Re: [Tagging] destination:ref with direction?

2020-12-16 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 16.12.2020 14:19, Skyler Hawthorne wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 05:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote: What is written on the sign at this junction? If "North" is mentioned there I would be happy enough with the tagging above. That is correct, the sign says "I 787 North". H

Re: [Tagging] destination:ref with direction?

2020-12-16 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Trying to understand your question, the way in your example is tagged: destination Troy destination:ref I 787 North From the data consumer perspective, such tagging will generate a navigation instruction: "turn slightly right towards Troy, I 787 North". This would be helpful as long as

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - vaccination=* and vaccination=covid19

2020-12-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Following the 14 days of commenting, the voting is open, 08 - 22 Dec. Comments received are discussed in the "Discussion results" section. Please remember the voting is about the single key, not a full scheme. Voting question: Do you approve the introduction of the vaccination=* key, the

[Tagging] RFC: vaccination / COVID-19 vaccination centres

2020-11-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Following the discussion on how to tag COVID-19 vaccination centres previously on this list, I have created a proposal for the vaccination key: tom ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] COVID-19 vaccination centres

2020-11-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
> The wiki mentions healthcare:speciality=vaccination > although it is not used/ Well it's used 34x already: While it was not in the original healthcare proposal it has been added on 6feb2017 and appears in translations

[Tagging] COVID-19 vaccination centres

2020-11-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
With the first Covid-19 vaccines getting approved, many municipalities are planning facilities for administering mass vaccination. In Berlin, the two former airports Tegel and Tempelhof are planned, along with some sports facilities. This raises the question for appropriate tagging. The

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

2020-11-14 Thread Tom Pfeifer
beaver_made = dam ? On 14.11.2020 04:02, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 6:22 PM Adam Franco>> wrote: * origination:natural=beavers Thanks for remembering this one. Around here, beavers are a significant sculpting force on the landscape. (And

Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?

2020-11-11 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 10.11.2020 10:56, Andy Mabbett wrote: On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 05:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I think the best option is to deprecate water=pond and suggest using water=lake for natural lakes, even small ones, and use water=reservoir or water=basin (or landuse=reservoir or =basin if you

Re: [Tagging] religous bias - Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

2020-11-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I appreciate amenity=place_of_mourning. tom On 09.11.2020 10:15, wrote: OK, so I haven't really done all the counting, but my impression is that amenity=place_of_mourning has quite some fans while most of the others are at least able to swallow it. Unless anyone explains me

[Tagging] religious bias - Re: Feature Proposal - Voting - (Chapel of rest)

2020-11-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I was surprised that this tag is rushed into voting despite the arguments against it even here in the tagging list discussions. Let's summarize the criticism first, and look into the alternative "mourning room" * Vollis (the proposer) 18 Sep: ""chapel" will be opposed by some for being

Re: [Tagging] Defining the meaning of capacity tag for tourism=camp_site

2020-10-31 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I agree that qualifying the capacity key as capacity:*=N for numbers is more systematic than maxSOMETHING, which is still suitable for dimensions, such as maxspeed or maxweight. tom On 31.10.2020 12:03, Sven Geggus wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 31. Oct 2020, at 11:27, Sven Geggus

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a government job centre

2020-10-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer
As Volker said, office=employment_agency is the established tag. office=government is wrong, since the employees in the job centre do not govern. The government might be the operator of the job centre, which can be expressed in the operator tag, e.g. operator=Government of Example County tom

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:shelter_type=rock_shelter

2020-09-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 04.09.2020 18:19, Jmapb via Tagging wrote: I'd suggest natural=rock_shelter as a replacement tag. +1 for going into the natural key My expectations to amenity=shelter would be something purpose-built,

Re: [Tagging] RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)

2020-08-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I agree that it would be helpful to distinguish more subtypes of highway=service. However I find the proposed 'service=parking' misleading, as it suggests the way itself is used for parking, not that it provides access to such facility. I started a similar discussion four years ago, here is

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

2020-05-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 21.05.2020 09:21, Daniel Westergren wrote: > OSM is increasingly becoming more useful for forest trails than for car roads > (for which other sources are usually more up-to-date, to be honest). Which "other sources" are more up-to-date for car roads? Where I map, new roads are documented in

Re: [Tagging] Remove non-prefixed versions of 'contact:' scheme

2020-05-11 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 11.05.2020 03:10, Paul Allen wrote: > I'm far from convinced that contact:website is useful.  It's certainly > semantically wrong.  It's a contact;webpage not a contact:website > (there are maybe a handful of exceptions to that).  Why do you think > the user is more likely to require the

Re: [Tagging] Too many different features lumped together under amenity=social_facility?

