Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 17. Aug 2020, at 05:51, Yves  wrote:
> 
> station:type is still available then.


sure, I wrote: 
“ (I am not an expert for aerialway station types, but sooner or later someone 
will come along who is, and even if they decide to use “station” for these 
potential subtypes, it would still be confusing having also an 
aerialway:station with different meaning)”

this includes “station:type” as well.

Call the keys according to what they are about, if you are only interested in 
the position, add this somehow to the key. “Type” has no inherent logics, there 
are always many typologies imaginable.

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Yves]

station:type is still available then.
Yves 

Le 17 août 2020 01:52:12 GMT+02:00, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 a écrit :
>
>
>sent from a phone
>
>> On 17. Aug 2020, at 00:25, Colin Smale  wrote:
>> 
>> Other attributes like the presence of the drive motors, ticket sales etc are 
>> not determinants of the "valley" vs "mountain" labels.
>
>
>I have followed this discussion, my comment was that there may well be other 
>types of these stations, not referring to valley or mountain, but to other 
>properties, and that the distinction top/mid/bottom should better not “occupy” 
>the station type key therefore.
>
>Cheers Martin 
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 17. Aug 2020, at 00:25, Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
> Other attributes like the presence of the drive motors, ticket sales etc are 
> not determinants of the "valley" vs "mountain" labels.


I have followed this discussion, my comment was that there may well be other 
types of these stations, not referring to valley or mountain, but to other 
properties, and that the distinction top/mid/bottom should better not “occupy” 
the station type key therefore.

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-08-17 00:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> sent from a phone 
> 
>> On 16. Aug 2020, at 15:26, dktue  wrote:
> 
>> Ok, then I'm going to edit the wiki [1] now.
>> 
>> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aerialway=station
> 
> sorry for this late comment, but maybe it would be better to use 
> station:position=top/mid (or middle) / bottom 
> 
> reasoning is that aerialway:station might be wanted for subtypes of the 
> stations (I am not an expert for aerialway station types, but sooner or later 
> someone will come along who is, and even if they decide to use "station" for 
> these potential subtypes, it would still be confusing having also an 
> aerialway:station with different meaning)

The OP's intention was to label the "valley station" and "mountain
station" in machine-readable form (a controlled vocabulary domain). The
discussions about how to distinguish them, showed that the only
significant characteristic is the altitude. Other attributes like the
presence of the drive motors, ticket sales etc are not determinants of
the "valley" vs "mountain" labels.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

>> On 16. Aug 2020, at 15:26, dktue  wrote:
>  Ok, then I'm going to edit the wiki [1] now.
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aerialway=station
> 


sorry for this late comment, but maybe it would be better to use
station:position=top/mid (or middle) / bottom

reasoning is that aerialway:station might be wanted for subtypes of the 
stations (I am not an expert for aerialway station types, but sooner or later 
someone will come along who is, and even if they decide to use “station” for 
these potential subtypes, it would still be confusing having also an 
aerialway:station with different meaning)

Cheers Martin 

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 16. Aug 2020, at 13:55, Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
> You can't have a mid terminal, by definition.


right, this is also something that always bothered me with our way of tagging 
ferry stations.

Cheers Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

Ok, then I'm going to edit the wiki [1] now.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aerialway=station


Am 16.08.2020 um 15:07 schrieb Yves:

I derived, not copied :-)
Go on with proposed top, mid & bottom, Dktue.

I tried to be more specific and imply a meaning that is beyond 'the 
station at the top of the aerialway' because us dealing with a geo 
database, it's a bit clumsy to tag this, and I fear the proposal will 
attract some criticism, let see what happens !

Yves

Le 16 août 2020 13:53:31 GMT+02:00, Colin Smale 
 a écrit :


Nope You can't have a mid terminal, by definition. And as
"terminal" is used with similar semantics to "station" here, if
you start with aerialway:station you don't need to include
"terminal" or "station" in the value as well.

That web page doesn't refer at all to the "top station" or the
"bottom station", but it does refer to a "midstation"; I am not
sure what you actually derived from that page?


On 2020-08-15 18:25, Yves wrote:


Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up
with :

Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal

Yves

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



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


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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Yves]

I derived, not copied :-)
Go on with proposed top, mid & bottom, Dktue.

