Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Groundskeeping Shop

2019-03-12 Thread phil
I am not sure I understand this proposal, the term is completely new to me.

Why would I not search for either garden equipment or lawnmowers if that is 
what I need?

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tuesday, 12 March 2019, lamplighter wrote:
> This proposal is to create the tag shop=groundkeeping
> 
> Description
> A shop selling groundskeeping equipment, equipment service and supplies for 
> groundskeeping to businesses and homeowners.
> 
> Please see the proposal page at
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/groundskeeping
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Pets allowed

2019-03-07 Thread phil
On Thursday, 7 March 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
> 
> Many shops and a few restaurants in my town display a sign somewhere saying
> that dogs
> are allowed.
> 
Some pubs make dogs  very welcome by providing biscuits and water bowls.

Phil (trigpoint) 


-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Pets allowed

2019-03-07 Thread phil
Pets is probably a bit vague, many hotels will accept pet dogs, but are less 
likely  to accept cats and extremely unlikely to my pet alligator (no I don't 
really own one).

Maybe search for dogs rather than pets.

Obviously dogs=no will only apply to pets, registered assistance dogs are 
covered by the law of the country, in the UK a hotel/pub/restaurant is not 
allowed to refuse assistance dogs. I assume the same is true throughout the EU.

Phil (trigpoint) 


On Thursday, 7 March 2019, Cascafico Giovanni wrote:
> Hello ML!
> 
> how can I tag and hotel (or whatever) that allows pets? Besides, semi-OT,
> if hotel offers babysitting, is childcare=yes ok?
> 
> I briefly googled in OSM wiki and couldn't find. If already answered,
> please forgive me.
>

-- 
Sent from my Sailfish device
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing

2015-11-24 Thread phil
On Tue Nov 24 13:40:38 2015 GMT, Marc Gemis wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Sidewalks, unless they are physically separated in some way are an
> > integral part of the highway. Sidewalk tags can allow a router to, maybe
> > prefer, roads with sidewalks but there a lot of cases where this would
> > just be plain annoying. A pedestrian simply needs to be told to follow
> > the road, they are quite capable of deciding which side to walk, where
> > to cross and whether it is simply easier to walk on the road.
> >
> 
> 
> Then we do not have an answer for Clifford's original question: how do
> you tag sidewalk characteristics for wheelchair users: such as kerb,
> slope, width, surface ? Especially when tagging is done by novices ?
> 
I was thinking that, not easy but important.  We do need to do this, just not 
so that it breaks normal pedestrian routing.

I guess the things that need mapping are: 
drop kerbs - Probably a highway node,  sidewalk:drop_kerb=left/right/both. We 
will need to map driveway drop kerbs too as these will be crossing point too. 

width - very important as many sidewalks are singlefile for walking.
sidewalk:left:width=0.6, or 1.5 etc

 kerb height - Again important,  different heights are barriers for different 
people, different wheelchairs.  sidewalk:left:kerb_height=10 cm.

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Trolltags

2015-09-04 Thread phil
On Fri Sep 4 18:40:55 2015 GMT+0100, John Eldredge wrote:
> Not to mention the amount of horse dung you are willing to have your bike 
> wheels fling up onto you.

Many bridleways see very little horse traffic so its not often a problem. Mud 
however, lots of that.

Phil (trigpoint)
> 
> -- 
> John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
> "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot 
> drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
> 
> 
> 
> On September 1, 2015 4:59:34 AM p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
> 
> > On Tue Sep 1 10:49:56 2015 GMT+0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> >>
> >> I unsure about highway=bridleway+bicycle=designated but given that it
> >> appears 2 129 times worldwide it is likely that is also may be
> >> considered as mistake.
> >>
> > Makes sense to me, bicycles can legally use a bridleway in England/Wales. 
> > Practicality will depend upon surface, type of bike and recent weather.
> >
> > Phil (trigpoint)
> > --
> > Sent from my Jolla
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Trolltags

2015-09-01 Thread phil
On Tue Sep 1 10:49:56 2015 GMT+0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> 
> I unsure about highway=bridleway+bicycle=designated but given that it
> appears 2 129 times worldwide it is likely that is also may be
> considered as mistake.
> 
Makes sense to me, bicycles can legally use a bridleway in England/Wales. 
Practicality will depend upon surface, type of bike and recent weather. 

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] highway=footway - Advanced definition: Distinction footway vs path

2015-08-28 Thread phil
On Fri Aug 28 23:10:59 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 
 
 sent from a phone
 
 Am 28.08.2015 um 17:07 schrieb Andy Townsend ajt1...@gmail.com:
 
  On 28/08/2015 15:18, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
  horse=designated
  
  That's an access tag.  Are you saying that access tags convey physical 
  characteristics somehow?
 
 
 this is explicitly a synonym for bridleway. It says that there is a sign 
 bridleway. Whether the sign is reliably indicating that the way is suitable 
 for riding a horse might depend on the region you are in, and also on weather 
 conditions (rain, ice etc), but it is not different to any other 
 highway=bridleway which also might cause problems for horse riders in some 
 (supposedly rare) occasions 

You can, in England /Wales also walk or ride a bike on a bridleway.  Your 
choice of bike is important in most cases, a town/road racer will not last very 
long.
 
Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] landuse=religious Monastic schools

2015-08-21 Thread phil
Precinct is used around cathedrals, does that work?

Phil ( trigpoint)

On Fri Aug 21 11:53:52 2015 GMT+0100, Andreas Goss wrote:
 In first though landuse=religious was supposed to be for all religious 
 institution and include more than a church yard.
 
 Now I read...
 
  landuse=religious is specifically meant for the area used by a religious 
  facility and it's supporting or directly related amenities used for 
  practicing the religion - not merely land that happens to be owned by a 
  religious entity. Likewise, Facilities such asamenity=school or 
  amenity=hospital that are not part of a primarily religious complex, or are 
  not primarily a place of worship, but merely operated by a religious entity 
  are represented with different tagging schemes
 
 Does this mean a school run by a monastry even on their grounds would 
 not be included in landuse=religious?
 
 Is this this now really just become a replacement for churchyard to 
 include more religions? Bascially limited to the area around a place of 
 worship?
 __
 openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎
 
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Describe explicitly that values of highway tag do not imply anything about road quality (except highway=motorway and highway=motorway_link)

2015-08-19 Thread phil
On Wed Aug 19 18:36:05 2015 GMT+0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Note that it afffects also highway=path - in that case some/many
  people are convinced that there is some kind of difference of implied
  quality between highway=path and highway=footway.
 
 
 I tend to see the distinction as this:

It depends where you are. 
 highway=bridleway
 foot=no
 bicycle=no
 horse=designated
 motor_vehicle=no
In the UK a bridleway is also for foot and bicycles. Although you usually need 
a trail or mountain bike to cycle on one.

 
 
 highway=footway
 foot=designated
 bicycle=no
 horse=no
 motor_vehicle=no
 
 highway=cycleway
 foot=no
 bicycle=designated
 horse=no
 motor_vehicle=no
Again in the UK you can walk on a cycleway, but not in Germany. 
 
 
 highway=path
 foot=yes
 bicycle=yes
 horse=yes
 motor_vehicle=no


Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Local highways classifications

2015-07-17 Thread phil
On Fri Jul 17 09:36:05 2015 GMT+0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
 On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:23 AM, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
 
  On Thu Jul 16 15:06:34 2015 GMT+0100, Richard Mann wrote:
   For those interested, the issue appears to be that the Poles can have
   multiple routes on one road section (fine, just like the Americans, use
   relations), but also the same route number can get used on a series of
   roads of different classification. So route 2 goes from Germany to Warsaw
   as a motorway, then becomes a trunk, then a primary.
  
  That happens in the UK, on whos road system OSM road classification is
  based, too.
 
  Many A roads switch between trunk and primary, or even vanish for a
  section where the route is a motorway. The A5, passing Telford,  is a
  classic example.
 
 
 It doesn't do something like A5(M)?

The section through Telford was built first and was going to be, but it opened 
as the M54.

http://pathetic.org.uk/lost/a5m/

The section of A5 between Telford and the M6 has been de-trunked to encourage 
traffic to use the M54.

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Local highways classifications

2015-07-16 Thread phil
On Thu Jul 16 15:06:34 2015 GMT+0100, Richard Mann wrote:
 For those interested, the issue appears to be that the Poles can have
 multiple routes on one road section (fine, just like the Americans, use
 relations), but also the same route number can get used on a series of
 roads of different classification. So route 2 goes from Germany to Warsaw
 as a motorway, then becomes a trunk, then a primary.
 
That happens in the UK, on whos road system OSM road classification is based, 
too.

Many A roads switch between trunk and primary, or even vanish for a section 
where the route is a motorway. The A5, passing Telford,  is a classic example. 

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Pet Relief Areas

2015-06-10 Thread phil


On Wed Jun 10 09:32:26 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 
 I prefer leash_anchor over lead_hook because it is more generic and easier
 to understand.
 
Leash is AE, lead is BE.

Phil (trigpoint)


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)

2015-06-09 Thread phil
On Tue Jun 9 16:06:40 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 2015-06-09 14:37 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
 
  How would you tag a shop that sells tax stamps and licenses, but is not a
  government office, and does not provide other services?  The Oklahoma Tax
  Commission uses such a system throughout the state (authorized tag
  agents) to save people the hassle of having to drive down to their office
  on the capitol mall in Oklahoma City.
 
 
 
 In Italy you can buy tax stamps at the tobacco shop.
 Your case can be a shop=tax_stamps_and_licenses? How do people call it?
 
Is a tax stamp some sort of vehicle tax?

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)

2015-06-09 Thread phil
On Tue Jun 9 16:26:36 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 
 
 you can use them universally for payments of government taxes and fees,
 typically you have to stick them onto forms or other documents to make them
 valid.
 
Tax_stamp sounds good, I have never heard of a UK equivalent. 

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Self serve and full serve gas stations

2015-06-09 Thread phil
On Tue Jun 9 13:23:05 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 2015-06-09 13:48 GMT+02:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
 
   While I agree that fueling only is minimum service and not full
   service, around here (Europe) minimum service is always cheaper than
   self because there is someone who does work for you, while in self you
   will do it and nobody has to paid for it (there might no even be any
   staff at the gas station, and you'll pay in advance at a machine).
 
  In the UK your card is pre-authorised, usually to GBP99, you cannot
  easily prepay for an unknown amount.
  
  The charge to your card is made after you have filled the car, with the
  amount of fuel you have bought.
 
 
 
 payment in advance is possible with GCHQ-save cash as well, no
 compromising plastic needed ;-)
 
Why worry, the ANPR cameras will get you anyway. 

Do they give change? Otherwise how do you know how much to prepay?

My own car I have an idea,  within 4 litres but when filling a hire car (which 
must be returned full), I haven't a clue.

