Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

On 28/07/18 07:47, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:54 AM marc marc wrote: a good idea would be to explain with a (as easy as possible) example why access=customers or private does not fit for your need. If it was what you did in your previous email, sorry but I didn't understand

Re: [Tagging] landuse=clearing

On 28/07/18 14:13, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On 28 July 2018 at 12:31, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: I think the basic tag is trying to show that the surrounding area (usually trees) stops around this area. So why not tag the trees as a

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

On Sat, 28 Jul 2018, 00:28 Warin, <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For me a 'licence' implies a certain level of skill or knowledge is > required - > e.g. licences for driving a vehicle, having a gun all should have tests of > skill and/or knowledge. > It is a formal process. > > A permit, on

[Tagging] landuse=clearing

Hi, Presently trying to reduce the number of these .. some 1,300 in the data base. In Cosata Rica around Parque Nacional Corcovada there are a vast number of these. They have varying land covers, some of them mixed covers. I think the basic tag is trying to show that the surrounding area

[Tagging] amenity=festival_ground

I came across the tag amenity=festival_grounds and it has quite a bit of variance in its use. I wrote a diary entry on it so I have more details there. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jgon6/diary/44497 Basically, the tag has

Re: [Tagging] landuse=clearing

On 28 July 2018 at 12:31, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think the basic tag is trying to show that the surrounding area (usually > trees) stops around this area. So why not tag the trees as a multipoygon > and use these tagged clearings are inners? It would render unlike the >

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 12:52 AM, Alan Grant wrote: Obtaining a TV licence in the UK or Ireland does not require demonstrating > the ability to operate a television! > To understand this, you need to understand the history of the thing. Before there were televisions there were radios. In the

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

What's about access=license? For me it has the same meaning. It has 245 uses and is documented https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dlicense. Javier 2018-07-27 6:22 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny : > 27. Lipiec 2018 03:38 od t...@fitchdesign.com: > > > My take is to toss an

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

Hi! For the rest of us Like Kevin, I followed this email list for a couple years. The first case I read about was the lakes of Alaska (Sept 21st 2017), but I'm sure there were more threads on this matter before. For cases where you get your permit on the entrance of a national park or similar,

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

On 27/07/18 18:06, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 26. Jul 2018, at 22:48, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com > wrote: I went and updated the wiki a little bit. I added details to the building=house  

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 22:48, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > maybe even adding to them as the pages are still pretty sparse on detail. we have to be careful when making the definitions more specific (adding detail will result in this), as there will be differences how

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

On 27/07/18 17:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 26. Jul 2018, at 19:47, Sebastian wrote: In Australia houses that share one or more walls with the next house (can be one or both sides) are called town houses town houses are a more recent variation of terraced houses.

Re: [Tagging] RFC: property for the presence of pitch markings

Hi, Martin, What about if there is a basketball pitch (basketball hoops are on the pitch) but lines are for futsal only? Maybe some like this? leisure=pitch pitch=basket; futsal lines:futsal =yes lines:basketball =no Yours, José 2018-07-27 0:43 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: >

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 19:47, Sebastian wrote: > > In Australia houses that share one or more walls with the next house (can be > one or both sides) are called town houses town houses are a more recent variation of terraced houses. The term usually describes luxury

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

On 27/07/18 18:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 26. Jul 2018, at 22:48, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com> wrote: maybe even adding to them as the pages are still pretty sparse on detail. we have to be careful when making the definitions more specific (adding detail will result

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 19:39, Szem wrote: > > There is a significant difference compared to existing values (private, > permissive), because mostly anyone can ask permission for these roads (what > you get), but without it, entry is forbidden. That's why I've thought needs

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 22:48, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I went and updated the wiki a little bit. I added details to the > building=house and you kept the „single dwelling“ paragraph. I’ve got no feedback on my previous mail about houses in villages (with

Re: [Tagging] RFC: property for the presence of pitch markings

I agree with both of you that lines: seems a better way to deal with the specifics. I wasn’t aware there is already something in use. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On 27/07/18 21:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 26. Jul 2018, at 21:26, François Lacombe wrote: I don't want to break things but only improve them, all the best one issue with using only one unit for a tag is that they can’t always be transformed without rounding. E.g.

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

sent from a phone > On 27. Jul 2018, at 10:18, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If it is intended for more than one family (and the independent entrances > give that feeling) then I'd not use "house" .. apartments perhaps? for me “apartments” means a place with a shared building

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 19:39, Szem wrote: > > - Roads on the embankments (The longest ones in category. Driving by car > without permission is forbidden, other access is free. Some roads on the > embankments are free access): > The access tags are: access= private,

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

On 27/07/18 19:36, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 27. Jul 2018, at 10:18, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: If it is intended for more than one family (and the independent entrances give that feeling) then I'd not use "house" ..

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

sent from a phone > On 27. Jul 2018, at 12:06, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Looks like common entrances to me? > Another alternative is residences? the first ones I posted some days ago had individual entrances, these are from an Internet search and although they are similar,

Re: [Tagging] building = house vs detached.

