Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - 3rd and 4th rail

Hi Colin, Am 09/06/2020 um 15.36 schrieb Colin Smale: > Great idea. Not sure about using "3rd" and "4th" though - it's a bit > tightly coupled to the English language and possibly prone to error. > Wouldn't "3rail" and "4rail" fit the bill? > > Actually, as electrified=rail is so widely used at

Re: [Tagging] How are protected_area (and national_park) boundaries determined?

Hi, Am 24.06.20 um 00:31 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > in Italy or Germany, the boundaries of protected areas typically either > exclude builtup areas or if they are included, there are typically explicit > special explanations/provisions for these areas. (there might be exceptions > to this,

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of bicycle anti-features

Hi Tobias, Am 28.10.19 um 19:45 schrieb Tobias Zwick: > Most commonly, a cycleway that just ends without merging it back onto the > street. Do you have images illustrating this? Best regards Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___

Re: [Tagging] Disputed territory mapped as a country

Hi Alexey, Am 27/01/2020 um 17.07 schrieb Захаренков Алексей: > Today I discovered a new country in OSM, created in > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80105029 > with the name "Disputed territory between France and Italy" and tags > "type=boundary + boundary=administrative + admin_level=2

Re: [Tagging] Tagging the presence or absence of signs for surveillance cameras

Hi, Am 19.02.20 um 12:45 schrieb Jez Nicholson: > In general, are these signs physically on the camera, or are they in the > vicinity? If so, should they be tagged objects in their own account? In supermarkets and other shops, I do not map surveillance cameras individually. Instead, I just put su

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Hi Leif, Am 16/02/2019 um 15.04 schrieb Leif Rasmussen: > Here is a link to the current proposal, which everyone with a wiki account > can now vote on: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_schedules/Departures Please mind the rules documented at https://wiki.op

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Line attachments

Hi François, Am 08/03/2019 um 00.35 schrieb François Lacombe: > The line attachments proposal has been updated according to comments > received all along past weeks. Thanks to TOGA and Nakaner mainly. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Lines_clamps > > It is not restricted to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal -- RFC -- service=irregular

Hi Markus, Am 01.04.19 um 11:52 schrieb Markus:> I'm proposing the tag service=irregular for tram, light rail, > underground and other railway tracks not used for regular scheduled > passenger services, but only for diversions or shortcuts. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_feature

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

Hi, Am 18/04/2019 um 18.52 schrieb Christoph Hormann: > On Thursday 18 April 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: >> Please avoid the term "label painting." What you call "label >> painting" is the entirely reasonable desire to have recognized, named >> objects appear on the map with their names. > > I disti

Re: [Tagging] 'track_detail' on railway lines - what does it represent?

Hi Dave, Am 21.04.19 um 13:37 schrieb Dave F via Tagging: > 'track_detail, used on railway tracks. > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4414158 > > 4700+ total worldwide  3900+ in the UK > > I can find nothing in the wiki > > Is track_detail meant to indicate that all tracks have been mapped?

Re: [Tagging] what todo if the status of a propal isn't set to Voting ?

Hi, Am 08.05.19 um 22:14 schrieb marc marc: > Some use the status to check propal with the status=Voting > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Proposals_with_%22Voting%22_status > but some propal fail to have it, currently > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/camp_site_

[Tagging] iD adding highway=footway to all railway/public_transport=platform ways and relations

Hi, I discovered today that iD suggests to add highway=footway to railway/public_transport=platform objects as part of its new validation rules. On a GitHub ticket I found, Quincy Morgan explained it that way [1]: > Features with these tags are expected to be part of the pedestrian network, > but

Re: [Tagging] solving iD conflict (was: pointlessly inflamatory title)

Hi Nick, Am 23.05.19 um 21:58 schrieb Nick Bolten: > # My experience with this mailing list: > - Quick to exasperate. > - You will be assumed to be coming to the table in bad faith. > - You will probably be insulted at some point, potentially sworn at. > - The same 8 or so people respond to posts

Re: [Tagging] Tagging fraction house numbers?

