On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:02 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/10/12 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:15 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
The only problem then is how to tag the start/end of a numbering
section, based on that document major
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote:
2009/10/12 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
Surveying a few points every 100km is easier than surveying every
house. And it's likely that most of the starting/end points will
already be in the database (e.g. the intersection of X
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
There are plans in the US to import Tiger address interpolation
information - which is intentionally obfuscated for privacy reasons by law.
Tobias mentioned a possible tag interpolation:complete=yes to represent
fully accurate
2009/10/13 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
IMHO landuse=military is already what you want to express with
boundary=military.
Then all the landuse=military tags can be changed, and
landuse=military can be deprecated.
On the other hand, ownership=military and/or access=military makes
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Randy Thomson rwtnospam-...@yahoo.com wrote:
Sounds good Martin. I have about 3000-5000 houses to tag, I'll tag the
beginning and ending house addresses, on each street, if you'll tag the
15-20 individual houses in between. They're in the satellite images, so
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
What happens when there's a section of forest which people are using
as their residence?
No matter what the size, I see these as mutually exclusive. In other
words they can't both occur in the same place
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
Residential isn't exclusive at all. Not to say that what it's actually used
for in OSM can have different meanings amongst different mappers. You'll find
many parks in OSM for example inside a residential polygon. I've never
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Well then ground cover isn't what we need. We need land use.
Land use is generally studied on a parcel by parcel basis. The fact
that OSM mappers make these huge polygons which cover entire towns is
fine
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:24 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote:
Possibly just building=roof
would work (not my idea, someone else suggested it).
I have a much bigger preference to building=roof or building=cover
on
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Splitting the building into two parts, one at layer=0, touching the
parking area, and one at layer=1, encompassing both the area next to
and under the parking area, is another solution. It's similar to what
we'd do with a highway
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If a highway and a building cross at the same layer, the
building should be made partially transparent so the way can be seen
to be covering it.
Covering it - covered by it.
___
Tagging
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Randy
rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'd rather see boundary=federal enclave
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_enclave) or something like that
to represent
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/11/4 Richard Bullock rb...@cantab.net
We don't *have* to stick to dictionary definitions here when tagging, as
long as the meaning is clear;
exactly, this is not generally about dictionary definitions but
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Anthony o...@inbox.org writes:
But I've come across situations where the unnamed road is not a
roundabout, though. In one of these cases I used
highway=unclassified, because it was just a dirt road that was really
just
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Well, that's how I would tend to see it, but it being in practice street
like and large and having a name makes it feel like it's fair to label
it as if it were a private way. I wonder if it really is a private way
and the
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net writes:
With regard to apartment complexes, condo complexes, mobile home complexes,
and gated single-family-home complexes, I usually tag:
- The ways that cross the boundary line
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
We tend to explicitly tag whether something belongs to the site or not.
That doesn't make it right.
Anthony wrote:
It's redundant to have the same information
expressed twice, and doing so will only lead to conflicting
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Jonathan Bennett
openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk wrote:
My point was about newcomers to the project, who haven't sat in on
endless tedious tagging discussions (and may have no wish to do so)
assuming that because every instance of a type of road they know is one
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
So, tagging list, how are you supposed to tag cyclists must dismount,
bicycle=no
tag no bicycles
bicycle=no
and what does bicycle=no mean?
bicycle=no means you're not allowed to ride a bicycle.
What does no bicycles
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
What does no bicycles mean? Can you show a picture of a sign which
means you aren't allowed to carry a bicycle through this area?
Perhaps, as James
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
As in, bicycle=carriage_prohibited.
You can't have bicycle=carriage_prohibited along with bicycle=no. It
needs to be a different tag altogether, because it represents
something different.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
As in, bicycle=carriage_prohibited.
You can't have bicycle=carriage_prohibited
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
with_stroller=no, etc.
British English is pushchair. Baby buggy may be more international, but
one underscore is more than enough.
Fine
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote:
but one underscore is more than enough.
One of these days I'm going to propose a tag with a space in it.
They're not banned. Why don't we use them?
___
Tagging
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 2:09 AM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
I'd hope that bicycle=no would have the same implications for having a
bicycle without riding it as other *=no tags would for their transports. For
example I would guess that where horse=no is used, you often can't walk
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.comwrote:
Now whether one set of 20 nodes or a different set of 20 nodes better
represent the shape of a road is a matter of creative subjectivity. Neither
set is more mistaken nor more inaccurate than the other.
