Re: [Tagging] Long Tail ( was Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging)

On 19/05/2015 11:50, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 19.05.2015 um 01:47 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt : How about if first edits caused some sort of flag that experienced users see, and can welcome and thank the new user for registering and contributing. This is possible now, but not really part of th

Re: [Tagging] Estate agent

On 17/05/2015 16:52, Paweł Marynowski wrote: Hi all, it looks like since 2010 there is no consensus about how to tag estate agent - shop vs. office. Quick look at taginfo gives clear information, that office=estate_agent is much more popular. Surely both are potentially valid? Some estate

Re: [Tagging] man_made=apiary or ?

On 12/05/2015 18:13, Anders Anker-Rasch wrote: Hi, first post on the tagging list so I'll try to be short. Apiary tagging is still "in limbo" - and has been so for some years now as I can see from the talk. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/apiary How can I get thi

[Tagging] Gravel (was "Re: Tagging Digest, Vol 68, Issue 35", and before that "surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?")

On 12/05/2015 12:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-05-11 18:14 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt >: I only now, after having lived for many years in the UK, I realise that the definition of gravel is wider than the equivalent of the German Splitt. I thought them

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

On 11/05/2015 09:42, André Pirard wrote: The problem is that if you don't find a phone number you may miss a phone call but that if you use wrong access or routing tags you will instantly have GPSes send cars, bikes or pedestrian on the wrong road. It's really difficult to have it understood t

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

the thread title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports for example access:foot For my own use I've been doing it for a while, ever since (some) people started using it: https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L351 You could

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

Regardless of pebbles vs pebblestone, where did the distinction of "gravel=sharp, pebblestone=rounded" come from? Is there any way to easily see who first contributed a particular section of a wiki page? I'm not convinced that the wiki is documenting usage in OSM here. A bit like natural=wo

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite

On 06/05/2015 03:54, David Bannon wrote: Anyway, the issue is, perhaps confusion in some minds about =camp_site and =caravan_site. Most (but not all) camp_sites will also take caravans and RV's. But Tourism=caravan_site is for the caravan ONLY type of place. Here (in the UK) I'd differentiate

Re: [Tagging] electric zigarrettes

On 21/04/2015 21:47, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: On 21/04/2015, Thorsten Alge wrote: is there a tag to express that the use of electronic cigarettes is permitted at a location? If not I'd like to suggest the use ecigarette=* or vaporizing=* with the same values as smoking=*. I've never seen a pla

Re: [Tagging] inuse, defacto

On 17/04/2015 14:38, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: A more useful metric is how many different contributors used the tag. Is anyone aware of any analysis of who (or how many users) first used particular tags, or who (or how many users) "accepted" a tag by making a subsequent change to an object?

Re: [Tagging] Fuel shops

On 20/03/2015 12:18, Jan van Bekkum wrote: There is a similar confusion for kerosine (US), paraffine (UK), petroleum (NL); it all the same liquid. (for the avoidance of doubt) the normal UK spelling is "Paraffin". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin sums up the confusion nicely. If you go

Re: [Tagging] Regional stylesheets for osm-carto (Was: rendering of local power lines)

On 12/03/2015 21:11, John Willis wrote: On Mar 12, 2015, at 6:56 PM, SomeoneElse wrote: The "standard" map has an impossible job - trying to be "a nice map" This is true, and thanks for linking to the resources to set up the server for a special version. However, what

Re: [Tagging] Regional stylesheets for osm-carto (Was: rendering of local power lines)

On 12/03/2015 17:11, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: It's technically possible to divide that, at least along fairly coarse boundaries. (not that it's particularly relevant to the tagging list, but just in case anyone wasn't aware) that's what Mapquest already do: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=

Re: [Tagging] Regional stylesheets for osm-carto (Was: rendering of local power lines)

lding-a-tile-server-14-04/ (2) https://www.mapbox.com/tilemill/docs/crashcourse/introduction/ (3) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse (4) https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style (5) https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/openstreetmap-carto-AJT ___