Hi James, Am 2018-03-12 um 16:43 schrieb James: > https://i.imgur.com/eigT5hX_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium > > How should this be tagged in housenumber? Using unicode ( ½ ) or ASCII( 1/2 > )? Augsburg (Germany) has such house numbers. They use ASCII representation. Best regard

Re: [Tagging] Tagging fraction house numbers?

Hi, Am 2018-03-13 um 12:22 schrieb James: > in case it wasnt bad enough, there's 40A to the right of it: > > https://i.imgur.com/MhED15C_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium > > if we are using ASCII do we put a space between 40 and 1/2 to avoid 401/2? > it's the main advantage of usin

Re: [Tagging] Still RFC — Drop stop positions and platforms

Hi Christian, Am 28.03.2018 um 16:21 schrieb "Christian Müller": > In your proposal you complain about subjectively felt things like "history > won't go away", but at the same time you are trying to revert a part of > history itself - "the public_transport tags are seven years old now". Many >

Re: [Tagging] Unclear meaning of amenity=bus_station

Hallo Mateusz, Am 09.04.2018 um 12:55 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: > Currently definition at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dbus_station > is unclear, it fits two cases > > * intercity bus station (routes between cities, importance comparable > to railway=station) > * terminus

Re: [Tagging] Still RFC — Drop stop positions and platforms

Hi, Am 31.03.2018 um 17:00 schrieb Johnparis: > This implies the following changes to v2: > > 1) every platform node should have mandatory {mode}=yes tag(s) I also think that public_transport=platform without *=yes tags is some kind of incomplete. > 2) stop_positions should be optional on the m

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - hail and ride

Hi Michael, Am 10.04.2018 um 17:45 schrieb Michael Tsang: > The proposed feature "hail and ride" is open for voting: Could you please provide a link to the wiki page? Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten ausgenommen) I prefer GPG encr

[Tagging] When was the deprecation of location=kiosk for power=substation discussed?

Hi, while adding a substation to OSM yesterday I looked up the possible values of location=* and missed kiosk. A short glance in the history showes that it removed location=kiosk from the page on 2018-01-02. The edit description mentions man_made=street_cabinet+street_cabinet=power as a replacemen

Re: [Tagging] `amenity=shelter` implies `building=yes`?

Hi Bryan, Am 17.06.2018 um 06:45 schrieb Bryan Housel: > Does `amenity=shelter` imply `building=yes`? > > The osm wiki page does not suggest `building=*` as a “tag to use in > combination” > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=shelter >

Re: [Tagging] Unresolved notes

Hi Graeme, Am 17.06.2018 um 08:24 schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick: > Sorry, copied mixed info > > This bit should show > > Others are showing as a note apparently at a location > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1037676 but then it appears there's > nothing there to fix https://www.openstreetmap. >

Re: [Tagging] Part/whole confusion with Wikidata tag, and the need for enveloping parts into a whole

Hi peterkrauss, Am 08.08.2018 um 03:18 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira: > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Yuri Astrakhan > wrote: >> Nelson, there are several places I have seen in our wiki, e.g. [1], which >> discourage duplication of information if it can be avoided. name is a >> special case -

Re: [Tagging] micromapping complex level_crossing

Hi Martin, Am 29.08.18 um 11:55 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: >> On 29. Aug 2018, at 10:47, joost schouppe wrote: >> >> Has anyone of you seen a good example of a micromapped complex level >> crossing? >> >> Given how much we like trains, I'm surprised I didn't find a solution >> straight away,

Re: [Tagging] Topographic Prominence for Peaks

Hi Joseph, Am 23.09.18 um 02:00 schrieb Joseph Eisenberg: > Elevation and prominence can both be calculated from SRTM data, eg by > using Opentopomap tiles and finding the highest contour lines around a > peak, and the lowest near a saddle. > > Prominence and elevation can be calculated by comput

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

TL;DR I am agains this proposal. Timetables in OSM are an ugly hack. Please store them outside of OSM and link them using foreign keys. Hi Leif, Am 31.10.18 um 00:54 schrieb Leif Rasmussen: > I recently wrote up a proposal page for public transport schedule data. > This information would allow O

[Tagging] Native English speakers: locker or lockbox?

