Re: [Tagging] "satellit"

On 2019-03-06 08:46, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > On 3/6/19 3:31 AM, Sergio Manzi wrote: >> My friend, there are 88 persons who have mapped 520 antennas >> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/antenna). >> >> Compare it to the billions of antennas out there and I think we are far >> below the

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

Mar 5, 2019, 1:47 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > Landcover now has about 170 000 usage count. > > Still growing rapidly despite not yet being rendered on OSM Carto.  > > I would say that is enough reason to start renderin landcover on OSM Carto > and other renderings.  > I run a quick check,

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Am 6. März 2019 01:57:21 MEZ schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer : > > >sent from a phone > >> On 5. Mar 2019, at 12:17, Jan S wrote: >> >> Any thoughts on this? > > >if you think about it, there are more police forces in Germany, >particularly if we find more specific tagging for specific categories

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

If it's an import (not zutomated edit) and the import is ok then it's regular usage. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op wo 6 mrt. 2019 om 09:55 schreef Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > > > > Mar 5, 2019, 1:47 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > Landcover now has about 170 000 usage count. > >

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

For me there is a significant difference between "mappers adopted using this tag, usage tripled in a year" "single import is source of almost all new instances of this tag" Second is not indicating that mappers are using this tag. Mar 6, 2019, 12:29 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > If it's an

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 13:54 Uhr schrieb Andy Townsend : > Looking at the example data and comparing to the imagery > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/591832256 is clearly "substandard" as > what should have been mapped as "a tree, on one side of the road" has > instead been mapped as

Re: [Tagging] Emergency vehicle country-specific law

Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 14:16 Uhr schrieb Marc Gemis : > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 11:52 AM OSMDoudou > <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: > > If there was an explosion due to a gas leak and the road is blocked by > debris, I guess they can go in the opposite direction of a

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

On 06/03/2019 13:06, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Regarding landcover=trees overlapping the road: this is not a problem or an error, it means the trees are covering these parts. No - look at the imagery that the mapper claims to have used again - the tree (singular) doesn't cover the road. 

Re: [Tagging] "satellit"

Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi : > To put things in perspective, and just as an example, we have about > 186000 amenity=drinking_water, that is an antenna every 26 water taps... > > not really astonishing, because everybody is interested in obtaining drinking water when

Re: [Tagging] Emergency vehicle country-specific law

On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 11:52 AM OSMDoudou <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > AFAIK emergency vehicles are exempt from limitations of traffic law > > (including oneway roads, forbidden access roads, speed limits, red lights, > > forbidden turns) > > Belgian law requires

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 8:08 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I agree that imports are always distorting the tagging system, and pose a > general threat to our bottom up system of community generated tagging, and > "voting by using stuff". Still, when there's no clear consensus, an importer has

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees bot edits

On 06/03/2019 11:29, Peter Elderson wrote: If it's an import (not automated edit) and the import is ok then it's regular usage. Er, no - that way madness lies.  We get enough rubbish in OSM from "substandard" imports, without those imports deciding to use previously unused or unpopular

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 09:55 Uhr schrieb Jan S : > Am 6. März 2019 01:57:21 MEZ schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer < > dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > >if you think about it, there are more police forces in Germany, > >particularly if we find more specific tagging for specific categories > >of forces (e.g.

Re: [Tagging] Emergency vehicle country-specific law

There's quite a few bridges that are *definitely* access=no, emergency=no in my area, but are *not* disused. Might not be physically possible to get a motor vehicle onto the span and definitely not legal to use the span at all, but, not all people care about rules. On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 3:43 AM

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 17:57 Uhr schrieb Jmapb : > On 3/5/2019 2:48 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > > ... and then there are big research centres that are called > > "laboratory". Like LLNL or Los Alamos National Laboratory. > > > These sorts of things I've seen tagged as

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

sent from a phone > On 6. Mar 2019, at 02:02, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > Slightly off topic: vie ferrate are not a familiar thing in the > mountains near me. > Does > http://aspiringfortysixer.com/Upper_Lower_Wolfjaw,_Armstrong_%26_Gothics_files/P1010309.jpg > count? to me it looks like. A via

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:51 AM Volker Schmidt wrote: > > ... and then there are big research centres that are called "laboratory". > Like LLNL or Los Alamos National Laboratory. The two near me (GE Global Research Center; Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory) I've simply tagged 'landuse=industrial'.

