Colin Smale writes:
> As I mentioned before, the national datums of the Netherlands and
> Belgium differ by over 2m, which for everything connected to water is
> very significant. Waterways often form the border, with bridges that
> cross the border. You cannot use a map/chart (at last for tidal
On 08/05/2020 14:04, s8evq wrote:
And then some people in this very thread suggest to just ignore a
rejection and start using it anyway. What's the use of the whole
voting system then?
Frankly, not much.
Why even bother writing a proposal in the first place? I'll just do
whatever.
"I'll
On 2020-05-08 Fri 20:45, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> that, they think that. A discussion would just print the arguments
> back and forth.
>
Given the
On Fri, 8 May 2020 08:43:27 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 02:27, s8evq wrote:
> >
> > Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand
> > on the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any
> > discussion beforehand. That
Dear all,
some time ago I started the proposal to define tags for several light
electric vehicles. It turned out to be difficult to come up with names
for keys that unambiguously describes all these vehicles.
During discussion the idea came up to separate the proposal in two
parts. This
Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand on
the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any discussion
beforehand. That doesn't seem correct. It should not be possible to be suddenly
faced with this fait accompli.
On Thu, 7 May 2020 11:49:43
sent from a phone
> On 8. May 2020, at 00:43, Paul Norman via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> As a next step, I'd map motorcycle taxis as amenity=motorcycle_taxi. Vote
> with your mapping.
+1, most people who voted no supposedly never saw a motorcycle taxi in their
life...
Cheers Martin
> 2) Use ele:datum=unknown as a clue that the data is not that high
> quality.
or make that the default, so that when there is no ele:datum data
consumers have to consider it as unknown .
Any ordinary mapper, including myself, just wants to put the number
they see on a sign into the database.
Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
> Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:22 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
>> 3) Look up the data sheet and mark it as ele:datum=NGVD29 or
>> ele:datum=NAVD88 as it turns out.
>
> IIRR, in another mail, you wrote that the difference between these 2 is
> less than a meter, can you
On 7/5/20 1:54 am, Philip Barnes wrote:
On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 14:03 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 6. May 2020, at 13:14, lukas-...@web.de wrote:
In the wiki I found bell_tower=* (but without a carillon-specific
value) and I think a carillon does not have to be a
Peter Elderson writes:
> Why not use a datum:value pair?
>
> ele=[datum:]value
>
> datum: is optional. If you don't know, just leave it out. Data users can
> assume locally signed or known.
Becuase, as I have said many times and no one seems to be listening, in
OSM we have said that we use
Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
> Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:26 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
>> The notion of "local" has the same problem, and it is also a poor choice
>> of words in that in surveying, "local", refers to coordinate systems
>> established for particular projects or surveys that have
On 2020-05-08 14:09, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
>
> Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:22 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
> 3) Look up the data sheet and mark it as ele:datum=NGVD29 or
> ele:datum=NAVD88 as it turns out.
> IIRR, in another mail, you wrote that the difference between
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 02:27, s8evq wrote:
>
> Of the 8 opposing votes, only 1 has made the effort to comment beforehand on
> the talk page. The 7 others just came in and voted no, without any discussion
> beforehand. That doesn't seem correct. It should not be possible to be
> suddenly faced
On 2020-05-08 18:01, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I think we now know that the existing datums don't differ much from WGS84
> except Belgium, and given the EVRF2007 datum, it seems clear that Belgium now
> will have that and the old one, differing by 2m.
