Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[OSM]

Am 11.09.2023 um 23:39 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick:

Not arguing, but

oneway:foot = 5024
foot:backward = 394
foot:forward = 300

Personally, I would interpret that as time that the wiki had a 
rewrite! :-)


Voted by their "foot" ... ;-) - and I used it too ...
But it is already rewritten:

On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 19:19, Martin Koppenhoefer 
 wrote:


as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t
make a lot of sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or
„foot:forward“ as alternatives that follow the generic way of
tagging restrictions.



That is the official way - but it will be a long way until the "foot" 
will arrive there ...


--
Diese E-Mail wurde von AVG-Antivirussoftware auf Viren geprüft.
www.avg.com___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Not arguing, but

oneway:foot = 5024
foot:backward = 394
foot:forward = 300

Personally, I would interpret that as time that the wiki had a rewrite! :-)

Thanks

Graeme


On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 19:19, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 11 Sep 2023, at 08:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
> foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes?
>
>
>
> as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t make a lot
> of sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or „foot:forward“ as
> alternatives that follow the generic way of tagging restrictions.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#Pedestrians
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11 Sep 2023, at 08:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick  wrote:
> 
> foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes?


as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t make a lot of 
sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or „foot:forward“ as alternatives that 
follow the generic way of tagging restrictions.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#Pedestrians

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 16:22, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> The problem is that we frequently have cycleways or food-cycle-ways that
> are legally oneway for cyclists, but not for pedestrians. They are tagged
> "oneway=yes". I agree we need a oneway tag for pedestrians, but it cannot
> be a simple oneway=yes because that is already in use with a different
> meaning, i.e. "oneway for vehicles".
>

foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes?

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Volker Schmidt]

The problem is that we frequently have cycleways or food-cycle-ways that
are legally oneway for cyclists, but not for pedestrians. They are tagged
"oneway=yes". I agree we need a oneway tag for pedestrians, but it cannot
be a simple oneway=yes because that is already in use with a different
meaning, i.e. "oneway for vehicles".

On Mon, 11 Sep 2023, 08:03 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging, <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
>
> Sep 10, 2023, 23:37 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 01:25, Niels Elgaard Larsen 
> wrote:
>
> Volker Schmidt:
> > Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, not
> for pedestrians.
>
>
> We do have a lot of highway=footway,oneway=yes
>
>
> Also know of suspended Tree Walk walkways e.g.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-28.23281/153.13822 which are
> signposted as oneway, & tagged the same
>
> And there are oneway hiking trails where it is a legal restriction.
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

Sep 10, 2023, 23:37 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

>
> On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 01:25, Niels Elgaard Larsen <> elga...@agol.dk> > 
> wrote:
>
>> Volker Schmidt:
>>  > Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, not 
>> for pedestrians.
>>  
>>  
>>  We do have a lot of highway=footway,oneway=yes
>>
>
> Also know of suspended Tree Walk walkways e.g. > 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-28.23281/153.13822>  which are 
> signposted as oneway, & tagged the same
>
And there are oneway hiking trails where it is a legal restriction.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 01:25, Niels Elgaard Larsen  wrote:

> Volker Schmidt:
> > Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, not
> for pedestrians.
>
>
> We do have a lot of highway=footway,oneway=yes
>

Also know of suspended Tree Walk walkways e.g.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-28.23281/153.13822 which are
signposted as oneway, & tagged the same

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

Volker Schmidt:

Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, not for 
pedestrians.



We do have a lot of highway=footway,oneway=yes
at museums, train stations, airports, zoos, etc.
Which is useful for routers.

The wiki does mention vehicles. It may not always be a very legal restriction. And in 
many cases it could be considered false oneway footways. E.g., a museum might have a 
signed direction thorough the exhibition, but usually you can still wander back and 
forth a bit (not at the crown jewels).


Still, if think it makes sense.

E.g.,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/368800221

Although, using an OSM router here is already cheating.

oneway:foot and foot:backward is already documented in the wiki and could be used on 
mtb paths.


I see that we have 4 oneway=recommended


On Sat, 9 Sep 2023, 07:05 Andrew Harvey, > wrote:


I have previously proposed the tag path=mtb
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Tag:path%3Dmtb
 as a way to 
say
it's a purpose built mountain biking track (which if it has features like 
jumps,
skinnies, berms etc would make it such). Unfortunately the proposal could 
not
gain a consistent consensus about the best way to tag purpose built mountain
biking tracks/trails and didn't develop further, so while it won't impact
rendering, you can still use this proposed tag.

On Sat, 9 Sept 2023 at 03:09, Bryce Nesbitt mailto:bry...@obviously.com>> wrote:


I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning 
a route
that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one
way downhill mountain bike flow tracks.

I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly 
delineated we
would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
But I was left without clear tagging ideas.




One of the trails was
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667

highway 
  path

horse   no
name Bunny
oneway:bicycle
 
  yes

surface 
  dirt


With a clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a
single direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.




Is this trail tagged the best that can be?

Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look 
different
from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
highway 
  path

nameHiking Trail
surface dirt
bicycle 

permissive




I see that even /OpenCyclemap /does not draw directional arrows on the
"Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.

___
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


--
Niels Elgaard Larsen


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Warin]

On 9/9/23 17:31, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, 
not for pedestrians.



Some pedestrian barriers are 'oneway' .. for example turnstiles at train 
stations where the turnstile only allows travel if a card/ticket is 
produced. I know of another in a very large public park .. gates are 
locked around sunset but you can get out using the turnstile, yes it 
does have imposing walls



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Volker Schmidt]

Be careful: oneway=* is a legal access tag, only valid for vehicles, not
for pedestrians.