Phil (trigpoint)

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)

2015-06-08 Thread phil
On Mon Jun 8 15:48:01 2015 GMT+0100, Andreas Goss wrote:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_and_Vehicle_Licensing_Agency
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Motor_Vehicles
 
 amenity=driver_vehicle_licensing_agency
 
 Seems a bit long and while it's the name of the agency in the UK it also 
 describes what it does very well. Maybe without acency? Using + isn't a 
 good idea, right?
 
 amenity=driver_vehicle_licensing
 
 Or is there a more general term so we could subtag this in case some 
 countries don't combine it.
 
 __
 openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎
 
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)

2015-06-08 Thread phil
On Mon Jun 8 15:48:01 2015 GMT+0100, Andreas Goss wrote:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_and_Vehicle_Licensing_Agency
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Motor_Vehicles
 
 amenity=driver_vehicle_licensing_agency
 
 Seems a bit long and while it's the name of the agency in the UK it also 
 describes what it does very well. Maybe without acency? Using + isn't a 
 good idea, right?
 
 amenity=driver_vehicle_licensing
 
 Or is there a more general term so we could subtag this in case some 
 countries don't combine it.
 
Sounds reasonable, there are local offices in the UK, or at least in GB.

Or amenity=licensing, driver=yes, vehicle=yes.
This could then expand for other things requiring a license, shotgun=yes?

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Deprecating wikipedia Tag

2015-05-25 Thread phil
On Mon May 25 14:29:21 2015 GMT+0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
 On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:08 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  I already replied that I wonder what's the idea behind that enforcement.
  Why wouldn't Wikidata be used also rather than instead?  Is it really a
  goal of OSM insisting to destroy Wikipedia?
 
 
 So when people stop linking to Wikipedia, Wikipedia will be destroyed ? Or
 do I miss something here ?
 
I think a lot of us mappers  are going to need a lot of convincing,  wikipedia 
tags, in common with other osm tags, are human readable. 
When reviewing changes I do not see a number that is meaningless without 
following the link, and even then the wikidata page looks pretty meaningless. 

Phil (trigpoint ) 
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging

2015-05-15 Thread phil
On Fri May 15 10:41:00 2015 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 2015-05-15 1:27 GMT+02:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com:
 
  to me a pub is a shop/building .. sells stuff and is a building.

True, but a pub is much more than a business . It is as much a community centre 
as a business,  the customers are an essential part of the formula. 

It is one of the P's that make a village a viable community,  Post Office, 
Primary School and Pub.  

Pubs rely upon customer commitment and participation for darts, dominoes teams, 
to collect glasses,  take a turn behind the bar.when its busy, to greet and 
pass time with strangers who come in.

It is way more than a shop, probably the best example of an amenity there is.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

2015-05-13 Thread phil
On Wed May 13 09:02:18 2015 GMT+0100, Ross wrote:
 Not the way I read their email.
 
 However there is already provision for:
 
 maxspeed:vehicle
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed
 
 and
 
 maxspeed:advisory
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:advisory
 
 
 So I'd suggest that maxspeed is the legal speed limit as per the wiki 
 and all others are a sub set of this.
 
To clarity slightly, I would say the legal speed limit for cars and 
motorcycles. Cars towing trailers/caravans , buses and hgv's need to be tagged 
separately,  i.e. maxspeed:hgv, maxspeed:bus.

Phil (trigpoint )

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] On appointment restaurant

2015-05-13 Thread phil
I would tag that as amenity=events_venue.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Wed May 13 15:26:45 2015 GMT+0100, André Pirard wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Either opening_hours=on_appointment is missing or amenity=restaurant
 lacks a tag or an explanation.
 
 It is a restaurant indeed, but only hired for private group events like
 marriages.
 It is not an  amenity=community_centre  but it's also what you call a
 craft=caterer.
 
 How do I map that?
 
 BTW, here it is next to an attached building
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344739636 and I left the previous
 version separately around it.
 Does anyone know a good garbage detector software?
 Is there a map repairer of the month nomination?
 
  addr:city=Dolembreux
  addr:housename=Le Normandie
  addr:housenumber=21
  addr:postcode=4140
  addr:street=Haie des Chênes
  amenity=restaurant
  building=yes
  contact:email=i...@malherbes-normandie.be
  contact:phone=+32 4 368 72 35
  contact:website=http://www.malherbes-normandie.be
  craft=caterer
  name=Le Normandie
  operator=traiteur Malherbes
  takeaway=yes
 (no ad intended)
 
 TIA,
 
 André.
 
 
 
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

2015-05-11 Thread phil
On Mon May 11 10:03:48 2015 GMT+0100, André Pirard wrote:
 On 2015-05-10 15:33, Volker Schmidt wrote :
  We do have here roads where access with motor vehicles is limited to
  residents plus residents of the town, where the road is.
  Example: http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/H5QZAcvCLQBwhbF4u2mq7w (zoom
  in to read the details)
 
  How do I tag such situation?
 Same (as we) in Belgium. Specifically (as exception to access
 restrictions):
 Excepté circulation locale (must stop within with a reason to go)
 Exceptés riverains (local residents (no river needed ;-) ))
 
I have always read that as the equivalent to the UK 'except for access'. I know 
the literal translation is residents,  but a delivery driver or a friend 
visiting would be allowed to drive there.
I would use access = destination in these cases.

Phil ( trigpoint )

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Proposed tag shop=wholesale

2015-05-09 Thread phil
On Sat May 9 02:10:38 2015 GMT+0100, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
 On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
 wrote:
 
  Note that we also have shop=trade. It would be good to make the
  difference between both tags clear (of deprecate shop=trade, which I
  wouldn't oppose).
 
 
 trade is an attribute.
 
 Any type of shop (plumbing, electrical, lumber, restaurant supplies) could
 be trade focused.
 Such shops do not cater to walk in consumer traffic, and may be hostile to
 customers
 who come in without trade knowledge.

In the UK , wholesalers such as Booker and Makro do not allow you through the 
door without documentation proving you are registered as a business. 

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Camps

2015-05-07 Thread phil


On Wed May 6 23:21:41 2015 GMT+0100, David Bannon wrote:
 
 On Wed, 2015-05-06 at 11:09 +, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
  
   A resort is usually a town whos primary purpose is tourism. A resort
  is not operated by a single company,  and access is not restricted.  
   Resort should probably be avoided due to totally different meanings
  between BE and AE.
  
 OK Phil, I was not aware of that difference.  So that leaves us wonder
 what to call those UK Holiday Camps ?  Leave it to the UK people I
 guess.
 
There are not many left, they were of their time. In the UK context 
tourism=holiday_camp would work.

Look on YouTube for hi-de-hi for an example of a British holiday camp set in 
the 50s.

Actually my only reference to an American resort is Kellermans in Dirty 
Dancing) also set in the 50s.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Camps

2015-05-06 Thread phil
On Wed May 6 00:08:17 2015 GMT+0100, David Bannon wrote:
 On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 09:44 +, Jerry Clough - OSM wrote:
  
   It seems to me that the obvious generalisation, which would cover
  camps organised for profit and by non-profits would be
  leisure=vacation_camp. 
 
 I don't think 'vacation' or 'leisure' are good terms at all. A lot of
 people use the camp grounds we are talking about who are not on
 vacation, retirees, itinerant workers, travellers.  These grounds are
 'mostly' open throughout the year in my part of the world.
 
 tourism= means people are there because they want to be and I think that
 excludes refugee and military camps. Scout camps a bit grey 
It also excludes a lot of hotels :)

 Maybe the key is that people don't stay there indefinitely ?
 
  ... very specific British connotations associated with 
   holiday_camp. 
 
 Yes, I would consider the british holiday camps would be better called
 resorts (?). The permanent building being the clue. 
-1

A resort is usually a town whos primary purpose is tourism. A resort is not 
operated by a single company,  and access is not restricted.  

 
  
  In general I would use any derivative of resort : it is a word which
  has far too many meanings. 
 
 Did you mean to say avoid the use of  there ?
 
 So, in summary, why are we discussing abandoning or supplementing
 tourism=camp_site ?
 
 David
 
 
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tag
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Camps

2015-05-06 Thread phil


On Wed May 6 11:49:39 2015 GMT+0100, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

  
   ... very specific British connotations associated with 
holiday_camp. 
  
  Yes, I would consider the british holiday camps would be better called
  resorts (?). The permanent building being the clue. 
 -1
 
 A resort is usually a town whos primary purpose is tourism. A resort is not 
 operated by a single company,  and access is not restricted.  

Sorry,  sent that before I was ready. 

Resort should probably be avoided due to totally different meanings between BE 
and AE.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite

2015-05-06 Thread phil
On Wed May 6 08:23:34 2015 GMT+0100, SomeoneElse wrote:
 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 such places locally as to whether 
 they appear to be mostly for tents or caravans (there tend to be fewer 
 motorhomes - what the Americans call RVs - over here than caravans).  
 Another differentiator might be the organisation that the site is part 
 of.  If it's The Caravan Club it's more likely to be mostly for 
 caravans than tents.  However there seems to be more overlap between 
 camping and caravanning organisations and sites now than there used to 
 be, so in some cases either tag could apply equally.
 
+1

One of the biggest issues I see is that the mapper has to choose between 
tourism=caravan_site and tourism=campsite,  when the vast majority of 
commercial sites cater for both.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours default PH off

2015-04-30 Thread phil
On Thu Apr 30 16:40:25 2015 GMT+0100, Michał Brzozowski wrote:
 On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Robin `ypid` Schneider ypi...@aol.de wrote:
  Hi everyone
 
  As noted by Ein Mapper on [the current weekly task in Germany][1] it 
  would be
  convenient to have an implicit PH off added to most opening_hours values
  during evaluation. I had not thought about this before but now that I do I 
  agree
  more and more that this makes sense and wrote a proposal [2]. Any thoughts 
  about
  this?
 
 Don't be German-centric :-P (I know that basically everything closes
 on public holidays in Germany). It really is another hoop to jump
 through, another thing that we impose on data consumers of this
 already potentially (edge cases) very elaborated tag. And while a
 notion of SH/PH is rather well defined for a mapper in given country,
 default closure in these days may be not. Another table to maintain.
 It really makes more problems than it solves: is PH off supposed to
 apply also to 24/7 features? E.g. convenience shop vs an outdoor ATM.
 
+1
You would also have to define which public holidays, in the Uk Christmas Day 
and Easter Sunday have restrictions,  other public holidays are at the 
businesses discretion and will vary from year to year.

Phil (trigpoint ) 

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] lost and found

2015-04-28 Thread phil
On Tue Apr 28 15:46:18 2015 GMT+0100, Florian LAINEZ wrote:
 2015-04-28 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com:
 
  so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_and_found=yes seems good to me,
 
 
 It seems like a duplicate information to me. The second key doesn't give
 any additional information and is therefore not useful.
 