2020-04-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 20.04.2020 16:52, Paul Allen wrote: > Amenity is much larger and much more of an eclectic hodge-podge than > social_facility.  I'm not even sure that amenity=social_facility is a good > idea, but at least you can then refine it with social_facility=*.  Moving > do amenity=nursing_home just

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Unifying playground equipment tagging)

2020-03-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 30.03.2020 20:02, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote: >> How will that help? What errors are you commonly finding? > > For example: . In this case > Key:playground was used to tag playground equipment on the playground > object itself. But for such

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Unifying playground equipment tagging)

2020-03-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 30.03.2020 20:02, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote: >> How will that help? What errors are you commonly finding? > > For example: . In this case > Key:playground was used to tag playground equipment on the playground > object itself. But for such

Re: [Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square

2020-03-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 28.03.2020 12:45, ael wrote: On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:58:00PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Piccadilly Circus (note the different word). Is this a town square for British people? I notice the English WP seems to avoid the word square (although it then calls it a plaza), while both,

[Tagging] Please fix unnamed square tagging / was: ... description of place=square

2020-03-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Yes there is inconsistent use of place=square, in particular for _unnamed_ objects. As the place=* key is used to indicate that a particular location is known by a particular name, a place=* tag without a name is fundamentally wrong. (As the world is not black and white, there might be

Re: [Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square

2020-03-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer via Tagging
I fully agree with Martin here. The place=* key is used in OSM to indicate that a particular location is known by a particular name, and that is independent of details of the usage. It might be that Joseph's perspective is driven by his intense work on the Carto style, where it has to be

Re: [Tagging] Ponds are not observable on the ground

2020-03-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
This discussion originally started in this changeset, which quite obviously was _not_ driven by a ground survey: Some even larger in Sweden:

Re: [Tagging] a kind of name:XX-modern-not-used

2020-01-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I am against transforming OSM into an etymological dictionary. While etymological research is of course valuable, such results are not easily verifiable for other users, and overload the tagging of objects that have plenty of tags in current languages already. There are systems like

Re: [Tagging] What values of 'emergency=' should be on the main Map features page?

2020-01-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 19.01.2020 06:10, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: 2) =fire_water_pond " A man made or natural pond with water for a fire department." 2785 uses Why is that not verifiable? Such ponds typically have a red-framed sign "Löschwasserteich". Ground-verifiable, not necessarily Bing-verifiable. I see how

Re: [Tagging] What values of 'emergency=' should be on the main Map features page?

2020-01-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 18.01.2020 14:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Should we remove some of the rare values of "emergency=" which have got into Map Features? In general it might make sense to have the complete list on the key page of emergency, and a selection on map features. Like some other key pages, the

Re: [Tagging] nomoj de internaciaj objektoj / nazwy obiektów międzynarodowych / names of international objects

2020-01-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 06.01.2020 21:32, Tomek wrote: Exactly, does a buoy with the inscription "Baltic Sea" swim at 56° N18° E? No, there is simply water that Poles call the "Morze Bałtyckie", Germans "Ostsee", etc. Hey, if that solves the conflict, let's check OSMF's budget, charter the OSMbow-Warrior and plant

Re: [Tagging] amenity=tourist_bus_parking

2020-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I agree, I had the problem on motorway service areas, where parking is segregated between HGVs and cars. I solved it with access tags for the respective vehicle class. On 04.01.2020 22:10, Volker Schmidt wrote: I have just detected the wiki page "amenity=tourist_bus_parking" It has so far only

