Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-07-31 Thread Tom Pfeifer
-1 to removing as well, and I would appreciate a constructive discussion that does not qualify the thoughts of others as nonsense, as long as they are not clearly malicious. If you look at http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=religious#map you see the highest density of use in Poland

Re: [Tagging] Climbing access path

2014-08-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
If I understand Karsten correctly, the limitation is not about payment, it is to limit the number of people using this path. This would be typical for climbing crags in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conservation areas. A typical example is the sandstone climbing in Saxonia/Germany, which is

Re: [Tagging] Climbing access path

2014-08-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Dan S wrote, on 2014-08-08 11:31: 2014-08-08 10:21 GMT+01:00 k4r573n k4r5...@googlemail.com: Tom - yes you understood me right :) Thanks There is no one who check whether your a climber or not or want to have a fee - but these path are not aimed to be used by the general public. I admit

Re: [Tagging] Climbing access path

2014-08-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Tobias Knerr wrote, on 2014-08-08 12:55: access=destination makes sense. That second tag isn't established, though, nor is the concept of explaining the details through a destination=* subtag. At least it helps the fellow mapper why the access was tagged so, and is easier than a note= Am

Re: [Tagging] Wayside shrines that are not historic

2014-08-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Mateusz Konieczny wrote, on 2014-08-19 16:45: How one should tag wayside shrine that is not historic? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wayside_shrine is not providing an answer. That question was asked 2010 already on the discussion page. I agree that 'historic' is ambiguous in the first

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-08-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
John Packer wrote, on 2014-08-26 16:57: I'm not against landuse=religious, but I'm not satisfied with it's current description: The area surrounding a amenity=place_of_worship used for religious purposes I believe a tag such as landuse=religious is inevitably going to be used as

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-08-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
theatres or climbing halls. Some could be reactivated for the religious purpose by bringing the altar back. I still find a landuse tag very suitable for case 1 and 3, where calling the land *=place_of_worship would be a misnomer for the lack of ceremony. On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Tom

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-08-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote, on 2014-08-27 12:05: I'd like to bring the sacred area in (speaking about Christian religion here). In Italy we are using place of worship on the whole sacred area where known (I.e. Not only on the building). For practical reasons a lot of amenity placeofworships

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-08-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Andreas Goss wrote, on 2014-08-28 12:46: I removed it on several Wiki pages, including the Map Features template. I still have the impression that it's something a very few mappers use. The usage numbers might look big, but if you take a closer look especially at Poland it's done by 1

Re: [Tagging] Religious landuse

2014-08-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote, on 2014-08-28 13:16: +1, religious is no use why not, why is it not a use such as residential, commercial or retail use? and of no use (it doesn't express anything that religion=* won't express and introduces an incompatibility for mapping the actual usage of

Re: [Tagging] default value for oneway

2014-08-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Xavier Noria wrote, on 2014-08-28 15:45: 2) In cities and towns where two-way streets are exceptional like Barcelona or Madrid, are people expected to tag them no? The motivation for this question is that there seems to be the convention not to tag them, and therefore you cannot tell the

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a landmark clock

2014-09-16 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Andy Mabbett wrote on 2014-09-16 22:10: How should this clock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Clock http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/187104810 be tagged? It's a notable landmark, but not a memorial. It is already amenity=clock and has a name. You might add

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
-1, because: Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote on 2014-09-20 23:42: I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and probably other types of elements) official. Taginfo for paved: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/paved#values The above shows that the key is already being used,

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Tod Fitch wrote on 2014-09-21 18:05: On the second point, looking on printed maps of many vintages and at several routing engines, I see a distinction between paved and unpaved. But not, with the exception of maps for a pretty specialized small group of people like highway engineers,

Re: [Tagging] Forest vs Wood

2014-09-25 Thread Tom Pfeifer
These are all rendering questions that should be discussed separately from tagging, as there can be many different map styles being created for different purposes. johnw wrote on 2014-09-25 Or make Highway=trunk a little brighter green, so it stands out against the wood even more. johnw

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-10-01 Thread Tom Pfeifer
We are only reiterating the fact that being paved or not is subjective to the renderer/router/data consumer, based on the intention of the particular user, and thus a tag for paved=* is counter-productive. John F. Eldredge wrote on 2014-10-01 14:44: Compacted usually means compacted earth (the

Re: [Tagging] Retag: craft=sweep = craft=chimney_sweep

2014-10-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Now as we have clarified that they still exist, we could come back to the original question what would be the best tag. I agree that craft=chimney_sweep is less ambiguous than =sweep alone, and with currently 24 instances in taginfo it would be a good time to change wiki and tags. Andreas Goss

[Tagging] governmental / administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-10-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative use, maybe in the context of further civic use. We do have office=administrative and office=government but no appropriate tag for the land they stand on. Often such buildings are surrounded by some land and often fenced off.

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-10-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: 2014-10-03 15:19 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer: I feel the need for a landuse tag for governmental / administrative use, maybe in the context of further civic use. We do have office=administrative and office=government but no appropriate

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-10-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Dan S wrote on 2014-10-03 19:21: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-03 15:32: I see the introduction of a new, more specific key positive, e.g. landuse=public_administration +1 I would have suggested landuse=civic. Looking at taginfo, I don't see it in use, though there is a small

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-26 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-26 20:26: Am 24.10.2014 um 20:53 schrieb Tom Pfeifer: I would recommend to add maxheight=unsigned to the English and other wiki pages, and list maxheight=none as incorrect tagging. unsigned maxheight is the typical situation in all areas that I've been

Re: [Tagging] temporary restrictions / what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Changed the subject since that question forks in another direction. As with other temporary restrictions (blocked roads, speed limits), first some discretion should be applied how long the restriction will last and if it is worthwhile to be mapped (e.g. years yes, days no) Secondly the start

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
been agreed on. tom mmd wrote on 2014-10-27 07:27: Tom Pfeifer writes: I stumbled over some maxheight=none tags on motorways, that did not even pass under a bridge. I found that this is the most frequent value of maxheight (2889 of 41474). Tom, thanks for bringing this up. As the author

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
is split. An explicit reference would need a relation. Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-27 11:13: 2014-10-27 10:20 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org mailto:t.pfei...@computer.org: Another problem is that the tag is on the way under the bridge, and not the bridge way itself

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. maxheight is different from maxspeed in some aspects. Marc Gemis wrote on 2014-10-29 13:51: why would we treat maxheight different from maxspeed ? I thought the consensus for maxspeed was to tag the maxspeed

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-10-29 14:05: 2014-10-29 14:01 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer: Then it happens that a 3 m bridge that for some reason has no sign gets a 4 m tag. examples? What is some reason? - rural track never had sign posted - neglected road, sign fallen off - unsigned road

Re: [Tagging] Default maxspeed unit on waterways

2014-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
km/h is derived, at least with an integer multiple of seconds, from SI units. mph and knots are not. I would prefer to keep one default unit per tag, consistently, everything else leads to confusion. Pieren wrote on 2014-10-29 14:14: Hi, Currently, le wiki ([1]) suggests that maxspeed has to

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting

2014-10-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Hi, I like the proposal, and the picture is very sympathetic. I would suggest to consider garbage collection cabinets as well, https://www.google.com/search?q=müllschranktbm=isch which are found in some towns to collect waste individually per house and are often lockable (as opposed to public

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting

2014-10-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
François Lacombe wrote on 2014-10-30 21:42: I would suggest street_cabinet=garbage for the equipment you've mentioned. maybe =waste is more consistent with existing tags such as amenity=waste disposal, amenity=waste basket or generator:source=waste Garbage is less used in tags so far. A

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting

2014-10-31 Thread Tom Pfeifer
for the door hinge option (as the second one has no hinges) Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: François Lacombe wrote on 2014-10-30 21:42: I would suggest street_cabinet=garbage for the equipment you've mentioned. maybe =waste is more consistent with existing tags

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting

2014-11-02 Thread Tom Pfeifer
and the garbage pickup. They are not completely private, like a mail transfer box, but they are not public either. Javbw On Oct 31, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: I would distinguish between an amenity=waste_* for structures

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
So far we have discussed pros and cons of landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic} What about landuse=civil ? Oxford defines as attribute of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters, and in law as relating to private

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public} For my taste, public implies much more openness than we have from some ministries, immigration offices etc, but is certainly a value to consider. I would like to put a RFC page together towards the end of the week,

Re: [Tagging] path vs footway

2014-11-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
In a national park, I would prefer highway=footway for the built-up and paved ways, e.g. close to the visitor centre, that are often prepared for wheelchair=yes and attract people for a Sunday stroll. Any longer, more natural paths for longer hiking I'd tag as highway=path with tagging as Dan

[Tagging] bridleways / Re: path vs footway

2014-11-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-11-04 14:30: 2014-11-04 14:01 GMT+01:00 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk mailto:p...@trigpoint.me.uk: Surely highway=bridleway has been around forever? It was certainly there when I started editing in 2007. surely this was there, but the German

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
. I will be working on the details of the proposal later today. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dcivic Javbw On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:03 AM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: ok, now we have landuse={governmental|public_administrative|civic|civil|public

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-11-05 01:27: I might have missed it in the discussion, but why not simply landuse=governmental? Well that was among my first ideas, hence the subject of this thread. We are currently collecting the arguments for each potential tags on the Talk page, feel free to

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
To help us making up our minds which tag to prefer, or to check if we should use two of them, I have started a table of use cases that would suit one ore the other tag class better, and started with some examples, on the Talk page. Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2014-11-05 11:21: Matthijs Melissen wrote

Re: [Tagging] governmental / public_administrative landuse are not commercial

2014-11-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Yes I agree we should not include them, for two main reasons: - landuse should not describe ownership, by any means. Ownership is not publicly verifiable, they remain closed source. Even when land registries (fr/cadastre de/Kataster) now publish property boundaries, the owner remains

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Street cabinet - Voting

2014-11-17 Thread Tom Pfeifer
street_cabinet=waste had already been discussed during the proposal process, but not yet added during the voting. the value 'waste' is more consistent with existing amenity tagging than refuse or garbage. I have added it to categories and examples to the wiki, feel free to add a picture, some

Re: [Tagging] Main Distribution Frame added to man_made template

2014-11-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Further, it is a 3-letter acronym which could mean different things. Acronyms are generally not suitable for OSM, oops, Openstreetmap. François Lacombe wrote on 2014-11-19 11:53: Hi I've recently noticed that man_made=MDF has been added to man_made template on Map Features page.

Re: [Tagging] Various alt_name values?

2014-11-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Friedrich Volkmann wrote on 2014-11-27 03:38: On 26.11.2014 18:23, Brian Quinion wrote: At the moment nominatim supports alt_name_[0-9]+:language_code=name for alt names I've added this to the wiki Please don't document values supported by single applications. The wiki should represent

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

2014-12-15 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I don't see a need for a new key here. The properties can be easily modelled with sub-tagging of playground: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no (btw, using kids_area=both in the older proposal is poor tagging since it is not

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

2014-12-15 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Dmitry Kiselev wrote on 2014-12-15 14:52: I can't agree with you guys. All kinds of facilities where you can rent a bed for a night may be mapped as hotel with tons of sub-tags. But still we have hotels, motels, guest houses, and so on. [...] We have restaurants and cafe, both offers you

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

2014-12-17 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Erik, this gets really messy here. Not mapping a playground as a playground just because of the access? We don't map amenity=parking differently just because of access=customers. We have all the tools already without the need for a new tag, and definitely these shopping centre playgrounds should

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

2014-12-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Andreas Goss wrote on 2014-12-17 22:41: I don't see a need for a new key here. The properties can be easily modelled with sub-tagging of playground: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no I agree in general, but the main issue with

Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

2014-12-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2014-12-17 15:39: I also know a place that might fall into this category: indoor streetview: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8462111,12.4869449,3a,75y,151.95h,69.96t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sq3Z8vG9t0TkAAAQfCNjLlg!2e0!3e2 some pics:

Re: [Tagging] GPX dates / Date of survey

2014-12-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Dave F. wrote on 2014-12-23 15:48: On 23/12/2014 04:16, Marc Gemis wrote: Which would not help in my case, as I work for several days on the same survey. ... History command (Key: H) in Potlatch? Is it not available in other editors? One advantageous thing would be to click on a GPX trace

Re: [Tagging] Accuracy of survey

2014-12-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I would consider that a non-issue as you said, for those reasons: - When it comes to GPS traces on objects that don't move (*), the beauty of crowdsourcing is on our side. The collection of traces over a longer time creates a cloud of traces which form a Gaussian bell curve, in density,

Re: [Tagging] Accuracy of survey

2014-12-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Friedrich Volkmann wrote on 2014-12-23 23:59: There are no GPS traces for pipeline markes. There are traces for roads and paths only. It was not clear if the OP indeed wants to map pipelines, or was just quoting the pipeline expert for his opinion about surveying methods. And if you

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - leisure=fitness_centre

2014-12-25 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Matthijs Melissen wrote on 2014-12-25 22:35: On 25 December 2014 at 14:21, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Just had the great idea to suggest tagging gyms/fintess centres for the German a weekly task (new year's resolutions incoming), when I realized we still don't have tagging schema

Re: [Tagging] Accuracy of survey

2014-12-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Kotya Karapetyan wrote on 2014-12-29 15:27: Just recently I discovered that something in this direction already exists: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/Rep%C3%A8res_G%C3%A9od%C3%A9siques#Permanence_des_rep.C3.A8res Example:

Re: [Tagging] 'Variety' in UK English?

2014-12-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Langenscheidt translates DE:varieté into variety theatre, music hall, Am. vaudeville theatre. Oxford defines 'variety' for both BE/AE as a form of television or theater entertainment consisting of a series of different types of acts, such as singing, dancing, and comedy All is exactly what

Re: [Tagging] correct access tagging for tourist attraction

2015-01-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Mateusz Konieczny wrote on 2015-01-03 18:02: Typical situation in Poland is that only residents may drive on some roads in housing estates - not everybody who wants to reach this place. So I am using vehicle=private - despite the fact that it is quite different from private as in only one

Re: [Tagging] Whole planet flooded at main map?

2015-02-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote on 2015-02-06 21:52: On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote: Is it just me or is currently the whole planet flooded on the main map? At least at zoom level 1-6. Starting with 7 countries reappear. It's flooded, yes. (but tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - temperature

2015-02-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Just a nitpicking detail, using 'degree' with the Kelvin scale was deprecated in 1968 by the 13th General Conference on Weights and Measures. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin#Usage_conventions Lukas Sommer wrote on 2015-02-05 08:50: I suppose that in most countries of the world, °C is

Re: [Tagging] Mail Threading / was: Wiki Edit War ...

2015-01-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
jgpacker wrote on 2015-01-21 15:56: I agree. Sorry, I thought the previous messages we renecessary so the server could find out the who answered to who and to which thread this belongs. No that is what References (previous Message-IDs in the thread) in the header are for, in your mail:

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

2015-01-18 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Sorry but I'm sceptical about the scheme. It adds very little value compared to its own complexity. In particular the timing of the lights is highly volatile in modern cities, and it seems impossible to collect the ground truth as a mapper just by observing them. Take the 2050 traffic lights in

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

2015-02-15 Thread Tom Pfeifer
SomeoneElse wrote on 2015-02-15 10:52: You can't always take taginfo numbers at face value. right. let's look closer. For example, in the UK much of the usage of landuse=religious was introduced by this changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25035328 14 I have counted in this

Re: [Tagging] RFC aerialway=zip line

2015-02-17 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Richard Z. wrote on 2015-02-17 15:26: Otherwise you need to deprecate playground=zipwire. ok, I am in favor of deprecating playground=zipwire. Large share of aerialway ziplines are part of adult playgrounds. Technically there are no universally valid principal differences that could

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

2015-02-17 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Andreas Goss wrote on 2015-02-17 22:02: If people really continute to use this tag I will use it for everything run by the chatholic church in Germany, after all they are the largest private land owner... Then they can have fun with their church yards. the tag is about land_use_, not

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

2015-02-17 Thread Tom Pfeifer
fly wrote on 2015-02-17 23:12: I still do not understand, why we can not use religion=* without any landuse. on which area description? I have no problem to additionally add amenity=place_of_worship or appropriate tag to the area. I have. The same is true for supermarket with there own

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, REMOVED

2015-01-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
maybe fiction: and an explanation in the note tag. Richard Welty wrote on 2015-01-28 13:46: On 1/28/15 7:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I just stumbled over this in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix *removed:* * (features that do not exist anymore or never

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

2015-01-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-01-09 00:56: denomination=none ;-) Nice, but we need to stay on the religion= level 2015-01-08 23:21 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: The exact word is nondenominational, but multi fits with OSM definitions. As above, I would avoid the term 'denomination' in

Re: [Tagging] landuse=religious and amenity=place of worship

2015-01-06 Thread Tom Pfeifer
A while ago I had identified the following use-cases / situations, which I now extend and my preferred tagging to them. Please note that the focus of amenity=place of worship should be on a ceremonial place, while landuse=religious can comprise auxiliary structures. Case 1 A building where

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

2015-01-12 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Jgpacker asks on the PoW talk page: Are [Airports prayer rooms] really tagged with amenity=place_of_worship? I would say it's quite a different place from a normal religious place, and should get another tag. I'd say they are places where people go for worshipping, and for practicability they

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

2015-02-14 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I see nothing wrong with building=* on a node, used 772612 times. Typical cases are: - somebody collects house numbers along a road, but has no access to the geometry. Thus she can use plain addr: tags on unbuilt properties, and add building=* where a building is visible. - aerial imagery

[Tagging] religion=multi* ?

2015-01-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
No value has been documented so far for rooms dedicated for worshipping without being limited to a specific religion. It is useful however so a renderer could apply a specific icon, and a mapper sees that it is not just forgotten. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:religion Such rooms are

Re: [Tagging] Toll enforcement devices

2015-03-14 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-03-14 21:09: Am 14.03.2015 um 12:11 schrieb Tom Pfeifer : Agreed, thus the 'barrier' key should only be used if it is a barrier that stops you. If it is a 'free-flow' method only, a different description should be found. for barrier there are already

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

2015-03-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Michael Reichert wrote on 2015-03-09 15:27: 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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

2015-03-07 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Kotya Karapetyan wrote on 2015-03-07 23:19: On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de mailto:andi...@t-online.de wrote: And if I'm a visitor how would for example a OSM based navigation system figure out to which company or facility they belong? It should be

[Tagging] Toll enforcement devices

2015-03-13 Thread Tom Pfeifer
OsmAnd was telling me that I was passing a toll_booth on a German motorway, however it was just one of the camera bridges operated by TollCollect, and applicable only for toll:hgv=yes. However toll is not collected when passing this point, it is collected for using a certain road segment.

Re: [Tagging] Toll enforcement devices

2015-03-14 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Warin wrote on 2015-03-14 03:16: On 14/03/2015 11:31 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Thus my next stop was https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement but, interestingly, it does not know yet about toll at all, yet. No .. enforcement from the wiki is permanently installed devices

Re: [Tagging] recommend tagging of volcanos as ways rather than nodes

2015-03-30 Thread Tom Pfeifer
In contrast to a peak, which is a point by definition, a volcano is often characterised by its crater, thus a polygon makes perfect sense. I see people drawing perfectly round chimneys with one node per brick, thus a volcano certainly deserves its area. I would have recommended to sync this

