Re: [Tagging] service=access

2017-08-11 Thread marc marc
Or maybe use service=driveway pipeline amenities is like a small business property Le 11. 08. 17 à 17:53, Richard Welty a écrit : > not sure we need a tag at all, but i'd recommend a more general notion > such as > > service=facility_access > > there are, after all, access roads for things

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-13 Thread marc marc
Le 13. 07. 17 à 15:28, Svavar Kjarrval a écrit : > the local public transport authority started utilising OSM good :-) > 1. Sometimes streets don't have formal sidewalks (no markings on the > street nor signs) but there is an "common sense expectation" that > pedestrians are allowed to traverse

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 07. 17 à 01:29, Nick Bolten a écrit : > a block with 10 driveways would > actually need to be split into 10 lowered/flush curb sections and 11 > raised sections, for a minimum of 21 segments for a single block. There is no need to use so many section. A crossing is a node, not a

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 07. 17 à 14:24, Svavar Kjarrval a écrit : > I do think that the routers should > be programmed to evaluate when it's safe to suggest to the user to cross > the street without a specifically mapped crossing. it is already the case use sidewalk tag on the way when you can cross the street use

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-14 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 07. 17 à 15:41, Mike N a écrit : > when there is a small grass separation from the > roadway, they are drawn separately. For those cases, it is usually > allowed to cross the grassy separation and the road to get to the > opposite sidewalk. you can add a access tag like foot=permissive

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-15 Thread marc marc
Le 15. 07. 17 à 08:13, Marc Gemis a écrit : >> On Jul 14, 2017, at 11:32 PM, Nick Bolten wrote: >>> --> need to add all driveways? > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 11:56 PM, John Willis wrote: >> This is generally a good idea - and to make sure they share a node. >

Re: [Tagging] highspeed=yes

2017-07-15 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 07. 17 à 19:01, Michael Reichert a écrit : > - If a track qualifies to have highspeed=yes, should the whole line > (including the slow sections at its beginning and end where it leaves > the older parts of the network or runs through existing stations) get > highspeed=yes? If a line

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-15 Thread marc marc
Le 15. 07. 17 à 12:04, Svavar Kjarrval a écrit : > This point is demonstrated in my quoted example [2]. > Mapzen assumes the user can jump over the road > (or assume the user is already there) and walk a few steps, Your demonstration is only that a wrong map create sometimes a wrong routing

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-14 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 07. 17 à 12:20, Svavar Kjarrval a écrit : > A street with a sidewalk on either side but no marked crossings: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/64.08800/-21.89846 > (Sidenote: If one tries to route from no. 73 to 42, > GraphHopper suggests a long route while Mapzen assumes the user is >

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-14 Thread marc marc
>>> A street with a sidewalk on either side but no marked crossings: >> These are (IMHO) mapping errors. You can't draw isolated footway islands and >> expect a router to magically understand those are sidewalks which you can >> cross without a connection. > It is not uncommon to have such a

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-18 Thread marc marc
Le 18. 07. 17 à 16:01, Nick Bolten a écrit : >> All crossing between a sidewalk and a driveways I have tag have the same >> type of kerb on each side. It's why I use kerb=lowered without any need >> for left/right details, it is for the whole crossing. > I think I'm confused again

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-18 Thread marc marc
Le 18. 07. 17 à 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : >> You can try to make a proposal that mean : those 2 way (street/sidewalk) >> are only one for the routing. >> maybe a relation like associatedstreet or that extend it. > type=area does this somehow, as it defines (as default) that you can

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-15 Thread marc marc
Le 15. 07. 17 à 19:06, Nick Bolten a écrit : > > marc marc wrote: > > For wheelchair routing. >> If all crossing have a lower kerb, it is maybe enough to add >> sidewalk:both:wheelchair=yes to the street. > wheelchair=yes should be used sparingly, you ar