 2015-04-28 10:57 GMT+02:00 p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
 
  This type of facility is usually called 'Lost Property' or a lost property
  office.
 
 
 There is a difference between english american and the british language. I
 guess you're english ;)
 
There is a difference,  and  I am British and so is the language of OSM tagging.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] lost and found

2015-04-28 Thread phil
This type of facility is usually called 'Lost Property' or a lost property 
office. 

amenity=lost_property would work here, or lost_property=yes could be added 
where it is a secondary function of something else such as an information desk.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Tue Apr 28 00:01:07 2015 GMT+0100, johnw wrote:
 Usually a mappable lost  found is for a large theme park (or large public 
 complex - even large train stations) - so it would be a mappable node at high 
 zoom levels.
 
 There is a tiny tiny table at my community center that has had the same 
 pencase and scarf for 8 months. But it is a mappable point if I really wanted 
 to. 
 
 But most of the time the place would be a mappable node - like at Disneyland 
 or an airport, but occasionally it is part of an office, so 
 lost_and_found=yes would be useful for which stationmaster’s office or 
 service counter at the giant station has the lost and found.
 
 so amenity=lost found works well. Tourism is wrong, as it is for non-torust 
 places (most large train stations in Tokyo (which are a block or two long) 
 have a lost and found somewhere. 
 
 so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_and_found=yes seems good to me, 
 
 Javbw 
 
 
  On Apr 27, 2015, at 10:15 PM, Florian LAINEZ winner...@free.fr wrote:
  
  Hi,
  How would you tag a place where all the lost and found items are collected?
  Suggestions:
  lost_and_found=yes
  amenity=lost_and_found
  office=lost_and_found
  I don't like amenity=lost_and_found because it can't apply to already 
  existing amenity POI like amenity=post_office. And the fact is that such an 
  amenity can actually be the place where the lost and found items are 
  collected.
  
  It's not really a very popular topic for now ... 
  http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=lost_and_found#values 
  http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=lost_and_found#values
  
  What do you think?
  
  
  -- 
  
  Florian Lainez
  @overflorian http://twitter.com/overflorian
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] fire extinguisher class

2015-04-23 Thread phil
On Thu Apr 23 10:38:13 2015 GMT+0100, Florian LAINEZ wrote:
 Hi, it's the first time I write to this mailing list, I am a french
 contributor interested in train stations.
 
 I want to describe more precisely an extinguisher and I have seen the tag
 emergency=fire_extinguisher that is used de facto.
 What about adding some details regarding the type with fire_extinguisher=A
 for an extinguisher class A?
 
 Please comment my proposal on the discussion page
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:emergency%3Dfire_extinguisher
 Have a good day
 
 
Class A, B seems a bit confusing.  I would not be able to map this without 
reference to the wiki.

I have just checked the office extinguishers and can instantly see one powder 
and one foam. Neither is labelled with a letter.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] fire extinguisher class

2015-04-23 Thread phil
That makes much more sense,  and as you say, maps the physical characteristics. 

The letters seem like specialist knowledge that few people will be aware of.

Phil (trigpoint ) 

On Thu Apr 23 13:11:46 2015 GMT+0100, Florian LAINEZ wrote:
 Thanks for the feedback.
 I am not expert at all on the topic therefore I am open to describe with
 literal description.
 I just double checked in my office (in France) and couldn't find easily any
 literal mention. One the other way the class A and B were clearly
 mentioned.
 Therefore I think we will have to create a conversion table.
 
 I tried to find an international standard for classes but couldn't find any.
 Therefore what if, instead of mentioning the combustible (e.g. ordinary
 combustible) we mention the powder.
 After all, in OSM we try to describe the physical elements themselves, not
 the use of them.
 
 Therefore I propose the categories mentioned here
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_extinguisher#United_Kingdom that are :
 water, foam, dry powder, Carbon dioxide (CO2), Wet chemical, Class D
 powder, Halon 1211/BCF
 An example would be fire_extinguisher_class=water instead of
 fire_extinguisher_class=ordinary_combustibles
 
 2015-04-23 11:57 GMT+02:00 p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
 
  On Thu Apr 23 10:38:13 2015 GMT+0100, Florian LAINEZ wrote:
   Hi, it's the first time I write to this mailing list, I am a french
   contributor interested in train stations.
  
   I want to describe more precisely an extinguisher and I have seen the tag
   emergency=fire_extinguisher that is used de facto.
   What about adding some details regarding the type with
  fire_extinguisher=A
   for an extinguisher class A?
  
   Please comment my proposal on the discussion page
  
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:emergency%3Dfire_extinguisher
   Have a good day
  
  
  Class A, B seems a bit confusing.  I would not be able to map this without
  reference to the wiki.
 
  I have just checked the office extinguishers and can instantly see one
  powder and one foam. Neither is labelled with a letter.
 
  Phil (trigpoint )
  --
  Sent from my Jolla
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 *Florian Lainez*
 @overflorian http://twitter.com/overflorian


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Highway barrier

2015-04-15 Thread phil
On Wed Apr 15 05:32:13 2015 GMT+0100, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  I don't think they are all that common Bryce but I have seen them. And
  that is a controlled situation. This is a normal street! It would be good
  to be able to alert drivers about something like this when using a GPS for
  guidance but I'm not sure there's a good way to do that.
 
 
 I can think of two dozen off the top of my head, within local parks and
 parking lots.  There are probably thousands
 in just the city I live in.
 
 But I agree that on a normal road that's kind of extreme!

I agree it is extreme as it prevents emergency vehicles using the road in the 
opposite direction and affects wheelchairs, which are pedestrians and not 
normally affected by a oneway. As for reversing into a parking space..

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Highway barrier

2015-04-15 Thread phil
On Wed Apr 15 05:32:13 2015 GMT+0100, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  I don't think they are all that common Bryce but I have seen them. And
  that is a controlled situation. This is a normal street! It would be good
  to be able to alert drivers about something like this when using a GPS for
  guidance but I'm not sure there's a good way to do that.
 
 
 I can think of two dozen off the top of my head, within local parks and
 parking lots.  There are probably thousands
 in just the city I live in.
 
 But I agree that on a normal road that's kind of extreme!


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Highway barrier

2015-04-14 Thread phil

On Tue Apr 14 07:16:54 2015 GMT+0100, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
 On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Take a look at this nasty device that prevents traveling the wrong way on
  a oneway street. I've seen several of these here in Istanbul. Some have
  signs to alert motorists but this one does not. It is unmarked in any way.
  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:One-way_barrier_IMG_7111.JPG
  It is surely a barrier of some sort yet it does allow traffic to flow
  unimpeded in one direction. Traffic_calming doesn't quite get it either.
  LOL
 
 
 These are very common in the USA on parking lots.  Often the entrance road
 will be shut after hours,
 but the exit gate left open allowing motor vehicles to exit.  Do not back
 up, severe tire damage is the usual sign.

Likewise in the UK, have never seem one on a public highway though.

Phil (trigpoint )
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Fuel shops

2015-03-19 Thread phil
On Thu Mar 19 12:46:02 2015 GMT, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
 I would prefer a different tag as I would not like the lemonade table to be
 rendered in the same way as a regular filling station. The tag shop=gas
 with subtag would be better.

I would expect  shop=gas to sell bottled gas for camping 

Gas as you have used it is American,  the English is petrol.

However I can see nothing wrong with amenity=fuel, that is what it is in that 
part of the world . What turns amenity=fuel into a regular filling station is 
the building=roof.

Phil (trigpoint)



 
 On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:46 AM Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  I think they should remain as amenity=fuel (I have visited Thailand and I
  know what you mean).  Local people will know what to expect, but for
  clarity perhaps subtags should be used to add detail and differentiate
  between a filling station and a lemonade stand selling fuel.
 
  On Thursday, 19 March 2015, Lukas Sommer sommer...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  In Benin (Africa) these shops exist also – mostly only a table with
  some big bottles with fuel.
 
  2015-03-19 9:18 GMT, Dave Swarthout daveswarth...@gmail.com:
   I want to float an idea to get your reactions. Here in Thailand, and
   especially in rural areas, there are hundreds of shops that sell motor
  fuel
   in small quantities. Most of the population drive motorbikes which are
  used
   for every sort of transport imaginable. They have a tiny petrol tank,
   perhaps 4-5 liters, therefore a short range; they need frequent
  fill-ups.
   To meet this need local individuals have set up small sheds or kiosks
  from
   which they hand pump the small quantities needed. Some shops sell fuel
  by
   the liter bottle, often a whiskey bottle. Such shops are poorly marked,
   seldom have any signs indicating their presence and typically offer no
   other services. If you live in the area you will know where the fuel
  shop
   is, otherwise they're almost invisible
  
   At any rate, we're looking for a way to tag these fuel shops in such a
  way
   that they become visible in OSM (and on our GPS units), and will not be
   mistaken for a full size fuel service station. Current tagging practice
  is
   to tag them with amenity=fuel and a made up name, for example, Bike
  petrol
   or Drummed fuel. The people doing this are aware of the fact that such
   tagging isn't strictly correct, but they understandably want to be able
  to
   find those shops should they run out of fuel. One problem with this
   Thailand-centric approach, is that other data consumers are unaware of
  it.
   Another is that the informal names are multiplying rapidly and one
  mapper's
   drummed fuel is another's barreled fuel and another's Bike petrol.
  Where it
   will end is anyone's guess.
  
   I'm suggesting an addition to the values of the shop key: shop=fuel or
   perhaps shop=motor_fuel
  
   My goal is to standardize the tagging so that at some point these shops
  can
   be eventually rendered on Garmin compatible downloaded maps and hence
  made
   visible. I have done this for my custom Garmin maps and find it a real
   asset.
  
   Here is a photo of such a shop in my neighborhood:
   https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ABarreled_fuel_shop.jpg
  
   --
   Dave Swarthout
   Homer, Alaska
   Chiang Mai, Thailand
   Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
  
 
 
  --
  Lukas Sommer
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

2015-03-09 Thread phil
An example using a local uk map is http://binged.it/1x8GAHx

Phil (trigpoint )

On Mon Mar 9 15:16:54 2015 GMT, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
 On 9 March 2015 at 15:06, ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
  I have just been asked to give a talk about OSM to a local group
  including Councillors who are impressed with OSM and considering
  using it for Council purposes. There are many historical abandoned
  railways in the area (related to mining) and I think that they will be
  singularly unimpressed if prominent major bridges on the local lanes
  are missing.
 
 Do you have an example of how local maps render these bridges?
 
  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/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1320
 
 But as mentioned, developer time is limited. Although bug reports are
 useful, writing a pull request is typically a quicker way to get
 desired rendering on the map than filing a bug report.
 