Re: [Tagging] Survey points

On 11/03/2015 10:23, Malcolm Herring wrote: On 11/03/2015 09:46, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: Care to review them ? I took a quick look at these objects & the few that I examined were actually created as areas, rather than had been converted from a node. The most egregious example is this one:

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

On 10/03/2015 14:37, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: OSM apparently only cares about railways. No, no, no! OSM cares _passionately_ about semicolons: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-January/thread.html#21258 Cheers, Andy :) ___

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

On 09/03/2015 20:03, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: The core problem is: *railway=abandoned* Refers to railway service, and does not describe what's on the ground. No. "railway=abandoned" has been used from almost year 0 in OSM to indicate "where the rails have been removed but the route is still visib

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

On 09/03/2015 15:16, Matthijs Melissen wrote: On 9 March 2015 at 15:06, ael wrote: So is there a bug tracker that I have missed for the stylesheet? Yes, it was pointed out to you already: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542 https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetma

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

On 09/03/2015 14:22, ael wrote: I have resorted to changing railway=abandoned to railway=disused on several occasions just to get mapnik and friends to render bridges. Bridges over roads and rivers are major features of relevance to tall vehicles and boats, so really should show up on standard re

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - register

On 06/03/2015 11:48, ael wrote: I don't know if any of the Dartmoor boxes are marked in OSM. A very Addition: I just found one of them: http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/node/1129854737 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.65508/-3.97769&layers=D ael I suspect that a better tag than "

Re: [Tagging] Wiki vote threshold

2015-03-04 9:35 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: After, say, 1 year in any one status, move them to status ... 'Expired', 'Resting', 'Paused ' or ? ... pining for the fjords? This tag's not dead, it's Cheers, Andy ___

Re: [Tagging] route=foot

On 01/03/2015 21:48, fly wrote: Am 01.03.2015 um 22:04 schrieb SomeoneElse: On 01/03/2015 20:17, fly wrote: Wait a minute, out of the 25,000 over 21,000 have a network=* which leads me to the assumption that most should be tagged route=hiking. What makes you think that? Come on, just have a

Re: [Tagging] route=foot

On 01/03/2015 20:17, fly wrote: Wait a minute, out of the 25,000 over 21,000 have a network=* which leads me to the assumption that most should be tagged route=hiking. What makes you think that? This is a genuine question, by the way - I suspect at the root of this might be a difference in th

Re: [Tagging] route=foot

On 01/03/2015 17:43, fly wrote: Is route=foot really the tag we want to use for walking routes and city tours ? There are 25,000 of the things out there - it's not exactly some niche tagging: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=foot I've used "foot" in the UK for routes that aren't

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - key:rubbish=

On 18/02/2015 19:15, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Remember that OSM tags are based on UK English. dump_station should be fine. Maybe I've lived a sheltered life, but I'd never heard the term before this thread. When I had caravan holidays inflicted upon me as a child, "Elsan* disposal point" wa

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

On 15/02/2015 11:17, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I find that landuse=churchyard vs. landuse=religious+religion=christian have the same meaning, with the advantage that the latter works multicultural. No. If you read back up through this and previous threads, you'll see that "landuse=religious" simp

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

On 15/02/2015 01:24, Warin wrote: What 'landuse' would you say it is? It does not fit in any of the values given on the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse There are over 2,900 tagged landuse=religious currently. as shown by the taginfo. You can't always take taginfo numbe

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On 14/02/2015 07:45, Lukas Sommer wrote: Hello. The english wiki page key:building says that this key may not be used on nodes. ... it also says that it shouldn't be used on relations, which would exclude perfectly valid multipolygons, such as this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation

Re: [Tagging] length=

On 30/01/2015 14:12, St Niklaas wrote: > From: François Lacombe > > Since OSM editing tools aren't AutoCAD you can't be 100% precise on the > geometry. Exactly so. Francois if you’re using JOSM you’re be able to work up till 0,06 - 0,04 =0,02 m accuracy No. Unless you can measure accu

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 28/01/2015 21:57, John F. Eldredge wrote: Well, you also have the status "proposed, but no start date set", which would fit some subdivision maps I have seen. I am not sure how one would tag that. Again, I probably wouldn't add that, until it has got a projected start date (and a budget!