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

2017-07-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 07. 17 à 20:38, Nick Bolten a écrit : >> There is no need to use so many section. A crossing is a node, not a >> section/way. So put one kerb=raised on the way and kerb=lowered on the >> node. It's done :-) You have the same number of section/tag in both cases. > Hmm, I'm not sure I

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

2017-07-18 Thread marc marc
Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit : > Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value? I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign > Should it's use be discouraged by validators / presets? > (at

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

2017-07-19 Thread marc marc
Le 19. 07. 17 à 09:40, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit : > 2017-07-18 23:32 GMT+02:00 marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>: >> Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit : >>> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value? >> >> I would use this t

Re: [Tagging] source tag on object <> changeset

2017-07-25 Thread marc marc
Hello Ralph, I also use josm and his history/changeset/diff function, is's nice. But as you said yourself, all info you put at the chansetset level are easy to read... if other mapper want it ! So if comment/source/date is in changeset tag, why duplicate it on every object ? just in case that

[Tagging] source tag on object <> changeset

2017-07-22 Thread marc marc
I create a new thread because it have no link with a tree :-) Le 22. 07. 17 à 22:20, ael a écrit : > On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 08:51:16PM +0200, Simon Poole wrote: >> a) good practice to tag source on the changeset. > I always include a fairly comprehensive list > of sources on changesets, but

Re: [Tagging] amenity spamming?

2017-07-24 Thread marc marc
Talk to this user to explain that it's fun but must be stopped and reverted. He do it itself... or somebody 'll do it for him and request a lockout. Le 24. 07. 17 à 19:04, Tom Pfeifer a écrit : > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dstool

Re: [Tagging] Recommendation for building tags

2017-07-27 Thread marc marc
Le 27. 07. 17 à 08:52, Vozniuk Taras a écrit : > *1. Whether the building is permanent or not.* >> what are your definitions for semipermanent and non-permanent? > So non-permanent is a building structure constructed for a defined short > period of time. Like Circus tent for example. IMHO a

Re: [Tagging]

2017-07-27 Thread marc marc
Le 27. 07. 17 à 03:12, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson a écrit : > Which is correct? > > > > support=wall :) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Recommendation for building tags

2017-07-27 Thread marc marc
Le 27. 07. 17 à 07:14, Vozniuk Taras a écrit : > *1. Whether the building is permanent or not.* > Users select from the following preset /{permanent, semi-permanent, > non-permanent} . /Cannot really find an appropriate tag for this. by default, a building is permanent :) you can use

Re: [Tagging] Recommendation for building tags

2017-07-27 Thread marc marc
Le 27. 07. 17 à 13:30, Vozniuk Taras a écrit : > 2. *Whether building has basement or not.* > Ok, so I guess when user selects basement -> yes, he then needs to > specify how many underground floors building contains. you can, it's better. if unknown or if you don't want/need this detail, you can

Re: [Tagging] Names containing abbreviations that are the official name

2017-07-25 Thread marc marc
yes. name = full name without abbreviation official_name = like in government use. -- Le 25. 07. 17 à 03:16, Albert Pundt a écrit : > I know abbreviated names are frowned upon in OSM, but what about places > like towns where the abbreviation is part of the official name? For > example, Mt.

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

2017-07-04 Thread marc marc
Le 04. 07. 17 à 17:14, François Lacombe a écrit : > I still have some comments : > * fire_hydrant:couplings:type may only be fire_hydrant:couplings without > the :type suffix > * fire_hydrant:type really should be fire_hydrant only. I don't get the > benefit of adding :type here (feel free to

[Tagging] width larger than x

2017-08-04 Thread marc marc
Hello, How to tag that a entrance width is more than x meter ? I think 1- but I found several value like >1 +1 1-2 1+ what do you think ? Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Brasserie

2017-08-07 Thread marc marc
Thomas Bertels wrote: > A brasserie is "a small, informal restaurant that serves beer > and wine as well as simple food" > So should it be tagged as > - amenity=restaurant cuisine=brasserie (emphasis on food)? > - amenity=pub food=yes (emphasis on drinks)? > -