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, March 6, 2019 4:33 pm, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Yes, shop is not becoming shop=kiosk just becomes you are unable to enter > inside. Apologies - unsaid assumption was that we were talking about shops carrying the typical convenience supplies, for which the distinction between

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

My point was only to be aware that we in front of one of many cases where the same English word has many meanings and that may produce the effect of regrouping under one tag with subtags could produce problems. "Laboratory" certainly needs a disambiguation page, On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 15:15, Kevin

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Yes, shop is not becoming shop=kiosk just becomes you are unable to enter inside. Shop selling only clothes is still shop=clothes even if it is so small that you are unable to enter inside. Shop selling only cars is still shop=car even if it is so small that you are unable to enter inside.

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Absolutely. shop=kiosk is the best for these shops; which you mostly stand outside to buy goods. shop=convenience if you can enter the shop I tell people now a days. Le mer. 6 mars 2019 à 15:07, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit : > On Wed, March 6, 2019 3:58 pm, Enock Seth Nyamador wrote: > >

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, March 6, 2019 4:23 pm, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > - convenience: small supermarket that is usually too small to have > shopping carts but still also sells things of daily need (shampoo, toilet > paper, milk, cornflakes, bread and spread,...). The typical 7-Eleven store > (doesn't exist in

[Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Hello, I currently found out that shops that sell clothes are either tagged with     shop=clothes or with     shop=fashion but I can't find out when to use which. Can anybody clarify? Cheers, Daniel ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

kiosk and convenience is supposed to be the same? I always used it like - convenience: small supermarket that is usually too small to have shopping carts but still also sells things of daily need (shampoo, toilet paper, milk, cornflakes, bread and spread,...). The typical 7-Eleven store

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, March 6, 2019 4:28 pm, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > > Enock's razor sums it up nicely: > - stand outside to buy goods -> shop=convenience > - you can enter the shop -> shop=kiosk Aargl. I inverted it - gross mistake, sorry... So, again but in the correct order: Enock's shop razor: -

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, March 6, 2019 3:58 pm, Enock Seth Nyamador wrote: > Jean-Marc I agree with about shop=boutique much used in West Africa. The > reason being that the shops have boutique attached to their names. Indeed. In Dakar and Bamako, when you need to buy a Fanta, tu vas à la boutique... So I can't

Re: [Tagging] "satellit"

On Wed, March 6, 2019 2:37 pm, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > I still fail to see _who could benefit_ from that fragmentary, sparse, > information of unknown quality: I surely would not I do not know either - but I'll let those who do have their fun and make sure that it does not interfere with the

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, March 6, 2019 3:42 pm, dktue wrote: > > I currently found out that shops that sell clothes are either tagged with > shop=clothes or with shop=fashion > but I can't find out when to use which. shop=clothes only sell unfashionable clothes. But seriously, shop=clothes is factual whereas

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 09:42, dktue wrote: > I currently found out that shops that sell clothes are either tagged with > shop=clothes > or with > shop=fashion > but I can't find out when to use which. > > Can anybody clarify? There is a continuum with shop=clothes, shop=fashion, and

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Jean-Marc I agree with about shop=boutique much used in West Africa. The reason being that the shops have boutique attached to their names. Best, - Enock Le mer. 6 mars 2019 à 14:51, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit : > On Wed, March 6, 2019 3:42 pm, dktue wrote: > > > > I currently found out that

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Shop selling only clothes is still shop=clothes even if it is so small that you are unable to enter inside. Shop selling only cars is still shop=car even if it is so small that you are unable to enter inside. Of course that's very valid scenarios. In some funny cases kiosk-type shops (sells

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:04 PM Kevin Kenny wrote: > Slightly off topic: vie ferrate are not a familiar thing in the > mountains near me. > Does > http://aspiringfortysixer.com/Upper_Lower_Wolfjaw,_Armstrong_%26_Gothics_files/P1010309.jpg > count? > I wonder this as well. I don't have any direct

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

I think it is not correct. Parking zones in a street are not amenity=parking , are they? It would be very interesting solution...but parking zone in a street is not a parking (an specific place for park). Parking spaces would fit correctly, but as you can see not all the parkings zones have drawn

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

It is probably similar to "should we map sidewalks as a separate highway=footway" but why not? See for example tagging in Poland: https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.23091=20.95912#map=19/52.23091/20.95912 There are some reasonable objections (and arguments in support), but "parking zone in

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

Ok , ok, if it is fine I will tag parking zones at the streets with amenity parking and the properties of parking lanes Thank you for your attention yopaseopor PD: When I have said "parking lane is not a parking" I mean a parking lot, a big parking zone not in the middle of a street. Sorry for

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On 3/6/2019 1:12 PM, yo paseopor wrote: Sorry...but parking space is not a lane, lanes are for driving. You cannot drive by a "parking lane". Lane has differents meanings. You can see the difference in Spanish: Carril para circular, Zona de aparcamiento. It does not exist Carril de

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

Not only parking_space but all the parking you can find in a street, not a parking lot or a parking place (amenity=parking). I say I need to separate and zoom the info about parking spaces (but not delimited every place) in each street. Parking is not a lane of the street so I want to draw it

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

I mean something like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675000355 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675000354 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675000856 Salut i mapes yopaseopor On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 6:26 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 17:06, yo paseopor wrote: > >> Not

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 17:49, yo paseopor wrote: > I mean something like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675000355 > or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/675000354 > or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/67500085 > > Which look, in the editor,

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 19:21 Uhr schrieb Markus : > via ferratas also > don't correspond to the definition of highway=path, which is "a > generic multi-use path open to non-motorised vehicles". I would say they would correspond to this definition, unless there is the via ferrata category

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

Sorry...but parking space is not a lane, lanes are for driving. You cannot drive by a "parking lane". Lane has differents meanings. You can see the difference in Spanish: Carril para circular, Zona de aparcamiento. It does not exist Carril de aparcamiento. Also adding parkign properties to the

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:02 Uhr schrieb Marián Kyral : > Typically a small areas in the city between apartment buildings. These > areas are not official parks, gardens or grass. It is just a green > accessible for everoyne. > are these guaranteed to be accessible? Are they part of the

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 11:15 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > > Mar 5, 2019, 9:00 AM by mky...@email.cz: > > Typically a small areas in the city between apartment buildings. These > areas are not official parks, gardens or grass. It is just a green > accessible for

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 18:23, yo paseopor wrote: > I think it is not correct. Parking zones in a street are not > amenity=parking , are they? > Why not? They have conditions of use. This one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103703582 even has a ticket machine and you get fined if you park

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

What is the reason for not tagging it as an area? This seems to mix drawbacks of tagging as area and as a tag on road: - geometry is not mapped - it is complicated to match it to a road - not handled by most of data consumers - highly unusual tagging Mar 6, 2019, 7:14 PM by pla16...@gmail.com:

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

I agree with Volker and I also woul like to underline how in Italian we use the sister word "laboratorio" (/both com from the Latin "labor, "work"/) for some craftmanship activity: we call a "laboratorio" also the places where a goldsmith or an orthodontic mechanic performs their craft, and the

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:02 Uhr schrieb Marián Kyral : > Hi, > recently was dropped [1] the leisure=common rendering from > openstreetmap-carto as it is "misused" by mappers. > are we really going to invent tagging duplicates because OSM-Carto dropped rendering for the established tags? If

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 17:06, yo paseopor wrote: > Not only parking_space but all the parking you can find in a street, not a > parking lot or a parking place (amenity=parking). I say I need to separate > and zoom the info about parking spaces (but not delimited every place) in > each street. >

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 23:08, Richard wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 05:09:31PM +0100, egil wrote: > > The 3 main goals of this proposal are: > > > > 1. the removal of the special tag highway=via_ferrata, > > highway=via_ferrata is supported by almost all renderers(*) and you will > break

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Am 6. März 2019 19:37:13 MEZ schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer : >I would be more in favor of using more explicit tags, like >amenity=police_station because this implies more obviously that it is a >public facing facility. Or, to keep it simple, maintain amenity=police for public-facing police

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

Hmm, basically all kiosk type shops around my area are big enough to be entered - but only sell newspaper, magazines, cigarettes, drinks and snacks. But *not* any of toilet paper, shampoo, cornflakes, yogurt, bread (so, daily needs) iirc I think what they sell is a more useful differenciation

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 11:10 AM Adam Franco wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 8:04 PM Kevin Kenny wrote: >> >> Slightly off topic: vie ferrate are not a familiar thing in the >> mountains near me. >> Does >>

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Am 6. März 2019 13:56:43 MEZ schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer : > >IMHO we need to distinguish different kind of facilities (e.g. a police >station from police barracks) and different kind of police types at the >facility (e.g. coast guards, customs, federal police, military police, >etc. >plus

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On 3/6/2019 12:04 PM, yo paseopor wrote: Not only parking_space but all the parking you can find in a street, not a parking lot or a parking place (amenity=parking). I say I need to separate and zoom the info about parking spaces (but not delimited every place) in each street. Parking is not a

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

I would be more in favor of using more explicit tags, like amenity=police_station because this implies more obviously that it is a public facing facility. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] "satellit"

On 06/03/19 18:52, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: On 3/6/19 6:00 AM, Warin wrote: So .. what is the best way to map them? My proposal would be a straightforward main tags chain to describe the physical landmark features - and then all the extra sauce specialists might want, but in a way that