I tried to be more specific and imply a meaning that is beyond 'the station at 
the top of the aerialway' because us dealing with a geo database, it's a bit 
clumsy to tag this, and I fear the proposal will attract some criticism, let 
see what happens !
Yves 

Le 16 août 2020 13:53:31 GMT+02:00, Colin Smale  a écrit 
:
>Nope You can't have a mid terminal, by definition. And as "terminal"
>is used with similar semantics to "station" here, if you start with
>aerialway:station you don't need to include "terminal" or "station" in
>the value as well. 
>
>That web page doesn't refer at all to the "top station" or the "bottom
>station", but it does refer to a "midstation"; I am not sure what you
>actually derived from that page?
>
>On 2020-08-15 18:25, Yves wrote:
>
>> Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up with :
>> 
>> Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal
>> 
>> Yves 
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

So that would leave us with

    aerialway:station={bottom,mid,top}?

Am 16.08.2020 um 13:53 schrieb Colin Smale:


Nope You can't have a mid terminal, by definition. And as 
"terminal" is used with similar semantics to "station" here, if you 
start with aerialway:station you don't need to include "terminal" or 
"station" in the value as well.


That web page doesn't refer at all to the "top station" or the "bottom 
station", but it does refer to a "midstation"; I am not sure what you 
actually derived from that page?


On 2020-08-15 18:25, Yves wrote:


Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up with :

Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal

Yves

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Colin Smale]

Nope You can't have a mid terminal, by definition. And as "terminal"
is used with similar semantics to "station" here, if you start with
aerialway:station you don't need to include "terminal" or "station" in
the value as well. 

That web page doesn't refer at all to the "top station" or the "bottom
station", but it does refer to a "midstation"; I am not sure what you
actually derived from that page?

On 2020-08-15 18:25, Yves wrote:

> Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up with :
> 
> Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal
> 
> Yves 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

Am 15.08.2020 um 18:25 schrieb Yves:

Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up with :

Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal

I'd be totally fine with that aswell.

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Yves]

Had a look at http://www.skilifts.org/old/glossary.htm, came up with :

Aerialway:station=top_terminal, mid_terminal, bottom_terminal

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Yves]

Interesting:
https://pistetopowder.com/the-new-schindlergratbahn-lift/
Quote:
Facts & Figures

Bottom station: 2,035 m
Middle station: 2,643 m
Mountain station: 2,579

OK, maybe 'head' is not ideal, but I think it's worth to find something else 
than 'upper'
Yves 

Le 15 août 2020 13:37:31 GMT+02:00, Werner.Haag@leitstelle.tirol a écrit :
>
>Hi,
>
>it was mentioned, we have many aerialways in Tyrol and there are really
>cases where the mid station is the one with the highest altitude.
>I found an example ("Schindlergratbahn", base 2035 m, mid 2643 m , head
>2579 m, see link ). So i think, the second scheme with  base, mid, head
>could
>be the better scheme.
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020
>
>Werner
>
>
>"Yves"  schrieb am 14.08.2020 18:07:53:
>
>> Von: "Yves" 
>> An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>> , "Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging"
>> 
>> Kopie: "Tagging" 
>> Datum: 14.08.2020 18:09
>> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations
>>
>> I'm not a natural speaker, head like in where the aerialway is heading.
>> I propose the second scheme because of the duplicate meaning with
>> ele in the definition, and because the aim of an aerialway could be
>> lower than mid.
>> Yves
>
>> Le 14 août 2020 17:32:08 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
>>  a écrit :
>> I strongly prefer up/top over head.
>>
>> At least for me (not representative,
>> not a native speaker), head = up
>> is not clear.
>>
>> 14 Aug 2020, 17:05 by em...@daniel-korn.de:
>> Am 14.08.2020 um 16:37 schrieb yvecai:
>>
>> I would propose, if you want to use altitude as a definition:
>> bottom: the end station with the lower altitude
>> up: the end station with the higher altitude
>> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station, irrespective
>> of the altitude
>> Or, alternatively one that does not compete with the ele tag and
>> carry a destination meaning (my preference):
>> base: the 'valley' station, usually with the lower altitude
>> head: the 'mountain' or 'top' station, usually with the higher altitude
>> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station.
>>
>> aewrialway:station has my preference
>> Yves
>> I like both. Any other people here with a peference for one of Yves'
>schemes?
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