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tax free shopping

2020-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 04.01.2020 19:47, Hauke Stieler wrote: * no: All customers of a shop with duty_free=no have to pay normal taxes. I don't think it can be phrased that way. As for the VAT in the EU, everybody who proves that the goods were exported is eligible for a tax refund. However, since this requires

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

2019-12-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 18.12.2019 16:26, Andy Townsend wrote: On 18/12/2019 15:22, Tod Fitch wrote: In the U.S. it would be called wifi or wi-fi rather than wlan. Anyone know what the British English is? In the UK it's also "wifi" or "wi-fi", but wlan is understood and has considerable establishment in OSM:

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Leisure=Skatepark

2019-12-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 09.12.2019 19:09, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 17:31, Tom Pfeifer>> wrote: I'd prefer to keep it leisure=pitch, avoiding top-level tag fragmentation. Refinements about the sport definition can appear in the sport=* subtagging.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Leisure=Skatepark

2019-12-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 09.12.2019 03:13, Scott via Tagging wrote: Description: An area designated and equipped for skateboarding, in-line skating, BMX'ing, or scootering. Proposal for fixing improper definition of sport=skateboarding, creating skatepark as a result, and other relevant access and equipment tags.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

2019-12-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 08.12.2019 00:49, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 07.12.2019 um 18:59 schrieb brad: We already have park_ride tag.   I don't see the new tag adding anything? "park and ride" rather describes the change to public transport and not the continuation of driving with others in a private vehicle.

Re: [Tagging] Supermarket pick-up service

2019-11-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 08.11.2019 13:40, Philip Barnes wrote: > Its not a shop, you don't buy anything there. In my local case, the payment is done at collection time with any method the main marked uses, i.e. cash and card. Thus I'd call it a shop > Maybe supermarket=customer_collect or customer_pickup. Collect

[Tagging] Supermarket pick-up service

2019-11-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
A supermarket chain offers to order groceries online, being collected and packed, and picked up by the customers themselves in a small shop in the local supermarket building. Illustration [1]. How should the shop be tagged? shop=pick-up ? tom [1]

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

2019-10-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital" I had a look at the original proposal, and it does not contain the word 'amenity'. Thus I conclude it had been later fiddled into the wiki page. Anyway looking into the voting results the

[Tagging] 360 degrees / Re: Deprecating mini_roundabout

2019-10-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.10.2019 15:08, Philip Barnes wrote: You can enter a normal roundabout, do 360 degrees and then be traveling in the opposite direction. And you recognise a fellow OSM mapper by seeing her/him doing 360 degrees plus the angle for the intended exit, to create the full circle in her/his

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating mini_roundabout

2019-10-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.10.2019 12:05, Florian Lohoff wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 12:00:13PM +0200, Tom Pfeifer wrote: ..., it can give instructions like at a normal junction, just using the tag to describe the junction: "At the mini-roundabout [turn right|go straight|turn left]". You would expe

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating mini_roundabout

2019-10-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.10.2019 11:35, Florian Lohoff wrote: These are a very common feature, it does seem odd that routers are not supporting them. The point is that a mini roundabout does need a LOT of preprocessing to put it into some graph for your classical A* or Dijkstra. You need to eliminate the node

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

2019-10-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 04.10.2019 19:10, Markus wrote: While orchard=meadow_orchard is the most used way of tagging a meadow orchard (2 748 uses), there are also 668 uses of the other subtag meadow=meadow_orchard. That means that people don't agree that the orchard is more important than the meadow. Apparently

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

2019-10-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 03.10.2019 21:12, Markus wrote: How shall we remain now? Can we agree on on a single way of tagging in order that this discussion doesn't come up again in a year or two? I still think that landuse=meadow_orchard (as well as landuse=silvopasture for forest and pasture) is the best option. The

Re: [Tagging] Default values for surface by road category and country

2019-09-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 21.09.2019 17:09, Richard Fairhurst wrote: voschix wrote: I am trying to figure out where the surface default values by road category and country are defined. I don't believe there's a place where it's stated, but I work on these assumptions: - in developed countries, all "higher"

Re: [Tagging] Tagging ideas for a non-profit ”course center”