Hi, over a year ago I was indoor-mapping the central train station of Heilbronn, Germany and looked for a tag to tag a locker/lockbox like this: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schlie%C3%9Ff%C3%A4cher_-_Bahnhof_Neumarkt_Oberpfalz.jpg After reading a discussion at talk-de from October 2010

Re: [Tagging] Native English speakers: locker or lockbox?

rases. Are your answers in British English? (Because tags should be in British English, shouldn't they?) > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Michael Reichert wrote: >> At the moment Constantin Müller (aka ubahnverleih) and I think about a >> consistent tagging of this ameni

Re: [Tagging] highway=speed_camera equivalent for non-speed enforcement types

Hi Ronnie, On 22. Juli 2014 07:35:07 MESZ, Ronnie Soak wrote: > I've mapped some traffic light enforcement cameras lately and > stumbled across the somehow missfitting tag highway=speed_camera. > > It was obvioisly invented for cameras enforcing only speed limits. > > Now the actual enforcemen

Re: [Tagging] Dispute with user over changing wiki page

Hi PeeWee32, Am 2014-11-08 um 16:47 schrieb Pee Wee: > We are writing to you for advice on what steps we should or could take > next. The situation is best summarized as: > > > 1. A user is attempting to change, without consensus, the meaning of a tag > that was accepted through a proposal proce

Re: [Tagging] Dispute with user over changing wiki page

Hi Pee Wee, Am 2014-11-11 um 19:20 schrieb Pee Wee: > Thanks Micheal > > I thought I just wait some days for other to reply but unfortunately no > more then yours. The question we still have is : What can we do? I suppose > the DWG will only block when harm is done to the OSM database and not on

Re: [Tagging] Dispute with user over changing wiki page

Hi Martin, Am 2014-11-13 um 17:56 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > I'd kindly ask you to not point to actual or presumed real life identities > of OSM contributors and to not disclose their (presumed/actual) place of > residence on public lists, unless they are publicly known or the mapper has > aut

Re: [Tagging] Adding values to usage=* key for power transmission

Hi, Am 2014-11-23 um 23:09 schrieb François Lacombe: > As suggested on Talk page of Power transmission refinement proposal, power > lines and cable should be described with a key giving their usage in the > network. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Power_transmission_re

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Traffic Signals)

Hi, Am 2015-01-18 um 19:02 schrieb fly: > Additional to below I want to mention that on a micromapping style a > traffic_signal is placed one the pedistrian crossing or the stop_line. I > even came across ones one the stop_line and an addition highway=crossing > on the pedestrian crossing. > > I

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Hi, Am 2015-01-22 um 07:53 schrieb Marc Gemis: > It seems like the German community started some voting process on the > deprecation of the associatedStreet-relation (it was on the mailing list > and on the forum). Right: I iniated the discussion. > Discussion is going on on the wiki > https://w

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Hi, Am 22. Januar 2015 11:45:47 MEZ, schrieb althio althio : > > Please vote here: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:associatedStreet > > Is this a formal voting? It is not as formal as a proposal voting. I would like to know how the community (those who vote) think about a

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Hi Dan, Am 2015-01-22 um 13:06 schrieb Dan S: > 2015-01-22 6:53 GMT+00:00 Marc Gemis : >> It seems like the German community started some voting process on the >> deprecation of the associatedStreet-relation (it was on the mailing list and >> on the forum). >> >> Discussion is going on on the wiki