 -- Matthijs
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

2015-03-09 Thread phil
On Mon Mar 9 15:49:01 2015 GMT, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
 On 9 March 2015 at 15:26, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote:
  To be fair, someone did submit a pull request to resolve exactly this issue
  and it was summarily closed:
 
  https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/641
 
 That was not a pull request, but a bug report, and it happened to be a
 duplicate bug report so it was closed with a reference to the earlier
 bug report.
 
 We have decided not to render abandoned railways, but we haven't taken
 a decision on how to render standalone/abandoned bridges.
 
Most are not standalone, but part of embankments/cuttings which are significant 
navigational features.

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

2015-03-09 Thread phil
You should show them RichardF's cycle.travel site as a different way of 
rendering OSM, and it shows old railways.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Mon Mar 9 16:18:39 2015 GMT, ael wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 04:14:58PM +0100, Michael Reichert wrote:
  Hi,
  
  Am 2015-03-09 um 16:06 schrieb ael:
   Well, I have only changed the tag on the bridges themselves, and only on
   ways for which I did the original (and usually any subsequent) survey
   and edits. So I am not corrupting other people's data.
  
  Wrong! You have corrupted data because you have changed tags to values
  which are wrong. What about people who want to calculate the length of
  the railway network including disused tracks which have not been removed
  yet (and therefore are easy to reactivate)?
 
 That is ludicrous. I have changed a few metres only. The error bars on
 my surveys of several km of abondoned railway will far exceed that.
 
  The edits you did can be described as (semi-)vandalism.
 
 That sort of comment is unworthy of OSM. I did the surveys. Very
 carefully. I tagged corectly as far as I knew at the time. I only
 changed a very small section on a couple of bridges to explore the
 rendering and was unaware of this hornets' nest of bickering. And
 consulted this list.  Another mapper who has given no source has added
 1/2 km or more of track that I am fairly confident no longer exists: I
 intend to try to survey to confirm or refute, but it is on private
 ground.  He also added an entirely ficticious section of railway right
 across what is now a dual carriage way and other developments.  That
 might perhaps be near vandalism, although I suspect that he was a novice
 perhaps looking at an historical route, perhaps without realizing that
 he was modifying the database.
 
 Your sort of comment to someone who has contributed years of solid work
 to OSM is enough to make me consider ceasing to contribute.
 
  Well, if these people do not like OSM because /one/ OSM-based map does
  not show a couple of bridges, it is not bad if they do not use OSM. OSM
  is a database and no map! Please explain this if they ask why osm.org
  does not show bridge X.
 
 Many are likely to be complete novices, and even drawing that
 distinction at their first brush with the project might put them off.
 If I still give the talk after this reaction, I will pitch as best
 I can to the audience. If they are at the right level, obviously
 I will explain and illustrate the distinction between the data base
 and rendering. But that may be way over the heads of some local
 politicians. Or not.
 
 ael
 
 
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] custom road ref shields

2014-12-03 Thread Phil! Gold
* johnw jo...@mac.com [2014-11-28 13:11 +0900]:
  On Nov 28, 2014, at 9:53 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
  the basic scheme doesn't require anything new or unusual in
  route relation tagging, just care and consistency.
 
 I look forward to seeing his RFC page then ^_^

Well, the point is that you can render the shields using existing tagging
standards.  No RFC necessary.  :)

 That looks really good. Some graphic designers need to remake the
 shields for icon size (bigger lettering, details ignored), but the
 system of putting on the roads looks great.

As Richard noted, I kind of view my rendering as a proof of concept, and
as long as I was going for PoC, why not go for really high fidelity to the
roadside signs?  If I ever have a decent chunk of time to spend on this
again[0], I might look into simplified renderings for a lot of things.

 My question about multiple relations was about roads that would have
 more than one “symbol.” Maybe i didn’t see it,b ut all of thsoe roads
 seemed to have 1 shield apiece, but I’m wondering about roads that would
 need multiple shields next to each other.

That's handled.  In Paul Johnson's link:

  http://bl.ocks.org/ToeBee/raw/6119134/#16/36.0448/-95.7380

the Muskogee Turnpike has both the turnpike symbol and the SH-351 symbol.

 For example, State Highway 163 through downtown San Diego is part of the
 California highway system (so it gets a green ovalish “163” symbol), and
 is part of the CA scenic road system - so it would also get the small
 yellow flower icon as well.

If it were tagged appropriately and if I had put in shields for the
California scenic road system, it would show up with both shields.  Here's
something similar in Maryland, where MD-128 carries part of Maryland's
Horses and Hounds scenic byway:

  http://bl.ocks.org/ToeBee/raw/6119134/#14/39.4955/-76.7845

 As a next step, phil’s work looks great!

Thanks!  Toby Murray is also due some big thanks; he got this rendering
set up on a reasonable public-facing server.


[0] I haven't had a lot of time for OSM stuff in general lately, and I've
got a backlog of stuff that ought to be done with the renderer (not
least of which is a bunch of Ohio county route information that Minh
Nguyen's sent me).

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


Re: [Tagging] custom road ref shields

2014-12-03 Thread Phil! Gold
* Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net [2014-11-27 11:09 -0500]:
 actually, specifying the shield with a URL for an svg file was an older
 approach.

And, I should note, one that I consciously did not use.  I believe it was
Richard Weait who pointed out that grabbing an arbitrary image, chosen by
someone else, off of the Internet and using it in a rendering might not be
the greatest idea...

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


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

2014-11-07 Thread phil
On Fri Nov 07 2014 07:30:30 GMT+ (GMT), Colin Smale wrote:
  
 
 I would not expect the landuse value of the municipal bus company's HQ
 to change if the bus company was privatised... Only the ownership will
 have changed, nothing else. Actually, as the buildings are probably
 leased from a property company anyway, even that would stay the same.
 Just the shareholders of the company would different. 
 
 So I would suggest civic or government or whatever should only be
 applied where the activities taking place there are actually civic
 administration - council meetings, committees, births/deaths/marriages,
 highways,. i.e. the core business of a local authority as defined in
 law. Sidelines like running transport companies or sports grounds are
 not landuse=civic to my mind. 
 
+1

I totally agree Colin, it would be equally ridiculous to tag schools or parks 
as civic.

Phil (trigpoint )

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Release openstreetmap-carto v2.23.0

2014-10-30 Thread phil
If staff are available 24/7 I would call that a hotel.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Thu Oct 30 2014 13:24:02 GMT+ (GMT), Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 2014-10-29 21:56 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
 
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house as currently
  defined
  fits private residence where a single bedroom is made available to
  tourists.
 
  It is even mentioned - ranging from purpose-built guest houses
  to family-based BedBreakfast
 
 
 
 btw.:  that wiki page seems to have other issues as well. What is the
 reason to exclude places with staff available 24/7? Can't they be guest
 houses any more? What is the tag for a guest house with  staff available
 24/7?
 
 I agree that a guest house (the ones that I know in Germany that are called
 like this) and a bed and breakfast are (or can be) different kind of
 accomodation places.
 
 cheers,
 Martin


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

2014-10-27 Thread phil


On Mon Oct 27 2014 12:10:25 GMT+ (GMT), Richard Welty wrote:
 

 
 i have no idea what usage is in the UK

The UK uses the standard Vienna Convention system of a red triangle being a 
warning and a red circle being a prohibition. A height limit in a red circle 
means vehicles over the height are prohibited. 

Height is given in metric and imperial in most cases, although imperial only 
signs do exist.

Phil  (trigpoint )

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...

2014-10-23 Thread phil


On Thu Oct 23 2014 14:03:57 GMT+0100 (BST), Richard Z. wrote:
 On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 01:46:45PM +0100, Philip Barnes wrote:
  I like this tagging, but as an ex-diver I do feel it needs some
  expansion.
  
  compressor=yes/no
  To indicate whether there is air available to refill tanks or not.
 
 this would be mostly covered by
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dscuba_diving
  and
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddive_centre
 
 What other places would you attach scuba_diving:filling* to?

Would add it to dive shops, tourist accommodation  which caters for divers may 
too.

Phil(trigpoint )
 
  recompression_chamber=yes/no
  To indicate if there is a recompression chamber on-site.
 
 nothing like hyperbaric chamber mapping on OSM yet?
 
 Richard
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] man_made=bridge

2014-10-13 Thread phil
I like this proposal too, would it be possible to extend it to tunnels or would 
that require a similar proposal?

Phil (trigpoint )

On Mon Oct 13 2014 11:12:00 GMT+0100 (BST), Lukas Sommer wrote:
 I like this proposal.
 
 I would add the requirement that the highways/railways/paths that go over a
 bridge have to share a node with the outline area.
 
 Lukas Sommer
 
 2014-10-10 14:44 GMT+00:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
 
  man_made=bridge as proposed on
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/man_made%3Dbridge
  is in my opinion a good tagging scheme, I started work on displaying it in
  a
  default style (
  https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/436 ).
 
  But I noticed that there was never a vote to recognize it as an approved
  tag.
 
  I plan on starting vote in the near future, so it may be a good idea to
  check this
  proposal for potential problems.
 
  See also https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/436
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] University accommodation (was Re: Future proposal - RFC - amenity=dormitory)

2014-09-22 Thread phil
Dormitories are rooms with multiple beds, usually bunk beds and associated with 
youth hostels,  certainly not suitable for student accommodation where there is 
typically one student in a room, maybe two but they are certainly not 
dormitories. 

Phil (trigpoint )

On Sat Sep 20 2014 23:12:24 GMT+0100 (BST), Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
 On 9/20/14, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote:
  2014-09-19 15:52 GMT+01:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de:
  I still prefer (d) though if building=dormitory becomes widely
  accepted then I guess I shall have to swallow that loss for British
  english!
 
 Wouldn't be the first time if ever:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dsoccer
 
 That said, to me dormitories may also apply to other institutionalized
 housing such as housing for staff of a manufacturing plant. Although I
 admit that dormitories are primarily for students in my understanding.
 This ambiguity can be resolved by careful definition in the Wiki if
 ever people accept *=dormitory.
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

2014-09-22 Thread phil
Toll? I assume that means the same in US English as in UK English?

You really have to pay to use cycleways? How is the toll collected and 
enforced? 

Phil (trigpoint ) 

On Sun Sep 21 2014 23:36:04 GMT+0100 (BST), Paul Johnson wrote:
 Along with this, I really hope renderers start computing surface=* and
 toll=* values for ALL ways.  I say this since surface=asphalt,
 highway=cyclway is an exceptionally rare combination in the midwestern US,
 but highway=cycleway, surface=gravel, toll=yes is not.
 
 On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Pee Wee piewi...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  -1
 
  A renderer/router is perfectly capable of deciding what he thinks is
  paved/unpaved. He can decide whether he calls gravel / fine_gravel paved or
  unpaved. Do not leave the decision paved/unpaved  up to the mapper. Map
  what you see. As you may have guessed I prefer surface=asphalt over
  surface=paved since the last one could mean that it is gravel.
 