2019-09-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 21.09.2019 10:46, Jyri-Petteri Paloposki wrote: Hi, At least in Finland we have course centers maintained by non-profit organisations, for example religious and scout organisations. These usually have accommodation space to some extent, kitchen facilities and usually also some yard space

Re: [Tagging] building typology vs usage

2019-09-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 07.09.2019 11:00, Frederik Ramm wrote: It is true that this is the canonical way of dealing with things, however it would be interesting to check how mappers and editing tools actually use this. We might well find that everyone is confused about this. [...] I think we cannot simply throw the

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

2019-09-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 07.09.2019 07:57, Hufkratzer wrote: Recently you [jesienbe] added to the wiki page for sports_centre that sports halls inside of sports centres don't need a leisure tag if the centre is mapped as an area. And this is wrong, as it fails the purpose of the leisure=sports_hall tag. As I

[Tagging] building typology vs usage / Re: Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

2019-09-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 07.09.2019 09:16, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: To me it seems redundant to tag leisure=sports_hall on buildings inside of a leisure=sports_center, like tagging "healthcare=hospital_ward" on each building inside of a large medical center which is already mapped as amenity=hospital. The standard

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

2019-09-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 05.09.2019 15:48, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Another user would like the proposed tag (used 329 times) 346 if you count all tags. Look at taghistory and see it has grown from 22 in early 2018, thus about 15 times. It was a result of discussion in some communities that time.

Re: [Tagging] bear box in campground ?

2019-08-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 21.08.2019 19:44, Rob Savoye wrote: Many western state campgrounds have metal bear proof food storage boxes in each campsite, but not all of them. At certain times of the year this can be important. :-) Around here the bears will destroy your car if there is food left inside. I see zero

Re: [Tagging] leisure=garden for private front/back gardens

2019-07-13 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 13.07.2019 09:35, Volker Schmidt wrote: I have tagged many planted centre pieces of roundabouts as leisure=garden, access=private in lack of better alternatives. Why 'private' if it is a public roundabout? If it not allowed to trample the flowers down, wouldn't access=no be more

Re: [Tagging] Maxtents= or capacity:tents= for campsites?

2019-07-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
"capacity" is the well established for the number of items the facility can hold, from students in school, parking spaces to hotel rooms. "maxtents" is hard to understand, ambiguous and likely leading to confusion. It could refer to the size as well (maxi tents?) which might explain the poorly

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - juggling spot

2019-05-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 22.05.2019 00:09, marc marc wrote: I you think that juggling is a sport, sport tag exist, just add sport=juggling but we miss a main tag for sport that does not take place on a delimited sports field, the same issue exist with outdoor sport=scuba_diving maybe leisure=location or

Re: [Tagging] Apps of delivery

2019-05-15 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 15.05.2019 17:07, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 15. May 2019, at 11:32, Philip Barnes wrote: We have deliveroo operating locally, however I have never seen verifiable evidence on the restaurants that they offer that service. Therefore I would not consider this a suitable thing to tag in

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

2019-03-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.03.2019 18:19, Paul Allen wrote: On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:05, Jean-Marc Liotier>> wrote: The case I have in mind is where the mosque is a complex of several buildings - such as the building for ritual ablutions, a separate prayer building for women,

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

2019-03-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.03.2019 15:12, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: I have learned from Muslims and confirmed in literature that this tagging scheme is wrong: what I considered as the mosque itself is merely the main prayer hall. The mosque is actually the whole complex that I used to tag as landuse=religious. So,

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

2019-03-13 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 13.03.2019 10:50, Cascafico Giovanni wrote: The lattest is great and leads to grotesque consequences: when a colleague hands me 12 guidepost locations to geocode, I must message planet import ML, local ML, write an import page and ask my fellow a consent form with certified signature. Is

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

2019-03-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer>> ha scritto: In short (I'm on phone)... Please find here [1] umap used for manual conflation. For source data and license, follow footer info link. AFAIK <100 nodes don't fall in import category. Il sab 9 mar 2019, 11:46 Tom Pfeifer mailto:t.pfei...@computer.or

[Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

2019-03-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 09.03.2019 10:10, Cascafico Giovanni wrote: Well, hotels dataset I'm manually importing has a boolean baby-sitting field (as for "pets" in other ML thread). I think that a generic info is better than no info, particularly if hotel features childcare=yes and whatever contact tag. Giovanni,