Am 15.08.2020 um 15:31 schrieb Colin Smale:


On 2020-08-15 15:15, dktue wrote:

The main thing is that people often refer to "Talstation" and 
"Bergstation" but this information is not machine-readeable but 
mostly encoded in the names of the stations. My goal ist to make this 
machine-readeable because it almost all cases people can refer to it 
even if they do not know the station's name. It's obvious what's 
meant in almost every case what I mean when I say "Bergstation 
Mutteralmbahn" [1] even if the station's name doesn't say so [2]. So 
let's put this into machine-readeable tags to enable applications to 
solve a problem not for specialists but for the general map purpose 
we're building.


In my opinion we did have the right discussion and have a very good 
proposed definition with easy values that people with a basic 
understanding of english can understand. Do you agree?


Yes, I agree, provided the values are "top/bottom" or "upper/lower" 
and not "head/base". Even "mountain/valley" could be problematic as it 
depends on the geography and not simply on the geometry (an 
end-station half-way up the mountain, what is that?). The distinction 
is purely about the altitude of the end-station relative to the other, 
not about whether it is surrounded by shops or rocks.


This will enable a user to select all top-stations for example, or to 
label the stations on a given cableway appropriately.



Well then I will put this into the wiki, ok? :-)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-08-15 15:15, dktue wrote:

> The main thing is that people often refer to "Talstation" and "Bergstation" 
> but this information is not machine-readeable but mostly encoded in the names 
> of the stations. My goal ist to make this machine-readeable because it almost 
> all cases people can refer to it even if they do not know the station's name. 
> It's obvious what's meant in almost every case what I mean when I say 
> "Bergstation Mutteralmbahn" [1] even if the station's name doesn't say so 
> [2]. So let's put this into machine-readeable tags to enable applications to 
> solve a problem not for specialists but for the general map purpose we're 
> building.
> 
> In my opinion we did have the right discussion and have a very good proposed 
> definition with easy values that people with a basic understanding of english 
> can understand. Do you agree?

Yes, I agree, provided the values are "top/bottom" or "upper/lower" and
not "head/base". Even "mountain/valley" could be problematic as it
depends on the geography and not simply on the geometry (an end-station
half-way up the mountain, what is that?). The distinction is purely
about the altitude of the end-station relative to the other, not about
whether it is surrounded by shops or rocks. 

This will enable a user to select all top-stations for example, or to
label the stations on a given cableway appropriately.

> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26746748
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/293382166
> 
> Am 15.08.2020 um 15:03 schrieb Colin Smale: 
> 
> It seems we can't even agree on what question to ask an "expert". @dktue I 
> think you started this discussion... What was your intention at the time? Was 
> it "how do we identify top/bottom stations on a cable car"? If you ask an 
> "expert" you might get an answer involving the project numbers for the build 
> phase, or the serial numbers of the pylons. Let's stop looking for even more 
> solutions until we have clearly defined the problem. Otherwise you will end 
> up with 100 different "solutions" and an argument about which is best. If 
> it's about tagging the stations as upper/mid/lower according to their 
> altitude and topological location, then we are there already; you should 
> prepare a tagging proposal and put it to the vote.
> 
> And bear in mind the values should ultimately be meaningful to a normal 
> person, not just to a ski lift engineer, and to people with limited English 
> (so using French/German/Italian nomenclature for example would not be 
> helpful). 
> 
> On 2020-08-15 14:37, Yves wrote: 
> 
> Maybe (as always here) we are too few specialists on this list to find the 
> right values. I know of two forum funivie.org and remontées-mécaniques.net 
> that specialize in the field, but in Italian and French. Does anybody know of 
> a similar community, but English speaking?
> Maybe we could have good advice and get a few new mapper's on board.
> Yves
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

The main thing is that people often refer to "Talstation" and 
"Bergstation" but this information is not machine-readeable but mostly 
encoded in the names of the stations. My goal ist to make this 
machine-readeable because it almost all cases people can refer to it 
even if they do not know the station's name. It's obvious what's meant 
in almost every case what I mean when I say "Bergstation Mutteralmbahn" 
[1] even if the station's name doesn't say so [2]. So let's put this 
into machine-readeable tags to enable applications to solve a problem 
not for specialists but for the general map purpose we're building.