  Cheers
  PeeWee32
 
  2014-09-21 2:49 GMT+02:00 David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net:
 
 
  yes, agree strongly. Surface= is a good tag, provides important info but
  it is far too fine grained. Someone setting up a route cannot be
  expected to sift through all the possible values.
 
  Similarly, we may well have a chance to get the renderers to respect a
  clear, on/off tag like the proposed and show it on the maps too.
 
  I see no problem with both tags being used.
 
  I think sometimes we put too much detail in the database and risk making
  the data unusable because of that. Mention making the data usable, we
  see charges of tagging for the renderer. But this is important, I have
  detailed life threatening issues resulting from unclear maps. This
  proposal will provide valuable, dare I say usable info for consumers !
 
  David
 
  On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 23:42 +0200, Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote:
   Hello all,
  
   I've posted the below message on the forum, and have been directed
   from there to this mailing list, thus re-posting it.
  
   Idea
  
   I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and
   probably other types of elements) official. Taginfo for paved:
   http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/paved#values
  
   The above shows that the key is already being used, but the Wiki
   doesn't describe this key, instead redirecting Key:paved to the
   article about Key:surface.
  
   Rationale
  
   Currently, the surface key is being used as a way of saying that a
   given highway is paved or unpaved, but often the value for the surface
   key is not a generic paved or unpaved, but a specific surface type is
   given.This is of course very useful for describing the particular
   surface type a given highway has. However, in some cases, a simple
   information on just whether a highway is paved or not, would be very
   useful. One such case would be navigation software – if a user chooses
   to avoid unpaved roads, the software can check the value of the
   surface key, but in practice most (all?) of the navigation software
   only checks for a subset of all the possible values the surface key
   can have. This leads to incorrect (in terms of what the user expects)
   navigation when, for example, the surface is set to some value that
   describes an unpaved road, not recognized by the navigation software –
   if the software assumes that all highways are paved, unless explicitly
   stated otherwise (by recognized values of known keys), then, in
   consequence, it assumes that the road in question is paved.
  
   If the paved key was widely used, then the navigation software would
   have a simple and clear way of checking whether a given road is paved
   or not. The default value of the paved key for highways could be yes,
   so that it would be consistent with the assumption that highways in
   general are paved.
  
   I don't mean that we should stop using the paved and unpaved values
   for the surface key – I'm sure those generic values are useful in some
   cases. However, using the paved key would be also very useful. Also,
   the surface=paved could also implicate paved=yes and similarly
   surface=unpaved could implicate paved=no, so that duplication of the
   information could be avoided when the generic paved and unpaved values
   are set for the surface key.
  
   I believe that adding an article for the paved key to the Wiki would
   encourage people to use this tag, and navigation software makers to
   implement support for it in their applications.
  
   What do you think about that?
  
  
  
   Regards,
  
   Tomek
  
   ___
   Tagging mailing list
   Tagging@openstreetmap.org
   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 
 
 
  --
  Verbeter de wereld. Word mapper voor Openstreetmap
  http://www.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] University accommodation (was Re: Future proposal - RFC - amenity=dormitory)

2014-09-20 Thread phil
Students accommodation is neither tourism or guesthouse,  I would have gone for 
hall_of_residence. 

Phil (trigpoint )

On Sat Sep 20 2014 14:46:17 GMT+0100 (BST), sabas88 wrote:
 On 19 Sep 2014 16:54, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
 
  On 19.09.2014 14:22 Dan S wrote:
for buildings:   building=residential + residential=university +
 operator=*
   OR
for sites:   landuse=residential + residential=university + operator=*
  
   Note that the same scheme seems to me to work well for building and for
 landuse.
  
   I thought this had been discussed on tagging recently, but I can't
   find it, all I can find is the RFC for amenity=dormitory, currently
   used 263 times. (I will add that dormitory is certainly a little odd
   from a British English point of view, notwithstanding the comments
   already made to the RFC.)
 
  That proposal now suggests amenity=student_accommodation, precisely
  because of the oddness involved with the term dormitory.
 
  Personally, I prefer using the amenity key rather than building or
  landuse. Landuse lacks the implication that this is one distinct
  facility, and building values are not supposed to represent usage, but
  how the building is built.
 
 +1
 I tagged some student residences as tourism=guest_house previously, but
 they aren't buildings (some are apartments inside buildings, but owned by
 the local government agency for student services).
 
 Stefano
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] University accommodation (was Re: Future proposal - RFC - amenity=dormitory)

2014-09-20 Thread phil
Dormitories are rooms with multiple beds, usually bunk beds and associated with 
youth hostels,  certainly not suitable for student accommodation where there is 
typically one student in a room, maybe two but they are certainly not 
dormitories. 

Phil (trigpoint )

On Sat Sep 20 2014 23:12:24 GMT+0100 (BST), Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
 On 9/20/14, Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote:
  2014-09-19 15:52 GMT+01:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de:
  I still prefer (d) though if building=dormitory becomes widely
  accepted then I guess I shall have to swallow that loss for British
  english!
 
 Wouldn't be the first time if ever:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dsoccer
 
 That said, to me dormitories may also apply to other institutionalized
 housing such as housing for staff of a manufacturing plant. Although I
 admit that dormitories are primarily for students in my understanding.
 This ambiguity can be resolved by careful definition in the Wiki if
 ever people accept *=dormitory.
 
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] interpolated housenumbers on single objects

2014-08-20 Thread phil


On Wed Aug 20 2014 15:27:06 GMT+0100 (BST), Janko Mihelić wrote:
 I'm trying to find a way to photograph sideways from my bike and send
 photos to Mapillary. The day should be shiny with a lot of light so I don't
 have to go to slow, and the camera should be mounted just right so I don't
 lose too much numbers.
 Then when the photos are on Mapillary, anyone can map the address numbers
 in them (and shops and everything else).

Three more cameras and then you have an openstreetview.

Cool.

Phil (trigpoint )


 
 Janko
 
 
 2014-08-20 14:19 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch:
 
  IMHO mapping house numbers while on a bicycle is one of those things
  that simply doesn't really work, contrary to other things that work well
  (road signs etc). Not that it couldn't be done, but the technical effort
  required to do so is significant (aka in the direction of googles
  streetview tricycle) and you still end up with having to post process,
  which again takes more time than doing it properly (at 1st glance
  slower) in the fist place.
 
  Simon
 
 
  Am 20.08.2014 13:52, schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
   On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, Simon Poole wrote:
   Am 20.08.2014 12:11, schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
   ... lots of stuff from past experiences ...
  
   There is no reason not to immediately enter the address data, preferably
   as entrance nodes if the building outlines exist, if they don't, placing
   an address node at an appropriate place is far easier if you are
   actually standing/walking past the building in question.
  
   All the address surveying I've done in the last couple of months has
   time wise been dominated by the time it takes to walk from building to
   building.
  
   Nice, but how would you do positioning of such nodes while cycling past
   the buildings? :-)
  
   I could make only trivial notes (to a draft SMS to be exact but that
   won't work with too fancy phones with touch keyboards though ;-)) that
   heavily depended near-term memory because the time available to mark
   individual address (or entrance) is very limited. Also, almost no time is
   wasted while moving from address to another. I was rather happy to
   have occassionally a short break in sequence to catch up/relax (or could
   use even higher speed, i.e., collect more addresses per time unit).
  
  
  
  
   ___
   Tagging mailing list
   Tagging@openstreetmap.org
   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
  
 
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - nudism

2014-08-19 Thread phil
Naturism is the preferred term for nudism, as naturist is the preferred term 
for a nudist.

Nudust/nudism are not normally used terms for clubs or beaches.

The proposal should be changed to Naturism.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Tue Aug 19 2014 00:18:04 GMT+0100 (BST), John Packer wrote:
 Heiko,
 
 You added the key naturism=* to the proposal.
 Is this also being voted on, or is the proposal just mentioning there are
 some uses of this other key ?
 
 
 2014-08-18 20:08 GMT-03:00 Heiko Wöhrle m...@heikowoehrle.de:
 
   Hi everybody,
 
  i'd like to readdress an old draft from Xan, that has never been voted but 
  is nevertheless in use.
 
  Please feel free to comment the slightly changed proposal:
  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Nudism
 
  Best regards,
  Heiko
 
 
  ___
  Tagging mailing list
  Tagging@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
 


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - nudism

2014-08-19 Thread phil
The usual english term applied to beaches is 'clothing optional'.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Aug 19 2014 11:54:21 GMT+0100 (BST), Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 
  Am 19.08.2014 09:37, schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
  
   
  Is it reasonable to define that it defaults to no? I am worried about 
  another obvious tag (nudism=no) appearing everywhere.
 
 
 this is entirely dependent on the culture, but I agree that in the region I 
 map nudism=no can safely be assumed to be the default. 
 
 Maybe a more generic tag like dress_code would also catch these places? This 
 was already proposed some time ago IIRR. Besides restaurants or beaches the 
 dress code tag might also apply to other places, eg in Italy for most 
 religious places you are expected to have your shoulders covered and shorts 
 are often not allowed (eg monasteries and churches).
 
 It could also be interesting sometimes if nudism is obligatory or clothing is 
 admitted as well 
 
 
 cheers,
 Marti

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Synonymous values in the shop key

2014-08-18 Thread phil
cuisine = crisps in a pub :)

The nearest in English for gelateria is ice cream parlour.

Phil (trigpoint )

On Mon Aug 18 2014 14:00:07 GMT+0100 (BST), Simone Saviolo wrote:
 2014-08-18 13:41 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
 
  I'm not sure what is a gelateria.
  Couldn't this be tagged simply with amenity=cafe + cuisine=ice_cream ?
 
 
 Pretty much the same way as a pub could be tagged amenity=restaurant +
 cuisine=burgers + alcohol=yes.
 
 Regards,
 
 Simone


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Vending: Cards for Prepaid mobile phone

2014-06-28 Thread phil
I agree with Martin,  we should avoid the detail of how the topup is applied 
and would go for the British term topup, rather than credit.  Credit has 
implications of borrowing money.

Shops and filling stations will sell topups for other things, as well as mobile 
phones,  such as gas and electricity. Mobile phone topups can often be bought 
from ATMs too. Not 100%  sure,  but I may have already tagged this. 

I would propose that we use the following tags on shops/filling stations /ATMs 
and other places I haven't thought of.

topup =mobile_phone  
tooup=gas
topup=electric

Phil (trigpoint)

 

On Fri Jun 27 2014 19:43:34 GMT+0100 (BST), Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
 
 
  Am 27/giu/2014 um 20:20 schrieb Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de:
  
  in a retail store by purchasing a top-up or refill card at retail. 
  These cards are stamped with a unique code (often under a scratch-off 
  panel) which must be entered into the phone in order to add the credit onto 
  the balance.
 