Re: [Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

2017-08-18 Thread marc marc
Le 18. 08. 17 à 21:06, Javier Sánchez Portero a écrit : > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels > Does everyone agree that building:levels refers to the maximum number of > building levels? This is common sense, irl when you talk about the number of levels of a building, it is

Re: [Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

2017-08-19 Thread marc marc
Le 19. 08. 17 à 00:52, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > they are describing all "overground" building levels *without the roof levels* right. > and minus the building:min_level. no. min_level is a 3D feature. the level of a building as a whole doesn't take care of min_level. A building as a whole

Re: [Tagging] Pepper: Chili, piper, bell pepper

2017-08-20 Thread marc marc
Le 21. 08. 17 à 00:07, Tod Fitch a écrit : > e.g. black pepper corns could be “produce=pepper”, “variety=black_corn”. +1 ! please avoid adding too many value to "top level" tag, If not, this 'll be like landuse : it is impossible to select "all agricultural landuses" of an area without first

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-20 Thread marc marc
> The simplest (and in many case the only) way to tranfser hydrants > attributes to GPS is to put them in waypoints names. you can also just use the same as you did in the past, as you do not use the name of the osm tag anyway > For sake of simplicity, fire_hydrant: and suction_point

Re: [Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

2017-08-22 Thread marc marc
Le 23. 08. 17 à 00:25, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > On 19. Aug 2017, at 10:16, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> and minus the building:min_level. >> no. min_level is a 3D feature. >> the level of a building as a whole doesn't take care of min_level

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-17 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 17. 08. 17 à 14:50, Moritz a écrit : > the hydrant (by the meaning of the word) is something connected > to the water main ;) If I read the previous wikipedia link, there are pressurized hydrant and not-pressurized hydrant. If wikipedia use the word hydrant for both, maybe the "by the

Re: [Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

2017-08-18 Thread marc marc
First tag the whole building without any "part". Therefore, building:levels, height refers to the maximum level and maximum height of the building, not an average. If a single closed way is enough to draw a building, you don't need multipolygon at this time. For nearly all applications that

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-18 Thread marc marc
Le 17. 08. 17 à 16:47, Viking a écrit : > I'm waiting for other opinions. colour:bonnet colour:cap colour:reflective seems for me to be in the reverse order the colour of a building is building:colour not colour:building the same exist with roof:colour light:colour ... survey:date is the date of

Re: [Tagging] fire hydrants

2017-06-15 Thread marc marc
Hello, fire_hydrant:outlets and fire_hydrant:couplings are not so intuitive. Without reading the wiki or the mailing, people can fill in with "yes" or with outlets number (it is the meaning of fire_hydrant:count ?) As a not-fireman, I unable to give the exact diameter of outlets. But I can and I

Re: [Tagging] Time is now: tag ALL traffic signs in OSM

2017-06-15 Thread marc marc
Hello, I think that tagging all traffic sign is very usefull. I hope having one day an app that automates photo-sign-osm process. Mainly because it is the easy way to detect signaling changes. The proposal is interesting but the key side should be improved. It would be useful to be compatible

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-14 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 09. 17 à 11:03, Moritz a écrit : >>> Maybe we should find a better suitable value for water_source=stream >>> which reflects also lakes. > stream, river, lake, ocean, sea -> water_source=waterbody > pond if it is a natural pond also -> water_source=waterbody > > if it is an artificial

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-14 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 09. 17 à 13:02, Moritz a écrit : > What do you mean with >> would not it be easier to keep the 2 separate info? > I would group unlimited, natural sources (stream, river, lake, ocean, > sea) under > water_source=waterbody if you want to group unlimited sources, it seems best to use

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-14 Thread marc marc
Le 14. 09. 17 à 13:56, Moritz a écrit : > What is the advantage of clarifying the source to stream, lake, river etc? if this has no advantage of knowing the exact source, don't fill the tag water_source > Why should we add another key (water_volume) to an unlimited source > where the information

