May 26, 2020, 08:28 by a...@thaw.de:
> Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> May 25, 2020, 02:45 by a...@thaw.de:
>>
>>>
>>> [access=private driveways implicitly permitting delivieries to destination?]
>>>
>>> Not all deliveries are actively requested, and the delivery person can't
>>>
Am 25.05.2020 um 01:48 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging:
> ..
> (1) there is some seemingly good overcomplicated tagging
access=yes
> (2) there is a good and simpler replacement
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>
Since the name effects how the tag is used, the name is not irrelevant
On 5/26/20 4:57 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
Exactly the name of any tag in OSM is completely irrelevant, it's as
you say how it's used and documented which matters. The iD editor
chooses to localise and abstract away the
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 11:10:17AM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 25. May 2020, at 20:37, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> >
> > i'd expect OSM
> > offering me a conflict free (in legal and physical terms) route based
> > on the tags it finds.
> >
> > This is
Based on my experience it is usually better to write something, even not ideal
and
ask for a review.
"Someone should write/expand it" is typically ignored.
May 26, 2020, 10:58 by vosc...@gmail.com:
> Please come back to my original question: > I would like to eliminate the
> contradiction in
May 26, 2020, 12:52 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
> 26 maj 2020 kl. 11:33 skrev Volker Schmidt <> vosc...@gmail.com> >:
>
>>
>> We have now been reviving the path discussion in 73 messages, and counting
>> ...
>> I still feel we are not understanding each other (or is it only me who is
>>
As an example, I have redundantly tagged the sections of a hiking route
with from, to and section_ref. The names still contain the same information.
name=parent route name - leg - from-to
*Parent route: *
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=2991780=10!52.5245!5.6135
*Section route:*
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:59 AM Andrew Harvey wrote:
> From what I can tell, the ask is a tag for a specific type of way which the
> person needs experience or preparedness before undertaking. But I'm lost and
> still not completely understanding what exactly this new tag would cover
> exactly
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 3:22 AM Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 5/26/20 5:44 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> It can't hurt to specify oneway=yes. I have noticed that the JOSM style
>> that shows lane counts and lane use will sometimes not show ways
>> properly if oneway=yes isn't there, but that's
Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> May 25, 2020, 02:45 by a...@thaw.de:
>>
>> [access=private driveways implicitly permitting delivieries to destination?]
>>
>> Not all deliveries are actively requested, and the delivery person can't
>> know if you requested it or not.
>
> Good point.
Please come back to my original question: *I would like to eliminate the
contradiction in the wiki. What wording do you propose?*
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 10:23, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 5/26/20 5:44 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> It can't hurt to specify oneway=yes. I have noticed that the
sent from a phone
> On 24. May 2020, at 23:43, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> plenty of ways that look from the layout like combined foot-cycle paths but
> have no signage at all
> plenty of service roads which show the "no transit for any vehicle" sign, but
> in reality you can happily pass
We have now been reviving the path discussion in 73 messages, and counting
...
I still feel we are not understanding each other (or is it only me who is
lost?)
To me a highway=path is a concept that is well defined in the wiki, and the
various types can be described with existing tags.
A hiking
Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> I took the liberty of revising the English translation in
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale#Values to something
> that I hope will be more helpful to English speakers.
Overall, this seems like an improvement to me.
However, I note that the translation
On 5/26/20 5:44 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
It can't hurt to specify oneway=yes. I have noticed that the JOSM
style
that shows lane counts and lane use will sometimes not show ways
properly if oneway=yes isn't there, but that's probably a bug in the
style more than an indictment
sent from a phone
> On 25. May 2020, at 20:37, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> i'd expect OSM
> offering me a conflict free (in legal and physical terms) route based
> on the tags it finds.
>
> This is especially true for transit e.g. traversing something. This is
> pretty inline with my
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 17:28, Arne Johannessen wrote:
> Kevin Kenny wrote:
> >
> > I took the liberty of revising the English translation in
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale#Values to something
> > that I hope will be more helpful to English speakers.
>
> Overall, this
26 maj 2020 kl. 11:33 skrev Volker Schmidt :
>
> We have now been reviving the path discussion in 73 messages, and counting ...
> I still feel we are not understanding each other (or is it only me who is
> lost?)
> To me a highway=path is a concept that is well defined in the wiki, and the
>
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 19:35, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> We have now been reviving the path discussion in 73 messages, and counting
> ...