 
 I probably wouldn't focus on the material details which may vary from country 
 to country and rather then card or voucher would opt for credit, eg in 
 Italy there are dedicated machines that print the code on the fly.
 
 cheers,
 Martin
 ___
 Tagging mailing list
 Tagging@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


Re: [Tagging] Signal-controlled roundabouts

2014-06-17 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2014-06-17 16:43 +0200]:
 you can find big roundabouts with traffic lights in most of the big
 European cities, another reason (besides the controlling the motorized
 traffic) is to let pedestrians (and sometimes cyclists) cross.

I know of a traffic circle (here: http://osm.org/go/ZZd4GvISp--) that has
a traffic light on the non-freeway entrance.  The light stops entrants to
the circle from that direction when there's too much of a queue on the
freeway offramp.  I'd still consider it a roundabout, though.

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


Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

2013-08-13 Thread Phil! Gold
* Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at [2013-08-09 07:28 +0200]:
 I also dislike the suggested special member roles: The positioning
 of the label depends on the font size, the free space, the map
 section and zoom level etc. and should therefore be determined by
 the renderer.

I tend to think of label nodes as hints for the renderer that provide it
with information it cannot derive on its own.  The canonical example, I
think, is a town where it makes sense to place the label over the town
center, which residents of the place can usually identify easily, but
which may not necessarily match the geometric center (or centroid) of the
town's border.

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


Re: [Tagging] railway=abandoned + highway=cycleway (was: [OSM-talk-be] Abandoned Railways / cycleways)

2013-04-19 Thread Phil! Gold
* Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com [2013-04-20 00:25 +1000]:
 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
   a) If the trail meanders a little from side to side (where the old
  railway would have just gone straight), I match the way to the trail
  and trust that the semantics of this used to be a railway remain
  intact.
 
 Interesting. I can't think of any around here that do that - must be a
 cultural thing.

I don't think I've seen it all that much, but the College Park Trolley
Trail outside Washington DC is an example: http://osm.org/go/ZZc1mvedD- .
The trolley went straight, but the trail, which is (last I saw it) largely
unpaved and really more for foot traffic than bikes[0], wanders a lot more
from side to side than the rails did.

[0] So I'm not sure I understand its current tagging, but it's been a
while since I was there in person, so maybe they've made it more
bike-amenable.

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


Re: [Tagging] railway=abandoned + highway=cycleway (was: [OSM-talk-be] Abandoned Railways / cycleways)

2013-04-18 Thread Phil! Gold
* Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com [2013-04-19 01:22 +1000]:
 1) A single way: railway=abandoned | highway=cycleway | name=Blah Rail
 Trail | surface=unpaved (usually with a cycle route relation as well)

This is basically how I tag them, with the following additions:

 a) If the trail meanders a little from side to side (where the old
railway would have just gone straight), I match the way to the trail
and trust that the semantics of this used to be a railway remain
intact.

 b) If the trail diverges significantly from the old railway (to take a
detour or something similar), I make a separate ways for the trail and
old railway.  An example is http://osm.org/go/ZZfEh16SR-- , where the
trail was diverted to better cross the road or
http://osm.org/go/ZZfEbCqE , where a mall was built in the path of the
old railway.

 c) If there are still rails present, even if they definitely qualify as
railway=abandoned, I use two ways, like http://osm.org/go/ZcJqM34YW-
(not my work, but a decent example).

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


Re: [Tagging] railway=abandoned + highway=cycleway

2013-04-18 Thread Phil! Gold
* Mike N nice...@att.net [2013-04-18 12:56 -0400]:
 However I have learned that the abandoned rail lines should not be
 removed - they magically regrow, so I allow them to remain as they go
 through hillsides which have long been bulldozed down and through blocks
 of buildings which have long since replaced the railway.

If there's still a trace of the railway left, even if only in a hedge or
property line, I'll leave the abandoned railway.  If nothing remains (as
in http://osm.org/go/ZZfEbI0G , where the land was bulldozed and a mall
built), I'll retag the way railway=dismantled, which seems to be the
accepted tag for such things.  It doesn't show up on the main map, but
it's still there for specialty maps and railfans.

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


Re: [Tagging] Power proposals

2013-03-14 Thread Phil! Gold
* François Lacombe francois.laco...@telecom-bretagne.eu [2013-03-14 18:52 
+0100]:
 Foremost, areas must reflect land occupation. If 2 different operators'
 plants are contiguous in reality then areas must be contiguous too.
 
 Do you have any example which can illustrate such situation in the wiki?

I know of a couple.

In Maryland, the Dickerson Generating Station, which is privately owned
and uses coal and oil is directly adjacent to the Montgomery County
Resource Facility, which is owned by the state and burns trash.

 OSM: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.20497lon=-77.45533zoom=15layers=M
 Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickerson_Generating_Station

The reverse situation gould, I guess, be illustrated with something like
Maryland's Chalk Point Generating Station, where there are multiple
generators some distance away from each other.  It's pretty clear in this
case, though, that they're all part of the same facility, so I don't know
how illustrative it might be as an example.

 OSM: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.55211lon=-76.69028zoom=15layers=M
 Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalk_Point_Generating_Station

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


Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - age groups in schools

2012-11-28 Thread Phil! Gold
* Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.is [2012-11-25 00:08 +]:
 The RFC process has started for my proposal to tag the age groups
 schools offer education for. More information is on the wiki page.
 
 The proposal is at
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/age_group .

I happen to think the existing ISCED proposal is easy to use and provides
more relevant information than the age groups proposal.

  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ISCED

I've been using it for a while now as I tag schools.

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


Re: [Tagging] Tag ref on motorway_link

2012-10-30 Thread Phil! Gold
* Andrew Errington erringt...@gmail.com [2012-10-24 14:49 +0900]:
 On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com wrote:
  using something like ref:unsigned=OH 315C to mean this road is part of
  Ohio state route 315C but the signs don't say so sounds perfectly sane to
  me.
 
 It doesn't sound sane to me.  Either the road has the reference, or it
 does not.  I don't think it's relevant whether it's included on a sign
 or not.

I think it's incredibly relevant whether it's included on the sign.  I
suspect that the vast majority of people who use maps with reference
numbers on them use those maps for navigation.  I think such people would
primarily be interested in signed reference numbers, because it's pretty
hard to navigate by unsigned ones.  Thus, there should be some difference
in the tagging of signed and unsigned reference numbers.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Real programmers can write assembly code in any language.   :-)
   -- Larry Wall

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


Re: [Tagging] name of river/admin area

2012-09-04 Thread Phil! Gold
* David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com [2012-09-03 18:51 -0400]:
 In my part of the US, nearly every river is of the form the X River and I
 would expect to see it that way on maps, leaving out the the which is
 used in forming sentences but not generally considered part of the name.
 In Michigan there's the River Raisin for some reason, and I would expect to
 see those two words in that order on maps.  Then there are rivers so large
 and famous they are almost geographical features apart from mere rivers:
 The Amazon, The Nile, The Thames, The Hudson, The Mississippi… the next
 that comes to mind for me is The Potomac, but now we've probably crossed
 that blurry line where the Potomac River sounds more appropriate.

I live near the Potomac River, and I think people here mentally think of
River as part of its name, even if sometimes (maybe a little more than
half the time) it gets dropped for brevity.  A similar thing happens with
road names: I live near the intersection of Scotts Level Road and Old
Court Road, people understand what you mean if you say, Take Old Court to
Scotts Level,[0] but the full names of the roads do have the word Road
in them.

I fully agree that there's no way to set a global standard; it should be
left to the locals, who know the features best.


[0] Because the names are still unambiguous.  The next larger road is
Reisterstown Road, which goes to the town of Reisterstown.  Most
people will refer to it as Reisterstown Road even if they drop the
Road from other road names, since Reisterstown by itself refers
more commonly to the town, not the road.

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


Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Rails with trails

2012-07-03 Thread Phil! Gold
* Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com [2012-07-03 17:22 +1000]:
 For the original question of how to tag a rail with trail (I've also
 heard the term railside trail), is it not sufficient to simply map
 the two ways separately? Example here:
 http://osm.org/go/uG4lkKxG?layers=C

As I understand it, NE2 was looking for a tagging scheme that would allow
for searches to find trails on a railway grade.  Searching for rail trails
is obviously easy; just look for railway=abandoned with a relevant
highway= tag.  But as things stand now, searching for railside trails is
hard; you have to find a pair of ways, one tagged highway= and the other
tagged railway=, that are roughly parallel to each other.  That's a very
complicated search to make, even working from a geodatabase.  Adding
another tag to the trails would make such searches much more feasible.

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


Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Rails with trails

2012-07-03 Thread Phil! Gold
* SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk [2012-07-03 13:37 +0100]:
 Phil! Gold wrote:
 As I understand it, NE2 was looking for a tagging scheme that
 would allow for searches to find trails on a railway grade.
 
 That might not have the desired effect in all cases:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.068937lon=-4.077433zoom=18layers=C

I would submit that an explicit tagging scheme such as the one NE2
suggests would handle that case quite well, because most people would not
tag the Llanberis Path as a rail trail.

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


Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Rails with trails

2012-06-28 Thread Phil! Gold
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2012-06-27 12:59 -0400]:
 But another popular kind of rail trail, a rail with trail, cannot
 be found in this manner.
[snip]
 Does anyone have any ideas for tagging? The simplest would be
 something like rail_with_trail=yes or maybe railway=adjacent.

Either of those would work.  Between those two, I'm inclined toward
railway=adjacent so the search would be something like
highway=(path|footway|cycleway) and railway=(abandoned|adjacent).

Another possibility would be to use rail_trail=yes, which would apply to
any rail trail.  It would be implied by a non-motor-vehicle highway= tag
and railway=abandoned, but could always be specified to be unambiguous.

___
Talk-us mailing list
talk...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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


Re: [Tagging] Turning circle with island or turning loop (was Re: (Mini)Roundabout: examples

2012-05-16 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com [2012-05-15 15:23 +0200]:
 I added highway=turning_loop to the last example and noted, that it is
 under discussion right now.
 
 It would really help a lot if the major renderers would support this,
 as well as junction=roundabout on a single node. Otherwise I'm afraid
 the acceptance would be rather low.

When I get a chance, I'll work on a patch to the main stylesheet.  I'm in
the middle of importing a planet file at the moment, so I can't do any
rendering work until that completes (and I don't know how long it'll take;
I had to move from small, fast disks to larger, slower ones so I'm
attempting a full-planet import rather than the US extract I'd been
using, which means I have no idea how long it'll take).