In my opinion we did have the right discussion and have a very good 
proposed definition with easy values that people with a basic 
understanding of english can understand. Do you agree?


[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26746748
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/293382166

Am 15.08.2020 um 15:03 schrieb Colin Smale:


It seems we can't even agree on what question to ask an "expert". 
@dktue I think you started this discussion... What was your intention 
at the time? Was it "how do we identify top/bottom stations on a cable 
car"? If you ask an "expert" you might get an answer involving the 
project numbers for the build phase, or the serial numbers of the 
pylons. Let's stop looking for even more solutions until we have 
clearly defined the problem. Otherwise you will end up with 100 
different "solutions" and an argument about which is best. If it's 
about tagging the stations as upper/mid/lower according to their 
altitude and topological location, then we are there already; you 
should prepare a tagging proposal and put it to the vote.


And bear in mind the values should ultimately be meaningful to a 
normal person, not just to a ski lift engineer, and to people with 
limited English (so using French/German/Italian nomenclature for 
example would not be helpful).


On 2020-08-15 14:37, Yves wrote:

Maybe (as always here) we are too few specialists on this list to 
find the right values. I know of two forum funivie.org and 
remontées-mécaniques.net that specialize in the field, but in Italian 
and French. Does anybody know of a similar community, but English 
speaking?

Maybe we could have good advice and get a few new mapper's on board.
Yves

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


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


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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Colin Smale]

It seems we can't even agree on what question to ask an "expert". @dktue
I think you started this discussion... What was your intention at the
time? Was it "how do we identify top/bottom stations on a cable car"? If
you ask an "expert" you might get an answer involving the project
numbers for the build phase, or the serial numbers of the pylons. Let's
stop looking for even more solutions until we have clearly defined the
problem. Otherwise you will end up with 100 different "solutions" and an
argument about which is best. If it's about tagging the stations as
upper/mid/lower according to their altitude and topological location,
then we are there already; you should prepare a tagging proposal and put
it to the vote.

And bear in mind the values should ultimately be meaningful to a normal
person, not just to a ski lift engineer, and to people with limited
English (so using French/German/Italian nomenclature for example would
not be helpful). 

On 2020-08-15 14:37, Yves wrote:

> Maybe (as always here) we are too few specialists on this list to find the 
> right values. I know of two forum funivie.org and remontées-mécaniques.net 
> that specialize in the field, but in Italian and French. Does anybody know of 
> a similar community, but English speaking?
> Maybe we could have good advice and get a few new mapper's on board.
> Yves
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Yves]

Maybe (as always here) we are too few specialists on this list to find the 
right values. I know of two forum funivie.org and remontées-mécaniques.net that 
specialize in the field, but in Italian and French. Does anybody know of a 
similar community, but English speaking?
Maybe we could have good advice and get a few new mapper's on board.
Yves ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

For me both schemes would be fine. I have no problem using "lower", 
"upper" and "mid" even if the upper station is lower than some mid 
stations. The definition from the wiki will then still explain how to 
tag it and it's a rare case where the mapper probably will look for the 
definition in the wiki. And your improvement regarding the defition 
itself is absolutely correct. There's no need to state the fact that 
it's the opposite end. So I'll give it a new try:



Definition:

    aerialway:station=lower

for the station at the end of the aerialway with the lower altitude,

    aerialway:station=upper

for the station at the end of the aerialway with the higher altitude,

    aerialway:station=mid

for any station not being at the end of and aerialway.


Anyone who wants to improve or oppose to this definition?

Cheers
dktue


Am 15.08.2020 um 13:57 schrieb Colin Smale:


Yes, I object to the specific values, as I (and others) said earlier. 
The use of "base" and "head" is not intuitive and will lead to 
confusion and errors amongst non-fluent English speakers. More basic 
words like "top" and "bottom", or maybe "upper" and "lower", are 
preferable.


You can/should remove the word "opposite" from the definition; this 
will make it completely independent of the other definitions.


On 2020-08-15 13:44, dktue wrote:


To make in unambiguous, the definition would then be:

    aerialway:station=base

for the station at an end of the aerialway with the lower altitude,

    aerialway:station=head

for the station at the opposite end of the aerialway (hence with a 
higher altitude) and


    aerialway:station=mid

for any station not being at the end of and aerialway regardless of 
the altitude.



Anyone who wants to improve or oppose to this definition?

Cheers
dktue

Am 15.08.2020 um 13:37 schrieb Werner.Haag@leitstelle.tirol:


Hi,

it was mentioned, we have many aerialways in Tyrol and there are 
really cases where the mid station is the one with the highest altitude.
I found an example ("Schindlergratbahn", base 2035 m, mid 2643 m , 
head 2579 m, see link ). So i think, the second scheme with  base, 
mid, head could

be the better scheme.
_https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020_

Werner


"Yves"  schrieb am 14.08.2020 18:07:53:

> Von: "Yves" 
> An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> , "Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging"
> 
> Kopie: "Tagging" 
> Datum: 14.08.2020 18:09
> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations
> 
> I'm not a natural speaker, head like in where the aerialway is 
heading.

> I propose the second scheme because of the duplicate meaning with
> ele in the definition, and because the aim of an aerialway could be
> lower than mid.
> Yves

> Le 14 août 2020 17:32:08 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
>  a écrit :
> I strongly prefer up/top over head.
> 
> At least for me (not representative,

> not a native speaker), head = up
> is not clear.
> 
> 14 Aug 2020, 17:05 by em...@daniel-korn.de:

> Am 14.08.2020 um 16:37 schrieb yvecai:
> 
> I would propose, if you want to use altitude as a definition:

> bottom: the end station with the lower altitude
> up: the end station with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station, irrespective
> of the altitude
> Or, alternatively one that does not compete with the ele tag and
> carry a destination meaning (my preference):
> base: the 'valley' station, usually with the lower altitude
> head: the 'mountain' or 'top' station, usually with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station.
> 
> aewrialway:station has my preference

> Yves
> I like both. Any other people here with a peference for one of Yves' schemes?
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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



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


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


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

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Colin Smale]

Yes, I object to the specific values, as I (and others) said earlier.
The use of "base" and "head" is not intuitive and will lead to confusion
and errors amongst non-fluent English speakers. More basic words like
"top" and "bottom", or maybe "upper" and "lower", are preferable.

You can/should remove the word "opposite" from the definition; this will
make it completely independent of the other definitions. 

On 2020-08-15 13:44, dktue wrote:

> To make in unambiguous, the definition would then be:
> 
> aerialway:station=base
> 
> for the station at an end of the aerialway with the lower altitude,
> 
> aerialway:station=head
> 
> for the station at the opposite end of the aerialway (hence with a higher 
> altitude) and
> 
> aerialway:station=mid
> 
> for any station not being at the end of and aerialway regardless of the 
> altitude.
> 
> Anyone who wants to improve or oppose to this definition?
> 
> Cheers
> dktue
> 
> Am 15.08.2020 um 13:37 schrieb Werner.Haag@leitstelle.tirol: 
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> it was mentioned, we have many aerialways in Tyrol and there are really 
>> cases where the mid station is the one with the highest altitude.
>> I found an example ("Schindlergratbahn", base 2035 m, mid 2643 m , head 2579 
>> m, see link ). So i think, the second scheme with  base, mid, head could
>> be the better scheme.
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020 [1] 
>> 
>> Werner
>> 
>> "Yves"  schrieb am 14.08.2020 18:07:53:
>> 
>>> Von: "Yves" 
>>> An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" 
>>> , "Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging" 
>>> 
>>> Kopie: "Tagging" 
>>> Datum: 14.08.2020 18:09
>>> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations
>>> 
>>> I'm not a natural speaker, head like in where the aerialway is heading.
>>> I propose the second scheme because of the duplicate meaning with 
>>> ele in the definition, and because the aim of an aerialway could be 
>>> lower than mid. 
>>> Yves 
>> 
>>> Le 14 août 2020 17:32:08 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging 
>>>  a écrit :
>>> I strongly prefer up/top over head.
>>> 
>>> At least for me (not representative,
>>> not a native speaker), head = up
>>> is not clear.
>>> 
>>> 14 Aug 2020, 17:05 by em...@daniel-korn.de:
>>> Am 14.08.2020 um 16:37 schrieb yvecai:
>>> 
>>> I would propose, if you want to use altitude as a definition:
>>> bottom: the end station with the lower altitude
>>> up: the end station with the higher altitude
>>> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station, irrespective 
>>> of the altitude
>>> Or, alternatively one that does not compete with the ele tag and 
>>> carry a destination meaning (my preference):
>>> base: the 'valley' station, usually with the lower altitude
>>> head: the 'mountain' or 'top' station, usually with the higher altitude
>>> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station.
>>> 
>>> aewrialway:station has my preference
>>> Yves
>>> I like both. Any other people here with a peference for one of Yves' 
>>> schemes?
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 

