On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:53:32PM +0100, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>
> Let's look at the entity relations in play here. Surely a club IS an
> organisation, not a building. The club MAY USE one or more buildings,
> and MAY OWN one or more buildings. A club HAS a contact address, HAS
> members, HAS a
Let's look at the entity relations in play here. Surely a club IS an
organisation, not a building. The club MAY USE one or more buildings,
and MAY OWN one or more buildings. A club HAS a contact address, HAS
members, HAS a "board" etc etc. So following the rules of "one object,
one set of tags",
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 02:13:07PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2014-11-24 13:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. :
>
> >
> > According to the approved
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Club
> > chess has an own club=chess, as has fishing, automobile, hiking - all
> > of which ca
2014-11-24 13:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. :
>
> According to the approved
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Club
> chess has an own club=chess, as has fishing, automobile, hiking - all
> of which can be either leisure type or sport type activities.
>
>
I think "club=automobile" f
sorry, didn't see your email earlier.
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 09:27:03AM +0100, Andreas Goss wrote:
> >The club page seems to suggest
> >that club=sport + sport=cycling type tagging should be used for competitive
> >sports.
>
> Which in my optinion is a bad idea, too. There is really no generel
>
The club page seems to suggest
that club=sport + sport=cycling type tagging should be used for competitive
sports.
Which in my optinion is a bad idea, too. There is really no generel
agreement as far as I know that club=sport is for competitive stuff
only. I also don't think it's a good idea, be
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 tan
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/wi
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.
recompression_chamber=yes/no
To indicate if there is a recompression chamber on-site.
Other possible facilities, are diving schools, int
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 03:42:35PM +0200, Andreas Goss wrote:
> Can you please stop trying to come up with exceptions for the sport= tag?
>
> Just saw this on scuba diving:
>
> > Should be used to mark a place for scuba diving, preferably as an
> attribute of natural=beach, natural=stone natural=
2014-10-21 2:04 GMT+02:00 Dave Swarthout :
> +1 for leisure=scuba_diving_attraction or better yet, leisure=divespot and
> define the attraction or divespot further with subkeys
>
I prefer leisure=divespot or dive_spot (?) or leisure=dive_site
This could still be coupled with tourism=attraction
+1 for leisure=scuba_diving_attraction or better yet, leisure=divespot and
define the attraction or divespot further with subkeys
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Yves wrote:
> Leisure=scuba_diving would be ok to me.
> Let the divers refine the particular attraction according to their
> practice
Leisure=scuba_diving would be ok to me.
Let the divers refine the particular attraction according to their practice.
Le 20 octobre 2014 22:19:14 CEST, Clifford Snow a
écrit :
>On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Janko Mihelić
>wrote:
>
>> What people probably want to tag are waters that are inter
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba
> divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction.
>
I haven't followed this thread but Janko's comment reminded me that of dive
sites that I
Am 20.10.2014 20:37, schrieb Janko Mihelić:
>
> What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to
> scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like
> leisure=scuba_diving_attraction.
.
I beg to differ, there is a fairly wide range of restrictions at least
on inland bodi
2014-10-20 19:16 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss :
> would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell
>> us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in
>> the past 2 days...
>>
>
> Using sport=scuba_diving for a dive spot. That would be like using
> sport=socc
would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell
us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in
the past 2 days...
Using sport=scuba_diving for a dive spot. That would be like using
sport=soccer for a soccer field without using leisure=pitch. And i
2014-10-18 15:42 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss :
> Can you please stop trying to come up with exceptions for the sport= tag?
>
would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell
us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in the
past 2 days...
cheers,
Marti
Can you please stop trying to come up with exceptions for the sport= tag?
Just saw this on scuba diving:
> Should be used to mark a place for scuba diving, preferably as an
attribute of natural=beach, natural=stone natural=cliff or a fitting
segment of a coastline or lake.
> For dive bases o
19 matches
Mail list logo