Re: [Tagging] Mapping private home toilets

2015-03-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
John Willis wrote on 2015-03-03 22:46: On Mar 4, 2015, at 1:03 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-03 14:07 GMT+01:00 John Willis jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com: Now I'm wondering if there is tags for boys girls as well. Off to

Re: [Tagging] Wiki edits on junction=roundabout

2015-02-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
+1 To draw a circle does not need complicated explanations. Compass directions are needless in this context. Editor-specific instructions are already there. No reed to recommend the kerb with such priority. Martin Vonwald wrote on 2015-02-23 11:02: I asked the user for an explanation and

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of pitches within a campsite

2015-05-08 Thread Tom Pfeifer
pmailkeey . wrote on 2015-05-06 23:13: On 6 May 2015 at 20:40, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: if they're static I'd probably tag them like other huts you can rent for vacation. As in 'alpine_hut' ? No, an alpine_hut is more like a

Re: [Tagging] Proposed tag shop=wholesale

2015-05-09 Thread Tom Pfeifer
ael wrote on 2015-05-09 20:30: I suppose what trade prices means will vary in different countries. In the EU, I think that will mean VAT-exclusive prices, ... just for the records, that is not possible, a business cannot sell without VAT to a domestic customer, regardless whether it is a B2B

[Tagging] residential granularity / was Re: OSM is ... right ...

2015-06-05 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-06-05 13:36: Am 05.06.2015 um 11:33 schrieb David Fisher djfishe...@gmail.com: As for landuse=residential -- I agree that we could probably do without it. But it does add to the readability of the map, especially at low zoom levels, as it enables you to see at

Re: [Tagging] tagging large intersections cross-road sections

2015-06-23 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Florian Lohoff wrote on 2015-06-23 14:55: Its not just links - When 2 streets with 2 seperate mapped lanes cross you'll get a hash - #. The inner 4 snippets: Whats their name and ref if the east and westbound roads are named different and have a different ref? Whatever you do you'll produce

Re: [Tagging] tagging large intersections cross-road sections

2015-06-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
ASCII art only works with proportional font: S N S N WWW*WWW*EEE S N S N WWW*EEE*EEE S N S N Marc Gemis wrote on 2015-06-24 09:15: but this does not work for the cases where there is only 1 OSM way for S N. Suppose S N do not form a dual carriage way and the

[Tagging] sport vs. leisure: High Ropes Course and Climbing Adventure

2015-08-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
There are competing proposals for facilities described as Ropes Course in wikipedia [1], mostly: leisure=high_ropes_course [2] , (21 uses, plus 30 leisure=.*rope.*) sport=climbing_adventure [3] (155 uses) sport=high_ropes_course [undocumented] (43 uses, plus 45 sport=.*rope.*) As these

Re: [Tagging] Amenities for kids parties

2015-08-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
From the pictures, I would characterise these places as indoor playgrounds, and if they are rented, tag them having a fee, thus: leisure=playground indoor=yes fee=yes You might also check if amenity=community_centre fits for your venues. Please avoid the component 'kids' in tags, since it is

Re: [Tagging] landcover=trees definition

2015-08-03 Thread Tom Pfeifer
christian.pietz...@googlemail.com wrote on 2015-08-03 09:20: landcover=trees has it's origins in this proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover The proposal wanted to seperate the phsyical landscape (landcover) from the cultural landscape (landuse). But the

Re: [Tagging] landuse=military

2015-07-27 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Richard Welty wrote on 2015-07-26 20:04: the wiki definition for landuse=military is very broad: For land areas owned/used by the military for whatever purpose so the usage is correct if we strictly follow the wiki, but it still seems odd. which wiki page should that be?