Links:
--
[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[dktue]

To make in unambiguous, the definition would then be:

    aerialway:station=base

for the station at an end of the aerialway with the lower altitude,

    aerialway:station=head

for the station at the opposite end of the aerialway (hence with a 
higher altitude) and


    aerialway:station=mid

for any station not being at the end of and aerialway regardless of the 
altitude.



Anyone who wants to improve or oppose to this definition?

Cheers
dktue

Am 15.08.2020 um 13:37 schrieb Werner.Haag@leitstelle.tirol:


Hi,

it was mentioned, we have many aerialways in Tyrol and there are 
really cases where the mid station is the one with the highest altitude.
I found an example ("Schindlergratbahn", base 2035 m, mid 2643 m , 
head 2579 m, see link ). So i think, the second scheme with  base, 
mid, head could

be the better scheme.
_https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020_

Werner


"Yves"  schrieb am 14.08.2020 18:07:53:

> Von: "Yves" 
> An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> , "Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging"
> 
> Kopie: "Tagging" 
> Datum: 14.08.2020 18:09
> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations
>
> I'm not a natural speaker, head like in where the aerialway is heading.
> I propose the second scheme because of the duplicate meaning with
> ele in the definition, and because the aim of an aerialway could be
> lower than mid.
> Yves

> Le 14 août 2020 17:32:08 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
>  a écrit :
> I strongly prefer up/top over head.
>
> At least for me (not representative,
> not a native speaker), head = up
> is not clear.
>
> 14 Aug 2020, 17:05 by em...@daniel-korn.de:
> Am 14.08.2020 um 16:37 schrieb yvecai:
>
> I would propose, if you want to use altitude as a definition:
> bottom: the end station with the lower altitude
> up: the end station with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station, irrespective
> of the altitude
> Or, alternatively one that does not compete with the ele tag and
> carry a destination meaning (my preference):
> base: the 'valley' station, usually with the lower altitude
> head: the 'mountain' or 'top' station, usually with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station.
>
> aewrialway:station has my preference
> Yves
> I like both. Any other people here with a peference for one of Yves' 
schemes?

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


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


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

[Tagging] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations

[Werner . Haag]

Hi,

it was mentioned, we have many aerialways in Tyrol and there are really
cases where the mid station is the one with the highest altitude.
I found an example ("Schindlergratbahn", base 2035 m, mid 2643 m , head
2579 m, see link ). So i think, the second scheme with  base, mid, head
could
be the better scheme.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23103020

Werner


"Yves"  schrieb am 14.08.2020 18:07:53:

> Von: "Yves" 
> An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> , "Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging"
> 
> Kopie: "Tagging" 
> Datum: 14.08.2020 18:09
> Betreff: Re: [Tagging] Antwort: Re: Aerialway stations
>
> I'm not a natural speaker, head like in where the aerialway is heading.
> I propose the second scheme because of the duplicate meaning with
> ele in the definition, and because the aim of an aerialway could be
> lower than mid.
> Yves

> Le 14 août 2020 17:32:08 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
>  a écrit :
> I strongly prefer up/top over head.
>
> At least for me (not representative,
> not a native speaker), head = up
> is not clear.
>
> 14 Aug 2020, 17:05 by em...@daniel-korn.de:
> Am 14.08.2020 um 16:37 schrieb yvecai:
>
> I would propose, if you want to use altitude as a definition:
> bottom: the end station with the lower altitude
> up: the end station with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station, irrespective
> of the altitude
> Or, alternatively one that does not compete with the ele tag and
> carry a destination meaning (my preference):
> base: the 'valley' station, usually with the lower altitude
> head: the 'mountain' or 'top' station, usually with the higher altitude
> mid: any station, not being a base or a head station.
>
> aewrialway:station has my preference
> Yves
> I like both. Any other people here with a peference for one of Yves'
schemes?
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging