Re: [Tagging] Toll road sections

Hi Ákos, I would do this : "toll=hgv_only" and "toll_ref=edid_123456" or "toll_ref=HU_edid_123456" (according to the wiki, it should not be toll=hgv_only but : *toll*=no, *toll*:hgv =yes) 2017-08-28 12:30 GMT+02:00 Topographe Fou

Re: [Tagging] Nicknames

Good idea ! nick_name=* ? :) djakk Le mer. 25 oct. 2017 à 08:09, Daniel Koć a écrit : > I think it'd be good to add "Big Apple" nickname as a popular (and > searchable) kind of placename for a New York: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/61785451 > > > However nicknames are

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

:-) Le ven. 3 août 2018 à 17:07, Simon Poole a écrit : > > > Am 03.08.2018 um 16:30 schrieb djakk djakk: > > I think it is less verbose. > > That isn't necessarily a positive (just as in programming languages). > > > There can be multiple ways to express some

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

lanes:xxx is supported by several data > consumers (OsmAnd, maps.me, MagicEarth and probably others). > In many countries people worked on tagging all roads with this system > after a project set up by the German community. > > m. > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 4:10 PM djakk

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

Hello ! What about a tagging method like this : lanes=3 lane_2=forward_direction;left_turn or lanes=3 lane_2:direction=forward lane_2:turn=left instead of lanes=3 lanes:forward=2 turn:lanes:forward=left|through ? djakk Le ven. 3 août 2018 à 13:13, Lionel Giard a écrit : > If you

Re: [Tagging] Points instead of areas

For cities there must be a point associated to the polygon to tell where the center is (maybe 2 if the city is poly centric, like Budapest maybe ?) djakk Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 05:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > On 08/08/18 12:52, Bill Ricker wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at

Re: [Tagging] place nodes for continents?

Why not a big polygon for each continent, subcontinent, ocean, sea ... ? djakk Le mar. 7 août 2018 à 12:28, Colin Smale a écrit : > As even continents now appear to be subjective, all uses of them should be > associated with the chosen frame of reference, much like one always > associates a

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

A renderer can easily pre-compute the nearby places and decides if the hamlet is isolated or not. I’ve done that for an European map : http://itineraires.de.bus.free.fr/carte-des-routes-europeennes-2016/index.html?5,14.4799,61.3229 All the places are rendered (village at least) except there is a

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

I agree with Michael, openstreetmap should reflect what the mapers see, not what the politics and the administration see. Though it is also interesting to map administrative things like borders. djakk Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 17:33, Yves a écrit : > Michael, you don't seem to take the right

Re: [Tagging] areas of risk

For such a subjective thing, it should be mapped by each openstreetmap member : djakk maps this area as dangerous, baloo as not dangerous, etc and the renderer makes an average. djakk Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 06:26, Paul Johnson a écrit : > > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 16:17 Adam Franco wrote:

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

wn major, so they have a town hall. > 2) Villages have their own local rules on max speed, buildings, street > markets and banking holidays. So a van driver looking to sell his/her > watermellon cargo could need to know this fact. > > El sáb., 18 ago. 2018 20:31, djakk djakk escribió

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

Hello Stefan ! I'd make a big polygon :) I think this has never been used before, but I don't see any problem using it - except that inheritance of the tags won't be mentioned in the editors Julien "djakk" 2018-01-13 20:21 GMT+01:00 Stefan Nagy : > Hi, > > in Vienna,

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Hello ! I think it’s a good idea to “replace” GTFS files with OSM data. In OSM there is already half of the GTFS (the relations that describes stops and route). Most lines of big cities can be map with frequency only (subway every 90 seconds during rush hour, 3 minutes otherwise). djakk Le

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

If we allow timetables in OSM, transit companies will possibly maintain directly them through OSM ;) There is a lot of non-geographical informations in OSM like the opening hours of a shop so public transport schedule does not shocked me :) djakk Le mer. 31 oct. 2018 à 09:58, Frederik Ramm a

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Moreover, GTFS always have some errors, as they are maintained by only a few people. djakk Le mer. 31 oct. 2018 à 10:17, Topographe Fou a écrit : > Hi Leif, > > I would rather consider the ability to store a "GTFS API link" (or > something similar) in transport relations. As soon as its