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

2019-02-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 10.02.2019 09:53, Markus wrote: On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 20:41, Paul Allen wrote: [...] I see individual trees and tree rows as alternative ways of dealing with things and plotting individual trees on a tree row seems bizarre (a row of individual trees is obviously a tree row, there's no

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

2019-02-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 09.02.2019 20:15, Tobias Knerr wrote: Because the two feature types exist at different levels of abstraction (a tree is *part* of a tree row), I do not see this as a violation of one feature, one element. Instead, I consider it comparable to mapping building:part areas within a

[Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

2019-02-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On the natural=tree page I stumbled over the phrase: "Tree rows ... This approach can also be combined with individually mapped trees for further details." On natural=tree_row I found it was part of the 2010 proposal which said: "if individual trees in a tree row are mapped, the tree nodes

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

2019-02-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 04.02.2019 08:51, Frederik Ramm wrote: * invent keys - ok * document widely used/established keys that never went through a proposal process - ok * invent keys and document them as if they were widely used or established - questionable * the whole thing done by someone who has in the past

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

2019-02-02 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 02.02.2019 09:21, s8evq wrote: Thank you for your input. I'm glad there are other examples of youth organisation that are clearly different from Scouts. Could we agree that club=youth does have a meaningful usage, despite what the wiki currently states?

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

2019-01-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 30.01.2019 22:41, s8evq wrote: 2) According to the wiki there's also club=youth, but it's not used and amenity=community_centre should be used instead. Reading the wiki on amenity=community_centre ( "When

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

2019-01-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 07.01.2019 19:08, Volker Schmidt wrote: if it is a religion related operator, I usually also add religion and denomination tags, i.e. in your Caritas example it would be religion=christian denomination=catholic I would not be sure how to handle this: Are these "access"

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of amenity=kindergarten operated by charitable operators and organisations

2019-01-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 07.01.2019 16:53, Konrad Lischka wrote: My solution would be: amenity=kindergarten operator=[Name of theregistered association] operator:type=charitable operator:type seems to be established with 180k uses. Plausible to me. organisation=[organisation name like Caritas] What you are

Re: [Tagging] amenity=taxi vehicle type

2019-01-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 05.01.2019 23:55, Warin wrote: But 'type' does not say much. Better to specify what type of 'type' is to be used :) In this case it is the type of vehicle.. so taxi_vehicle= car/motorcycle/rickshaw/* ? Thanks, I consider that the best idea so far! On 05.01.2019 16:13, Dolly

[Tagging] amenity=taxi vehicle type

2019-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Following a discussion on osm-carto [1], I am looking for a suitable tagging of taxi services that are not passenger cars. Examples are motorcycle taxis and rickshaws. While the original approval for amenity=taxi (32k) [2] does not specify the vehicle type, some additions were introduced in

Re: [Tagging] A fool with a tool ... Vehicle service tags

2019-01-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
As a side note, I find those mails with fancy "scissor" lines hard to read, as the actual contribution is hidden somewhere in between. It would help me if you could use the traditional method of quoting with '>' symbols, which is often supported in mail clients with some syntax highlighting.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Top up

2018-12-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 26.12.2018 19:05, bkil wrote: Please don't confuse top ups with refilling: No I don't confuse it. The refilling proposal is about refills without additional charge. To top-up a drink is purchasing a new one

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Top up

2018-12-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I find "top_up" alone highly misleading and unspecific. I encountered the term in filling stations, where you would order either "5 gallons" or "top up", i.e. to fully fill the tank. Or when pre-paying the fuel, you would either pay "fuel for $20", or leave your credit card with the cashier to

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

2018-12-14 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 14.12.2018 11:09, dktue wrote: Hi, I would like to tag a company where newspapers are being printed, but I feel that shop=copyshop doesn't fit well. My suggestion would be to go with craft=printer. Any opinions on that? I'd say it depends on the size. A small printer that focuses on