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Hi, Am 2015-01-22 um 16:14 schrieb Vincent Pottier: > Le 22/01/2015 14:00, althio a écrit : >>> Hi all - does anyone know what the geographic distribution of >>> associatedStreet is like? taginfo doesn't render a map (it seems it >>> doesn't do that for relations). > UK

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Am 2015-01-22 um 21:41 schrieb Michael Reichert: > Worldwide, 3,573,027 objects are member of an associatedStreet relation > and have the role "house". [1,2] 49,260,005 objects are tagged with > addr:housenumber=*. That's why 7.2 % of all adresses in OSM are mapped > u

Re: [Tagging] Tram tracks running in a road

Hi Luca, Am 2015-02-06 um 17:29 schrieb Luca Sigfrido Percich: > first time I write to the list (after lurking for a while), so I introduce > myself. I am from Milano - Italy, I work for the municipality's agency for > environment and mobility, and we'we been working for the last months to > integ

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

Hi ael, Am 2015-03-09 um 15:22 schrieb ael: > I have resorted to changing railway=abandoned to railway=disused > on several occasions just to get mapnik and friends to render > bridges. Bridges over roads and rivers are major features of relevance > to tall vehicles and boats, so really should sh

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges & abandoned railways

Hi, Am 2015-03-09 um 16:06 schrieb ael: > Well, I have only changed the tag on the bridges themselves, and only on > ways for which I did the original (and usually any subsequent) survey > and edits. So I am not corrupting other people's data. Wrong! You have corrupted data because you have chang

Re: [Tagging] Proposal : Move "smoking" tag to active status

Hi Bryce, Am 2015-03-21 um 01:54 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: > Any objection to moving: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Smoking > because it is heavily used and obviously well established. I agree. Because it is used on 47541 objects at OSM all over the world, it's best to move

Re: [Tagging] Proposal : Move "smoking" tag to active status

Hi, Am 2015-03-21 um 02:29 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: > Additions to that page, I'd think, should be proposed separately. > > - > The utility undergrounding RFC proposes tagging for a similar "regional > default value". > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Quickly_Marking_Utility_Wi

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

Am 2015-03-28 um 00:54 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: > Adding new value to a bicycle tag is a terrible idea. There is a widespread > support for bicycle=designated > and retagging cycleways to bicycle=obligatory would result in a breaking > data. > > Note also existence of bicycle=use_sidepath that i

[Tagging] Wiki: Key:level: proposed rewrite

Hi, Am 2015-05-25 um 01:41 schrieb pmailkeey .: > Any objection if I 'rewrite http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level ? > > It seems to have been written with the misconception that floor names are > numbers when they're not. > > A rewrite: > >- Won't affect existing names that appear

Re: [Tagging] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: highway=footway - Advanced definition: Distinction footway vs path

Hi Richard, Am 2015-08-02 um 23:25 schrieb Richard: >> Rationale: >> >> The current definition ("minor pathways which are used mainly or exclusively >> by pedestrians") is not specific in providing definite distinctive features >> between footway and path. The consequences are misconceptions and g

Re: [Tagging] highway=footway - Advanced definition: Distinction footway vs path

Hi Richard, Am 2015-08-04 um 16:59 schrieb Richard: > On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 11:43:21PM +0200, Michael Reichert wrote: >> I fully oppose highway=footpath. This is not backward-compatible and >> will therefore break almost all applications which use OSM data. It >> co

Re: [Tagging] Rail maxspeed conversions

Hi Dave, Am 2015-09-05 um 11:21 schrieb Dave F.: > Update: The user has informed me there was a discussion & the outcome > was to convert all to kph. Does anyone have a link to it? Converting UK railway maxspeeds to kph is just mapping for the renderer. OpenRailwayMap does not support mph speeds

Re: [Tagging] Rail maxspeed conversions

Hi Dave, Am 2015-09-05 um 12:58 schrieb Dave F.: > Do you know where the UK maxspeed figures would have originally come > from? I assume it's some form of open source database rather than > someone foolishly walking the tracks. There are multiple ways to get railway maxspeed data (1) data with a

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

Hi Michał, Am 2015-10-10 um 21:28 schrieb Michał Brzozowski: > In the course of surveys, I fill in opening_hours of shops and other > venues. Sometimes though, they are not marked outside. Therefore, when > looking at a feature that lacks opening_hours other mappers and I > can't tell the reason.

