed:practical. Do we have to choose between bad and worse ? As already mentionned, the skater, biker or car driver will have a totally different idea/view of what a good or bad smoothness is for his means of transport. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging

[Tagging] leisure=common

://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dcommon Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common

vague definitions in the wiki, we should better start with smoothness :-) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Map Features template

a simple alphabetic order or key string. Not something we can program easily. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

remember the time we always said that landuse is intended for small scale mapping, not a parcel scale. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RENDER

or may not be displayed on the map, depending if you added your RENDER tag or not. Your proposal have no chance to be adopted for these reasons. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

by using a differente style/colour/transparency if the tag amenity=place_of_worship is combined or not with a tag building=*. It's extremely sad and dangerous to create a precedent now just because we have a rendering issue for one of the amenity keys. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] usage of maxspeed:practical is described as recommended on wiki

I would modify the section [1] by replacing it is recommended by it is suggested and adding at the end a note saying that a large part of the community consider these two tags -smoothness and maxspeed:practical - too subjective. Pieren (I also suspect the 12000 coming from some imports

Re: [Tagging] minus or underscore in attribute values?

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: the space gets replaced by an underscore +1 The problem is not to have a preference between underscore and hypen but to know if our English colleagues can agree on the separator space or hyphen. Pieren

[Tagging] Fwd: Information board details in bus stops

other suggestions about this and the information boards ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forest vs Wood

forests without much human activity, either because they're protected or because they're far away from humans So, after 7 or 8 years of confusion about 2 main tags for forest, the best idea now is to introduce a third one... Pieren ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Mapping cave tunnels passable by human

underground). That would not be immediately visible on the map but data consumers requesting all highway path in Poland could also safely ignore this creation. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo

Re: [Tagging] convert imported natural=rock areas to bare_rock

) to inform the local community about your intentions. It is not politics but basic courtesy. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Kindergarten, Childcare and Preschool

(but could be summarized in a per country wiki page like we do for admin_levels) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

If you don't understand that a collection of all bus routes from operator XYZ in my city is not different than a collection of all McDonald's restaurants in my town, then I cannot argue any more. And if we tolerate the first, we cannot refuse the second. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

. The problem is that amenity=place_of_worship is always rendered as a building even when it could be a bigger area (like for schools). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

; this means that it has intrinsic knowledge about the location of objects. If you want to know about all footways in East Anglia, simply pass in a bounding box of East Anglia and request all footways, and the collection is made for you on-the-fly. Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

with network:operator where operator is already used. But tell me if you know an example where the network operator is differente from the hiking route operator belonging to this network... Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

related to the network relation ? Another problem is for routes that form the connection between 2 networks. Right now, they are placed in the 2 network relations. How would you tag the network names for them ? Create two route relations, one per network. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

and German mailing lists and forums. I think this single list and the wiki, instead of ten local lists and forums, is more appropriate, no ? I don't have preconception about such relation, if someone find a valid argument/example which explains it's not using relations as categories. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse?

is combined or not with a building=* tag. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

? Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relations/Proposed/Network ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

have a predefined list of (master) routes but only a list of path segments. But again, like all bus routes in a town or all motorways in a country, you should be able to retrieve the whole list of smaller routes and junctions with an appropriate set of tags on the nodes and route relations. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

around them. @Frank I agree that the wiki should formalize the practice but not all practices in OSM have to be followed. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Relations are not categories excepted for type=network ?

, there are a lot of other national cycle routes as well. Plus some attached relations examples very explicite. As raised in the discussion page, is that not exactly breaking the relations are not categories ([1]) principle ? Can we delete such relations when we meet them ? Pieren [1] http

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Proposed Node Relation

I think here you just try to compensate the missing 'z' component in OSM. I don't see any problem to have over two elements on the same position if they have different ele or layer values. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] Track grades

be objective. Forget the smoothness tag please. We might replace it by the 4wd tag (but it's only a partial solution) or another passable tag (for city car, 4wd, mtb, etc) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Rendering change: buildings within highway areas

order reflected more the real world. We can blame Google for many things but, at least, they render tunnels below the buildings... If you don't like buildings, than make it frankly and remove them completely from the style. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing

Re: [Tagging] Rendering change: buildings within highway areas

On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Georg Feddern o...@bavarianmallet.de wrote: Did you consider buildings that are - at least partly - raised on pillars/columns with a pedestrian area underneath? I think such buildings should have a tag layer, no ? Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

would prevent someone to add the MusicBrainz or freebase.com reference directly in OSM ? Why should we accept one and not the others. Where is the breaking point ? Pieren [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata ___ Tagging mailing

Re: [Tagging] tagging of a throughabout

On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com wrote: Am I right? FYI, we had a recent discussion about roundabouts controlled by traffic lights on this list: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Signal-controlled-roundabouts-td5808587.html Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

the building operator only through the wikipedia:operator where most of the data consumers are simply looking for the operator tag. I discover a semantic shift where traditional OSM tags are slowly replaced by wikipedia contributors eyes and habits. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Former tram lines: disused, abandoned or razed?

. The result for such mapping will be an excessive segmentation of the highways only for historical purpose (would be the same if someone changes the surface tag every 10 meters). I would suggest to map such things on historical map projects. Pieren ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] man_made=pipeline - is onewayness implied?

? or flow_direction=both and oneway=no ? About flow_direction=none, then you water stream/canal/pipe is not a water stream/pipe/canal (change the primary tag). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo

Re: [Tagging] Reviewing the use of addr:housename

name into addr:housename. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Signal-controlled roundabouts

of these junctions which are today the exceptions ([1]). Pieren [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184551793 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Signal-controlled roundabouts

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: Btw, we also have some special cases like this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/47.20880/-1.58741layers=N where a tramway is crossing the roundabout. It's a normal roundabout (not a traffic circle) excepted that traffic

Re: [Tagging] No abbreviations in names edge case

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

Re: [Tagging] Pipeline bridges

it a bridge. location=overground is enough. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Signal-controlled roundabouts

types of junctions ([1]). To avoid confusion, we could use a specific tag like junction=traffic_circle (already 33 in taginfo) (then we could discuss about the oneway=yes implied or not). But I don't think that routing applications are checking right-of-way's. Pieren [1] http

Re: [Tagging] Basic question about functional classification of highways

was not simply a maxspeed=zone type since OSM is a spatial db and knows in which country the way is. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Door Values

be interpreted as glass door, wooden door, ...) -1 where is the difference between door=* and door_type=* ? very confusing for newcomers. I would prefer a door=yes/hinged/sliding/... + automatic=yes or manual=yes (saying default is manual) 'not sure about door=opening means... Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Signal-controlled roundabouts

of land space for a junction... Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Wiki edits, building tags on nodes versus areas

If the whole building is a shop, I see no reason to not reuse the same OSM polygon for both features (the building and the shop). However, if the shop is not the unique entity, like apartments/flats on upper floors, I also recommended in the past to use a node. Pieren

Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes wiki page update

will be next ? delete all oneway=no because it's useless most of the time ? Pieren To André, I did not reply to your last message in our private conversation because I was simply not able to understand your arguments, even with my best efforts

Re: [Tagging] Urban perimeter

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I see, for this you'd most probably need a new boundary type (if it isn't the same as your administrative boundaries). +1 type=boundary + boundary=? Pieren

Re: [Tagging] Urban perimeter

of existing landuses ? Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

) to be linked. The risk if we don't specify a limit is that contributors will use it to link all places within the boundary (making a substitute of the infamous is_in tag). Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

don't like the key location=* for the same reasons. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Some more strange cases: We could create an additional role (e.g. capital) when the admin_centre is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid unnecessary duplicates). Pieren

Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice

is better than 'capital' (works for all levels and is formally linking both entities) but I know that renderers prefer tags directly on the node for convenience. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] deforestation tag

for newcomers. Doubling the amount of land tags/polygons is shooting ourselves in the foot. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] deforestation tag

the crowd will never accept. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

below the ground, otherwise it's a flood ;-) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] small change to turn restriction relation tagging

access restrictions really is. I think the tag makes sens only where a specific road sign exists. This is the case in my country (not U-turns but service roads or even pedestrian streets with e.g. special removable bollards) Pieren ___ Tagging mailing

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

. +1 Again, without a complementary tag like tunnel or covered, you can only speculate about the topology. QA tools report errors if two features are crossing each other without these additional tags (road/road, road/river, road/railway, etc... but not a river crossing a landuse). Pieren

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >