On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Yes, I know rewriting a page at this stage isn't the Done Thing. So sue me.
Wikifiddler, first class.
;)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/list
I've rewritten the page.
Fair play to Richard M for the first attempt but, really, it made a
potentially hugely useful, global tag seem like a parochial little thing for
English/Welsh footpaths. And that really isn't the point of it.
The page is at:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Propose
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
> On 03/02/2011 05:01 PM, Richard Mann wrote:
>
>> I reckon the voting is running at about 24000& a handful for, and a
>> handful against.
>
> Oh, come on. If you’re going to count every element tagged with
> designation=* as a “vote for” you re
On 03/02/2011 05:01 PM, Richard Mann wrote:
I reckon the voting is running at about 24000& a handful for, and a
handful against.
Oh, come on. If you’re going to count every element tagged with
designation=* as a “vote for” you really ought to count every element
*not* tagged with designati
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Tordanik wrote:
>> I'm still not quite sure whether I understand what designation=*
>> is supposed to do.
>
> It's to record the legal status, or designation, of a given object - whether
> that object be a footpath, a waterway, or whatever
Tordanik wrote:
> I'm still not quite sure whether I understand what designation=*
> is supposed to do.
It's to record the legal status, or designation, of a given object - whether
that object be a footpath, a waterway, or whatever.
Having now looked at the wiki voting page I'm afraid the descri
On 01.03.2011 20:04, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> There is already 2 alternative ways to tag these (path and
>> foot/cycle/bridleway), I feel we don't need a third one.
>
> Do try and keep up. This is not a third way of tagging. This is _additional_
> information that
2011/3/2 Richard Fairhurst :
> M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> it might also help to use namespaces for the values, like
>> "uk:public_bridleway"
>> instead of "public_bridleway"
>
> So I presume you're planning to do that for other tags whose meaning varies
> by country, like highway=uk:trunk, highw
M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> it might also help to use namespaces for the values, like
> "uk:public_bridleway"
> instead of "public_bridleway"
So I presume you're planning to do that for other tags whose meaning varies
by country, like highway=uk:trunk, highway=de:motorway...
OSM. For People Who
2011/3/2 Markus Lindholm :
> My proposal is simply to use an other key, and once a better name for
> the key is agreed upon to change the existing tags to use the new key
it might also help to use namespaces for the values, like
"uk:public_bridleway"
instead of "public_bridleway"
cheers,
Martin
On 1 March 2011 21:47, Richard Mann wrote:
> You'all are welcome to:
>
> 1) Make another proposal
> 2) Vote yes or no to the proposal as it stands
>
> It's not appropriate to fine-tune the proposal during the voting stage
> - you either approve or oppose it as it stands.
>
> If there's an appropri
2011/3/1 Richard Mann :
> You'all are welcome to:
>
> 1) Make another proposal
> 2) Vote yes or no to the proposal as it stands
>
> It's not appropriate to fine-tune the proposal during the voting stage
> - you either approve or oppose it as it stands.
Comments were requested 2009-06-10. It took
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 20:47:04 +
> Richard Mann wrote:
>
>> If there's an appropriate majority after 2 weeks, I'll move it to
>> "approved". Otherwise we'll just carry on waiting for a better idea
>> (it might be a long wait).
>
> Appropria
On 03/01/2011 03:14 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
Appropriate majority on the wiki of how many votes?
With the tagging numbers being in their thousands, how will you decide
on an appropriate number?
Well, the wiki says “8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a
majority approval”
But t
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 20:47:04 +
Richard Mann wrote:
> If there's an appropriate majority after 2 weeks, I'll move it to
> "approved". Otherwise we'll just carry on waiting for a better idea
> (it might be a long wait).
Appropriate majority on the wiki of how many votes?
With the tagging number
You'all are welcome to:
1) Make another proposal
2) Vote yes or no to the proposal as it stands
It's not appropriate to fine-tune the proposal during the voting stage
- you either approve or oppose it as it stands.
If there's an appropriate majority after 2 weeks, I'll move it to
"approved". Oth
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:51:22 -0800 (PST)
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Markus Lindholm wrote:
> > If this tag designation is about formal status in the UK
>
> It isn't. It's about formal status, full stop. You could just as
> easily use it to record that a European waterway is UNECE Class Vb.
>
> R
On 1 March 2011 20:51, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Markus Lindholm wrote:
>> If this tag designation is about formal status in the UK
>
> It isn't. It's about formal status, full stop. You could just as easily use
> it to record that a European waterway is UNECE Class Vb.
Well, the wiki certainly
Markus Lindholm wrote:
> If this tag designation is about formal status in the UK
It isn't. It's about formal status, full stop. You could just as easily use
it to record that a European waterway is UNECE Class Vb.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Feat
On 1 March 2011 20:04, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> There is already 2 alternative ways to tag these (path and
>> foot/cycle/bridleway), I feel we don't need a third one.
>
> Do try and keep up. This is not a third way of tagging. This is _additional_
> information that
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> There is already 2 alternative ways to tag these (path and
> foot/cycle/bridleway), I feel we don't need a third one.
Do try and keep up. This is not a third way of tagging. This is _additional_
information that can be used with either existing scheme. There is no oth
2011/3/1 Alex Mauer :
> For better or worse, in Germany it looks like they’re one and the same
> thing: a route’s official classification is basically “officially designated
> for [xxx] traffic”. There’s nothing like the UK’s “Restricted Byway”
> classification.
There is tracks for instance, wh
On 03/01/2011 11:30 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
do we really need a duplication in designation? Or is there some
details that I don't get?
As I understand it, while there is some overlap (especially in Germany)
it’s not exactly a duplicate of the access=designated tag.
Designation=* is us
2011/3/1 Richard Mann :
> 24000 uses so far, so I guess it's time to put it to a vote:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Designation
The RFC is from 2009, IMHO there is an established alternative for this:
foot=designated
bicycle=designated
horse=designated
You count 24000
On 01/03/11 17:12, Richard Mann wrote:
24000 uses so far, so I guess it's time to put it to a vote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Designation
Richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap
24000 uses so far, so I guess it's time to put it to a vote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Designation
Richard
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
26 matches
Mail list logo