What set of
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Stephen Gower socks-openstreetmap.org@
earth.li wrote:
Christ Church (College) Meadows:
http://oxford.cyclestreets.net/location/17860/ No Bicycles either wheeled
or ridden
For clarification, is that gate strictly for motor vehicle traffic? I see
it also says
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Fortunately, you're not mapping for a router. If there's no verifiable
data, you shouldn't map anything at all. I guess unknown would also
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On Tuesday 08 December 2009 17:53:33 Anthony wrote:
Information about tag support is a *good* thing, not a bad one. I now
realise that Mapnik doesn't recognise *any* sport=* tags, but that's
not
going to stop me using
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
As I've said before, I have absolutely no idea how suitable a particular
way is for bicycling.
Sure, but presumably you could follow directions
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
We must be operating under different assumptions. I'm thinking it's
*easier* to use a single tag, like bicycle:suitability=medium for a
stretch of a few kilometres, rather than tagging the width each time it
changes, the
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
There's a big difference between a fence intended to keep cars out, and one
that keeps people out.
*Sigh*. I'll bite. What would be a fence which is a barrier to one, but
not to the other? You know barrier doesn't
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Yep. Fortunately, there aren't too many ways which use both highway=*
and
barrier=*.
Yeah...but still. I'm not a fan of having bicycle=no mean two
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Yep. Fortunately, there aren't too many ways which use both highway=*
and
barrier
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 6:02 AM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
On 11/12/2009, at 5:44 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
The current wiki definition of highway=cycleway is mainly or
exclusively for bicycles. This I cannot be sure of from the aerial
imagery, nor can I of anything to do with
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I spotted two or three bicyclists near two or three pedestrians. Looks
like
shared-use, which means highway=path.
I vehemently object to this rule
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
currently i'm looking at the Australian legal definitions because i'm
sure the
traffic engineers have answered these questions for us already.
Maybe if by us you mean Australians.
not at all
Researching a topic means
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009, Anthony wrote:
You don't know how to define
place_where_people_walk/cycle/drive_vehicles?
It's a place, where people walk/cycle/drive_vehicles. Legal definitions
aren't going to help you with that. Well
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Hmm, the resolution isn't quite as good as I was expecting. Still, I
think I spotted two or three bicyclists near two or three
pedestrians. Looks like shared-use, which means highway=path.
I think
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Hmm, the resolution isn't quite as good as I was expecting. Still, I
think I spotted two or three bicyclists near two or three
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
What makes them genuine bike paths, then?
Signage, or non-copyrighted data telling the user that a cyclist can go
down it.
So anything that a cyclists is allowed to travel on (presumably, excluding
roads
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
What makes them genuine bike paths, then?
Bike signs. Painted bike symbols. Documentation to that effect.
Fair enough. But in the absence
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Anthony wrote:
For example, just one example, here in Florida bicycles are allowed to
use
certain roadways (most roadways, in fact, but I'm too lazy
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
wrote:
Depends on the country.
I'm gonna have to disagree... if it allows both pedestrians and
bicycles, that would be a
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Motorway is not a term defined in the MUTCD
It is, however, a term defined in the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic,
which says:
On motorways and, if so provided in domestic legislation, on special
approach roads to and exit roads
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.netalan_mintz%2b...@earthlink.net
wrote:
At 2009-12-22 11:59, Roy Wallace wrote:
I think Karlsruhe is still the best approach - e.g. even if you have
4, 6, 12, 18, 50, an even interpolation way from 4 to 50 is the best
you
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
Are there any other official node tags that depend on a parent way to
be fully defined?
Barrier=entrance et. al. spring to mind.
___
Tagging mailing list
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
Are there any other official node tags that depend on a parent way to
be fully defined?
Barrier=entrance et. al. spring to mind.
Also highway/railway
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
While a road might be a pre-requisite for a speed bump I wouldn't say
that the road defines the speed bump.
The orientation of the road defines the orientation of the speed bump,
though.
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com writes:
If you want to define steep as
meaning greater than or equal to 15% incline, THEN it has meaning.
But until then, it's meaningless.