On Sat, 9 Sep 2023, 07:05 Andrew Harvey,  wrote:

> I have previously proposed the tag path=mtb
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Tag:path%3Dmtb as a way to
> say it's a purpose built mountain biking track (which if it has features
> like jumps, skinnies, berms etc would make it such). Unfortunately the
> proposal could not gain a consistent consensus about the best way to tag
> purpose built mountain biking tracks/trails and didn't develop further, so
> while it won't impact rendering, you can still use this proposed tag.
>
> On Sat, 9 Sept 2023 at 03:09, Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:
>
>>
>> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
>> route
>> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way 
>> downhill
>> mountain bike flow tracks.
>>
>> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
>> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
>> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the trails was
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
>> highway  path
>> 
>> horse  no
>> name  Bunny
>> oneway:bicycle
>>  yes
>> 
>> surface  dirt
>> With a
>> clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
>> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>>
>> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look
>> different from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
>> highway  path
>> 
>> name Hiking Trail
>> surface dirt
>> bicycle
>> 
>> permissive
>>
>>
>> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
>> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Andrew Harvey]

I have previously proposed the tag path=mtb
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Tag:path%3Dmtb as a way to say
it's a purpose built mountain biking track (which if it has features like
jumps, skinnies, berms etc would make it such). Unfortunately the proposal
could not gain a consistent consensus about the best way to tag purpose
built mountain biking tracks/trails and didn't develop further, so while it
won't impact rendering, you can still use this proposed tag.

On Sat, 9 Sept 2023 at 03:09, Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:

>
> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
> route
> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way downhill
> mountain bike flow tracks.
>
> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>
>
>
>
> One of the trails was
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
> highway  path
> 
> horse  no
> name  Bunny
> oneway:bicycle
>  yes
> 
> surface  dirt
> With a
> clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>
>
>
>
> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>
> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look different
> from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
> highway  path
> 
> name Hiking Trail
> surface dirt
> bicycle
> 
> permissive
>
>
> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Kevin Broderick]

I don't know about the trail in question, but the one-way MTB trails near
me are clearly signed one-way regardless of transit mode. I'm not sure
offhand if foot traffic is actually banned or just a bad idea. I'd suggest
that, unless a one-way MTB trail is clearly two-way for other transit
modes, it should be tagged as oneway=yes.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 5:59 PM Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023, 3:21 PM Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
>> So, no signage?
>> Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there.
>>
> If I understand the OP you can hike there. Someone would have to make a
> router that is smart enough to know that despite being legal, hiking on a
> downhill mtb trail is not a good idea.
> Mike
>
>> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Kevin Broderick
k...@kevinbroderick.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Mike Thompson]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023, 3:21 PM Peter Elderson  wrote:

> So, no signage?
> Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there.
>
If I understand the OP you can hike there. Someone would have to make a
router that is smart enough to know that despite being legal, hiking on a
downhill mtb trail is not a good idea.
Mike

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Peter Elderson]

So, no signage?
Incline and mtb-scale still don't say you can't hike there.

Fr Gr. Peter Elderson


Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 23:01 schreef Mike Thompson :

> One of the trails was
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
> highway  path
> 
> horse  no
> name  Bunny
> oneway:bicycle
>  yes
> 
> surface  dirt
> 
>
> The solution might be to add incline=* and mtb:scale=* and then improve
> the routing algorithm to avoid downhill-only mountain bike trails when
> hiking.
>
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 2:15 PM Peter Elderson  wrote:
>
>> How did you find out what these paths are? Any kind of signage there?
>>
>> Fr Gr Peter Elderson
>>
>>
>> Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 19:08 schreef Bryce Nesbitt :
>>
>>>
>>> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning
>>> a route
>>> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way 
>>> downhill
>>> mountain bike flow tracks.
>>>
>>> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
>>> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
>>> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the trails was
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
>>> highway 
>>> path 
>>> horse  no
>>> name  Bunny
>>> oneway:bicycle
>>>  yes
>>> 
>>> surface 
>>> dirt With
>>> a clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
>>> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>>>
>>> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look
>>> different from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
>>> highway 
>>> path 
>>> name Hiking Trail
>>> surface dirt
>>> bicycle
>>> 
>>> permissive
>>>
>>>
>>> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
>>> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Mike Thompson]

One of the trails was
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
highway  path

horse  no
name  Bunny
oneway:bicycle
 yes

surface  dirt


The solution might be to add incline=* and mtb:scale=* and then improve the
routing algorithm to avoid downhill-only mountain bike trails when hiking.

Mike

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 2:15 PM Peter Elderson  wrote:

> How did you find out what these paths are? Any kind of signage there?
>
> Fr Gr Peter Elderson
>
>
> Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 19:08 schreef Bryce Nesbitt :
>
>>
>> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
>> route
>> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way 
>> downhill
>> mountain bike flow tracks.
>>
>> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
>> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
>> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the trails was
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
>> highway  path
>> 
>> horse  no
>> name  Bunny
>> oneway:bicycle
>>  yes
>> 
>> surface  dirt
>> With a
>> clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
>> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>>
>> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look
>> different from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
>> highway  path
>> 
>> name Hiking Trail
>> surface dirt
>> bicycle
>> 
>> permissive
>>
>>
>> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
>> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Peter Elderson]

How did you find out what these paths are? Any kind of signage there?

Fr Gr Peter Elderson


Op vr 8 sep 2023 om 19:08 schreef Bryce Nesbitt :

>
> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
> route
> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way downhill
> mountain bike flow tracks.
>
> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>
>
>
>
> One of the trails was
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
> highway  path
> 
> horse  no
> name  Bunny
> oneway:bicycle
>  yes
> 
> surface  dirt
> With a
> clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>
>
>
>
> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>
> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look different
> from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
> highway  path
> 
> name Hiking Trail
> surface dirt
> bicycle
> 
> permissive
>
>
> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Volker Schmidt]

This is a frequent tagging problem.
bicycle=* , oneway=* , and oneway/bicycle=* are tags describing the legal
access status.  So does highway=path (it implies, in many jurisdictions,
foot=yes and bicycle=yes).

There is a way to indicate a route is a MTB route, and also that such route
is technically unidirectional. If a highway=path is difficult to hike due
to the mtb jumping steps one could handle this by using sac_scale grading,
or by tagging the entire route with cai_scale.

