Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Andrew Hain
I see building=house as useful because it distinguishes houses from blocks of flats but the case to have anything that repeats way geometry or building:levels is much less obvious. -- Andrew From: Paul Allen Sent: 23 July 2018 22:55:36 To: Tag discussion,

Re: [Tagging] "sym" tag

2018-07-24 Thread José G Moya Y .
El mar., 24 jul. 2018 17:38, Andy Townsend escribió: What you would need to do would be different for the next one though. You can't assume that (e.g. "sym=church" actually means a church on the ground. You'll have to do this on a case by case basis. In fact, know it's not church but a

Re: [Tagging] "sym" tag

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 20:56, José G Moya Y. wrote: > > In fact, know it's not church but a hermit. In case you didn’t find it, there’s amenity=monastery and monastery:type=hermitage to tag a hermitage. cheers, Martin ___

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Jerry Clough - OSM
On 23/07/2018 14:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote it does not seem to be a very promising concept though. Terraced houses are usually seen as a compromise for people who want an independent house, but cannot afford a detached one. Terraced houses are cheaper because they need less ground

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging

2018-07-24 Thread François Lacombe
Hi Dave, I agree about monsooon or snow melt. Regarding industrial operations involving downstream rivers, there are precise restrictions and perimeters may be publicly displayed like this https://imgur.com/a/TLhZcgE Regarding this particular place : The stream

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging: hazard?

2018-07-24 Thread ael
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:48:05PM +0200, François Lacombe wrote: > > As the discussion about intermittent/seasonal/... on waterways goes on, > there is another thing to map: how waterways banks can be dangerous due to > sudden rise or lower water level. The obvious tag is hazard, but for some

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging

2018-07-24 Thread Dave F
Hi This is another one of those discussion which comes up every year or so. The perception of danger is subjective; which never fits well within OSM. Waterways are not dangerous in themselves. They are inanimate objects. They don't jump out & attack you as you walk by. It's the naive way

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 18:00, yo paseopor wrote: > > abandoned: (~180.000) ? Are you telling me are these items now exists yet in > OSM? yes, abandoned means there is an abandoned feature there. If you go there, you should see something (a feature in decay, most likely,

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 09:36, Andrew Hain wrote: > > -1, there are several established tags for residential buildings in osm, e.g. > apartments, > > The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them. We > have many tags for residential buildings > and

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

2018-07-24 Thread Warin
Hi, As part of the proposal .. I think  a document on how to map PTv3 in the simplest most basic way needs to be done. This would not be the bells and whistles method, but the bread and water method. The basics that would have the routing working and the map displaying things. It needs to

[Tagging] landuse=scrub

2018-07-24 Thread Warin
Hi, The next landuse = landcover tag that I have come across is landuse=scrub .. some 1,600 use of it according to taginfo. The obvious thing to do is change them to natural=scrub. I have not 'looked' at them (selected one and checked OSM rendering, and some imagery to 'see' what is

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging

2018-07-24 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On 24 July 2018 at 18:49, François Lacombe wrote: > > No because water always flows, look at the left picture on the danger sign. > Sorry, couldn't see the water - just looked like a dry gully It's just that sometimes, hydroelectric operator releases big amount of > water wich completely and

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 09:36, Andrew Hain wrote: > > That's what we do with some other types of buildings. We separate form from > function. We have industrial buildings > and then specify the industry. building=industrial is very poor tagging (armchair level of

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 09:36, Andrew Hain wrote: > > We can have building=bungalow but that is redundant when it just means > building:levels=1. I am still not sure building=bungalow really says nothing more than 1 floor, but if it did, it is ok. > > We can have

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread Warin
On 25/07/18 02:00, yo paseopor wrote: Thank you for guide me to a project that...doesn't work at some times. You know now why my option is the one I have made. In addition to that. As the future does not exist these items with proposed also does not exist, doesn't? So these (~20.000) items:

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 25. Jul 2018, at 00:11, Colin Smale wrote: > > But we must also not be tempted to force multiple concepts into a single tag > hierarchy. Before we start down that path, let us be clear what the hierarchy > is intended to represent, and what factors are in-scope (a

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Colin Smale
On 2018-07-24 23:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > We should not remove the details, and nuances in this field, data consumers > can deal with it, they will either treat all/most buildings the same (so it > doesn't matter to them anyway), or they could be specifically interested in >

Re: [Tagging] landuse=sand

2018-07-24 Thread Warin
Done. There will probably be more in the future. As long as the numbers can be kept down then it will not get like landuse=grass. On 20/07/18 06:13, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 18.07.2018 07:43, Warin wrote: I have already changed a few. Are there any comments on changing landuse=sand, before it