Re: [Tagging] leisure=hammock_hook

2018-12-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 10.12.2018 00:29, Sérgio V. wrote: Hi, I've found a playground equipment that is made to hang hammocks. If it is playground equipment, you should use the playgound=* key. tom ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

2018-10-31 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I am strongly against storing timetable data in OSM. tom On 31.10.2018 00:54, Leif Rasmussen wrote: Hello everyone! I recently wrote up a proposal page for public transport schedule data.  This information would allow OpenStreetMap to store information about when or how often certain buses or

[Tagging] unmarked crossing, tactile paving, lowered kerbs / was: 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

2018-10-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 26.10.2018 16:41, Robert Skedgell wrote: On 26/10/18 11:44, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there is no need for a tag here, as there is nothing special. A

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

2018-10-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 26.10.2018 15:37, Bryan Housel wrote: On Oct 26, 2018, at 6:44 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Tagging "unmarked crossings" does not make sense for me. An unmarked crossing is defined in OSM by a road and a footway sharing a node, there is no need for a tag here, as there is nothi

Re: [Tagging] 2 meaning for crossing=zebra

2018-10-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 26.10.2018 09:28, SelfishSeahorse wrote: What about tagging the presence or absence of traffic signals with a subkey, e.g. crossing:traffic_signals=yes/no? Why should we invent a new subtagging scheme when we already have one with crossing=* + crossing_ref=* ? On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at

Re: [Tagging] issues with the list of deprecated features

2018-10-15 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 15.10.2018 10:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 3. amenity=creche and amenity=nursery For both tags amenity=kindergarten is suggested as alternative tagging, which seems clearly wrong (kindergarten is usually for ages 3-6 while these tags are for ages 0-3). I thought the consensus was here

Re: [Tagging] Ignore roundabout flare in counting

2018-10-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Calling the driveway a 'flare' is a bit confusing, in my understanding a roundabout flare is the typical widening with two oneway segments around a small island. Such flares should be counted. I encountered a similar situation as you describe, where some private gravel parking area in front of

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations

2018-09-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 21.09.2018 03:23, Mike H wrote: I've only mapped one station like this so far, but the area is actually rendered on the map. Yes police and firestation areas are rendered for a while this year in osm-carto, with the same colour as military but without the hatching. Thus I don't

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

2018-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 20.09.2018 16:29, José G Moya Y. wrote: Hi! If we start mapping refill=soft_drinks;coffee... and so on, how would you map sites where some soft drinks are refillable and some are not? I am strongly against tagging the business practice how often a _paid_ glass of beverage is being

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations

2018-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Yes of course, I've been doing this for long already. On 20.09.2018 14:06, Philip Barnes wrote: Yes, just go for it. Makes perfect sense. Phil (trigpoint) On 20 September 2018 12:56:03 BST, dktue wrote: Hello, I love how we map areas with amenity=school and buildings inside of it

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

2018-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 20.09.2018 11:19, egil wrote: In Sweden government agencies are actually not allowed to own the properties they use. Well, but we tag the _use_, not the _ownership_. So if they have long-running tenancy, they use it this way. tom ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

2018-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 20.09.2018 07:28, Warin wrote: On 20/09/18 09:26, Tom Pfeifer wrote: First, how much of a delay is added by the routing engines, have you investigated this? If so, this would be a few seconds once-per trip, not every 500m like a traffic light. Thus the difference on the calculated overall

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Toll Gantry

2018-09-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 19.09.2018 19:31, Jonathon McClung wrote: The issue is mostly with how the current standard (as stated here ) impacts routing. This is said on the proposal page here

Re: [Tagging] Slow vehicle turnouts

2018-09-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 08.09.2018 01:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 8. Sep 2018, at 01:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: I'm also quite definitely not an expert Dave :-), but personally, I think that your highway=service + service=turnout concept may be the easiest, least messy or complicated way of doing it?

Re: [Tagging] Is waterway=riverbank an 'Old scheme' ?

2018-09-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 06.09.2018 15:15, yves wrote: > Is waterway=riverbank an 'Old scheme' ? That's what I read here : well it is certainly the _older_ scheme than natural=water + water=river, insofar the statement is not wrong. The wiki page for

Re: [Tagging] non-physical / why do we discourage leisure=skatepark/skate_park?