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

Hi Mateusz, Am Mon, 26 Oct 2015 08:58:08 +0100 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: > I recently started tagging traffic signs and I am surprised by wide > usage country-specific traffic sign codes. > > I think that at least common signs may be tagged by human-readable > values. Some (see > http://wiki.ope

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

Hi, Am 2015-11-06 um 11:24 schrieb Paul Johnson: > […] > *The fix: * I propose a goal of December 31, 2016 to eliminate ref=* as a > method to describe an overlying route; this should be more than ample time > for existing data consumers to catch up on doing a move and ensure data > consistency fo

Re: [Tagging] Road Running Railways

Hi Dominic, Am 26. November 2015 13:49:33 MEZ, schrieb Dominic Coletti : > I have noticed that there is no set tag for rails that are embedded > within > the road. One strategy I have had is to tag the road as highway=* and > add > another line with railway=rail. I just wanted to reach out to th

Re: [Tagging] Draft of proposal tag 'sells' for shops..

Hi, Am 07.03.2016 um 08:56 schrieb Frederik Ramm: > It is possible that some supermarkets would make their list of products > available electronically and thus provide an incentive for a clever > hacker to simply convert that to OSM. Once we say we accept a list of > products for a supermarket, fe

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Am 18.03.2016 um 18:38 schrieb Daniel Koć: > and it would be good to have universal scheme instead of > railway:station_category=* or flights_range=*. Looks like it is > being already used and quite popular: You know that you usually have more

Re: [Tagging] importance=* tag (for transportation etc)

Hi John, Am 18.03.2016 um 22:36 schrieb John Willis: > I was told point-blank by the head of OSM-carto on github That (as I remember > it) > > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/323 > > A) "importance" is unverifiable, so it is useless for OSM. > > Gravitystorm: > "Im

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Alan, Am 25.03.2016 um 23:54 schrieb Alan McConchie: > I’d like to solicit comments on the following proposal, to create a > new tag called "highway=social_path" > > Wiki page is here: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Soci

Re: [Tagging] steps parallel to escalator

Hi Bjoern, Am 01.07.2016 um 19:30 schrieb Bjoern Hassler: > A few questions about steps/escalators: > > (1) Should an escalator always have "highway=steps"? I.e. > highway=steps > conveying=yes > (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:conveying ). Yes. An escalator can be used as a steps ev

Re: [Tagging] Additions to public_transport scheme

Hi, Am 07.07.2016 um 08:19 schrieb Colin Smale: > You could use "long_name" to provide a version of the name which > includes the discriminators In Germany there are ref_name=* and uic_name=* in use. (We have the same problem) Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt

Re: [Tagging] Does disused:railway=* require railway=disused?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Am 28.07.2016 um 09:31 schrieb Warin: > My understanding is; > > The primary tag is railway=disused. > > Then you have a 'sub tag' to describe what is disused .. a railway > station, light rail line etc. railway=disused is a very old and est

Re: [Tagging] Roads with no speed limits

Hi Hans, Am 28.08.2016 um 21:35 schrieb Hans De Kryger: > Here in Phoenix Arizona more than half the freeway off ramps have no listed > speed limit. Does (maxspeed=none) work? I've worked hard here in the valley > adding speed limits and when you look at the ito map it looks like no one > added an

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Through service

Hi Michael, Am 2016-09-14 um 05:10 schrieb Michael Tsang: > RFC: Through service > > This proposes a kind of relation to associate different public transport > services to become a through service, i.e. the vehicles run through the > services sequentially, allowing passengers staying on board.