On Fri, 8 Sep 2023, 19:08 Bryce Nesbitt,  wrote:

>
> I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
> route
> that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way downhill
> mountain bike flow tracks.
>
> I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly
> delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
> But I was left without clear tagging ideas.
>
>
>
>
> One of the trails was
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
> highway  path
> 
> horse  no
> name  Bunny
> oneway:bicycle
>  yes
> 
> surface  dirt
> With a
> clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
> direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.
>
>
>
>
> Is this trail tagged the best that can be?
>
> Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look different
> from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
> highway  path
> 
> name Hiking Trail
> surface dirt
> bicycle
> 
> permissive
>
>
> I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
> "Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[brad]

The tagging looks right,  but until the renderers pick up the oneway tag 
it doesn't seem hopeful.
Changing the name is not right, and bicycle=permissive is not right 
either.   foot=discouraged would make sense, maybe the apps will pick 
that up?



On 9/8/23 11:02, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:


I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up 
planning a route
that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one 
way downhill mountain bike flow tracks.


I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly 
delineated we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.

But I was left without clear tagging ideas.




One of the trails was
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667 

highway  
path 

horse   no
name Bunny
oneway:bicycle 
 
yes 

surface  
dirt 


With a clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in 
a single direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.





Is this trail tagged the best that can be?

Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look 
different from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
highway  
path 

nameHiking Trail
surface dirt
bicycle 


permissive




I see that even /OpenCyclemap /does not draw directional arrows on the 
"Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.



___
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] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks

[Bryce Nesbitt]

I recently went on a hike, guided only by OSMAnd.  We ended up planning a
route
that took us uphill on what turned out to be a long series of one way downhill
mountain bike flow tracks.

I have no problem with the flow track: just had it been clearly delineated
we would have planned a different route more suited to hiking.
But I was left without clear tagging ideas.




One of the trails was
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/593945914#map=19/37.99250/-122.50667
highway  path

horse  no
name  Bunny
oneway:bicycle
 yes

surface  dirt
With a
clear direction, as it has jumps that can only be completed in a single
direction, and is all but impossible to cycle the "wrong way" on.




Is this trail tagged the best that can be?

Is there a way to better hint to rendering that this should look different
from a "standard" hiking trail, perhaps tagged:
highway  path

name Hiking Trail
surface dirt
bicycle 
permissive


I see that even *OpenCyclemap *does not draw directional arrows on the
"Bunny" trail or other oneway:bicycle=yes routes.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

[John Willis]

> On Apr 17, 2017, at 9:46 AM, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
> 
> draw the campus of the motel including their houses and parking, tag that 
> landuse=commercial and tourism=motel

This is why I love landuse for buildings. I use this method to map most 
business and factories.  (Landuse=retail+name=* and then Building=retail 
inside, with driveways and parking lots as well) works great for multi-building 
apartment complexes. Unlike the suburban US, most everything in Japan has a 
concrete wall or a chain link fence on the property line (you can see the 
stone/plastic property line markers in the wall/ground if you do a ground 
survey, so assuming the walls are always a property lines is a safe assumption) 
so it is really easy to "landuse" everything. 

Its why I really want a landuse=civic or equivalent for the government/city 
hall/tax office Kind of complexes.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 17.04.2017 01:27, Tom Hardy wrote:

The closest I've come is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780
where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created
the relation.  Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later
were gone.  I looked into it and found someone had moved addr:street
to the relation but had left addr:housenumber on the individual
buildings, so I "fixed" it.


Multipolygon is not for tying two houses of a motel together. What you can do here, remove the 
relation, draw the campus of the motel including their houses and parking, tag that 
landuse=commercial and tourism=motel plus the name and motel details. As the houses have individual 
house numbers, that can remain on the buildings. If the motel has an address it is registered at, 
that can be added to the campus outline.


It is irrelevant if this map shows the house number or not, they are for multiple purposes including 
navigation, so it is important they are in the database.



I've been tempted in the case of trailer parks where I've been
unsatisfied with my tagging efforts, e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/213616682
which is just a closed way with landuse=residential and addressing
information.  The address is not rendered.

I like to see addresses on the map because I like to use the map as
a visual aid to mental routing, the old fashioned way.


House numbers are currently not rendered on areas other than buildings, however they are still in 
the database. The default map cannot render everything. You can of course learn how to render your 
own maps and include any features important for you.


You can however use a single address node at the entrance of the trailer park.

tom


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

[Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

[Tom Hardy]

On Sunday, April 16, 2017 10:59:00 PM CDT Tom Pfeifer wrote:
 
> Identified as a glitch in the rendering databases, as assumed. See
> the carto ticket above and
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/156 for
> explanation.
> 
> No need to change any tagging for this (of course the school
> campus can be drawn with local knowledge).

I want to express thanks to all for a bit of education on the manner 
of discussion presented--how to refer to a specific object, how to 
(possibly) open a ticket, etc.  The wiki, for instance, led me to 
believe the way to open a ticket was to hang a note on an object.

I'll be surveying the school some time in the next week.

_Tagging for the Renderer_

The closest I've come is 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780
where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created 
the relation.  Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later 
were gone.  I looked into it and found someone had moved addr:street 
to the relation but had left addr:housenumber on the individual 
buildings, so I "fixed" it.

Justification: all elements of an address belong together.  This is 
obviously right because it keeps the renderer happy.

Comments?

I've been tempted in the case of trailer parks where I've been 
unsatisfied with my tagging efforts, e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/213616682
which is just a closed way with landuse=residential and addressing 
information.  The address is not rendered.

I like to see addresses on the map because I like to use the map as 
a visual aid to mental routing, the old fashioned way.