> Hence the thing we need to know, we don't, in
apart from the joke with the foot_taxi, I used all the others, what to
reply to someone who tells me it's not common and therefore gives the
impression that only this usecase is important and therefore requires a
top-level tag just for that ?
that's why it gives the impression that you're saying
Le 08.05.20 à 19:06, Phake Nick a écrit :
> Your argument was like saying we should use a amenity=stop tag for all
> bus stop, taxi stop, helicopter stop, and cruise ship stop because they
> are just "services
public_transport=* was invented for a service and relegate
the mode of transport to a
May 8, 2020, 18:06 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:06 AM Phake Nick wrote:
>
>> Given the proportion of opposing comment being raised, I would say "more
>> than what have been discussed", as barely anyone raised the point during the
>> discussion. The only two
May 8, 2020, 19:23 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 08.05.20 à 19:06, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>> Your argument was like saying we should use a amenity=stop tag for all
>> bus stop, taxi stop, helicopter stop, and cruise ship stop because they
>> are just "services
>>
>
> public_transport=*
For the record, I responded to Marc Marc’s comment on this list, and there
was not a response back:
“ On 2/20/20, marc marc wrote:
> Le 20.02.20 à 12:45, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
>> Can't we have an easy to use top-level feature tag, instead of having
>> to add 3 tags like amenity=taxi +
The subject of a vote should not be amendable. All the discussions,
debates, consideration of alternatives etc should be BEFORE the proposal
is put to the vote. If a vote fails, THEN the proposal might be amended
and submitted again - but this has to be subject to some time
constraints such as not
On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 09:17 -0700, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> There used to be human-pulled rickshaws, but these no longer exist.
> They were take over by pedicabs / aka bicycle rickshaws, since those
> are much more efficient.
Not so. I've seen human-pulled rickshaws in Japan. And they probably
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 14:35 Uhr schrieb Colin Smale :
> As I mentioned before, the national datums of the Netherlands and Belgium
> differ by over 2m, which for everything connected to water is very
> significant. Waterways often form the border, with bridges that cross the
> border. You cannot
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 14:26 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
>
> > Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:26 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> > the "definition" for "ele:local" (in German language on the English talk
> > page of the tag) seems to be about this: a local datum based on a
Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
> I was not aware there weren't any meaningful differences (when comparing
> some official height references to the German DHHN92 those in wikipedia.de
> with delta information all are within 1m besides Belgium DNG/TAW, which is
> -2.3).
Thanks for looking into this.
在 2020年5月8日週五 23:47，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> > If these arguments were given beforehand
>
> except memory problem, I exposed this opinion here during the RFC
> (=consider that taxi is a service independent of the propulsion
> of the engine which is a sub-tag), and I have the impression that
>
My thoughts - trying to be brief, I started writing a much longer
message, but it got disorganized fast:
1. ele=* should always be orthometric.
2. Datum may be supplied with ele:datum=*, defaulting to
'ele:datum=unknown'. Within the regions of the Earth where a datum is
valid, all the datums in
Hello,
> If these arguments were given beforehand
except memory problem, I exposed this opinion here during the RFC
(=consider that taxi is a service independent of the propulsion
of the engine which is a sub-tag), and I have the impression that
the answer was "you didn't understand".
I would
On 2020-05-08 11:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
It could be useful when mapping something like a building. You could
establish a certain elevation as local zero (e.g. the elevation of the
ground floor) and have all other levels based on this. It is something
that could also not be needed
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 14:09 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> Martin Koppenhoefer writes:
>
> > Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:22 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> >
> >> 3) Look up the data sheet and mark it as ele:datum=NGVD29 or
> >> ele:datum=NAVD88 as it turns out.
