Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Section numbers in hiking routes

Thanks for the examples. I will leave the splitting and punctuation issue for now, I think it's fine as it is. In the second example, the stage numbers should not be in the name unless the names are actually shown like that on the signs. See

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 16:29, Daniel Westergren wrote: > Great discussion! I think we're discussing two different things here. One > is about differentiating *trail* (not necessarily hiking trail) from > other kinds of highway=path and the other is about *difficulty of a > (hiking) trail* in

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Section numbers in hiking routes

First example: Superrelation GR5 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4580796) consists of the following 8 relation members: GR 5 Netherlands (9176775) GR 5 Belgium, Flanders (3121667) GR 5 Belgium, Wallonia (3121668) GR 5 Luxembourg (2790499) GR 5 Lorraine (2029679) GR 5 Vosges (1956165)

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:58:50PM -0400, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 9:52 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > We have a similar system here > > > > The Australian Walking Track Grading System > > > > Grade 1 is suitable for the disabled with assistance > > Grade 2 is suitable for

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

The sac=scale is a attribute of trails. Yet we do not explicitly state “this is a trail” We should have a path=trail subtag. The presence or absence of a sac_scale Tag shouldn’t mean it is a trail. Imagine we had no highway=track. That we dumped all tracks into highway=service. That is

Re: [Tagging] Adding values healthcare=dispensary and healthcare=community_care?

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:39, Claire Halleux wrote: > > Agreed. Although, I'm not even sure if we should still need > amenity=healthcare or just go without it at some point. > There is a reason why it is still needed. > > Next: let's get them rendered on the map too. > And that's the reason

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

Well said John. When we now have highway=path, we need a subtag. Question is, on what criteria would we differentiate a trail from another "path"? Groomed vs beaten may not be specific enough. But by using some combination of dictionary definitions of trail, in the sense of path, could we come up

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

Great discussion! I think we're discussing two different things here. One is about differentiating *trail* (not necessarily hiking trail) from other kinds of highway=path and the other is about *difficulty of a (hiking) trail* in terms of how technical and demanding it is (and thus who can use it

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

On 5/24/20 15:26, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I just noticed an apparent contradiction regarding the use of the oneway > tag between the wiki pages key:oneway > and motorway > . > The former

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

This was originally sent to the Talk mailing list, but it is better if it is discussed on the Tagging mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging I agree that razed, completely demolished railways, where all traces of the former track-bed have been removed, should be removed

Re: [Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

On 25/5/20 8:28 am, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: May 24, 2020, 23:42 by vosc...@gmail.com: The strict wording introduced by Florian is simply not practically applicable here. My questions are: Is Italy the only country with this problem? Poland used to be similar,

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

> "Path (is) a trail for the use of, or worn by, pedestrians". > So path=trail does not work semantically anyway. Path: tied to man-made landuses& amenities in general. Trail: tied to natural landuses, in general. A path is tied to urban/suburban/rural landuses: an urban route for

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Recreational route relation roles

Local to me the 'Great North Walk' is signposted in many different ways. e.g. Post with directional arrows http://thegreatnorthwalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ww_photo_Looking-into-Mulbinga-Street.jpg Some of these posts have no name plate so those may not be recognized by those

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-ml] With leisure=common deprecated, Senegal & Mali need a replacement

On 4/5/20 1:12 am, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: So, this discussion gravitates towards using landuse=common for those African urban freely accessible multipurpose open spaces, which I fully support. Implementing this change requires the following actions: - Editing the leisure=common wiki

Re: [Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

May 24, 2020, 23:42 by vosc...@gmail.com: > The strict wording introduced by Florian is simply not practically applicable > here. > My questions are: > Is Italy the only country with this problem? > Poland used to be similar, though police sometimes setup trap where they were fining

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 11:54, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 8:01 PM John Willis via Tagging > wrote: > > Mapping “where the sidewalk ends” and the trails begin is vital to keep > people from being routes where grandma could have a heart attack Climbing a > difficult route or

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

sent from a phone >> On 24. May 2020, at 23:54, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I am aware of the histroy - I only wanted to bring up the contradiction > between the two wiki pages before changing the wiki. The situation is different for roundabouts and motorways. In both cases in absence of the

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 00:31, Daniel Westergren wrote: > Well said John. When we now have highway=path, we need a subtag. > > Question is, on what criteria would we differentiate a trail from another > "path"? Groomed vs beaten may not be specific enough. But by using some > combination of

Re: [Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:42:09PM +0200, Volker Schmidt wrote: > -- Forwarded message - > The OpenStreetMap Wiki page Key:access has been changed on 24 May 2020 > by Flohoff, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access for the > current revision. This follows HUGE changes

[Tagging] Access tag abuse examples

moved from talk list as it become more suitable for tagging May 25, 2020, 00:36 by f...@zz.de: > > Hi, > > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:16:14PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > >> > - To use access restrictions as simple and minimal as possible. >> > >> Can you find a good example for

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 05:05, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > > At the higher levels of difficulty, the page focuses on mountain > hazards. There's no consideration for slippery or unstable bog > bridging, stream crossings (rock-hop or ford: and how deep or > fast-moving is the water?); deep mud or

Re: [Tagging] [Tagging-fr] [Talk-ml] [Talk-sn] With leisure=common deprecated, Senegal & Mali need a replacement

Unless you demonstrate me that I am wrong, the tag leisure=common was deprecated without any agreement with the community. So it's clearly not a deprecated tag. Another thing is what you actually think about the tag itself. Cheers, Rafael. O 23/05/20 ás 20:49, Marc M. escribiu: Agree on

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 8:01 PM John Willis via Tagging wrote: > Mapping “where the sidewalk ends” and the trails begin is vital to keep > people from being routes where grandma could have a heart attack Climbing a > difficult route or break her leg crossing a stream because we routed her on a

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

Path and trail are confusingly near in meaning. The first Google search result on the difference between the meaning of path and trail says *: *"*Pat**h** (is) a trail* for the use of, or worn by, pedestrians". So path=trail does not work semantically

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 5:42 AM Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 09:58:50PM -0400, Kevin Kenny wrote: > [Australian grading of hiking trails] > > And all five of those grades are sac_scale=hiking, which is why I say > > that's an impossible scale to use for the purpose we're

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 12:53 PM Volker Schmidt wrote: > This proposal is not going to fly, unfortunately. As I said before the big > issue, at least in central Europe, is the massiv use of highway=path (with > the additional "designated" tags) for foot-cycleways. We will have to live > with

[Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

I just noticed an apparent contradiction regarding the use of the oneway tag between the wiki pages key:oneway and motorway . The former states: "Some tags (such as junction

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing importance of trails in OSM

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 20:15, Kevin Kenny wrote: The absence of a tag `potrzebie=*` doesn't mean 'there's no potrzebie > here'; it means only `the mapper didn't say anything about potrzebie.' > Drawing the conclusion that 'there's no potrzebie' would require an > explicit `potrzebie=no` or some

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:26:19PM +0200, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I just noticed an apparent contradiction regarding the use of the oneway > tag between the wiki pages key:oneway > and motorway >

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

PS: The standard rendering assumes junction=roundabout, highway=motorway, and highway=motorway_link to be oneway=yes by default (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1363) On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 22:26, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I just noticed an apparent contradiction

[Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

I would like to bring this up in the list. I am not happy with the recent change of the key:access page of the wiki -- Forwarded message - The OpenStreetMap Wiki page Key:access has been changed on 24 May 2020 by Flohoff, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access for the

Re: [Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 17:42, Volker Schmidt wrote: > In my country (Italy) there are literally thousands of ways where it is most > likely legal to pass by bicycle, but there is no (practical) way of finding > out. > Essentially two classes: > > - plenty of ways that look from the layout like

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

I am aware of the histroy - I only wanted to bring up the contradiction between the two wiki pages *before* changing the wiki. On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 23:11, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:26:19PM +0200, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > I just noticed an apparent contradiction

Re: [Tagging] oneway=yes on motorways

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:52:54PM +0200, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I am aware of the histroy - I only wanted to bring up the contradiction > between the two wiki pages *before* changing the wiki. Feel free - The "new" (Most likely a decade old) way is that motorways and roundabouts have an