Re: [Tagging] Tagging becoming more mature

2020-11-12 Thread bkil
Although, I understand that there could exist some special meanings of the word "park": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/park The most widely understood meaning also documented in Wikipedia seems to be consistent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park And anyway, terms must be understood in their GB

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Objects generating audible cues

2020-10-16 Thread bkil
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Objects_generating_audible_cues is open for voting now. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

2020-10-15 Thread bkil
measures aren't that interesting from an ear-mapping perspective) On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:32 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 01:10, bkil wrote: >> >> "hearing a dog" could be one of them. > > > But aren't you then going

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

2020-10-14 Thread bkil
at the moment (but this could change for the worse in the blink of an eye!), it is more desirable to hike, walk your puppy or push your baby stroller on calmer streets that have the least amount of barking. On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 4:42 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a p

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

2020-10-14 Thread bkil
. What do you think? On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 12:01 PM bkil wrote: > > I welcome your comments on the following proposal: > > Those with vision impairment should also have the right to explore and > map their surroundings in ways appropriate for them. We should have a > unified way t

Re: [Tagging] meaning of highway=crossing + bicycle=no

2020-10-05 Thread bkil
We always use it on nodes to mark a crossing where you must dismount. Not very common on ways around here. On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 11:22 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I always understood > highway=crossing + bicycle=no > tagging to mean "you cannot use

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

2020-09-26 Thread bkil
I welcome your comments on the following proposal: Those with vision impairment should also have the right to explore and map their surroundings in ways appropriate for them. We should have a unified way to specify the kind of noise that is generated by an object. The most useful ones are those

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

2020-09-16 Thread bkil
> namespace and not in the responsible proposer's user space?" - it's a wiki, > we are generally a libertarian group, there are no restrictions on creating a > page other than wanting to be relevant. I personally find it relevant. > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, 14:47 bkil, wrote: >> >>

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

2020-09-16 Thread bkil
that add the greatest value to the largest number of users. I think these should have their separate pages. On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:39 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 14:47, bkil wrote: >> >> >> Private swimming pools aren't that interesting but people seem

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

2020-09-16 Thread bkil
Could someone perhaps clarify why this page resides in the main namespace and not in the responsible proposer's user space? > Do not name individuals in OpenStreetMap tags, unless their name is on a > business sign posted towards the street, or part of the business name and > available in

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

2020-09-04 Thread bkil
=*, how would you know whether it is for the operator or for the camera stream? On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:47 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 20:40, bkil wrote: > >> "contact" can mean one-way contact, as in "on what channel does this POI >> br

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

2020-09-04 Thread bkil
"contact" can mean one-way contact, as in "on what channel does this POI broadcast information for us?" Note that except contact:email, most other links are also used oneway in 99% of the time. On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:34 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 20:

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

2020-09-04 Thread bkil
I also raised this question some years ago on the talk page but went with the flow and continued to tag webcams with contact:webcam=*. I think it makes more sense if you see a static gallery of a venue specified under contact:flickr=*, prerecorded videos under contact:youtube=* and you can also

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-27 Thread bkil
ut > multiple images into one tag > > Cheers > Thibault > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil wrote: > > Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or > whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM M

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-27 Thread bkil
into one tag > > Cheers > Thibault > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil wrote: > >> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or >> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? >> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Ko

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-26 Thread bkil
Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org>

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-26 Thread bkil
Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken links? (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago should clear up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they _should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality image is also available) On

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-26 Thread bkil
> [...] Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. [...] > File in use in another Wikimedia project [...] [OR] > File in use on Commons only: An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page or in a category on

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-26 Thread bkil
t still doesn't solve the problem of long urls clogging > up one tag. > Definitely if you have long urls because of unique hash/id's > (extreme example: IPFS urls: > https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd?filename=IMG_20200727_172553.jpg > ) > > Ch

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

2020-08-26 Thread bkil
As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by doubling it: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27 On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman < thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote: > While I use the semicolon for some

Re: [Tagging] source=RTK_GNSS

2020-07-28 Thread bkil
So let me just repeat to see whether I understand you correctly. You would like to see protection measures getting implemented in OpenStreetMap editors (like JOSM, iD and Vespucci)? Such protection would warn if any node or way is moved that has accuracy < 1? And/or it would warn if the