> >
> > IIRR, in another mail, you
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 17:16 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com>:
> I was not aware there weren't any meaningful differences (when comparing
> some official height references to the German DHHN92 those in wikipedia.de
> with delta information all are within 1m besides
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:06 AM Phake Nick wrote:
> Given the proportion of opposing comment being raised, I would say "more than
> what have been discussed", as barely anyone raised the point during the
> discussion. The only two remotely relevant mentions about it during the
> discussion
That they exists doesn't mean they make a different. Taxi with low
pollution and taxi with electric power are same type of taxi as regular
taxi while motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
That is like saying we shouldn't have a separate tag for bus versus cars
because there
The tag motorcycle=yes is already documented as defining legal access
restrictions for motorcycle riders, like access=yes or foot=yes
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:motorcycle%3Dyes
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 1:34 PM Florimond Berthoux <
florimond.berth...@gmail.com>
> (especially those approved after, say, 2012)
The proposal process became more difficult after March 2015, when the
standard for approval was changed from >50% to >74%:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal_process=revision=1150734=1143140
This has been helpful in
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 09:05, s8evq wrote:
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 08:43:27 -0400, Jarek Piórkowski
> wrote:
> > How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> > oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> > that, they think that. A discussion
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 09:05, Phake Nick wrote:
> On 2020-05-08 Fri 20:45, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>> How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
>> oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
>> that, they think that. A discussion would just
Hi
Le ven. 8 mai 2020 à 20:48, Phake Nick a écrit :
> motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
>
Then may I ask you why ?
I pay a driver to take me where I want to with his vehicle.
> The reaso why you get the feeling of people saying "you don't understand"
> to you is
François,
Have you personally hired a motorcycle before, or is the assumption that
this is the same service based on theory rather than experience?
The proposal gave several reasons that using amenity=taxi was not a good
idea, including these:
"Motorcyles have different abilities.
"In contrast
Hi,
5) As a French I have to give you again the universal answer : amenity=taxi
+ motorcycle=yes + whateveryourvehicle*=yes|*designated :)
Tags is an intermediate language between human and machine, at the end its
just characters with definitions, but some are easier to use for mapping
and
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 18:30, Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> > (especially those approved after, say, 2012)
>
> The proposal process became more difficult after March 2015, when the
> standard for approval was changed from >50% to >74%:
>
>
On 5/7/20 1:49 PM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> So, what's the next step?
>
> 1) Propose using taxi=motorcar, =motorcycle, =boat, =airplane, and get
> that idea officially rejected (it appears it would be certain to fail),
> or is that a waste of everyone's time?
taxi=* is already used as an
On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 00:59, François Lacombe
wrote:
We're not having an argument about making a difference or not between
> motorcycles or cars
>
What we're having is an argument about taxonomy.
Some people have mental models that distinguish between a taxi, an ojek and
a rickshaw, pther
Hi Joseph,
Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 01:28, Joseph Eisenberg a
écrit :
> François,
>
> Have you personally hired a motorcycle before, or is the assumption that
> this is the same service based on theory rather than experience?
>
I've hired some before lockdown, independently as cars when alone.
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:22 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> 3) Look up the data sheet and mark it as ele:datum=NGVD29 or
> ele:datum=NAVD88 as it turns out.
>
IIRR, in another mail, you wrote that the difference between these 2 is
less than a meter, can you confirm this, or did I understand
Since the wiki say,
> Rejected features may be resubmitted, modified, and moved back to the RFC
process.
, and given most reason appeared on the voting page, I would say the
correct action right now is to improve the reasons listed in the paragraph
on why alternative tagging are not available,
Le 07.05.20 à 20:49, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
> Opposing voters preferred using amenity=taxi + motorcycle=yes
> So, what's the next step?
propose that :) (maybe with motorcycle=only variant if needed)
it allow to have "zone when you request to be transported by individual
transport" with
Am Fr., 8. Mai 2020 um 03:26 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
> The notion of "local" has the same problem, and it is also a poor choice
> of words in that in surveying, "local", refers to coordinate systems
> established for particular projects or surveys that have no lasting
> significance.
>
the
Why not use a datum:value pair?
ele=[datum:]value
datum: is optional. If you don't know, just leave it out. Data users can
assume locally signed or known.
Thus, the spontaneous mapper and the elevation experts are served. Mapper
communities can establish regional preferences. Quality checking
Hi,
at the moment, there are not so many people who looked at my proposal for traffic_signals=crossing_only :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/traffic_signals%3Dcrossing_only
I would look forward to some more people comment or vote on my proposal which has the aim to
50 matches
Mail list logo