Re: [Tagging] Railway=station + area=yes questions:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Am 2016-10-04 um 11:50 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > 2016-10-04 0:19 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > >> There is a nice diagram of how to map a simple station >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dstation#A_S >> i

Re: [Tagging] Railway=station + area=yes questions:

Hi, Am 2016-10-04 um 11:37 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > 2016-10-03 21:54 GMT+02:00 Alexander Matheisen > : > >> The main problem I see for mapping stations as areas is the lack >> of defined boundaries. Compared to other types of POIs, the >> definition of a "station area" strongly differs depe

Re: [Tagging] Railway=station + area=yes questions:

Hi Martin, Am 2016-10-05 um 10:13 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > 2016-10-04 21:36 GMT+02:00 Michael Reichert : >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Station-asymmetric.svg >> >> (1) A passenger might define the station as the area around the >> platforms, the sta

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of Country Names

Hi Warin, Am 25.10.2016 um 23:32 schrieb Warin: > ? You are not proposing removing all the English names from the data base?! No, he doesn't. He just proposes to remove the English name from the name=* tag in countries where English is neither an official language nor a common (but non-official)

Re: [Tagging] railway=rail vs. railway=subway

Hi, railway=* should depend on the infrastructure only. The services which use the track, don't matter. Am 22.11.2016 um 15:41 schrieb Michael Tsang: > On Tuesday 22 November 2016 11:28:00 jc86035 wrote: >> Should a commuter rail system with rapid transit frequency but main >> line-standard track

Re: [Tagging] railway=rail vs. railway=subway

Hi Bill, Am 23.11.2016 um 05:12 schrieb Bill Ricker: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:08 PM, Michael Tsang wrote: >>> Oh really. Boston MBTA green line is a subway line that extends onto >>> surface streets. Not full rail gauge iirc (though other lines are) and >>> neither surface or tunnel curves co

Re: [Tagging] Tagging speed camera *zones*

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Rory, Am 2017-01-16 um 17:24 schrieb Rory McCann: > In Ireland, there are several roads which could have a mobile > speed camera van. We have some open data from the government of > these roads, and we'd like to map them in OSM. Ideally satnav ap

Re: [Tagging] Tagging speed camera *zones*

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Rory, Am 2017-01-17 um 13:39 schrieb Rory McCann: > On 16/01/17 17:56, Michael Reichert wrote: >> Are there signs along the road which inform the car drivers that >> there might be a mobile speed camera van? > > Yes the

[Tagging] Invalid voting of proposed feature motorcycle_friendly=*

Hi, I have been informed by another mapper who uses XING (the German LikedIn) that there is a new tag motorcycle_friendly=yes. [1] Its wiki page says that the key has been proposed and accepted. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motorcycle_friendly The proposal page can be found here: https

Re: [Tagging] Invalid voting of proposed feature motorcycle_friendly=*

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Am 2017-03-02 um 20:21 schrieb Michael Reichert: > Because the proposal violated the guideline, I would like to - > remove the status "proposed" from its feature documentation page - > reset the status of the proposal to &qu

Re: [Tagging] Invalid voting of proposed feature motorcycle_friendly=*

Hi, Am 2017-03-04 um 15:02 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > mapping this kind of information (e.g. michelin star restaurants ) in a > structured and systematic way is likely forbidden because it means recreating > a (probably) proprietary db IMHO this is the only way who the friendliness of a PO

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Feature Proposal - Voting - tag "motorcycle friendly" for accomodations

Hi David, Am 05.03.2017 um 23:46 schrieb David Bannon: > Maybe its time someone put a note on the proposal page saying that the > author is posting to the list but does not appear to be receiving > messages from it ? > > In case its a language issue, could that message be in German and > English