Re: [Tagging] Map maintenance with StreetComplete - Preferred tagging

2020-07-24 Thread bkil
OpenStreetMap is a shared database - you generally shouldn’t annotate POI with tags for your own use. Tags should correspond to ground truth - hence they need to pass the verifiability. If I resurvey the POI, will I conclude the same future todo_check_date=* that you have previously added? What

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
. On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 9:36 PM Jmapb wrote: > > On 7/22/2020 12:05 PM, bkil wrote: >> >> My guess is that the adoption of a dismounted_bicycle=* tag or similar >> would require significantly *less* work than re-examining all current >> bicycle=no ways. >

Re: [Tagging] Map maintenance with StreetComplete - Preferred tagging

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
This should be more applicable in case the person walked by the said object in person: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:survey:date Also, I'd like to stay neutral in this question as of now, but I think it would be possible to implement heuristic algorithms to reconstruct the history of a

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
the capitalization — > although I wonder about that because I always think of IFF as more a > military thing. I'm not sure if civilian transponders are really meant > to *identify friend or foe*, or if they're more just "transponders".) > > On 23/07/2020 09.59, bkil wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
: > On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 at 15:01, bkil wrote: > >> >>> I'm trying (and failing) to imagine a road/path/whatever that you are >>> allowed to walk on *iff* you are pushing a bicycle (or moped or...). Do >>> you know of any examples? >>> >>&g

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
access=* to buildings. On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 3:53 PM Volker Schmidt wrote: > Careful with "access". > access=customers on an office building would imply you can drive into this > building with any means of transport, provided you are a customer. > > On Thu, 23 Jul 2

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
> > I.e., bicycle=dismount means that you can proceed after you dismount, > > however if a certain combination of other tags are also present > (foot=no), > > a data user would need to ignore this, making this more confusing than > > necessary (bicycle=no). > > I'm trying (and failing) to imagine

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 3:39 PM Volker Schmidt wrote: > So it would have to be customer_service=yes|no at least. > That would also permit to check which offices have been evaluated by > mappers for the presence or less of customer_service. > > access=customers/private would also solve this

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

2020-07-23 Thread bkil
Could you perhaps use existing tags instead of this? office=company + access=customers vs. office=company + access=private On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:44 PM Philip Barnes wrote: > On Thu, 2020-07-23 at 14:06 +0200, Simon Poole wrote: > > Wouldn't most, if not all, cases where this would be used

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
be sufficient? That mostly covers the legal definition around here. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:26 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 22. Jul 2020, at 22:51, bkil wrote: > > bicycle=no is usually used on busy motorways where dismounting isn'

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
Although I think we've given enough evidence and _some_ of your quotes make sense, let me add another consideration. This is where bicycle=dismount could be used (although it is the default on highway=footway): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Opastemerkki.jpg bicycle=no is usually used

Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
It would be advantageous to map them separately because one riding a motorcycle could make better use of OSM to navigate to and from the exact position of the applicable parking space. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 9:11 PM Matthew Woehlke wrote: > I've seen some parking lots that have spaces

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
> > My guess is that the adoption of a dismounted_bicycle=* tag or similar > would require significantly *less* work than re-examining all current > bicycle=no ways. > > Yes, I think that would be workable. > Nonetheless, I completely agree with you, =no should mean =no! But I > fear we're in

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
> > Yes, my guess is that early mappers felt no need for bicycle=dismount > because it was simply presumed that foot=yes + bicycle=no meant the same > thing -- the assumption of a very bicycle-friendly culture! > > The obvious problem with bicycle=closed is that it's rarely used so > routing

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
When it was split in 2008, it had the following proposed values: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:bicycle=119888 - bicycle=yes - bicycle=no -

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
> I wonder if carrying a bicycle (possibly folded) would also be prohibited > on these unpaved ways? > > As was mentioned in the last thread, the rules for most federal wilderness > areas in the USA strictly prohibit possession of any bicycle on the > property, whether the wheels ever touch the