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
   -- E. Rutherford
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Turning circle with island or turning loop (was Re: (Mini)Roundabout: examples

2012-05-15 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com [2012-05-15 14:11 +0200]:
 Now the only issue remaining is: how? Right now I see two solutions:
 1) highway=turning_circle and turning_circle=island or traffic_calming=island
 2) new tag like e.g. highway=turning_loop
[snip]
 I would really like to get more opinions from the people using
 turning_circle right now for places with islands.

I usually map loops explicitly, but I have occasionally tagged such places
as highway=turning_circle when I wanted to indicate that there was
something there, but didn't want to spend the time drawing a bunch of
loops.  In such cases, I've used turning_circle, because it seemed the
least-incorrect tag available.

I think I'd prefer highway=turning_loop.  It seems simpler to use one tag
rather than two, since in this case, you could argue that a
turning-area-with-an-island is not really a subtype of a
turning-area-without-an-island.  (Though you could address that by saying
that the two cases are highway=turning_circle, turning_circle=island and
highway=turning_circle, turning_circle=open, with the assumption that a
missing turning_circle tag implies turning_circle=open.)  I don't think it
would be too hard to add a rendering for highway=turning_loop, so if it
gets general approval and no one else beats me to it, I'll try to put
together a patch against the main rendering for it.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
 o   \ o /  _ o __|\ / |__o _  \ o /   o  
/|\| /\   ___\o   \o|o/o/__   /\ |/|\
/ \   / \   | \  /)  |( \  /o\  / )|  (\  / |   / \   / \ 
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] OSMI layers in JOSM

2012-04-29 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com [2012-04-25 10:28 +0200]:
 I'm trying to view the OSMI layers in JOSM. The all-knowing,
 all-seeing trash heap pointed me to this (german) article:
 http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=9315
 
 There it is recommended to use the following link in JOSM:
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/view/routing/wxs?REQUEST=GetMapSERVICE=wmsVERSION=1.1.1FORMAT=image/pngSRS=EPSG:4326STYLES=LAYERS=unconnected_minor1,unconnected_minor2,unconnected_minor5,unconnected_major1,unconnected_major2,unconnected_major5;
 
 This works like a charm, but with the limitations, that one has to
 adjust the resolution manually. Also I seem to be unable to get this
 layer transparent. In the article one wrote to add TRANSPARENT=TRUE to
 the link, but I can't get this working.

Not sure tagging@ is the best list for this, but...

Here's what I use for my OSM Inspector WTFE view:


wms:http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/views/wtfe/wxs?FORMAT=image/pngtransparent=trueVERSION=1.1.1SERVICE=WMSREQUEST=GetMapLayers=wtfe_line_created,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_point_modified,overview_low,overviewSRS={proj}WIDTH={width}HEIGHT={height}BBOX={bbox}

In particular, my URL contains /osmi/views/, while yous has
/osmi/view/.  That might be a source of problems.

 Has anyone a hint for me how to get this layer transparent? Is there
 any possibility to autoadjust the resolution?

You can't automatically adjust the resolution, but you can right-click on
the layer in the Layers window and select Change resolution.  What I
often do is work at two (or sometimes three) specific resolutions, set two
layers of the same WMS to the two different resolutions, and switch
between them with Zoom to native resolution from the same right-click
menu.

As the mapping resources I use become more available in either tiles or
AcGIS REST (which I can turn into tiles with tilestache), I've been
transitioning more to using tiled backgrounds, which do change resolutions
automatically (though there are still glitches there).

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
If there's nothing wrong with me, there must be something wrong with the
universe.
   -- Beverly Crusher (Star Trek)
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

2012-04-12 Thread phil
That was my point, any footpath or cycleway following a motorway should be 
treated as a separate way.

After more careful thought, the only UK instance of a path following a 
motorway, that I am aware of, is the old Severn bridge, and they are on 
different decks.

Phil


On 12/04/2012 14:11 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

Am 12. April 2012 08:33 schrieb Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
 What are you asking? A sidewalk is almost always a separate physical way
 (if not, it's a shoulder, except on minor urban streets with flush
 sidewalks and no curb).

 In the Netherlands I have sometimes seen cycleways paralleling
 motorways, some 20-30 metres away, and on long estuary bridges there is
 often a cycleway but beyond that motorways never have a sidewalk.


I guess that in all of these Dutch cases there will be a guard rail
separating the cycleway from the motorway, so there is really no doubt
these should be mapped distinctly. On the other hand I wouldn't call
this a sidewalk.

cheers,
Martin

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


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


Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

2012-04-11 Thread phil
I am wondering what happens where there are no crossings, or outside of built 
up areas where there are no sidewalks.

Phil


On 11/04/2012 11:32 John Sturdy wrote:

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
 Am 10. April 2012 22:01 schrieb Komяpa m...@komzpa.net:
 It's possible to have pedestrian routing without separate ways for
 sidewalks, but it's nicer when it shows you where you can actually
 cross the road.
 The thing is that you can generally cross any road at any spot, as
 long it is not impossible or too dangerous ;-), i.e. in most of the
 cases you can simply cross the road if your destination is right on
 the other side for example.

I think that in some countries this is illegal.

 With explicit footways your router will
 send you to the next crossing and tell you to cross the road there and
 then come back.

This is probably useful information for blind people.

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


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


Re: [Tagging] Extension of the payment:* keys

2012-04-11 Thread phil
You also need:
payment:debit_cards for shops such as aldi and lidl.

Phil


On 11/04/2012 11:09 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

Am 10. April 2012 20:55 schrieb John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com:
 (1) a payment:cards key, intended specifically for use with the
 value no, to indicate that a shop / pub / whatever doesn't take
 electronic payment;


the mostly used keys are:
payment:credit_cards
payment:account_cards


 (2) a payment:other key, intended specifically for use with the
 value no, to indicate that a shop / pub / whatever takes only the
 forms of payment that have been listed with other keys.


you could also tag:

payment:cash=only

and no other key would be needed.

cheers,
Martin

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


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


Re: [Tagging] Extension of the payment:* keys

2012-04-11 Thread phil
I should add that the most useful key would be:
cards_accepted:amex

As a general rule, everywhere accepts debit cards, non-foodie pubs are cash 
only.

The helpful tag would be amex as so few places accept it, and all of my 
business expenses should be on my corporate amex card, usual routine is to walk 
in to several resturants and walk out again, until I find one that will take it.

Phil


On 11/04/2012 13:35 p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:

Debit cards are accepted in most shops, but not usually accepted in pubs.
The point I was making is that Aldi and Lidl accept debit cards but not credit 
cards.

Phil


On 11/04/2012 13:10 Simone Saviolo wrote:

2012/4/11 p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
 You also need:

 payment:debit_cards for shops such as aldi and lidl.

Would you mind to clarify that? Debit cards
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debit_card) are accepted in most shops,
not only Lidl. I'm not sure I understood what you meant.

Thanks,

Simone

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




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


Re: [Tagging] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes

2012-03-14 Thread Phil! Gold
* Richard Weait rich...@weait.com [2012-03-13 10:30 -0400]:
 adding a tag for banner=Alternate/Business/Truck is my least-favourite
 option of those above.

Why?

 increasing specificity on the network tag like network=US:US:Alt
 follows the original intent of the network tag.  It also offers the
 least surprise to naive consumers of the data.

So you get the reverse questions from NE2.  };  We (so far) mostly use
the network tag as a hierarchy of ownership, not containment: the US:MD
network is for Maryland's roads and Maryland is in the US, but its roads
are not members of the US network.  Does it make sense to double up on
the meanings of network tags, so that, say, US:NJ:Business would be a
business route that's a member of the New Jersey state highway network,
but US:NJ:CR would be a county road that's not a member of the state
network?  Is it still easier for data consumers if they have to
differentiate between those two cases?

Compared to the scenario where we add a modifier tag for special routes,
data consumers already have to consider two tags to work with route
relations.  Would adding a third make a difference?

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Frederick!  He's eating a screw!
   -- Eat-Man '98
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes

2012-03-13 Thread Phil! Gold
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2012-03-11 22:30 -0400]:
 It also makes the most sense to put it in the ref tag. Otherwise
 there's inconsistency between an alternate signed as US 1 Alternate
 and one signed as US 1A (with the suffix in the shield). In each
 case I'll also use the modifier tag (modifier=Alternate/A).

But US 1A and US 1 Alternate are signed quite differently.  From the
perspective of a driver on the road, the US 1 Alternate signing is much
more obviously a variant route of US 1.  (US 1A even has its/their own
page on Wikipedia, while the US 1 Alternates are listed with the other
special routes on the Bannered routes of US 1 page.  Not that Wikipedia
dictates our actions, but it's indicative of other people's thinking on
the matter.)

Note that I'm not strictly disagreeing with you.  I do personally like the
separate network, ref, modifier tagging approach a little more than the
others, but I also don't consider myself to have that extensive an
understanding of road networks, either in the US or worldwide.  I mostly
want to see what sort of community consensus there is here, so the data
consumer I'm working on will work in a reasonable way.  I'd hoped to have
feedback from several people, but since you're the only person who's
responded so far, you get all the questions.  :|

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
If I'm drunk and tell you to grab my wrist, don't.
   -- Keith Engle, Aikido blackbelt
 --- --

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


[Tagging] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes

2012-03-11 Thread Phil! Gold
I'd like to solicit some thoughts on the tagging for special routes
(commonly known as bannered routes)[0].  In route relations, it's
customary to separate the network and the reference number.  How do or
should special routes fit into that?

I'm torn between three views and I'm not sure which of them is the best
fit for the way people think about special routes in a general sense.

Let's consider one of US Route 1's alternate routes[1].  We can
think of it as:

 * An independent route within the US Highway system whose reference
   number happens to be alphanumeric.
   network=US:US
   ref=1 Alternate  (but people might use ref=1 Alt, because that's what's
 on some of the signs)

 * A route within the subset of the US Highway system consisting of
   alternate routes:
   network=US:US:Alternate
   ref=1

 * A route related to the main US Route 1, but with an additional tag
   indicating that it's a bannered offshoot:
   network=US:US
   ref=1
   banner=Alternate

I'm partial to the idea of separating the banner from the reference
number, but I'm not sure how any of these ideas mesh with the
understandings of people with more experience with road networks than I
have.

tagging@ is included because I'm not sure how global a practice this sort
of thing is, even though it's quite common in the US.

  [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_route
  [1]: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bannered_routes_of_U.S._Route_1#Alternate_routes

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Wow, I'm being shot at from both sides.  That means I *must* be right.
:-)
   -- Larry Wall
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Voting for Relation type=waterway

2012-02-21 Thread Phil! Gold
* John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com [2012-02-19 14:13 -0600]:
 I take it, then, that there are some watercourses tagged as streams, but
 named XXX River, and there are some watercourses tagged as rivers, but
 named XXX Stream or XXX Creek?

It's what I've done, based on my understanding of the tag documentations
in the wiki.  So I've done things like tagging the headwaters of the
Potomac River[0] as waterway=stream and tagging the quite broad Willis
Creek[1] as waterway=river.