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Feature Proposal - Voting - tag "motorcycle friendly" for accomodations

Hi Martin and others, Am 2017-03-06 um 17:37 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > yes, that wording is unfortunate, because in most/many OSM mailing lists > messages never get approved. I am myself admin of a very small regional ML > and from time to time there are periods where a lot of spam arrives, I

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi François, Am 2017-03-08 um 15:18 schrieb François Lacombe: > frequency=* tag aims to qualify active elements on telecom or power > networks (among others, see wiki > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:frequency) > > I see it as an optional property of power lines or cables. > http://wiki.o

Re: [Tagging] Discouraging frequency=* on power lines and cables

Hi David, Am 09.03.2017 um 06:35 schrieb David Marchal: >> Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reichert a écrit : >> >> Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on >> every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V). >> > Totally a

Re: [Tagging] simple 3D buildings, proposed redefinition of building:levels and building:min_level for building:part

Hi Martin, Am 09.03.2017 um 19:39 schrieb Tobias Knerr: > Your proposed change would, therefore, make data mapped using these keys > mostly useless due to the unresolvable ambiguity. In my opinion, that > kind of cost is not worth it. I oppose the proposed change for exactly the same reasons. Red

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

Hi, Am 2017-03-16 um 05:13 schrieb Tod Fitch: > The “direction” tag [1] has different uses that seem disjoint to me. > To specify the orientation (compass point or degrees from north) of an object > (adit or cave entrance, etc.). > To specify direction (clockwise/counterclockwise) around a round

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - 2nd RFC - Improve Toilet Tagging

Hi Micah, Am 2017-04-14 um 18:49 schrieb Micah Cochran: > I've rewrote the proposal for improving toilet tagging. This is a second > request for comments. > > Now this proposal tags for occupancy (single or multi), gender/group > designation > of toilets that are within a place (where tagged "to

Re: [Tagging] rail routes and stations (rail question 1)

Hi, Am 2017-05-12 um 08:07 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > this was closed as duplicate, so they are aware there is an issue. > In the discussion the only argument (by Nakaner, a rail enthusiast) > is that there are 3 different legally relevant areas for train > stations in Germany, so the German r

Re: [Tagging] rail routes: how are platforms and stops associated (rail question 2)

Hi Bjoern, Am 2017-05-10 um 18:59 schrieb Bjoern Hassler: > In an osm:relation:route > (type=route, > route=train/...), you have both platforms and stop positions. How is a > particular platform associated with a stop that serves it? > > E.g.

Re: [Tagging] rail routes: how are platforms and stops associated (rail question 2)

Hi Bjoern, Am 2017-05-11 um 12:08 schrieb Bjoern Hassler: > Basically, I'm trying to understand > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Members. There's the > concept of station vs. stop_position, in case there are many stop_positions > in a station / stop_area. Sorry for London examp

Re: [Tagging] rail routes: how are platforms and stops associated (rail question 2)

Hi Bjoern, Am 2017-05-11 um 11:17 schrieb Bjoern Hassler: > in the case of 4a/4b etc I would put in different stop points. If 4a always > serves one route, then 4a would be added to the route relation. Maybe if 4a > / 5a / 6a can all serve the same route, then I don't know what the solution > is..

Re: [Tagging] rail routes and stations (rail question 1)

Hi Martin, Am 2017-05-12 um 12:46 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > btw: the current railway=station tag definition doesn't say anything how to > differentiate between freight stations and passenger stations and possibly > combinations of both. > > Which tags are used? As a railway mapper, I must

[Tagging] highspeed=yes

Hi, I have a small dispute with user flierfy about the usage of highspeed=yes and would like to ask for your opinions. [1] I think that highspeed=yes should only be use that tracks whose speed limit is above a certain minimum speed (On The Ground Rule). The speed might vary between countries. fl