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
> > On the other hand, the terms of services of transport companies usually >> have written provisions for carrying on folded bicycles irrespective of >> size limits (for example, they even allow folded mountain bikes). >> > they might not even allow big boxes, according to the current situation >

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
come across another type of hard-no for bicycles in the form of > chicane-type cycle barriers too narrow to push a bicycle (or a wheelchair) > through. > > On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 11:48, bkil wrote: > >> I have yet to see a park where they limit the size of luggage I can carry >&

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
I didn't have a lock at hand and they didn't mind. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:43 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > Am Mi., 22. Juli 2020 um 11:34 Uhr schrieb bkil : > >> I think the core idea behind such a restriction is that people only want >> to go to that park for

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
I have yet to see a park where they limit the size of luggage I can carry with me (within rational limits). I think local law always defines what a bicycle is exactly. I don't think that they have the right to search your box to check whether it contains legally defined bicycles - that could only

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

2020-07-22 Thread bkil
I think the core idea behind such a restriction is that people only want to go to that park for walking around (no cross-traffic), and pushing the bike for half an hour doesn't make much sense and allowing people to push bikes around would risk them hopping on the bike when nobody is looking.

Re: [Tagging] source=RTK_GNSS

2020-07-21 Thread bkil
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=accuracy Yes, definitely. We used accuracy=* for this in the past, although I see it is now a bit overloaded. accuracy:meters=* and location:accuracy=* both seem to be widely used. All of them should be interpreted as meters by default (i.e.,

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-07 Thread bkil
Should this be tagged amenity=fast_food? Its name contains the word "restaurant" and these are proper cooked meals similar to what one makes at home, but they cook large batches, so people can just sit in and have a bowl of pagpag with no delay:

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-01 Thread bkil
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 1:18 AM Paul Allen wrote: > I can't let Britain down in the bizarre food vendors contest. A butcher near > me sells various types of raw meat (obviously). There are also racks > outside on the pavement: a rack of fruit and a rack of vegetables. I was > informed a few

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-01 Thread bkil
Funny that you mention. I've just read the Hungarian interpretation of a legal advisor regarding what counts as seating. They were differentiating between the sit down amenity kind and the takeaway-only shop kind of cukrászda from a tax perspective. According to them, in order for a _service_ to

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-01 Thread bkil
Again, I still don't have enough information about your "takeaway" places, but if you are not satisfied with takeaway=only + capacity=0, could it be also solved via subtagging? I can see someone started experimented with amenity=restaurant + restaurant=diner And: amenity=fast_food +

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-01 Thread bkil
>> > Shop=pastry? >> > >> >> Unfortunately we can't use that tag, as the menu of a cukrászda far >> exceeds the definition of what the word "pastry" implies. They usually >> offer many items from the following categories: >> * cakes >> * cookies >> * custards >> * doughnuts >> * frozen desserts >>

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-01 Thread bkil
> The only possible downside I see is that it requires more carto code if you > want different icons. But that would be necessary however we did this. > Possibly. But if part of the world already uses amenity=café for places that do not primarily focus on coffee, this icon revision based on

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-30 Thread bkil
. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:40 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 20:13, Gábor Fekete wrote: >> >> >> It's about the main function. In an imagined daily routine (similarly to >> Bkil), coffeehouse (and cukrászda) is the place of some social life after or >

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-30 Thread bkil
> But then how do we handle food places in food courts? > > They would all count as =fast_food, as everything is already cooked / > prepared, & they are takeaway only from the actual shopfront, but there is > seating & tables 5m's away, so are they takeaway or sit-down? > These kind of places

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-30 Thread bkil
> I'd be happy with that. Except we don't have seating=yes. We can > differentiate > with takeaway=yes|no|only. However, apart from the chip shop and a Greggs, > all > the fast food joints near me that I can recollect are takeaway=only. So I > don't > get a hint from the icon as to whether

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-30 Thread bkil
Yes, pretty much sounds like a cukrászda to me. ;-) Especially if they prepare their own desserts and if they take custom orders (why shouldn't they if they already have a pastry cook?). Do they have waited tables? Do they serve alcohol? It would be great if you could share a link to their