-- 
Tom Hardy 


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Marc Gemis]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 4:36 AM, André Pirard 
wrote:

> Strange for the French because the whole map of  openstreetmap.fr  is
> osm.org itself.
>

take a look at
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=15&lat=49.47299&lon=2.87899&layers=B000FFF
, that's the one I was thinking of.  I didn't know they were linking to
osm.org right now. Although they clearly mention under the picture, that
this is just one of the possible renderings. Just like the Germans do. Both
sites do not prominently show a large map on the home page, so people learn
from day one that OSM is not the map on osm.org

IMHO we should focus on the richness of the OSM map & app ecosystem, not
one rendering which lacks features compared to Google maps. We look like a
poor rip off that way. People should know from the moment they contribute
that they map for the cool webapp their wife is using, the website their
grandmother is visiting, the maps that are printed for humanitarian help
organisations, etc. And that they can easily check some of their mapped
features on a map, is just a nice bonus.

regards

m

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[André Pirard]

On 2015-05-16 20:31, Marc Gemis wrote :
>
> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 5:01 AM, André Pirard
> mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On 2015-05-16 01:40, Frederik Ramm wrote :
>> Thing is, there is no "THE" map. There's tons of maps in various colour
>> schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
>> this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
>> motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.
> Yes, there is "THE" ("main") map at OSM.org
>
>
> That is just because you are not German or French, otherwise you might
> refer to openstreetmap.de  or
> openstreetmap.fr . IMHO those sites represent
> OSM much better. They actually show that there are alternatives to the
> map you see on osm.org  or on their sites.
>
> IMHO, it's not wise to talk about THE map, especially if you know
> better ( and I know you know better)
I wasn't speaking of "how", the style in which, the map is drawn, but
what tags are mapped, that is the reason why they are tagging for the
renderer, using tweaked tags.
Strange for the French because the whole map of  openstreetmap.fr
  is osm.org itself.
The map of openstreetmap.de   fetches its
mapnik tiles from openstreetmap.org, its transport tiles from
memomaps.de, its cycle tiles from opencyclemap.org and OSM deutscher
Stil is from openstreetmap.de.
openstreetmap.de does not provide the tools of osm.org.  In particular,
one must use the osm.org tool to make a link to the map and hence
there's very little chance that Mr Everybody's link used the
openstreetmap.de server.
I have tried to see if, the subject of this thread, OSM deutscher Stil
would render features that osm.org does not, but, alas, openstreetmap.de
does not support the openstreetmap.de/way/... nor #map= URL syntaxes,
and it doesn't show the tags of the objects in the left pane.  So, it's
very difficult to use it for that comparison.  In fact, I wonder if it's
not the reason why I seem to be not well understood when I speak of
things like displaying boundary data in the left pane.  But I don't
think it displays more features than osm.org.

Cheers

André.


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Warin]

On 18/05/2015 6:04 AM, Daniel Koć wrote:

W dniu 16.05.2015 9:55, Janko Mihelić napisał(a):

It maybe controversial, but I think we don't want "everyone" editing
the map. I think we need some barriers to filter out people who are
"good" mappers. Good mappers have to understand this is not a service
for them, but a community. They have to understand this is not a drawn
map but a database. They have to appreciate the effort of others, and
so on.


I think "everyone" editing the map is the way to go. We just need to 
be prepared for vandalism if we get more popular - and Wikipedia 
clearly shows it's possible.


Yes .. everyone who wants to should have access to edit the map. The 
editing needs to be easy, fun and productive.. if it is not then most 
people will leave.
The more complex and technical OSM becomes the less information will be 
entered and the more probable incorrect entries will be made.
"Good mappers" contribute their time, knowledge .. usually at some cost 
to them, and want to see a result. OSM should accept that.
If OSM bars common people for 'helping' then there will be a narrow 
focus and a reduction in data entered.


 If you are not stubborn geek and you want to try to map many 
different kind of objects available locally, and are not interested in 
just one particular kind of them, you will loose.


No. It is OSM that looses the input from that person.

If OSM upsets people then some of them may well become vandals.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[David Bannon]

On Sun, 2015-05-17 at 23:01 +0200, Daniel Koć wrote:
>  Once we start seeing through the eyes of people using the 
> map, who can help expand and refine our data, we can understand what are 
> their background, what are the problems for them and how they may behave 
> when experiencing obstacles. That may give us a hint what could we do to 
> let them be better mappers and achieve their personal goals at the same 
> time.

Yep, well said !

While it might well be fun to treat the database as a write only memory,
for the project to move forward, we need to concentrate on what end
users want, need and might use. 

And, sticking my neck out here, one thing most end users expect and
probably need is to find the terms used in the database can be looked up
(eg in the wiki) and clearly understood.

David


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 16.05.2015 19:42, Richard Welty napisał(a):


 on the other hand, demanding that the rendering on
www.openstreetmap.org [1]
 be all things to all people is actually pretty unreasonable. the
current
 architecture which separates data from style is well considered and
in line
 with modern best practices; i haven't yet seen an argument that would
 persuade me otherwise.


For only experts, probably yes (like HTML development or the likes). But 
we're much closer to Wikipedia, where we don't demand anybody to be 
GIS-aware or to participate in making drafts.


We're not community of GIS experts, rather small-scale mappers, just 
like Wikipedians. But it's much easier to write new article or even put 
the photo there than try to make visible some features one consider 
essential.


We don't care for them now and I think we should start to do it. Maybe 
some user-cases study would be useful to conduct, like in usability 
research - these examples may get you the idea how one can do it to 
imagine the possible real life scenarios:


a) "Mary is a 32 australian farmer and wants to have the data about her 
big farm..."


b) "Jerzy is a 54 polish librarian fond on taking picture of the nature 
and he likes to have a map of birds nests..."


c) "Tove is 21 of Finnish descent living in Sweden and she regularly 
sails on the Baltic sea on her parents boat..."


...and so on. Once we start seeing through the eyes of people using the 
map, who can help expand and refine our data, we can understand what are 
their background, what are the problems for them and how they may behave 
when experiencing obstacles. That may give us a hint what could we do to 
let them be better mappers and achieve their personal goals at the same 
time.


The important thing is we should not just research using tools like iD, 
but rather we should look what they try to achieve with OSM as a 
project. Maybe conducting real study would be the best, I don't know, 
but until we try to understand them, and we will just keep saying "DON'T 
map for renderer", they will go away or just do it anyway...



 what we could use are more people doing projects like opencyclemap
and
 openfiremap and the like to bring out the data they care about in
formats
 that they like.