> I still feel we are not understanding each other (or is it only me who is
> lost?)
>
To me a highway=path is a concept that is well defined in the wiki, and
Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> That said, my favourite solution here would indeed be to add a new
> main tag highway=trail and slowly retag the existing mountain
> paths starting with the most dangerous/abused ones.
Fully agree with this, other than the slight detail that =trail is the wrong
value.
May 27, 2020, 01:35 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:48 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>> bicycle=no and bicycle=dismount are de facto equivalents
>>
>
> How can you conclude that?
>
There are many places that require people to dismount from bicycles and
On Wed, 27 May 2020 at 04:54, brad wrote:
>
> How about this, as default:
> cycleway - paved path that a typical tourist or casual rider can ride on a
> road bike.
> footway - smooth path, very firm surface or paved that is good for someone
> with less than average ability.
> bridleway- for
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:48 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
wrote:
> May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
>
> Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
> (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing (bicycle=dismount).
> Bikes are only completely forbidden if
May 27, 2020, 01:35 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 1:48 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>> May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
>>
>> Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
>> (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing
> On May 26, 2020, at 12:37 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> May 26, 2020, 20:50 by bradha...@fastmail.com:
> Yes! We have an overload of tags for trails, many poorly defined, many
> rarely used. KISS - keep it simple stupid. I think it would help if we
> narrowed the
On 5/26/20 8:26 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 6:59 AM Andrew Harvey wrote:
From what I can tell, the ask is a tag for a specific type of way which the
person needs experience or preparedness before undertaking. But I'm lost and
still not completely understanding what
May 26, 2020, 20:50 by bradha...@fastmail.com:
> Yes! We have an overload of tags for trails, many poorly defined, many
> rarely used. KISS - keep it simple stupid. I think it would help if we
> narrowed the focus for cycleway and footway.
> How about this, as default:
> cycleway -
Am Di., 26. Mai 2020 um 18:48 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
>
> Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
> (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing (bicycle=dismount).
> Bikes are only
May 26, 2020, 17:20 by f...@zz.de:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 11:10:17AM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> > On 25. May 2020, at 20:37, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>> >
>> > i'd expect OSM
>> > offering me a conflict free (in legal and physical terms) route based
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:43 PM Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> 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
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
>
> > Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
> > (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing (bicycle=dismount).
> > Bikes are only completely forbidden
May 26, 2020, 19:19 by f...@zz.de:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>> May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
>>
>> > Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
>> > (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing
May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
> Bikes may "pass" in two different ways: riding
> (bicycle=yes/permissive/destination) or pushing (bicycle=dismount).
> Bikes are only completely forbidden if bicycle=no/private.
>
bicycle=no does not mean that you cannot push bicycle
I would think that oneway=yes or oneway=-1 was required on motorways in
order to identify the direction of one-way travel. For roundabouts, it
must be easier provided data consumers know the national rules.
Steve
On 24/05/2020 21:26, Volker Schmidt wrote:
I just noticed an apparent
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 12:34 PM Steve Doerr
wrote:
> I would think that oneway=yes or oneway=-1 was required on motorways in
> order to identify the direction of one-way travel. For roundabouts, it must
> be easier provided data consumers know the national rules.
>
Seems pretty easy to tag it
Richard Fairhurst:
> highway=mountain_path works for me for tagging mountain paths.
>
Along that line, to retag all the unpaved highway=path's in Nederland with
something more specific, we would need at least forest_path, dune_path,
heath_path, grass_quai and peat_path.
highway=path in
> 27 maj 2020 kl. 06:54 skrev Yves :
> […]
> I'm as fool as you, and always mapped the paved, urban-style as
> highway=footway and the ones in the wilderness as highway =path.
>
So have I, and so have, as far as I can tell from the areas I am familiar with,
most mappers in Sweden.
Not all
On 26/5/20 9:49 pm, Peter Elderson wrote:
Richard Fairhurst:
highway=mountain_path works for me for tagging mountain paths.
Along that line, to retag all the unpaved highway=path's in Nederland
with something more specific, we would need at least forest_path,
dune_path, heath_path,
Le 27 mai 2020 06:27:42 GMT+02:00, Tod Fitch a écrit :
>
>
>> On May 26, 2020, at 9:18 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>For me footway [1] and path [2] are distinctly different. The photos
>are from a blog post of mine regarding rendering of trail distances
>[3].
>
>Cheers!
>Tod
>
39 matches
Mail list logo