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - ephemeral -STOPPED

2018-07-24 Thread Warin
Unfortunately seasonal has a wider use than just waterways ... Used with highways ~8,000 times (probably snow closures) Used with sports ~1,600 times (things like cricket in the summer and soccer in the winter) So I don't think that water_permanence is all that useful. On 20/07/18 05:45,

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

2018-07-24 Thread Roland Olbricht
Hi, This would not be the bells and whistles method, but the bread and water method. The basics that would have the routing working and the map displaying things. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbus_stop and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dplatform

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread yo paseopor
Thank you for guide me to a project that...doesn't work at some times. You know now why my option is the one I have made. In addition to that. As the future does not exist these items with proposed also does not exist, doesn't? So these (~20.000) items: out of OSM please. The explanation also

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging

2018-07-24 Thread François Lacombe
Hi Graeme, 2018-07-24 0:12 GMT+02:00 Graeme Fitzpatrick : > > On 24 July 2018 at 06:48, François Lacombe > wrote: > >> >> Then what could be the best way to tag it? >> No existing tag sounds suitable for this, even the idea of a single >> "permanence" key. >> > > I think intermittent would

[Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread yo paseopor
Hi! As I have received some notes for Mueschel and other user in a authorized import of the Spanish Cadastre I want to explain some variations I use in tagging of erased items. The rationale is simple: If I can use the prefix "was:" and also exists https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread Ilya Zverev
Lifecycle prefixes are not for adding historic or future data in OpenStreetMap. Please see http://openhistorymap.org/ for that. These prefixes are in OSM only to avoid mapping mistakes. For example, when a building is visible on a commonly used satellite imagery, but has been demolished, we

[Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes (was: Re: Public Transport v3 — starting RFC)

2018-07-24 Thread Leo Gaspard
My point of view, as a beginner in OSM who still hasn't understood how PTv1 and PTv2 are supposed to work (and thus didn't read this specific proposal, take this as generic comments on PT tagging in OSM): 1. Beginners are already at a loss, introducing a third (!) tagging scheme will just make

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes (was: Re: Public Transport v3 — starting RFC)

2018-07-24 Thread Jo
The whole point of wanting to move to a simpler tagging scheme is to become able to write simple to understand documentation. Dropping the "v1" tags that some like to call 'deprecated' is not possible, because then your stops don't render. Replacing highway=bus_stop by public_transport=platform

Re: [Tagging] "sym" tag

2018-07-24 Thread Andy Townsend
On 24/07/2018 15:59, José G Moya Y. wrote: I've found some places of worship tagged with the undocumented "sym=church" tag. They're from Garmin waypoints.  See https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/sym for other examples. Don't just mechanically edit them, because there are likely other

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

2018-07-24 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
24. Lipiec 2018 15:30 od yopaseo...@gmail.com : > tagging of erased items > Please, do not add (especially via import!) objects that are no longer existing. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes

2018-07-24 Thread Leo Gaspard
On 07/24/2018 11:17 PM, Jo wrote: > The whole point of wanting to move to a simpler tagging scheme is to become > able to write simple to understand documentation. From what I understood (so, second-hand information) PTv2 can be used with as few objects and tags as PTv1, so it's not inherently

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes (was: Re: Public Transport v3 — starting RFC)

2018-07-24 Thread Leo Gaspard
Hi Ilya, I unfortunately won't be anywhere near Milan anytime soon, but thanks for the invitation :) The problem I can see with your proposal is that it appears to be based on PTv1, not on PTv2, which looks much more logical to me (even though I still don't understand it completely). I mean,

Re: [Tagging] Documentation issues of PT tagging schemes (was: Re: Public Transport v3 — starting RFC)

2018-07-24 Thread Ilya Zverev
Hi Leo, As a person who tried for many years not to touch any public transport in OSM because of hard to understand tagging, I share your pain about missing tutorials and instructions. The situation with these is a bit better in the Russian part of wiki, because we don't have hordes of mappers

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

2018-07-24 Thread Jmapb
On 7/23/2018 5:56 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 23. Jul 2018, at 17:08, Jmapb wrote: woke up to the conclusion that the attached/detached/semi-detached distinction is not a great use of the building tag. As mentioned by André, we can literally see on the map if these house footprints

[Tagging] "sym" tag

2018-07-24 Thread José G Moya Y .
Hi! I've found some places of worship tagged with the undocumented "sym=church" tag. It appears to be added from some old software, since the"name" tag in the same element is truncated to eight characters. It's surprising to see how these places are being rendered as churches despite of this tag

Re: [Tagging] Dangerous waterways tagging: hazard?

2018-07-24 Thread Yves
The tag 'hazard' can be found on the whitewater wiki page, so I guess whatever tag is found here would be worth mentioned there. Yves Le 24 juillet 2018 12:51:39 GMT+02:00, ael a écrit : >On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:48:05PM +0200, François Lacombe wrote: >> >> As the discussion about