I disagree - they typically won't have enough technical skills and the 
OSM is already very scattered. For example adding routing to the main 
site was a huge step ahead, because it's the whole toolset is what the 
people need, not just a do-it-yourself kit. Google Maps are not the 
best, but the fact that it is part of their ecosystem (routing, ads, 
mail etc.) makes them very useful and popular.



 my presentation at SOTM US will include examples of using leaflet,
jquery
 and overpass to create mashups of OHM and OSM data, and i'll be
making
 my javascript available on the ohm github repository under a 3 clause
BSD
 license for anyone who wants to play.


That is nice, but most our mappers don't know even these words, let 
alone have enough competence to use it themselves.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 16.05.2015 9:55, Janko Mihelić napisał(a):

It maybe controversial, but I think we don't want "everyone" editing
the map. I think we need some barriers to filter out people who are
"good" mappers. Good mappers have to understand this is not a service
for them, but a community. They have to understand this is not a drawn
map but a database. They have to appreciate the effort of others, and
so on.


I think "everyone" editing the map is the way to go. We just need to be 
prepared for vandalism if we get more popular - and Wikipedia clearly 
shows it's possible.


Some people will do the technical stuff (servers, tagging schemes 
crafting, rendering etc.), but most of them will only add buildings and 
POIs in the neighborhood or visiting some places - and the long-tail 
distribution says that is also the most of our database! So it is a 
precious content, even if very basic.



Of course, not everyone is a good mapper from the start, and starting
to map should be easy and fun. And I think it is. But if you want to
go to the next step and become a regular mapper, something not being
rendered shouldn't be an obstacle for you to continue mapping it.


The most surprising (in a bad sense) for new mappers is probably 
decentralized nature of the project. It's easy to start with iD, but 
anything above clicking presets is a huge obstacle!


You have to start being active on some forums and lists, know a lot of 
technical and social conventions, have a time to invest in developing a 
single feature on this list, on wiki, then with rendering - and if you 
even succeed in one of these places, they are so disconnected 
(autonomous), that you have to deal with them separately. If you are not 
stubborn geek and you want to try to map many different kind of objects 
available locally, and are not interested in just one particular kind of 
them, you will loose.


Micromapping is this kind of work and I suppose that is what average 
mapper want to do, not crafting and dealing with proper global 
definitions. And the main motivation is you can see it, not routing or 
big data analysis. On the highest zoom levels we could easily show much 
more currently missing features, so maybe we should remember that not 
every object needs to be rendered on middle and large scale - 
micromapping is all about micro scale and we don't even show highways 
properly there, as if we live only on the middle and big scale, where 
they are not considered to be areas!


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[pmailkeey .]

>
> On Sat, 16 May 2015 19:19:20 +0200
> Kotya Karapetyan  wrote:
>
> > I would like to ask you: is there a web-site and a smartphone app
> > where I could see all OSM data and switch things on and off?
> > That would probably be the answer to the question.
>
>
That's what I think we should have for the base OSM.org map.

That leaves me with one solution - OSM removes all its maps and instead
promotes the idea of each of us producing and rendering our own 'personal'
maps which OSM hosts. So we get things like cycle map, humanitarian map, my
map, your map and her map all listed for us with an info panel as to what
the map shows so people can choose which map they prefer to use/embed.

-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 16.05.2015 20:31, Marc Gemis napisał(a):

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 5:01 AM, André Pirard
 wrote:


Yes, there is "THE" ("main") map at OSM.org


That is just because you are not German or French, otherwise you might
refer to openstreetmap.de [1] or openstreetmap.fr [2]. IMHO those
sites represent OSM much better. They actually show that there are
alternatives to the map you see on osm.org [3] or on their sites.


Marc- it's just generalization... Not being true in all details doesn't 
mean it's wrong. Much the same Google Search is "The Search", however if 
you are Russian (Yandex), Chineese (Baidu) or me (DuckDuckGo) you would 
disagree.


That's not the point! The point is it's _very_ important and we should 
remember it.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Sat, 16 May 2015 19:19:20 +0200
Kotya Karapetyan  wrote:

> I would like to ask you: is there a web-site and a smartphone app
> where I could see all OSM data and switch things on and off?
> That would probably be the answer to the question.

http://www.openstreetmap.org - see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Data_layer

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Marc Gemis]

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Kotya Karapetyan 
wrote:

> I would like to ask you: is there a web-site and a smartphone app where I
> could see all OSM data and switch things on and off?


I don't know of any website that shows the turn:lanes or destinations on a
map (I know the german webapp that shows them, but that is not on a map).
So the answer is no.
I think we should wait until the rendering on the client is feasible before
this becomes reality.

Until then, JOSM + many different styles that can be switched on/off is the
best alternative.

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Kotya Karapetyan]

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Richard Welty 
wrote:

>  On 5/16/15 1:19 PM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
>
> Though I strongly disagree to the idea of "mapping for the renderer", I
> agree that there is a huge problem: a lot of data available in OSM database
> is effectively lost because the renderers do not show it.
>
> on the other hand, demanding that the rendering on www.openstreetmap.org
> be all things to all people is actually pretty unreasonable. the current
> architecture which separates data from style is well considered and in line
> with modern best practices; i haven't yet seen an argument that would
> persuade me otherwise.
>
>
The idea of mixing style and data was not implied! They are separate and
should remain such. I was only complaining about inability to see the data,
in whichever usably form. Currently there are two ways I can see some data:
switch on editing (bad, because I can screw data up) or use the query tool
(bad, because I cannot see the presence of a feature, I need to click the
map to find it).

Also I didn't mean that www.osm.org should be the place to show all data.
It can well be a separate site.

what we could use are more people doing projects like opencyclemap and
> openfiremap and the like to bring out the data they care about in formats
> that they like.
>

Good idea. Though, for the sake of usability, it would be great to have a
single site capable of showing everything. The problem is of course that
OSM doesn't restrict tagging in any way, meaning that it's barely possible
to create layers for different tags.


>
> my presentation at SOTM US will include examples of using leaflet, jquery
> and overpass to create mashups of OHM and OSM data, and i'll be making
> my javascript available on the ohm github repository under a 3 clause BSD
> license for anyone who wants to play.
>
>
I will be very much interested in having a look.