If you know the actual incline you
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
The primary purpose of OSM is to create useful maps, not to provide some
kind of look-up service for the real world.
Isn't that what a map is? Some kind of look-up service for the real world?
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Why is that? Presumably you think the dedicated cycleway is a better way to
get somewhere. I argue that it's not the sign that makes that the case, it's
the construction of the path, its location, etc.
Doesn't the lack
Lightbulb goes off.
Now I get it.
highway=cycleway means highway=path, bicycle=designated.
bicycle=designated means bicycles are explicitly allowed (generally, by
signage)
highway=footway means highway=path, foot=designated
therefore, highway=footway, bicycle=designated means
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:06 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
therefore, highway=footway, bicycle=designated means highway=cycleway,
foot=designated, which means highway=path, foot=designated,
bicycle=designated.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com wrote:
i generally also set access=private for the official vehicle only
u-turns.
would access=official here be an overly fussy distinction ?
I would think access=official would mean all types of traffic have official
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
On 1/11/10 11:49 AM, Anthony wrote:
It may sound like access=official means official access only, but
any programs which have encoded access=* and *=official will be
completely confused by such a designation
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you picture a use case where it matters
whether police=yes is set?
Not really. But at least it's harmless.
All emergency services will drive wherever physically possible. But maybe
I'm oversimplifying or
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
To me power is energy. It's not a physical entity.
That's just silly. Energy is a physical entity.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/1/20 Anthony o...@inbox.org
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Peteris Krisjanis pec...@gmail.comwrote:
We map everything we can.
What in the world is that supposed to mean? It's either untrue
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Emilie Laffray
emilie.laff...@gmail.comwrote:
Just a little rant, but please chill down as there is no need to get so
excited like this: you have no control over the situation, simple as that.
The only thing I have to say about that is that the very idea of
I went with a multipolygon tagged as amenity=parking. Inner nodes for the
islands tagged barrier=curb. In the center of the island I stuck a
natural=tree. I also tagged the strip of parking blocks with
barrier=parking block.
see that a carpark
island is any different from any other traffic island or raised
section of kerb.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I went with a multipolygon tagged as amenity=parking. Inner nodes for
the
islands tagged barrier=curb. In the center
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
a tree may be in a parking area, but how exactly do you propose to park
on it?
The more important question is what does amenity=parking
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 7:44 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 31 January 2010 10:34, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, but what about mapping the way *as an area*, e.g. if you want to
accurately trace over wide vs. narrow parts of the track? I remember
this
, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 01:43, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Maps. If a bunch of treetops are blocking the view of a road, we'd show
the
road, not the treetops. How is that even relevant?
The current line of thinking almost goes so far as to map
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:59 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 01:51, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Among other things, I want to be able to produce
http://mytechnews.info/b/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/nuvi-lane-assistance.jpg
That's not photorealism
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 11:15 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 02:10, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Maybe your implementation of micro mapping lanes doesn't have anything to
do
with areas, but then, if so it probably doesn't work. How do you
represent
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 11:57 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 02:50, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
That it doesn't make sense? Show me the complex interchange. Then you
An example given in the past is a tri-deck road way, from memory the
middle deck
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:22 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 03:16, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If you're not going to give a real world example (complete with a
latitude
and longitude), don't bother.
I've told you where to look
I googled 2009 SoTM
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:22 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 03:16, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If you're not going to give a real world example (complete with a
latitude
and longitude
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
What tag should we use for places that people can park?
If you literally mean place that people can park, this is verging on
unverifiable (e.g. well *I
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 8:38 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
Going with Richards idea, what about making the editor do the grunt
work, place a node at a point, and then have the editor calculate the
width by stretching the road way side ways, then apply the width
values against
I've heard that before about GPS equipment, but I'm not convinced it a) is
true; and b) isn't easy to workaround, even if true. The raw data received
by a GPS is timing data. How can they mess up the altitude without messing
up the lat and lon? And even if they can (presumably by lying about
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:28 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 13:19, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I've got no problem with letting the editor do the grunt work. But a way
with a width is difficult to connect lengthwise to another way with a
width
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:46 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 13:38, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
It's trivial with areas. If the borders touch, the areas touch. You
can't
do that using a way and a width, unless you expect to do a bunch of
calculations
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:26 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 14:21, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
1) use tags on nodes to describe an area
2) use an area to describe an area
Generally speaking, I predict 2) will be easier.