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

. 3 nov. 2018 à 06:57, djakk djakk a écrit : > Yes I trust you ;) > But where the bus network does not revolutionate (that exists) every 6 > months, timetables and bus stops can be in OSM ... > > Julien « djakk » > > > Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 06:20, Warin <61sundow...@gmai

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

No : bus relations are broken because of the way part, not because of the node part. And detailed timetables will be associated with the nodes. Breaking a bus relation by cutting a street way in half does not implies that the osm timetable breaks too. I do not see why timetables are hard to

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

buses that 'linger' at stops, but that's usually > because they are ahead of their schedule by more than a few minutes. > > Jo > > Op za 3 nov. 2018 om 12:02 schreef djakk djakk : > >> Jo, I did not try yet, but I think there should be a departure timetable >> AND an arri

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

the time tables. >>> >>> When done this way, it's not a timetable relation for each stop/route >>> pair. >>> >>> I'll try to do something similar for a more complicated situation. >>> (telescopic line, i.e. not all trips are the same length) &g

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Impossible to maintain ? Maybe but let’s give a try ! djakk Le ven. 2 nov. 2018 à 08:23, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > sent from a phone > > > On 1. Nov 2018, at 21:19, Roland Olbricht > wrote: > > > > opening_hours=... > >for the operation times > > > I’d suggest to use

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

at trips are added or removed or their > start time changes slightly. The time to get from one stop to the next will > remain constant, most of the time. > > Jo > > Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 18:40 schreef djakk djakk : > >> I don’t get it ... >> >> With my point of view, one

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

nflict with > other another timetable relation for the same route it will be extremely > hard to figure out where it went wrong. > > Polyglot > > Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 17:08 schreef djakk djakk : > >> In which case a timetable per stop and per route is unmaintable ? >&g

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

:) Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 20:55, Yves a écrit : > Are you looking for a general transit feed specification? > :) > > Yves > > Le 6 novembre 2018 20:22:18 GMT+01:00, djakk djakk > a écrit : >> >> Ok I see. >> >> I am still a bit reluctant to your pr

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

gt; > > On 6. Nov 2018, at 15:41, djakk djakk wrote: > > > > Martin, maybe locals do know their bus stop timetable, as they always > use the service they may memorize the schedules ... ? > > > there are no timetables and the service is notoriously bad and infrequent

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

For example in Japan transit companies sells their timetable for about 1000€ ... maybe copying the timetable is forbidden but Osm can have at least an opening hour and a frequency for a line in Japan. An other example, the city of Accra (Ghana) : only share taxis, no transit authority, lines are

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

I do not agree with your last argument, it is like « do not add residential roads before primary roads are all mapped » ;-) GTFS can have errors (I’ve worked with Paris’ GTFS, bus stops names in caps locks, sometimes misplaced), plus, as I said, does not reflect the reality (there was this train

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Then, why OSM as they are some competent national geographic societies ? ;-) Julien « djakk » Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 16:19, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > 7. Nov 2018 16:15 by djakk.dj...@gmail.com: > > Only a independent and crowdsourced database can handle that. > > > Competent public

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Martin, maybe locals do know their bus stop timetable, as they always use the service they may memorize the schedules ... ? Julien Le lun. 5 nov. 2018 à 17:08, Jo a écrit : > Hi Leif, > > You made me do it! :-) I sort of stole your proposal and started creating > a new one. It differs in

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

I’ll agree with Leif, having a timetable relation per stop is better. Yes Leif, there can be a delay expressed in minutes instead of an arrival-departure pair of time. Julien « djakk » Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:04, djakk djakk a écrit : > In order to reduce the length of the va

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

the stops > in a route relation and appear in the same order. > > Polyglot > > > Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 16:07 schreef djakk djakk : > >> I’ll agree with Leif, having a timetable relation per stop is better. >> >> >> Yes Leif, there can be a delay exp

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

In which case a timetable per stop and per route is unmaintable ? Julien “djakk” Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:59, djakk djakk a écrit : > I think it is important to have an osm object describing the timetable > user-oriented for simple editing without any tool. > The mapper is at a

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

> > > Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 15:57, Paul Johnson a > écrit : > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 08:27 djakk djakk wrote: >> >>> By the way, we should de-correlate the legal status of an highway from >>> the highway tag : with the k