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Marc Gemis]

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 5:01 AM, André Pirard 
wrote:

> Yes, there is "THE" ("main") map at OSM.org


That is just because you are not German or French, otherwise you might
refer to openstreetmap.de or openstreetmap.fr. IMHO those sites represent
OSM much better. They actually show that there are alternatives to the map
you see on osm.org or on their sites.

IMHO, it's not wise to talk about THE map, especially if you know better (
and I know you know better)

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Richard Welty]

On 5/16/15 1:19 PM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
> Though I strongly disagree to the idea of "mapping for the renderer",
> I agree that there is a huge problem: a lot of data available in OSM
> database is effectively lost because the renderers do not show it.
on the other hand, demanding that the rendering on www.openstreetmap.org
be all things to all people is actually pretty unreasonable. the current
architecture which separates data from style is well considered and in line
with modern best practices; i haven't yet seen an argument that would
persuade me otherwise.

what we could use are more people doing projects like opencyclemap and
openfiremap and the like to bring out the data they care about in formats
that they like.

my presentation at SOTM US will include examples of using leaflet, jquery
and overpass to create mashups of OHM and OSM data, and i'll be making
my javascript available on the ohm github repository under a 3 clause BSD
license for anyone who wants to play.

there's nothing particularly radical or new in what i'm doing, but i hope it
serves as a reminder that there's more than just the rendering on
www.openstreetmap.org and if you want to show off the data you've
entered, there are ways to do it.

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Kotya Karapetyan]

Though I strongly disagree to the idea of "mapping for the renderer", I
agree that there is a huge problem: a lot of data available in OSM database
is effectively lost because the renderers do not show it. Right now there
is a question whether we should use ref or name to tag parts of the
cemeteries. Logically, it's clearly a "ref". But refs are not rendered, so
no use to the map users, so why would I tag so? Just for the sake of making
database clean?

"Through 20 years of effort, we've successfully trained everyone to use
passwords that are hard for humans to remember, but easy for computers to
guess." (https://xkcd.com/936/)

I would like to ask you: is there a web-site and a smartphone app where I
could see all OSM data and switch things on and off?
That would probably be the answer to the question.

@Dave Swarthout: Have you by chance described your effort anywhere?


Cheers,
Kotya


On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . 
wrote:

> I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...
>
> Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
> disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
> appear on the map. This situation is no use to anyone but has been allowed
> to continue and 'enforced' with wiki et al going against the notion of
> tagging for the renderer. The problem was likely there in the beginning and
> is still there now - several years later - unresolved. In fact, the way OSM
> is put together, it's completely unresolvable - as people are free to tag
> how they like and the map shows only what the renderers choose to show. I
> have considered that what we see in the editors is the real map and true
> OSM isn't. If the editors had a 'read-only' mode, they'd be far more use
> than OSM proper and mappers would be happier to see their work on the 'map'.
>
> I therefore want to air the view that 'mapping for the renderer' is no
> longer 'wrong' by actually adding a good set of basic tags for areas, lines
> and points ("simple English" as opposed to technical English of 'nodes' and
> 'ways') so that when a mapper invents something new, they can add tags for
> colour, opacity, line colour, line width, line opacity - for areas and
> similar attributes for lines and points (colour, opacity, size etc.) and
> obviously tags for name and description etc. What do people think to this ?
>
> --
> Mike.
> @millomweb  -
> For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
> via *the area's premier website - *
>
> *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
> property & pets*
>
> T&Cs 
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Fri, 2015-05-15 at 23:03 +0100, pmailkeey . wrote:
> I therefore want to air the view that 'mapping for the renderer' is no
> longer 'wrong' by actually adding a good set of basic tags for areas,
> lines and points ("simple English" as opposed to technical English of
> 'nodes' and 'ways') so that when a mapper invents something new, they
> can add tags for colour, opacity, line colour, line width, line
> opacity - for areas and similar attributes for lines and points
> (colour, opacity, size etc.) and obviously tags for name and
> description etc. What do people think to this ?
> 
Read up on the history of HTML 3.2 and why all the presentational
garbage that was put into it was deprecated in HTML 4.0 and is nowhere
to be seen in XHTML 1.1 and HTML 5.

What you are proposing is the mapping equivalent of the  tag in
HTML 3.2 when we have had something far better than that for years. No
thanks.


-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Frederik Ramm]

André,

   you're obviously bearing some grudge against "whoever makes decisions
in OSM" because your suggestions have been ignored. That's fine, you can
do that, but please don't run around and claim that just because you are
unhappy with things,

> Consequently, the consensus was "we prefer tagging for the renderer".

This is silly and you know it; no such consensus exists for any
definition of the word consensus.

> An alternative is for example using something like a rendered
> "landuse=tourism" for features more specifically defined 

...

> I called that "generic rendering" and even that was refused (the
> examples above are generalized existing tags).

I don't recall at the moment but probably you made a suggestion that
went "hey let's change everything to my cool new idea" and people went
"nah" and now you're miffed. In fact such "generic rendering" as you
call it does already exist in many places in OSM, here's a three-level
example of a lake:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264574966

Of course using such tagging for everything would greatly increase the
amount of redundant data in the database; the information that a
turlough is a kind of lake, and a lake is a water feature, would be
replicated thousands of times across our database (along with the
theoretical liberty to tag a few turlough that are swamps instead if
someone so desired). This is one of the main counter arguments to this
style of tagging; it makes retrieving and processing information easier
because more information is intrinsic to the database, but at the same
time increases the data volume.

> So, the general consensus answer is clearly "please do tag for the
> renderer".

You argue like a child who has been denied candy and now runs around
telling everyone that obviously the "consensus" was that they should
starve.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Janko Mihelić]

It maybe controversial, but I think we don't want "everyone" editing the
map. I think we need some barriers to filter out people who are "good"
mappers. Good mappers have to understand this is not a service for them,
but a community. They have to understand this is not a drawn map but a
database. They have to appreciate the effort of others, and so on.

Of course, not everyone is a good mapper from the start, and starting to
map should be easy and fun. And I think it is. But if you want to go to the
next step and become a regular mapper, something not being rendered
shouldn't be an obstacle for you to continue mapping it.

Janko

sub, 16. svi 2015. 05:03 André Pirard  je napisao:

> On 2015-05-16 01:40, Frederik Ramm wrote :
>
> Hi,
>
> On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:
>
>  I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...
>
>
> Often.
>
>
>  Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
> disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
> appear on the map.
>
>
> Thing is, there is no "THE" map. There's tons of maps in various colour
> schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
> this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
> motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.
>
>  Yes, there is "THE" ("main") map at OSM.org but indeed I don't remember
> having ever read what it is for.
> Tentatively it's a tourism, traveler's  etc. *general* map like those one
> finds in bookshops on paper, but ecologic.
> But lately, under "Is what we're doing useful?", I reported a reply from
> Tom Hughes
> 
> seeming to say that THE map is not for the general public and refusing to
> set a help page for it (plus saying that the documentation we make amounts
> to being crap).  So, every tagger is invited to make and publish his own
> rendering and to pay Google so that it were advertised better than the
> others.
>
>  Your suggestion would kill that flexibility, and everyone would have to
> adhere to that one colour scheme set up by the mapper or editor. It
> would totally run against everything we hold dear.
>
>  I understand that what pmailkee suggests is basically similar to what I
> once suggested: lessen tagging for the renderer by finding means to make
> rendering simpler to implement so that every specific tiny feature is not a
> hassle to render and that the tagger finds "legal" ways to tag with
> rendering (making visible) the features *he* holds dear. The proposed
> solutions may well not be the best ones but...
> Just like what you write here, all the answers were "NOT".  Even stupidly
> laughing at what I wrote.
> There was *not a single* attempt to suggest alternative solutions to the
> problem.
> Consequently, the consensus was "we prefer tagging for the renderer".
>
> An alternative is for example using something like a rendered
> "landuse=tourism" for features more specifically defined with Logical
> Structured tagging attributes like tourism:leisure=maze,
> tourism:leisure=miniature_golf, tourism=camp_site, etc., any feature that
> fits on an area with a name for touristic purpose. Other purposes alike.
> That tag would fill an otherwise empty area with any plain color the
> render chooses and write a name on it unless some more specific rendering
> exists.  And the tagger would be glad that not only the feature found by
> search are made visible (and back to invisible when the search pane is
> closed).
> I called that "generic rendering" and even that was refused (the examples
> above are generalized existing tags).
> So, the general consensus answer is clearly "please do tag for the
> renderer".
>
> Cheers
>
>   André.
>
>  What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with multi-user
> capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself but not
> something that we should remotely consider in OSM.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
>
>
>  ___
> 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] Tagging FOR the renderer

[André Pirard]

On 2015-05-16 01:40, Frederik Ramm wrote :
> Hi,
>
> On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:
>> I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...
> Often.
>
>> Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
>> disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
>> appear on the map.
> Thing is, there is no "THE" map. There's tons of maps in various colour
> schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
> this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
> motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.
Yes, there is "THE" ("main") map at OSM.org but indeed I don't remember
having ever read what it is for.
Tentatively it's a tourism, traveler's  etc. /*general*/ map like those
one finds in bookshops on paper, but ecologic.
But lately, under "Is what we're doing useful?", I reported a reply from
Tom Hughes

seeming to say that THE map is not for the general public and refusing
to set a help page for it (plus saying that the documentation we make
amounts to being crap).  So, every tagger is invited to make and publish
his own rendering and to pay Google so that it were advertised better
than the others.
> Your suggestion would kill that flexibility, and everyone would have to
> adhere to that one colour scheme set up by the mapper or editor. It
> would totally run against everything we hold dear.
I understand that what pmailkee suggests is basically similar to what I
once suggested: lessen tagging for the renderer by finding means to make
rendering simpler to implement so that every specific tiny feature is
not a hassle to render and that the tagger finds "legal" ways to tag
with rendering (making visible) the features *he* holds dear. The
proposed solutions may well not be the best ones but...
Just like what you write here, all the answers were "NOT".  Even
stupidly laughing at what I wrote.
There was *not a single* attempt to suggest alternative solutions to the
problem.
Consequently, the consensus was "we prefer tagging for the renderer".

An alternative is for example using something like a rendered
"landuse=tourism" for features more specifically defined with Logical
Structured tagging attributes like tourism:leisure=maze,
tourism:leisure=miniature_golf, tourism=camp_site, etc., any feature
that fits on an area with a name for touristic purpose. Other purposes
alike.
That tag would fill an otherwise empty area with any plain color the
render chooses and write a name on it unless some more specific
rendering exists.  And the tagger would be glad that not only the
feature found by search are made visible (and back to invisible when the
search pane is closed).
I called that "generic rendering" and even that was refused (the
examples above are generalized existing tags).
So, the general consensus answer is clearly "please do tag for the
renderer".

Cheers

André.


> What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with multi-user
> capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself but not
> something that we should remotely consider in OSM.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Warin]

On 16/05/2015 10:39 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Regardless of people's views on this, the reality is that one of the 
main reasons people get involved with OSM is because they want to see 
the things they tag show up on a map somewhere at some time.


Tagging for the renderer isn't going to go away anytime soon because 
IMO almost everyone wants to see "their stuff" on a map.


Absolutely.




On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 4:58 PM, pmailkeey . > wrote:




On 16 May 2015 at 00:40, Frederik Ramm mailto:frede...@remote.org>> wrote:

Hi,

On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:


> Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially
newbies will be
> disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the
db does not
> appear on the map.


Not at all. I'm suggesting additional tags for basic graphic
properties - and for http://www.openstreetmap.org to make use of
these ADDITIONAL basic tags. All other maps and rendering would be
totally unaffected.


What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with
multi-user
capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself
but not
something that we should remotely consider in OSM.


Why shouldn't a user who adds a new feature to the db be allowed
to 'suggest' how it appears on 'THE' map ? Once the feature is
designed to be 'properly' rendered, the basic graphic tags can be
removed.
I'm suggesting that these additional basic tags are used on a
temporary basis but would not oppose their permanent use if others
agreed.