[0] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.20647lon=-79.47779zoom=16layers=M
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.6956lon=-78.7731zoom=14layers=M

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
NO COMPILER DETECTED ERRORS.
   -- VM/CMS VS/PASCAL compiler message indicating
  sucessful compilation
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] RFC: place=neighbourhood

2011-08-31 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2011-08-30 17:01 +0200]:
 Waiting for comments especially for the aspect, that you could apply
 this tag to all kind of settlement fractions including commercial and
 industrial (and of course mixed) areas. I guess the wording
 neighbourhood does suggest other.

The proposed semantics exactly match a number of areas I've mapped in my
area, which makes me happy with it.  (e.g. a planned community that is
part of an unincorporated area (that I've tagged place=village, I believe)
where the planned community comprises several separate, named residential
areas plus a couple recreation areas and a retail area.)

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
I object to doing things that computers can do.
   -- Olin Shivers
 --- --

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


[Tagging] Use of place=suburb (was Re: RFC: place=neighbourhood)

2011-08-31 Thread Phil! Gold
* Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2011-08-31 14:33 +0200]:
 No, suburb is actually not necessarily outside the city (in OSM), it
 is used for central districts as well.

I've often been confused by the suburb tag and maybe someone can clear it
up for me.

The tags place=city, place=town, place=village, and place=hamlet are
mutually exclusive; if a spot is in a place=village, then it's not in an
adjacent place=town.  It seems to be that place=suburb is regarded as
hierarchically below place=city (at least); if a spot is in a
place=suburb, it could also be in a place=city.  Is that a correct
understanding of the tag's usage?  Could the proposed place=neighbourhood
tag within a place=town or place=village be analogous to place=suburb
within a place=city?  (Assuming I'm correct here, I guess
place=neighbourhood would strictly be hierarchically below place=suburb,
so a suburb could comprise more than one neighborhood.)

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
dark eat Depends: cook | eat-out.
   But eat-out is non-free so that's out.
   And cook Recommends: clean-pans.
   -- Seen on #debian
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] landuse=residential and named residential areas which belong together (neighbourhoods/subdivisions?)

2011-08-31 Thread Phil! Gold
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2011-08-31 08:50 -0400]:
 There's a third possibility - the unincorporated suburb or exurb
 that nevertheless has a defined boundary, since it's planned or
 controlled by one company. I think Columbia, Maryland is this way

It is.  Additionally, Columbia could benefit a lot from the proposed
place=neighbourhood tag, because it's composed of several (twelve, I
think) separate villages, each of which has its own village center with
retail, commercial, and recreational facilities to serve the surrounding
residences.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
⊦:.α,β∈1.⊃:α∩β=Λ.≡.α∪β∈2
   -- Theorem 54.43 from _Principia Mathematica_,
  which proves that 1+1=2
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Tags for neighborhoods / subdivisions

2011-05-13 Thread Phil! Gold
* Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com [2011-05-10 23:27 -0400]:
 Either way I think we need to allow for admin_level or something
 similar to permit nesting of neighborhoods.

I know, let's use relations!  (Now I have two problems...)

But seriously, what about a very simple contains relation?  A given
relation would have one member (node or way) with role parent and one or
more members (nodes or ways) with role child.  This would solve the
hierarchy problem without assigning arbitrary numbers.  A given entity
could, of course, be a child in more than one relation, if a neighborhood
spanned more than one containing place.

I do think that this sort of thing should only be used if spatial
relationships don't work: i.e. one or both related entities are nodes.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Lensmen eat Jedi for breakfast.
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalks as separate ways

2011-04-03 Thread Phil! Gold
* Ed Hillsman ehills...@tampabay.rr.com [2011-04-02 22:26 -0400]:
 With regard to routing, sidewalks on college campuses, in parks, and
 in cemeteries may be interior to a large area bounded by streets,
 and as a result some may not have an associated street to use for a
 name.

I don't think those would qualify as sidewalks for purposes of this
discussion, since the two proposals both only consider pedestrian walkways
that run along and adjacent to roads.  If a walkway doesn't have those
characteristics, it would just get tagged as highway=footway (probably
with surface=paved), and given a name= only if it has its own, distinct,
name.

 Would it work to add a tag associated_street and then simply list the
 name of the street? For example, highway=footway,
 associated_street=East Fowler Avenue.

This might not be a bad idea.  It makes the association without using a
relation (about which there have been concerns raised regarding the
complexity of handling, both for mappers and data consumers).

 A value of none could be coded if the sidewalk does not parallel a
 street.

I think that the absence of the tag could reasonably be assumed to be
equivalent to no associated street but, like oneway=no, it doesn't hurt
to have an explicit value for that case.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight -- it's not just a good idea, it's the
law!
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalk

2011-03-21 Thread Phil! Gold
* M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2011-03-21 18:03 +0100]:
 The main purpose of detailing sidewalks is IMHO to be able to add
 further details, which might be interesting for the users of the
 sidewalk.

I think that one very good reason for adding sidewalks is simply to allow
better routing for foot traffic.  A great many sidewalks run parallel to
roads without any complicating obstacles or barriers; for those, not only
is this proposal completely sufficient, but it is gives mappers a very
simple way to map them.

 All of these details are not possible to enter following this
 proposal. As soon as you tried to enter more detail (using complicated
 tags like sidewalk:width:right=0.7m) you will have to split the
 street-highway even if it is not concerned itself, because of surface
 changes or width changes on one of the sidewalks.

I would not support this proposal to the *exclusion* of mapping separate
ways.  Rather, I would support this proposal as the simplest way to add
sidewalk data with the understanding that if a mapper wishes to add
further detail to the sidewalks that they do it via the separate-ways
method.  But I think that a simple tagging approach that covers a great
number of common cases is worth using.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
No cow's like a horse
and no horse like a cow.
That's one similarity
anyhow.
   -- Similarity (Commutative Law), Piet Hein
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Tagging Metropolis

2011-01-19 Thread Phil! Gold
* Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com [2011-01-19 15:17 +1100]:
 I suggest we investigate something like a general prominence=* tag,
 with values of 1-10.

I wouldn't be opposed to this, but I keep thinking a two-tiered system
like the Ranally City Rating System[0] might be a better approach.  You'd
have one axis for general importance, like the Ranally System's numbers,
where 1 corresponds to national or global importance and 4 corresponds to
local importance; and another axis for a place's relative standing within
its region.

  [0]: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Ranally_city_rating_system

As an example, in Maryland we have Washington DC and Baltimore, which have
similar populations and are both at least national-level hubs, but DC is
the more important of the two.

There's some subjectivity in a scheme like this (but no more, I think,
than determining whether a highway is primary, secondary, tertiary,
etc. in most places outside the UK), but the first axis should be
relatively objective and the second axis shouldn't be a problem for people
living in the region to decide on.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
  What is your name, barbarian?
  Who are you calling a barbarian? snarled Hrun.
  That is what I want to know.
   -- _The Color of Magic_, Terry Pratchett
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Paper streets?

2010-10-22 Thread Phil! Gold
* Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net [2010-10-19 15:25 -0400]:
 tiger seems to have spots where there are streets that developers planned
 but never built. i see them from time to time.

The problem there is that proposed roads have been recorded as actual
roads.  If people want to record proposed roads as highway=proposed, I
don't think that's a problem, since they're much less likely to be taken
as actual, usable roads.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
I think that's easier to read.  Pardon me.  Less difficult to read.
   -- Larry Wall
 --- --

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


[Tagging] How can the US get its stuff together? (was Re: Response to A critique of OpenStreetMap)

2010-10-16 Thread Phil! Gold
* Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net [2010-10-14 10:47 -0700]:
 I think you could largely sum up his criticisms in two broad headings:
 
1. US OSM contributors need to get their shit together
2. European maps don't look like American ones

I'm trying to see what sort of consensus exists on some of the issues from
41 latitude's post.  I've sent an email to the talk-us list[0] asking for
feedback and discussion.  I encourage anyone who's interested, particulary
people who map in the US, to contribute to the discussion on that list.

  [0]: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-October/004361.html

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping
tom to install your window blinds.
   -- _Decrypting the Puzzle Palace_, John Barlow
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Layer=* tags disappearing

2010-10-12 Thread Phil! Gold
* M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2010-10-12 18:11 +0200]:
 Layer's range is from -5 to 5.

How true is that these days?  It's still in the JOSM presets, but a) I
don't see any reason in principle that should be true, and my reading of
the Mapnik rendering rules seems to indicate that any number of
(integer-based) levels would be rendered correctly.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
I do not like broccoli, and I haven't liked it since I was a little kid,
and my mother made me eat it, and I'm president of the United States, and
I'm not going to eat any more broccoli.
   -- George Bush
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Relation for saying x is attached to y?

2010-08-30 Thread Phil! Gold
* M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2010-08-30 17:40 +0200]:
 2010/8/30 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
  - these objects express the same thing as that object but in more
  detail (eg, one line representing a pair or more of train lines)
 
 in this actual example you don't need relations but can do as with
 streets (lanes-tag). I'm not sure on the best syntax though: should it
 be tracks=4 or lanes=4? The latter is less correct regarding the
 language but doesn't require additional tags.

There is a proposal for a tracks= tag:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Multiple_Tracks

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
   -- Edward Everett
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Landuse border alignment

2010-05-14 Thread Phil! Gold
* Jonas Minnberg sas...@gmail.com [2010-05-14 16:39 +0200]:
 What about bordering buildings - ie buldings sharing walls but having
 different addresses/uses ? Is it better to draw the as a single area or as
 separate but with shared nodes?

I feel that separate ways that share nodes along the joint wall makes the
most sense from an accuracy standpoint.  It allows you to tag the
appropriate areas with the building's address and type, which can be
useful, since the renderers can color different building types
differently.

I osciallate on how much I do this, though.  For dense commercial/retail
areas, I might make distinct ways for the largest buildings (a supermarket
in a strip mall, for instance) and just a few other ways that encompass
all the smaller buildings; for example: http://osm.org/go/ZcIoRxTbc- .
For residential areas, I often don't even bother with the buildings;
because they're so small, they take a lot of time to make.  There are
examples in the residential areas just east of the shopping center I
linked above.

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
The router thinks it's a printer.
   -- BOFH excuse #118
 --- --

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


Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting

2010-05-14 Thread Phil! Gold
* Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com [2010-05-14 18:29 +0200]:
 If you tag highway=footway with bike=yes then you don't make it
 exclusively for bikes. So if you tag a playground with baby=yes
 shouldn't that just mean that there are some baby specific toys there,
 and baby=no that there aren't any big structures for babies.
 
 Perhaps adding a baby=exclusive?

Could that be unified with other access designations?  'baby=designated'
or 'baby=official'?

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle.

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