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 28/01/2015 13:05, Richard Welty wrote: i changed them to highway:unbuilt, rather than deleting them so that they would stop rendering and wouldn't get added back in later. I guess that that makes sense here in a "fix the mapper" kind of way (I've certainly done similar things), but genera

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

On 28/01/2015 11:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-28 8:48 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: Unfortunately this does not have a tag for non drinking water .. possible values could be non-potable_water grey_water I like grey_water

Re: [Tagging] sidewalk=* or footway=* (Hubert)

On 20/01/2015 13:01, Hubert wrote: I just found the following Thread ion the GB mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-August/013663.html (I haven’t read it yet.) Is that the one you where referring to? That's certainly one of them, yes. I have a vague recoll

Re: [Tagging] Tagging road illumination quality

On 20/01/2015 01:21, Warin wrote: As a camera/light meter should try to reproduce the human eyes response I'd think it would be a good approximation - certainly acceptable compared to a subjective human assessment of 'bright/good/bad/average'. Perhaps what you need to do is to make some mea

Re: [Tagging] sidewalk=* or footway=* (Hubert)

On 19/01/2015 23:19, Warin wrote: To me, sidewalk is American English. British English is more footway? " footpath" is common Australian English. In English English* "footpath" means either that thing at the side of the road that Americans call a "sidewalk" or a path not at the side of the r

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC: Reverse Vending Machine

On 11/01/2015 11:25, makko wrote: ... However, I do not know how widespread the term "reverse vending machine" is. ... In the UK, it isn't common - at least, I'd not heard of it before this thread. Interestingly, one of the links from the WP page is to a UK company that claims to have a tra

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

On 10/01/2015 00:17, John Willis wrote: Similarly, animal sacrifice and practicing voodoo at the airport's prayer room might get you arrested. Not even poodles? :) https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-January/020847.html Cheers, Andy

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

On 08/01/2015 22:21, johnw wrote: On Jan 8, 2015, at 11:11 PM, Tom Pfeifer > wrote: ... My favourite would be "multi" as is is concise and also used in sport=multi, The exact word is nondenominational, but multi fits with OSM definitions. Maybe referencing th

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and terminal without building tag

On 06/01/2015 02:48, John Willis wrote: I thought tat was a feature, to actually deprecate the landuse from the buildings, so we don't have the similar issue again of a building and area rendered the same. (at the risk of going around in circles) in the Western Christian tradition, it's usu

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

On 04/01/2015 21:25, Warin wrote: /rant/ I joined this group so I could vote for things . I think you might misunderstand what this list is for. On https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging "About Tagging" says: "Discuss the tags used in OSM, how they could evolve, and how editors

Re: [Tagging] hrmpf.

hich was also done in the changeset) as a result of the proposal. I see a point here, considering that the change of a tag affects map styles, software, ... as mentioned by SomeoneElse. To be clear, I don't think that anyone's criticising the change itself, just the notification of it. If p

Re: [Tagging] oneway=no spams

On 28/12/2014 16:01, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: I think that those editors should only make , "yes" and "-1" selectable, or omit the "no" values on upload at last, except for motorways, motorway_links and roundabouts. I don't believe that there's yet an automatic interface between mailing list a

Re: [Tagging] Date of survey

On 22/12/2014 19:56, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: Whether on the changeset or on the object - whichever is most appropriate, automatically adding the current date as survey:date whenever a source=survey is entered could be a nice optional editor functionality. In addition to current limited ado

Re: [Tagging] craft=builder definition?