If you 'add a new feature to the db' then you should describe it on a 
wiki page .. on that page you can suggest the rendering .. some of the 
wiki pages have it ...


e.g. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tap#Rendering

This does not mean it will be rendered. Nor does it mean it will be 
rendered in the way suggested. In fact many people using  the tag 
man_made=water_tap use the additional key amenity=drinking_water ... and 
it is the drinking_water that gets rendered.


So if you want something rendered straight away .. pick an existing tag 
that is already rendered. If you want to add a new tag .. then do so, 
document it on the wiki ... and hope that lots of people use it and lots 
of them get onto the db .. then finally the renders might recognise it 
and it appears on the map. That is the way it works now .. unless you 
start rendering your own maps.


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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Dave Swarthout]

Regardless of people's views on this, the reality is that one of the main
reasons people get involved with OSM is because they want to see the things
they tag show up on a map somewhere at some time. In my case I wanted to
see the roads and features in my areas of interest (Alaska, Thailand) show
up on my Garmin GPS. Now that I'm compiling my own maps from OSM data I can
choose to render the things I like in my own way.

But the point i'm trying to make is that because I have created my own
custom icons for things I like, for example milestones, radio and
observation towers, motorcycle shops, to name just a few, I find myself
tagging them more often than before. I do it because I enjoy seeing them on
my GPS. I can therefore adhere to OSM guidelines and tag things properly
but because I am the renderer in question, I can also legitimately "tag for
the renderer".

Tagging for the renderer isn't going to go away anytime soon because IMO
almost everyone wants to see "their stuff" on a map.



On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 4:58 PM, pmailkeey . 
wrote:

>
>
> On 16 May 2015 at 00:40, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:
>> > I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...
>>
>> Often.
>>
>> > Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
>> > disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
>> > appear on the map.
>>
>> Thing is, there is no "THE" map.
>
>
>
> THE map is here: http://www.openstreetmap.org - supposedly.
>
> However, everyone should look here:
> http://openstreetmap.us/iD/master/#background=Bing&map=2.00/-1.8/53.8
>
> as this is a more complete map.
>
>
>
>
>
>> There's tons of maps in various colour
>> schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
>> this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
>> motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.
>>
>> Your suggestion would kill that flexibility, and everyone would have to
>> adhere to that one colour scheme set up by the mapper or editor. It
>> would totally run against everything we hold dear.
>>
>
> Not at all. I'm suggesting additional tags for basic graphic properties -
> and for  http://www.openstreetmap.org to make use of these ADDITIONAL
> basic tags. All other maps and rendering would be totally unaffected.
>
>>
>> What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with multi-user
>> capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself but not
>> something that we should remotely consider in OSM.
>>
>>
> Why shouldn't a user who adds a new feature to the db be allowed to
> 'suggest' how it appears on 'THE' map ? Once the feature is designed to be
> 'properly' rendered, the basic graphic tags can be removed.
> I'm suggesting that these additional basic tags are used on a temporary
> basis but would not oppose their permanent use if others agreed.
>
> --
> Mike.
> @millomweb  -
> For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
> via *the area's premier website - *
>
> *currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
> property & pets*
>
> T&Cs 
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[pmailkeey .]

On 16 May 2015 at 00:40, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:
> > I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...
>
> Often.
>
> > Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
> > disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
> > appear on the map.
>
> Thing is, there is no "THE" map.



THE map is here: http://www.openstreetmap.org - supposedly.

However, everyone should look here:
http://openstreetmap.us/iD/master/#background=Bing&map=2.00/-1.8/53.8

as this is a more complete map.





> There's tons of maps in various colour
> schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
> this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
> motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.
>
> Your suggestion would kill that flexibility, and everyone would have to
> adhere to that one colour scheme set up by the mapper or editor. It
> would totally run against everything we hold dear.
>

Not at all. I'm suggesting additional tags for basic graphic properties -
and for  http://www.openstreetmap.org to make use of these ADDITIONAL basic
tags. All other maps and rendering would be totally unaffected.

>
> What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with multi-user
> capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself but not
> something that we should remotely consider in OSM.
>
>
Why shouldn't a user who adds a new feature to the db be allowed to
'suggest' how it appears on 'THE' map ? Once the feature is designed to be
'properly' rendered, the basic graphic tags can be removed.
I'm suggesting that these additional basic tags are used on a temporary
basis but would not oppose their permanent use if others agreed.

-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 05/16/2015 12:03 AM, pmailkeey . wrote:
> I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...

Often.

> Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
> disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
> appear on the map.

Thing is, there is no "THE" map. There's tons of maps in various colour
schemes and designs, as well as tons of non-map uses of our data, and
this is one of the super strenghts of OSM - we record that there's a
motorway, and the map maker can define how they want the motorway drawn.

Your suggestion would kill that flexibility, and everyone would have to
adhere to that one colour scheme set up by the mapper or editor. It
would totally run against everything we hold dear.

What you are talking about is essentially "MS Paint with multi-user
capability". That's certainly an interesting project in itself but not
something that we should remotely consider in OSM.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

[Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[pmailkeey .]

I don't know whether this has been discussed or even mooted before...

Tagging for the renderer is natural. Mappers, especially newbies will be
disappointed their pet new feature they've just added to the db does not
appear on the map. This situation is no use to anyone but has been allowed
to continue and 'enforced' with wiki et al going against the notion of
tagging for the renderer. The problem was likely there in the beginning and
is still there now - several years later - unresolved. In fact, the way OSM
is put together, it's completely unresolvable - as people are free to tag
how they like and the map shows only what the renderers choose to show. I
have considered that what we see in the editors is the real map and true
OSM isn't. If the editors had a 'read-only' mode, they'd be far more use
than OSM proper and mappers would be happier to see their work on the 'map'.

I therefore want to air the view that 'mapping for the renderer' is no
longer 'wrong' by actually adding a good set of basic tags for areas, lines
and points ("simple English" as opposed to technical English of 'nodes' and
'ways') so that when a mapper invents something new, they can add tags for
colour, opacity, line colour, line width, line opacity - for areas and
similar attributes for lines and points (colour, opacity, size etc.) and
obviously tags for name and description etc. What do people think to this ?

-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

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