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Hello ! There is also speed limit areas, a sign is posted at the entrance of the area. Imagine that a big part of Paris becomes a 30km/h area. Is it possible to create a big polygon tagged with maxspeed=30, each street inside inherits the maxspeed value of the big polygon ? (to escape the

Re: [Tagging] Draft Proposal: Default Langauge Format

Hello ! I have in mind my trouble when driving back from Amsterdam toward France. I knew I had to pass through Lille but I did not see it on the directional signs. (No gps device back in the days ;-) ) I understood at last close to the border that the Rijsel I saw all the time on the signs means

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sept. 2018 à 14:47, djakk djakk a écrit : > Hello ! > > There is also speed limit areas, a sign is posted at the entrance of the > area. > > Imagine that a big part of Paris becomes a 30km/h area. Is it possible to > create a big polygon tagged with maxspeed=30, each s

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : example : it looks like the countryside but legally it is inside the built up area : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Dybpz_fHGEmWdLjfG7OMvQ/photo There should be 2 tags : abutters=rural and highway:legal_type=built_up djakk Le

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

An other example : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/k43_fyX2AuL594qhVuSY7w/photo abutter=residential and highway:legal_type=rural Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 21:41, djakk djakk a écrit : > Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : > example : it looks like the count

Re: [Tagging] Link roads between different highways type

Hello ! I think there should be both pieces of information ! A tag to indicate the main road typology and a tag to indicate the link road typology (basically the lower class of the interchange but it can be something else in case of spaghetti junctions). And let renderers decide which feature

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello ! So I have written something on the wiki : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Djakk/new_tagging_scheme_for_roads It is not definitive, feel free to add new ideas or to criticize ;) Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 11:36, djakk djakk a écrit : > I meant “road for

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

... furthermore, highway_level can be used to classify footway or cycleway :) For example, in a park, some footway are “unclassified” (or highway_level=5) and some are “primary” (or highway_level=1). Very useful to render long-range trail. djakk Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 15:44, djakk djakk

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Okay I found it ! May 2018 ;) Julien “djakk” Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 19:11, djakk djakk a écrit : > Erkin, when did you make this proposal ? > > Julien > > > Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 18:31, Erkin Alp Güney a > écrit : > >> It reminds me my road_level proposal for

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello ! I think we should decorrelate the attributes of a road : its administrative class, its importance in the road network (at least 5 levels), its physical characteristics (motorway-like, two large lanes, link=yes ...), possibly its traffic characteristics. So we can tag a secondary motorway

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

... for the unclassified / residential issue : highway_level=5 or 6 and highway_physics=countryside or town djakk Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 15:25, djakk djakk a écrit : > Hello ! > > I think we should decorrelate the attributes of a road : its > administrative class, its importance

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Erkin, when did you make this proposal ? Julien Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 18:31, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit : > It reminds me my road_level proposal for some reason. > > 24.02.2019 17:48 tarihinde djakk djakk yazdı: > > ... furthermore, highway_level can be used to classify footway

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello Mateusz, You can not render correctly with a bad tagging, and that is the case here : in France, a trunk road have 2 lanes and oneway=yes by default, not in UK. I understand your criticism about the values I’ve used, it is not definitive :). Except maybe the values for road_level : they

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

gt; > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 at 00:27, djakk djakk > <mailto:djakk.dj...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Hello ! > > > > I think we should decorrelate the attributes of a road : its > > administrative class, its importance in the road network

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

I meant “road for hgv” not “road for hybrid” ^^ Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 11:35, djakk djakk a écrit : > I forgot to mention that there are several kind of road to class : > footway, cycleway, road for cars, road for hybrid, road for psv ;) > > Julien “djakk” >

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Yes it must be additional tags, so that existing tools that use openstreetmap do not get lost :) I’ll try to write this on my wiki’s page in the next days ... Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 00:30, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > sent from a phone > > > On 24. Feb 2019, at

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello ! I’ve updated https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Djakk/new_tagging_scheme_for_roads To answer the original question of this thread, I wish you can use importance_local=5 or 6 with abutters=rural or residential ;) Julien “djakk” Le dim. 3 mars 2019 à 01:01, Sergio Manzi a écrit