On 16/12/2014 17:05, Andreas Goss wrote: Just found this tag (craft=builder) on Taginfo and it has been used by a few times, but it does not seem very clear what it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder So is there any good definition for this tag or should I just create a Wiki page tha

Re: [Tagging] Survey of street/road layouts and their tagging

On 12/12/2014 13:13, Ulrich Lamm wrote: See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Tables_of_street_layouts This could benefit from an explanation of what problem you're trying to solve here. The wiki's full of "I think we should tag X like Y" pages but without any arguments for a

Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance

On 06/12/2014 18:43, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: On 06.12.2014 19:06, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: There is a proposed tag man_made=adit that is a good idea. But I think that it would be better to use man_made=adit_entrance for adit entrances - too make it clear and obvious what should be tagged and t

Re: [Tagging] man_made=adit_entrance

On 06/12/2014 18:06, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: There is a proposed tag man_made=adit that is a good idea. But I think that it would be better to use man_made=adit_entrance for adit entrances - too make it clear and obvious what should be tagged and to make it closer to natural=cave_entrance Th

Re: [Tagging] pipeline flow direction; was: Feature Proposal - RFC - Pipeline Extensions

On 18/11/2014 08:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: "while flow_direction=oneway doesn't imply any specific direction" It is well established that oneway=yes means "in direction of the way" and oneway=-1 "in opposite direction than the way". To be clear, "oneway=yes" means _traffic_ direction in

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - cycleway=soft_lane

On 31/10/2014 12:02, Hubert wrote: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - cycleway=soft_lane Ihave a quick question.Howshould I proceed with a voting that is a tie? Invoke the spirit of Groucho Marx? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7cry-4pyy8 :-) Cheers, Andy ___

Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways

On 29/10/2014 19:48, Richard Z. wrote: ouch. Luckily we don't map anything in UK vs US gallons or UK vs US barrels or tons.. or do we? US tons, certainly (and it has caught mappers out in the past when they've been looking for rogue values to correct). The UK uses (generally) metric measures

Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies

On 21/10/2014 05:24, Toby Murray wrote: ... I considered Staples to be different enough to deserve a different tag. I am not convinced that I am right... just stating at how I arrived at my tagging decision. ... that was pretty much my thought process with shop=office_supplies too. I'd be

Re: [Tagging] Retag: craft=sweep => craft=chimney_sweep

On 03/10/2014 12:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-10-03 13:17 GMT+02:00 SomeoneElse <mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk>>: That doesn't much sound primarily like a chimney sweep at all, but some official function to do with gas etc. certification. exactly. This i

Re: [Tagging] Retag: craft=sweep => craft=chimney_sweep

On 03/10/2014 09:45, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I guess this depends on the region. In Germany they are sort of authority not only for cleaning but for chimney and combustion plant verification and certification of the installed instances. Typically you will have no choice, the whole country is

Re: [Tagging] name and brand tags

On 24/09/2014 15:24, Richard Welty wrote: true, but are we better off with that in operator= than in name= ? richard Not if they're different. As an example, here's a hotel: http://www.royaloakhotel.com/ The brand is "Best Western". The name is something like "Royal Oak Hotel". The op

Re: [Tagging] Route relations - Forward & Backward

On 06/09/2014 07:38, Jo wrote: I hope noboby is still using the older way of adding bus routes for adding new bus routes to OSM. Lots of people are, because they understand how they work :-) Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstr

Re: [Tagging] bridge movable vs swing vs swinging

On 07/08/2014 16:53, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: "culvert" isn't a bridge type at all (in my understanding), (on the other part of this) I'd agree that "culvert" isn't a type of bridge. I think that some of the confusion in OSM came from someone finding an old American drawing of a car dri

Re: [Tagging] Proposed change to Tag:access=designated page

On 24/08/2014 11:43, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: For me, "designated" means that there's a respective sign, e.g. a cycleway sign => bicycle=designated. For compulsory use, *=official was introduced, but that tag is rather useless without a relation to the way where access is forbidden. I'd tend