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-30 Thread bkil
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > it is you who knows the cukrászda best. You must decide (together with your > fellow local mappers who also know the feature), whether it is a subtype of > one of the established tags, or whether it is so different that it must get a

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-29 Thread bkil
ly keep fancy bakery products, not staple ones. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 4:09 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > On 28. Jun 2020, at 15:58, bkil wrote: > > We are leaning towards being dissatisfied with tagging as either > shop=pastry or a

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-29 Thread bkil
Yes, "we" refers to the Hungarian mapping community who we discussed this topic with a few times in the past, although we're still waiting for others from the neighboring area to also chime in. We'd be more than happy if we could have input from as many cultures as possible. In Hungary,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=bubble_tea

2020-06-29 Thread bkil
Actually we have a very similar problem with tagging a "Tejivó" in Hungary (literally a "place to drink milk"). It's conceptually very similar to a café (coffeehouse...), but the coffee offering isn't that pronounced (other than using their own milk). Rather, they serve a huge variety of dairy

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-29 Thread bkil
> That's what cuisine=* is for. That's what Google is for. That's what Yellow > Pages is for. That's what TripAdvisor is for. Yes, I've been wondering why we keep adding streets and POI to OSM, I thought that's what Google Maps is for. Now seriously, OSM has a great advantage of not favoring

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-29 Thread bkil
Okay, so at least now I better see where the misunderstanding stems from. Let's get some facts straight. It may be true that almost all words in OSM are interpreted within British English, but amenity=café is an exception (we've decided to leave out the accent for the benefit of the international

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-28 Thread bkil
Thank you for your additions regarding Italy and Germany, I've copied your insights into the document. So to summarize, we started to debate this around 2011 before you introduced shop=pastry and then had some more discussions in 2016, 2018 and this year too. We've also experienced the

[Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-06-28 Thread bkil
Hello, I'd like to ask your help in improving the definition of the venue mostly serving self-made artisanal desserts that I describe at the end of this message. Before we discuss possible tagging solutions (we will probably need a new tag), we would like to have some input from mappers in other

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

2019-12-31 Thread bkil
* don't clash with others * don't disappoint users * discuss with the community On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 10:40 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 30/12/19 21:31, bkil wrote: > > We have similar services to those, but I wouldn't map those. If you > > subscribe

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

2019-12-30 Thread bkil
after we invent the missing keys. On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 9:56 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some have no fee as such but linked to you opening your home wifi for use > by others (telstra Australia do such a thing). > I prefer access=private. > > On 30/12/19 09:40, bk

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

2019-12-29 Thread bkil
PM marc marc wrote: > Le 29.12.19 à 21:50, bkil a écrit : > > fee=no @ register with an Italian phone number > > it seems to indicate that it's fee=yes if you don't register, > which doesn't seem to fit with what you're saying. > I prefer : > internet_access:fee=customers (y

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

2019-12-29 Thread bkil
I find it amusing that some of the other big map providers have chosen a different "canonical" capitalization of the same trademarks. So they either are not canonical after all, or we misunderstood the meaning of the name=* key all along. I think when deciding such issues, we would need to share

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

2019-12-29 Thread bkil
I probably wouldn't add the antenna tags either, unless it is visible and useful for navigational purposes. If possible, please add the network name as well, something like this: operator=Comune di Cividale del Friuli internet_access=wlan internet_access:ssid=FVGWiFi This is a bit sketchy

[Tagging] szekler_gate vs. szekely_gate?

2019-12-29 Thread bkil
Just a quick question to some native speakers, which one would you understand as more correct? artwork_type = szekler_gate tourism = artwork vs. artwork_type = szekely_gate tourism = artwork For describing the following very common objects in central Europe:

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

2019-07-06 Thread bkil
In many parts of Hungary, vegetation can overshadow street lights, especially if they are placed high enough. They may make efforts to protect roads against this, but they rarely consider footways. Hence I know a lot of streets where road illumination is fair, but the sidewalk right beside it

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-06 Thread bkil
/boat/cart/tent/building/... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure#Load-bearing On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 1:26 AM Fernando Trebien wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:33 PM bkil wrote: > > Be my guest: > > intermittent=yes > > ephemeral=yes > > building=no &g

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

2019-07-01 Thread bkil
Be my guest: intermittent=yes ephemeral=yes building=no permanent=no movable=yes stationary=no caravan=yes mount=trailer support=wheels foundation=no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_restaurant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houseboat On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:30 PM Fernando Trebien wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Which global OSM mailing list for the "community index"?