2018-08-31 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 31.08.2018 14:33, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:08 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: What are "non-physical" & "physical" tags? My interpretation of the wiki is based upon my classification of things.  My brain is a physical object, my thoughts are not.  A grass field with

Re: [Tagging] why do we discourage leisure=skatepark/skate_park?

2018-08-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 7:50 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Once again I stumbled across a warning which discourages these leisure=skate_park and skatepark on the sport skateboard page because of low usage, but with the only alternative “pitch”. If you can speak about pitches in

Re: [Tagging] mobile phone repair only

2018-08-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 05.08.2018 19:52, Dave F wrote: I've a shop which only repairs mobile phones. I've tagged it as shop=mobile_phone mobile_phone:repair=yes sales=no I'd call that 'troll tagging', tagging a feature and telling in the subtag that it is not what the primary tag says [1]. Why not following

Re: [Tagging] Mirror setting marks

2018-07-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
In order to shorten the tag, avoid the crowded amenity space, and be more descriptive what vehicles they are for, what about 'hgv=mirror_adjustments' ? On 26.07.2018 22:04, Tijmen Stam wrote: On 26-07-18 15:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I'm fine with your proposal, I just wondered if the name

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Probably the reason can be explained etymologically. In the UK, terraced houses (AmE row houses) are very common, so those lucky enough to hear less noise from their neighbours emphasize that by owning a 'detached' (not attached to a terrace) or 'semi-detached' (two houses sharing a wall)

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sauna

2018-06-11 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I suggest to distinguish the key for the operation mode (hot, steam etc) from those for the expected user group and dress code. On 11.06.2018 09:29, Rory McCann wrote: I suggest adding `sauna=gay`, for a gay bathhouse. "gay" is a simplification since many men who have sex with men visit them

Re: [Tagging] 3d-tagging

2018-05-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 24.05.2018 13:25, Stefan K. wrote: Sorry, more information needed :) Okay, i found ... I'm right now asking because i am wondering if there is a somehow "official" one. "Official" is what is used by data consumers - this is the case

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Walkingbus_stop

2018-05-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 19.05.2018 16:56, marc marc wrote: if an operator decided to replace a diesel engine with a bicycle crankset for each passenger, would that stop being a PT? Yes - the operator would have to serve beer, and we'd have to tag them tourism=attraction + highway=obstacle.

Re: [Tagging] How orphanage should be tagged?

2018-04-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 23.04.2018 12:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: For privacy concerns we obviously wouldn't map foster families, I'm less sure for supervised shared apartments (it depends whether they are publicly known / promoted / listed, have a sign, etc., or if you need "insider knowledge"). Exactly. I

Re: [Tagging] How orphanage should be tagged?

2018-04-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 22.04.2018 23:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 22. Apr 2018, at 22:23, Paul Allen wrote: It might have as much to do with tagging as trying to replace terms with euphemisms. They're all social facilities. They're all group homes. Then specify the target group. I am

Re: [Tagging] How orphanage should be tagged?

2018-04-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 20.04.2018 12:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: I encountered one with amenity=social_facility, JOSM is asking to provide proper social_facility tag (what makes sense) None from seems to fit so I used social_facility=orphanage used 17x

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Carpet hanger

2018-04-10 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Again I agree with Warin, man_made suits better since it is more specific and avoids the crowded amenity key. On 10.04.2018 09:03, Warin wrote: Don't be too hasty. There may be others who disagree. On 10/04/18 15:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: I see no meaningful difference between

Re: [Tagging] Carpet hangers

2018-04-01 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Which is strange, since the beater is the instrument you keep at home: On 31.03.2018 18:45, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: It seems that amenity=beater is the most popular tagging (at least it was when I was checking it). On Sat, 31 Mar 2018, 18:12 Tomasz

Re: [Tagging] Historic building usage

2018-03-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
On 29.03.2018 15:38, Dave F wrote: The building=train_station tag remains, since it describes the building type, independent of the current usage. No. The building tag is for current usage. OSM maps the present with its primary tags. If contributors want to indicate it had previous use, as I

  1   2   3   4   >