Re: [Tagging] Proposed change to Tag:access=designated page

On 20/08/2014 12:38, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Currently only weakest reason to use this tag are described. I propose to add "Typically it is used on ways legally dedicated to specific modes of travel by a law or by the rules of traffic." as described on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:T

Re: [Tagging] problem with bicycle=designated

On 19/08/2014 09:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: FWIW, the documented "default" in OSM (if such thing as defaults is accepted anyway) is foot=no according to this page linked from the cycleway definition: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions That wiki pag

Re: [Tagging] problem with bicycle=designated

On 18/08/2014 20:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Another point was that ways with signs like this http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:120px-Zeichen_240.svg.png http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/a/aa/120px-Zeichen_241.svg.png are neither cycleways nor footways, they are both at the same

Re: [Tagging] Bitcoin: Distinction of purchase through website and cash register/Point of sale

On 14/08/2014 13:19, Markus Lindholm wrote: No, that's a bad idea. I believe there's a clear consensus that payment:bitcoin=yes is not a proper tag for a shop that doesn't accept bitcoin at its physical location. I'd fully agree with that. Most of the "bitcoin taggers" seem just to be using

Re: [Tagging] Mapping cave tunnels passable by human

On 14/08/2014 12:35, John Packer wrote: One question. How would people map a cave? (answering in case it wasn't a completely rhetorical question): One option is the same way that people mapped before GPSs arrived - accurately measure a baseline and triangulate from it. Obviously it's subst

Re: [Tagging] Mapping cave tunnels passable by human

On 14/08/2014 12:22, André Pirard wrote: I know I still have to learn that OSM is fuzzy, but using "cave=yes" for paths would first need a definition of it in the "highway=*" page. No, it really wouldn't(1). Cheers, Andy (1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like - and yes,

Re: [Tagging] Mapping cave tunnels passable by human

On 14/08/2014 12:18, Dan S wrote: 2014-08-14 12:01 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann : ... I am not sure about English terminology. In German, we call natural cavities "Höhlen" (caves), and artificial cavities "Stollen" (adits?). A straight "Stollen" with an entrance on each end is a "Tunnel" (tunnel

Re: [Tagging] bridge=humpback ?

On 13/08/2014 05:54, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Some people consider freeform values in bridge tag as a problem and think that bridge tag should have only yes/no values and specific type of bridge should be stored in a separate tag. People are entitled to their opinions, but I'd argue that fr

Re: [Tagging] bridge movable vs swing vs swinging

For the benefit of anyone looking at taginfo stats in this thread, it's worth mentioning that there's some "non-survey-based" editing going on: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/24690099 Cheers, Andu ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreet

Re: [Tagging] Using highway=footway as an area

On 09/08/2014 17:06, Dave F. wrote: Hi http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.49428/-0.12149 I've noticed highway=footway is being used as an area across Lambeth Bridge: North side as a closed polygon; South side within a relation. (checking the history previously they were both highway=pede

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:leisure=gym

On 31/07/2014 11:54, Andreas Labres wrote: sport=fitness seems to have won: Not really, because that might apply to e.g. exercise bars in a park rather than a gym as such. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://

Re: [Tagging] seafood vs fishmonger (was Re: Synonymous values in the shop key)

On 31/07/2014 09:27, Holger Jeromin wrote: The voting was performed "using the extended "North-American definition" - there including fresh water": http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/seafood_shop ... and exactly 8 people voted in favour. That's clearly a ringing endorsemen

Re: [Tagging] sport=horse_racing unnecessary sport=equestrian

On 24/07/2014 10:35, Andreas Goss wrote: Is there a reason to keep sport=horse_racing? "horse racing" is a very different animal (pun intended) to e.g 3 day eventing, country point-to-points, gymkhanas, etc. Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Vending Machines: Drink & Food