2019-06-28 Thread bkil
1. Although, just copying the archive may not seem to add too much value, I do see the potential improvement to the forum search index. However, it would be real useful if this transfer could be automated and turned into a kind of near-realtime sync. Then all you needed to implement is reverse

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 117, Issue 90, topic 1 & 4: Ban of Ulamm by Woodpeck

2019-06-25 Thread bkil
If you could give us a link where we can continue this discussion without being off topic, I'd gladly chime in with my viewpoint. We had dozens of mail threads on our local list in this topic in the past with some good pointers as well. On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:01 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

2019-06-22 Thread bkil
My answer reflected on Paul's suggestion of introducing yet another term (fare=*) to more closely match common vocabulary. I wouldn't recommend merging tolls, sorry if you read it like that. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:10 AM Colin Smale wrote: > On 2019-06-22 10:38, bkil wrote: > > I

Re: [Tagging] About the diaper key

2019-06-22 Thread bkil
 On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:48 AM Satoshi IIDA wrote: > > As my small contribution, switched to changing_table in a baby care > proposal page~ > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/babycare > > > > 2019年6月17日(月) 5:44 Rory : > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:14:59 +0200,

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

2019-06-22 Thread bkil
If we step back a bit from our dictionaries, fee=* as a concept is isomorphic to toll=* (and fare) in this context. As all of them could be understood by native speakers and fee=* covers a more general category, it is clearly the better choice. If we consider our data users, non-native speakers

Re: [Tagging] Which global OSM mailing list for the "community index"?

2019-06-22 Thread bkil
We should probably list the OSM Forum as well then. OSM Help also uses your OSM credentials. OSM IRC channels do not need credentials - a random alias is sufficient. The OSMF link seems to be more about donations than giving a hand. I'd funnel using these two categories: Primary: * OSM Help *

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

2019-06-22 Thread bkil
This is what you are looking for, it has been used 160 times: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddevice_charging_station Although, I'd probably just unify this with amenity=charging_station and always specify the socket type and voltage. You should only navigate to a charging

Re: [Tagging] A modest proposal to increase the usefulness of the tagging list

2019-06-14 Thread bkil
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:05 AM John Willis via Tagging wrote: > On Jun 4, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Or you will use. > Thanks for handling man_made bridge. I use it a lot. > > The only comment to this idea of “make tags for you to use” is that if you > invent a tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

2019-06-01 Thread bkil
Commands wrote: > > > Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:01:13 +0200 > > From: bkil > > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in > > > [...] > > > Also, currently I se

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

2019-06-01 Thread bkil
Sorry if I didn't make myself clear in formulating the questions, I'll try to rephrase my inquiries again below. On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 8:09 PM ET Commands wrote: > > Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 20:34:52 +0200 > > From: bkil > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging building

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

2019-06-01 Thread bkil
The kind of derivative information that you suggest does not add much to the map, hence I don't support your proposal. On the other hand, if you simply added the area of the parking lot you see next to the building (kind of a factual information), others could draw the same conclusion as you did.

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

2019-05-26 Thread bkil
on the long term and it is prone to change. I consider this a constructive alternative approach to recommending mass tagging of "something is here but I don't know what". On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 8:34 PM bkil wrote: > I can see what maintenance burden this notation could bring, but I

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

2019-05-24 Thread bkil
I can see what maintenance burden this notation could bring, but I would need more information to see what we could gain from it. landuse=* seemed appropriate for most use cases I have encountered. Why do we need to tag this on a building resolution? What data consumers did you have in mind?