On 27/07/18 20:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 27. Jul 2018, at 12:06, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Looks like common entrances to me? Another alternative is residences? the first ones I posted some days ago had individual entrances, these are from an Internet

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

sent from a phone > On 26. Jul 2018, at 21:26, François Lacombe wrote: > > I don't want to break things but only improve them, all the best one issue with using only one unit for a tag is that they can’t always be transformed without rounding. E.g. maxspeed=55mph cannot be converted to kph

Re: [Tagging] RFC: property for the presence of pitch markings

On 27/07/18 20:28, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I agree with both of you that lines: seems a better way to deal with the specifics. I wasn’t aware there is already something in use. Don't know if it has much use. I used as a template the basketball page to create the netball page, so I have

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On 27/07/2018 13:19, Andrew Hain wrote: ... and unit management support in editors. ... and presumably also in every data consumer that uses OSM data too? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

My own preference is to have no (zero) units in the database, decimals where wanted (maxwidth=2.2) and unit management support in editors. -- Andrew From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> Sent: 27 July 2018 12:27:04 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re:

Re: [Tagging] default access tag for driveways

service=driveway isn't just for residential driveways. It is also used for other driveways. Here is an example of a driveway to a church. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100946154 I would agree that residential driveways should probably be implied as access=private. Jgon6 On Fri, Jul 27,

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

I agree maybe with the exeption of case like maxspeed François voltage is a good usecase to open an issue to the whised app. Le 27. 07. 18 à 14:19, Andrew Hain a écrit : > My own preference is to have no (zero) units in the database, decimals > where wanted (maxwidth=2.2) and unit management

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On 27/07/2018 16:20, marc marc wrote: I agree maybe with the exeption of case like maxspeed And maxheight and maxwidth. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

Data consumers would convert to units they are interested in, no others. -- Andrew From: Andy Townsend Sent: 27 July 2018 14:34:41 To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values On

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

Here we go again. I have used access=permit in several instances. I'm clear on what it means and the differences between the various access tags. I'm using the tag and unless someone shows me a good reason why such tagging is proven incorrect in some way, I'll continue to use it. I'm betting

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

Le 27. 07. 18 à 02:45, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:40 PM marc marc wrote: >> Le 26. 07. 18 à 19:39, Szem a écrit : >> imho *=licence is included in the current meaning of *=customers > > I understand that you are entirely convinced that your personal view > is the only

[Tagging] default access tag for driveways

Hi, The wiki does not explicitly state what the default assumed tagging is for highway=service + service=driveway. I've seen it used mostly as the private entrance to a house, i.e. the bit of road you use to connect the edge of your property to wherever you leave your car. People usually would

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

normalization into SI is the sort of thing that engineers and scientists go for, and speaking as a (computer) scientist it has some appeal. but practically it's probably not a good idea in mapping, where i think we should be using local units in an unambiguous manner. if i see maxspeed=40 on a

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

Le 27. 07. 18 à 18:51, Richard Welty a écrit : > but practically it's probably not a good idea in mapping, where i think > we should be using local units in an unambiguous manner. nothing prevent a editor nor a site to show "volt" next to the textbox for voltage value nor to show "km/h or mph"

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

I'm all for SI units for things like voltages and elevations. I'm perfectly fine with tagging the elevation of Slide Mountain as 1274 metres and letting a US data consumer convert that to 4180 feet. Regulatory things like maxspeed=* should have the unit in the tag, and they should be in the same

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

> Regulatory things like maxspeed=* should have the unit in the tag, and >they should be in the same units that the signs are in. A sign reading >'Speed limit 25 mph' means 25 mph, and entering 40.2336 km/h loses the >information that the regulatory signs are in US customary units. I agree with

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:54 AM marc marc wrote: > a good idea would be to explain with a (as easy as possible) example > why access=customers or private does not fit for your need. > If it was what you did in your previous email, sorry but I didn't > understand it, because your examples are too

Re: [Tagging] default access tag for driveways

On 28 July 2018 at 03:33, Mike H <1jg...@gmail.com> wrote: > service=driveway isn't just for residential driveways. It is also used for > other driveways. Here is an example of a driveway to a church. > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100946154 I would agree that > residential driveways

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

Le 27. 07. 18 à 22:44, Nelson A. de Oliveira a écrit : > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:33 PM, François Lacombe > wrote: >> Well okay >> Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : >> [Maxspeed>25] ? > > Maybe the query tools could simply implement a function that converts > number+unit to a

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

2018-07-27 22:44 GMT+02:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira : > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:33 PM, François Lacombe > wrote: > > Well okay > > Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : > > [Maxspeed>25] ? > > Maybe the query tools could simply implement a function that converts > number+unit to a

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 6:48 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > I'm all for SI units for things like voltages and elevations. I'm > perfectly fine with tagging the elevation of Slide Mountain as 1274 > metres and letting a US data consumer convert that to 4180 feet. > I respectfully disagree. One reason

Re: [Tagging] Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)

2018.07.27. 3:15 keltezéssel, Warin írta: ... Just use the tag. 245 in the data base now. As for fees they can be tagged with fee= tag As for the permit conditions .. well you could just tag permit=* I'd just do it. Overpass turbo shows a wide distribution around the world. It makes much

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On 26.07.2018 21:26, François Lacombe wrote: > Then store voltage=40 is far way better but harder to be read by > humans also. I currently prefer explicit units in the database because they document the mapper's intent and avoid ambiguity. Defaults aren't always obvious. For example, people

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

Well okay Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : [Maxspeed>25] ? It's not possible while units are stored with values. Then i agree that human display is a matter of tools, not database François Le ven. 27 juil. 2018 à 22:21, Tobias Knerr a écrit : > On 26.07.2018 21:26, François

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:33 PM, François Lacombe wrote: > Well okay > Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : > [Maxspeed>25] ? Maybe the query tools could simply implement a function that converts number+unit to a numeric value only? [to_number(maxspeed) > 25]