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 3:15 PM Paul Allen wrote: > Unsurprisingly, the English "Laboratory" also derives from the Latin. The > Latin, as you stated, > means a place where one labours or works. Somehow, in English, it appears > only to ever have > meant a place where one conducts scientific

Re: [Tagging] Emergency vehicle country-specific law

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 16:29, Richard Welty wrote: > i spent some time looking at a project to build OSM based > emergency maps. i concluded we needed to do layers of > information, some of which were appropriate to host in > OSM and others which were not. there would have been a > program to

Re: [Tagging] RFC rewritten proposal Via_ferrata_simplified

Hi On 2019-03-06 01:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > sent from a phone > >> On 5. Mar 2019, at 23:06, Richard wrote: >> >> highway=via_ferrata is supported by almost all renderers(*) and you will >> break them. >> Not only is there no need to remove it but it is highly counterproductive. >>

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

In Hong Kong, we have many area that are officially destinated as "sitting-out area" that would fit the description. These area usually have a few benches along with little bit of plantation around them for people to sit inside. They are managed by government and usually sandwiched between

Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees

-- Původní e-mail -- Od: Martin Koppenhoefer Komu: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Datum: 6. 3. 2019 19:27:05 Předmět: Re: [Tagging] leisure=common replacement for public areas with some trees " Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:02 Uhr schrieb Marián Kyral

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 20:17, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > Hmm, basically all kiosk type shops around my area are big enough to be > entered - but only sell newspaper, magazines, cigarettes, drinks and snacks. > But *not* any of toilet paper, shampoo, cornflakes, yogurt, bread (so, daily > needs)

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

On 3/6/19 8:51 PM, Markus wrote: What you describe is a shop=newsagent [1]. I wasn't aware of this tag until four days ago when someone mentioned [2] on the Swiss mailing list that some newsagents (k kiosk brand) are wrongly tagged as shop=kiosk instead of shop=newsagent. Unfortunately, the word

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

> maintain amenity=police for public-facing police station +1 for keeping the basic tag for police stations ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 05:29, Jmapb wrote: > > On the other hand, if drawing amenity=parking areas alongside the street > is what you want to do, certainly I've seen situations (such as the ones > Paul linked to) where that seems to work well. > I'd also agree that amenity=parking on the road

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On 3/6/2019 8:39 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 05:29, Jmapb > wrote: On the other hand, if drawing amenity=parking areas alongside the street is what you want to do, certainly I've seen situations (such as the ones Paul linked

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 19:28, Sergio Manzi wrote: > I agree with Volker and I also woul like to underline how in Italian we > use the sister word "laboratorio" (*both com from the Latin "labor, > "work"*) for some craftmanship activity: we call a "laboratorio" also the > places where a goldsmith

Re: [Tagging] Emergency vehicle country-specific law

> Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 14:16 Uhr schrieb Marc Gemis > mailto:marc.ge...@gmail.com>>: > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019 at 11:52 AM OSMDoudou > <19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com > > wrote: > > If there was an explosion due

Re: [Tagging] New Tag "Departures" voting results.

sent from a phone > On 5. Mar 2019, at 21:33, Paul Allen wrote: > > Routes do exist with more than one operator. wouldn’t these simply be tagged as several relations? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

[Tagging] Tagging professional cycling competitions as route=bicycle?

After a discussion with another user, I saw some people put a lot of effort in adding and maintaining the course of professional bicycle races. For example the world famous Paris-Roubaix (traject of the 2014 edition: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4853475) I also found for example local

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

There is a very long thread on the same subject in August/September 2017. It started here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-August/033127.html The arguments of the emails in this thread regarding boutique/fashion/clothes stores were given back then as well. So nothing has

Re: [Tagging] Tagging professional cycling competitions as route=bicycle?

They don’t belong in OSM for the reasons you state, and would be better hosted independently on umap or similar. But in any case, they absolutely should not be tagged route=bicycle, as routers and renderers use this as a signifier that “this road/path is particularly suitable for cycling”.

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

sent from a phone > On 6. Mar 2019, at 16:23, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > Sometimes even so small that you can't go inside but buy things through the > window I agree with what was said before for kiosks: if you can go inside it is not a Kiosk. The kind of items sold may vary slightly in

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

Thanks Jason On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:18, Jmapb wrote: > Yo passepor wants to "draw exactly what space is occuping" so in that case > putting the area to the side of the road probably makes more sense, > Just thinking about it, you'd only map strips of marked individual parking bays, wouldn't