Re: [Tagging] highspeed=yes

Hi Martin, Am 11.07.2017 um 01:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: >> On 10. Jul 2017, at 23:42, Michael Reichert wrote: >> >> The main question is: >> Shold the whole line (the definition of "line" is a different discussion >> worth) get highspeed=yes or on

Re: [Tagging] highspeed=yes

Hi, sorry for the late response on the mailing list, I accidentially send the email only to Richard. Am 11.07.2017 um 10:49 schrieb Richard: > without a proper definition there is no way to resolve your dispute > and the tag is unverifyable and of limitted use as is. There are two open questions

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposals - RFC for multiple features - Education Reform - Magnetic Levitation Trains

Hi Erkin, Am 17.09.2017 um 07:54 schrieb Erkin Alp Güney: > Two RFCs by me are ready. One of them are education reform(actually > delayed a bit). This brings education key instead of amenity=school. > Full proposal at >

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: "slogan" tag. Opinions?

Hi, Am 2017-09-19 um 09:32 schrieb Topographe Fou: > From my understanding it would open even more the door to advertising and I > don't see any added value from a map point of view (no usefull data for the > user). > > Moreover, in your exemple, I don't see the point to repeat on all McDonald'

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of Subway Stations

Hi Ilya, Am 2017-09-24 um 10:49 schrieb Ilya Zverev: > I had a task of extracting subway infrastructure from OpenStreetMap, and > I found out that some things cannot be mapped at all (e.g. > interchanges), and some are unclear or mapped differently in different > countries. > > Please consider th

[Tagging] Proposed deletion of wiki pages about motorcycle_friendly=*

Hi, while I was looking up some tags for camp sites, I just stumbled across the proposal of motorcycle_friendly=* and the tags motorcycle:*=*. The proposal was discussed on this mailing list in March 2017. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-March/031403.html I hereby propose t

Re: [Tagging] Proposed deletion of wiki pages about motorcycle_friendly=*

Hi Yves, Am 04.10.2017 um 17:44 schrieb Yves: > Whatever this tag is good or bad, it's not a good idea to delete the page > from the wiki. > If I find it in the data, this page will inform me on its meaning. > Now if it's bad, you can trust the contributors not to use it. > Also, you can take

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

Hi Ialokim, Am 04.10.2017 um 05:36 schrieb Mikolai-Alexander Gütschow: > I've elaborated a proposal for the route=coach tag according to the > Public Transport Scheme v2 and as already in use in some cases. > > See > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport_v2_Vehicl

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of Subway Stations

Hi Ilya, Am 25.09.2017 um 09:46 schrieb Ilya Zverev: >> Am 2017-09-24 um 10:49 schrieb Ilya Zverev: >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Metro_Mapping >> >> I don't understand what's the aim of your "proposal". There are almost >> no new tags. Is it intended as a write-up of w

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v2 Vehicle Type "coach"

Hi Martin, Am 2017-10-06 um 09:51 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > what I forgot to conclude: as the values are mostly new, and it’s not an > access restriction, I’d use a different key for this, rather than bus you > could use something like route:scope or route:type etc. Some people (including

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

Hi, every year timetables of many public transport services in Europe change on the second Saturday in December at 24:00. At this date lots of changes are necessary to route relations – operators change, reference numbers change or whole networks are restructured. I would like to introduce a tag

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

Hi Andrew, Am 12.10.2017 um 22:45 schrieb Andrew Davidson: > Do you want data users to consume this tag? Or is intended for other > mappers to know when something needs to be updated? It is their decision what they consume and what not. The primary users are mappers and validators. But if data co

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Validity of Route Relations

Hi Warin, Am 2017-10-13 um 23:22 schrieb Warin: > On 14-Oct-17 04:11 AM, Michael Reichert wrote: >> end_date=* is used on disused objects or objects whose last day of >> operation/service is known. Common examples are disused railway tracks >> or shops which announced the

  1   2   >