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
John Willis wrote on 2015-07-22 03:47: On Jul 21, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Tom Pfeifer t.pfei...@computer.org wrote: I would prefer to have that in the playground:theme=* tag, thus playground=structure and playground:theme=octopus_mountain|ship|castle|dungeon|etc If they were a one-off, yea

[Tagging] theatre vs concert_hall / Re: Rendering dept questions

2015-07-24 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Daniel Koć wrote on 2015-07-24 14:43: 2. There was also a request for rendering concert halls: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1677 [...] Two most obvious propositions would be: a) amenity=concert_hall b) specific tagging sub-scheme for amenity=theatre Many places

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-19 Thread Tom Pfeifer
I assume you are using the playground=* key already, just looking for a proper value for these kind of devices? Probably something with .*combination.* or multi.* ? Or, checking some manufacturer's websites, I found play system playstructure play combination play castle/village play

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
John Willis wrote on 2015-07-20 00:35: Because it is under the playground tag, just structure should be fine. Structure might be a good value for a large piece, if the other pieces (bridges, slides, climbing nets, etc) are large enough to be mappable (like a very large installation at a

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Marc Gemis wrote on 2015-07-20 12:14: I was waiting for some more reactions, but for now playground=structure seems the best value for me. ... Is it OK to add this with a picture to the wikipage ? Fine for me. You might add that rather high in the example list, I'd say. Do you have a

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-20 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-07-20 20:56: Am 20.07.2015 um 12:14 schrieb Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: I was waiting for some more reactions, but for now playground=structure seems the best value for me. this is almost not more information than without it, all playgrounds will have

Re: [Tagging] Playground equipment

2015-07-21 Thread Tom Pfeifer
John Willis wrote on 2015-07-21 02:14: On Jul 21, 2015, at 4:01 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I think this is ok, if these are indeed japan specific, but I'd add a namespace like this: playground=jp:tako_no_yama so if I was tagging it in english it would be

Re: [Tagging] diplomatic institutions (with tl;dr)

2015-08-25 Thread Tom Pfeifer
serpens-...@gmx.de wrote on 2015-08-25 16:43: having an English name for a Spanish consulate to France seems kind of odd for the tag name ;-) That’s a joke, right? ;-) I would not see that a joke. name= should be the locally used name, name:en= the English one. t.

Re: [Tagging] when should highway=centreline be used?

2015-10-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
We need to distinguish two questions, which were mixed up in the previous discussion, namely a) should a centre line be mapped at all, b) if so, how should it be drawn and tagged. As for a), mapping certainly provides a value on a road with bidirectional traffic. We can map if it is a solid or

Re: [Tagging] when should highway=centreline be used?

2015-10-28 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Tom Pfeifer wrote on 2015-10-28 12:18: Thus we would need a new key as follows: =[single|double|dashed|etc] As the line might not always be in the centre, a better name would be welcome. carriageway_divider = [single|double|dashed|etc] ? Although the UK highway code also calls them Centre

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

2015-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-10-29 13:38: sent from a phone Am 29.10.2015 um 13:05 schrieb Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org>: man_made=weighbridge for checking trucks there are also other vehicles that are weighted, ... man_made=weighbridge for checking vehicles, so to i

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

2015-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2015-10-29 12:29: it's still a bit unclear, which variation makes it, as amenity=weighbridge itself has less than 400 occurencies at the moment, my guess is that these alternate links have been set up for this reason (i.e. those are actually used variants, and

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a weigh station / bridge ?

2015-10-29 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Gerd Petermann wrote on 2015-10-29 11:39: amenity=weighbridge (taginfo reports 386 uses) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dweighbridge I agree that they mean all the same thing, with some exception, > weight_sensor=yes (1) might actually be a monitoring device rather

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

2015-10-22 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Andy Townsend wrote on 2015-10-22 12:46: On 22/10/2015 11:18, Colin Smale wrote: On 2015-10-22 11:27, Andy Townsend wrote: I'd agree with that. I can think of more than a few examples of "the road/path used to go here, but now it doesn't", and even if the imagery gets updated, underlying

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

2015-11-11 Thread Tom Pfeifer
Marco Antonio wrote on 2015-11-11 02:10: On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Can you provide an example of real situation where highway=residential_link makes sense? In my city (in South America) it is very common to have this type of roads

  1   2   3   4   >