On 21/07/2014 18:49, Andreas Goss wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Vending-Dinks%26Food (offlist) You might want to fix the typo in the page name... Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https:

Re: [Tagging] Townhouse

On 21/07/2014 10:29, Volker Schmidt wrote: Wikipedia is rather precise on the different meanings - see my earlier post with links. Volker Sure - I understand that you were correctly flagging the ambiguity associated with the term, but what I was saying was that one of those three definition

Re: [Tagging] Townhouse

On 21/07/2014 00:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: ... but looking into WP showed that in Britain the meaning "refers to the town or city residence of a member of the nobility or gentry , as opposed to their country

Re: [Tagging] Problem with access=designated

On 13/07/2014 19:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dofficial access=designated "often includes ways that have no legal dedication like e.g. recommended routes of a local bicycle club" Presumably here you don't actually mean "access=designa

Re: [Tagging] Synonymous values in the shop key

On 10/07/2014 10:50, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: According to Wikipedia "In North America, although not generally in the United Kingdom, the term "seafood" is extended to fresh water organisms eaten by humans, so all edible aquatic life may be referred to as seafood.". We really, really, can't r

Re: [Tagging] Tagging-rendering relations

On 09/07/2014 16:39, Matthijs Melissen wrote: On 9 July 2014 16:24, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 09.07.2014 14:19, Matthijs Melissen napisał(a): So - what about making the testing map and adding there all the already documented features for the start? Maybe we should discuss it elsewhere, because w

Re: [Tagging] Track grades

On 09/07/2014 12:32, Janko Mihelic' wrote: 2014-07-09 12:08 GMT+02:00 Pieren >: 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) I don't think sm

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Enhancing natural=peak tag

On 08/07/2014 14:59, Daniel Koć wrote: This is my first attempt to define OSM features. Currently taginfo suggests almost no usage of peak like this http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/peak#values and see also: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=peak#combinations The "Proposed

Re: [Tagging] Where do source tags belong?

On 30/06/2014 22:17, Tod Fitch wrote: At least in JOSM if you do a ctrl-h on a selected object it shows you the source entry text that given on the change set (if it exists which it usually doesn't on older change sets). If the other editors don't show that, then they should be fixed. For in

Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

On 30/06/2014 11:12, Andreas Goss wrote: We're presumably suggesting "wikidata=$something" but what is "$something"? Every Wikidata entry has an ID. You can find it in the URL and behind the title: OpenStreetMap: Q936 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q936 So you would use wikidata=Q936 That'

Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

On 30/06/2014 10:57, Andreas Goss wrote: If the building is important I would tag the company as a seperate node on the building and then there is no confusion with the basic tag anymore. I'd agree (that in the Bayford's HO case) having the company details on a node within the building woul

Re: [Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

On 30/06/2014 10:34, Andreas Goss wrote: but I was aware it conflicts with the language version The best solution would be to just use Wikidata. If editors supported that, then they could also always show the titel of the Wikidata tag to avoid errors. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wiki

[Tagging] Subsequent wikipedia links

Dear wikipedia taggers, There seems to be some doubt as to how the second and subsequent wikipedia links are handled. Here's an example of the problem: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/117544396/history Of the six versions 2 are initially mapping it and refining the mapping; the other four

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

Andrew Shadura wrote: Both "maxspeed=:" and "maxspeed=" are evil, as we need to have a separate DB for those zonal limits. Please, just use maxspeed=. Any router that deals with more than one type of traffic will need to do that anyway, as many places have different limits that apply to c

Re: [Tagging] generalized survey and consequences

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Actually the "source:maxspeed" tag was discussed years ago (2009 IIRR) on this list and by the time approved. The idea to use maxspeed:type instead is very new compared to this, and there wasn't any actual proposal to see whether this was backed by the community, r