Just like ways
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's a brainstorming picture, plenty of kinks to be worked out if
anyone's up for a challenge: http://www.myimgs.net/images/psgb.gif
E.g. if we're mapping ways as areas, how should the intersection
area be tagged?
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 4:59 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 February 2010 13:31, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
that altitude error will always be worse than lat/lon error. But I think
that's a good argument for not recording absolute elevation but rather
recording some
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote:
2010/2/3 Chango640 chango...@gmail.com:
If you are interested in this proposal, please visit
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gated_community to
see
full details and discuss.
Why not use
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I'm not sure
what FHWA's thinking was with the End School Zone sign (what about
traffic that doesn't remember what the previous speed zone was
because they turned into the school zone at a midpoint?).
Same thing they
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
The school zone ends where the next speed zone starts.
Hmm, I just checked a school zone near my house and I don't think that's
correct. The 35 Mph sign comes before for the End School Zone sign. Do you
have any source
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
wrote:
The school zone ends where the next speed zone starts.
Hmm, I just checked a school zone near my house and I don't think
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.netalan_mintz%2b...@earthlink.net
wrote:
At 2010-03-12 20:07, John Smith wrote:
On 13 March 2010 14:05, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.netalan_mintz%2b...@earthlink.net
wrote:
Any suggestion on how to tag an
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:46 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 12 April 2010 01:36, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote:
For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at
fast
food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru (and
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:13 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 12 April 2010 01:56, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
In my experience the oneway is usually explicit, as there are arrows on
the
ground.
junction=roundabout implies oneway=yes, which is why you don't need
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:41 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 12 April 2010 22:44, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If you want to be consistent, use underscores not hyphens, eg
service=drive_through
I still
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:08 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 13 April 2010 03:54, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Well, I now see that there are a few. I still don't understand why,
though,
and I don't think we should keep doing something which makes no sense
just
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I have indeed tagged a couple
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 04/12/2010 12:48 PM, Anthony wrote:
Yeah, that's what I was quoting above. However, with drive-thrus (at
least
here in Florida), the public does not have any right of access
whatsoever.
Really? So you can’t
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com wrote:
Just don't give a name to the small ways between the left and right
streets.
It's not part of either road on both sides anyway.
Seems like the best way to go - easy for routers to simply ignore really
short unnamed ways.
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
the other issue, of course, is when the map contains mistakes, which may
be intentional on the part of the map maker.
And then what about when the map mistakes become the commonly accepted name
of the road, and then
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote:
Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of
notice that tow-away is enforced for unauthorized parking. So the general
idea is you're free to park there, ONLY if you're visiting the businesses
serviced by
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* Anthony o...@inbox.org [2010-05-18 20:47 -0400]:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote:
Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of
notice that tow-away is enforced
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:55 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 20 May 2010 06:28, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
One problem I have with the concept of access=destination, even beyond
the
fact that it says right of access, is that parking lots quite often
aren't
connected
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote:
I think in most circumstances it is probably pretty clear which business a
parking lot is intended for though.
Agreed, although the situations in which it's not so clear are the ones
where OSM could really get an advantage
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:50 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 20 May 2010 22:46, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote:
Lol, now just think if we micro-mapped each tree in the parking lot you
could get your GPS to determine the spot that is likely to be in shade
for
a large
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
It was said here that some motorways allow bicycle in US. But nowhere else.
The US does not recognize motorway as a designation. So a motorway is
whatever we define it to be. I'd say that by definition a motorway does not
allow
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Simone Saviolo
simone.savi...@gmail.comwrote:
IMO, if the law defines motorways to have certain features, these
should be implied.
How about the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic:
[quote]Motorway means a road specially designed and built for motor
traffic
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
They should be tagged
highway=motorway bicycle=yes or bicycle=designated.
Based on that second pdf, wouldn't something like bicycle=shoulder_only be
more accurate?
In any case, I don't think it should be called a
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
Anthony wrote:
I wouldn't suggest tagging a road with bicycle=yes if bicycles are only
permitted in a bike lane either. How's a router supposed to know how to
handle turns if it thinks the bikes are allowed to use
1 - 100 of 316 matches
Mail list logo