Re: [Tagging] Filter bubbles in OSM

2019-05-24 Thread bkil
Not sure about the context of this message but Andy's reasoning seems sound. On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 2:26 PM Andy Townsend wrote: > On 23/05/2019 20:58, Nick Bolten wrote (in the "solving iD conflict" > thread: > > OSM needs an alternative for community tagging discussions outside of > > these

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Top_up (fifth revision)

2019-05-10 Thread bkil
I've read in the previous rejection comments that many opposed to putting brand details in keys. What do you think about this version: prepaid_top_up:mobile=yes/. The reason is that around here, you could top up your mobile phone either at the given carrier, kiosks over generic online charging or

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Top_up (fifth revision)

2019-05-10 Thread bkil
1. If I want to find a place where I can have some ice cream, searching for cuisine="*ice_cream*" is a simple solution. Listing each individual product is difficult to maintain due to changes in time, but I usually add general categories that define the shop and for which people would

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - tag:Police

2019-05-05 Thread bkil
We're now at 20 unanimous approval votes. Do we still need more? On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 11:51 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 04:18, Jan S wrote: > >> >> So, I'm looking forward to your votes > > > Done! Good luck :-) > > Thanks > > Graeme >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Key:golf_cart

2019-05-05 Thread bkil
We're currently at 16 unanimous approval votes. Do we still need more? On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 2:00 PM Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Voting has been open for about a week for the key "golf_cart", which > is already being used to define access for golf carts on highways and > paths. > > Please

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

2019-05-05 Thread bkil
Thank you for bringing street_vendor=* to my attention. I've been looking for something like this for some time now. On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 11:33 AM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > > > 2 May 2019, 21:55 by amilopow...@u-cloud.ch: > > surface=whispering_asphalt or surface=silent_asphalt > > Please

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-29 Thread bkil
I recommend that we rename the proposal to the following: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table Then we can create a redirect from the old URL so that all links mentioned in this thread and elsewhere will work indefinitely. Please verify that both the main page and

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability wiki page: "Geometry" section added

2019-04-28 Thread bkil
 On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 11:44 AM Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've added a new section to the Verifiability wiki page about mapping > features with ways or areas when these geometries are not verifiable. > > This has been discussed here several times in the past few

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-28 Thread bkil
As a non-native speaker, I did need to look up bureau_de_change before first using it back then, but it does not cause confusion for me anymore. The most common word in Hungarian for this is "money exchanger"/"money exchange" ("pénzváltó"/"pénzváltás"), and the clerks usually sit at a desk behind

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 4:57 PM Michael Brandtner via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I don' think we should use no, but private. But as others have stated, I > can't really think of a changing table that should be mapped in osm but > isn't accessible even for customers. > But us

Re: [Tagging] Variable position

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
leisure=outdoor_seating + shelter=no + covered=no On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 3:11 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 13:49, bkil wrote: > >> Note that outdoor_seating is usually for customers, so don't forget to >> add: >> access=yes >> > > True, us

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
To aid those with achondroplasia, I think it would also be useful to indicate whether adjustable_height is a feature of the table, though I guess they are already prepared to use the floor anyway. On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 2:22 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > > On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 00:50, marc marc

Re: [Tagging] Variable position

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
Note that outdoor_seating is usually for customers, so don't forget to add: access=yes Also, why not simply use the already established: shelter=no + covered=no? On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 2:35 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 11:01, bkil wrote: > >> This

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
height=* was my fault, but I don't feel strongly about it, you may remove it then. "straps" and "tilting" could still go under the list of *:feature=*, though, that's a good idea. toilet vs. room vs. dedicated_room: How do you map a changing table that is found inside a small "toilets"

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
AM marc marc wrote: > Le 20.04.19 à 00:36, bkil a écrit : > > Is it correct that nappy_changing:location=toilets is equivalent to > > nappy_changing:location=unisex? > > not really, having a changing table somewhere in the toilet area doesn't > give any information abo

Re: [Tagging] Variable position

2019-04-22 Thread bkil
This is what note=* is for - when you'd like to disclose an important fact with future mappers that is not that interesting to non-mappers. You may also draw a way/area and indicate the count of benches there or the total sitting capacity. We may need to submit a proposal this, though.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

2019-04-21 Thread bkil
=* nappy_table=* On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 2:07 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for starting it. > > Think the name could be better .. sounds like a baby exchange :) > > On 21/04/19 04:59, bkil wrote: > > Thank you for taking the time to complete this nice writ

  1   2   >