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

Greg Troxel wrote: I may be alone in thinking this, but I find the legal Right of Way notion to be critical, and an important distinction between highway=unclassified and highway=track or highway=service. Well, ish - but what's important is that all aspects that can be mapped (legal, physical,

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

Janko Mihelic' wrote: 2014-06-03 8:55 GMT+02:00 John Sturdy >: They're not necessarily service roads --- they don't have to lead to any premises at all; they're simply minor roads, usually unsealed. Then maybe: highway=unclassified + unclassified=byway +

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

Dave F. wrote: I believe byway shouldn't be deprecated. In my area most of them are signed as just 'byway' on the ground. I think that it varies greatly by area. Some highway authorities use just "Byway"; some have more explicit signage; some in some cases none at all. I think many tha

Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes (again)

Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: (Please, don't make a voodoo doll of me because I am bringing this discussion back.) Too late! :) We had a long discussion in https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-April/017247.html and now I saw in the English wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wi

[Tagging] "byway" vs "track" ( was: highway=track access )

Dave F. wrote: Going slightly off topic, I notice the UK listing is missing byway, a recognised highway classification. Dave F. Is there a notable physical difference between a "byway" in England and Wales and a "track"? "Byway Open to All Traffic" and "Restricted Byway" are both legal d

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

Richard Fairhurst wrote: Hi all, There are almost 8m highway=track objects in the database (thanks taginfo!), third only to =residential and =service (thanks TIGER!). I'm interested to know what level of access people believe this implies in their home countries. Here in the UK, for exampl

Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] #5163: paths and tracks rendering indistinguishable: your opinion?

André Pirard wrote: On 2014-05-19 18:35, SomeoneElse wrote : If you feel strongly about it why not knock up a rendering with more differentiation between track and path and invite people to compare with the current standard map? ¿¿¿ ¡¡¡ That is exactly what I did with showing OSM and IGN

Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] #5163: paths and tracks rendering indistinguishable: your opinion?

André Pirard wrote: Hi, This is about OSM ticket https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/5163: The rendering of highway=path and highway=track is barely distinguishable. Just my 2p, but personally I don't think that the rendering of highway=track and highway=path on the standard map are "barel

[Tagging] access=designated - what do we think it means?

Currently, there are 41,000 things tagged "access=designated (1). I can understand what "=designated" means for a specifc transport type (foot, bicycle, etc.) but not "access". The wiki (2) also doesn't know. What do we think that someone means when they tag something as access=designated?

Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway

Richard Welty wrote: and if you are not sure about the extent of the structure or its nature there's no harm in nipping out a short section, setting layer=1 and skipping the other tagging (bridge=yes or whatever.) you have accurately represented what you know and maintained correct topology. .

Re: [Tagging] shop for baby strollers only

André Riedel wrote: At the moment "stroller" is used for ramps or ways as access condition. But it's ambiguous, even in American. It's a noun meaning "pushchair" only in American; in both English AND American it means "a person going for a walk". I can't comment on other English variants (

Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway

On 03/04/14 23:27, Richard Welty wrote: On 4/3/14 6:06 PM, Richard Z. wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Advanced_relationships http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer umm, the term only seems to appear here. google does not find any references to it. from this i have to assume t

Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ?

fly wrote: Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? Asking a slightly broader question, in what situations is "noexit=yes" useful at all, except as a cue to subsequent mappers in the very rare situation that one way ends very close to another one and there's absolutely nothing (not a wall, footpath,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Extended - amenity=boat_sharing

On 29/03/2014 12:41, nounours77 wrote: As discussed in my earlier post, I think voting is important even for specific service tags to make them offical. Not really - OSM doesn't have "official" tags. It has "commonly used" ones, and people agree not to use the same tag to mean different thin

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - opening hours holiday select

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: IMHO "summer_holiday" would be preferable because we should avoid abbreviations ... and people have already used the abbreviation "SH" for "School Holidays" (which I'd argue also ought not to be abbreviated for the same reason). Cheers, Andy ___

  1   2   3   >