Re: [Tagging] contact:* for review websites

2017-09-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 09. 17 à 00:56, Tom Pfeifer a écrit : > I have seen a few mappers recently adding > contact:[ yelp | tripadvisor | foursquare ] > to businesses. it sometimes happens that a small shop does not have a own website. in this case it is useful to add the page of another commercial website

Re: [Tagging] contact:* for review websites

2017-09-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 09. 17 à 13:49, Dave Swarthout a écrit : > owners will update the website info as needed do you mean that for example the tripadvisor website is often more up-to-date for a POI than the POI website itself ? AND that tripadvisor website is not enough to have all contact info and it is why

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

2017-09-17 Thread marc marc
Le 17. 09. 17 à 07:54, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit : > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative +1 for good inventory work

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

2017-09-20 Thread marc marc
Le 20. 09. 17 à 20:39, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > Is this a minimal proposal that we can all tolerate? I do not see any difference between access=permit and (not tag for) access to a sports club : you can go there if you meet certain conditions and generally any sports club allows you to "buy a

Re: [Tagging] Access by permit

2017-09-21 Thread marc marc
you do so much slalom to avoid the categories access=private and fee=yes that I persist in believing that it would be easy to add tags to these 2 functions that already work to explain the conditions in which access is possible. this would allow to tag in the same way a road leading to a lake

Re: [Tagging] Swimming pool facilities

2017-09-17 Thread marc marc
Le 17. 09. 17 à 18:20, Selfish Seahorse a écrit : > a sub-tag swimming_facility=outdoor/indoor existing indoor=yes/no is not enough ? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/indoor#values ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

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

2017-10-06 Thread marc marc
Le 04. 10. 17 à 17:44, Yves a écrit : > Now if it's bad, you can trust the contributors not to use it. > Also, you can take time to explain your argument against in the > discussion page, it's a wiki ;-) if an individualist contributor makes both mass changes on the wiki to mark tags that

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

2017-10-02 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 02. 10. 17 à 13:21, Michael Reichert a écrit : > What are your opinions? I totally adhere to the many problems you point out. Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Fixing wiki* -> brand:wiki*

2017-10-02 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 02. 10. 17 à 10:41, Ilya Zverev a écrit : > why brand:wikipedia and not wikipedia:brand? brand:wikipedia: the wikipedia is related to the brand. it is the wikipedia link about the brand, so brand:wikipedia is the right order. the same as with name:en : the english version of the name.

Re: [Tagging] Way beneath overhanging cliff

2017-10-03 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 03. 10. 17 à 21:46, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > is there particular tagging that I should > be using where ways cross because of natural topography? > 'covered=yes'? Something else? you can/should put layer to parts of ways that don't cross Regards, Marc

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: How to map a bin with dog excrement bags dispenser

2017-10-10 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 10. 10. 17 à 15:42, Alejandro Moreno a écrit : > In Spain it is common to find litter bins that have attached a dog > excrement bags dispenser. it look like you have 3 questions in one :) one easy : fee=no <> payment:none=yes payment:*=* is useful when you need to add several payment

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

2017-10-05 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 05. 10. 17 à 12:16, Viking a écrit : > I really don't understand why so many people oppose this proposal [1] without > ever having participated in the discussions it is indeed strange that no opponent took the time to say during the RFC arguments that are found now during the vote.

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

2017-09-08 Thread marc marc
Le 07. 09. 17 à 23:31, Mike Thompson a écrit : > he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point 11,463 ft. > it does say "Name is the name only"[3]. as the wiki says: the name is only the name. "Crown Point 11,463 ft" is not a name. Elevation goes in the "ele" tag. in meters if it's only a number. add

Re: [Tagging] Any tag for tiny, pittoresque, tool store houses?

2017-09-08 Thread marc marc
Le 08. 09. 17 à 08:30, José G Moya Y. a écrit : > In some parts of Spain, there are tiny igloo-like houses, smaller > than a person, traditionally used to store tools near the fields. building=shed building:architecture=whatyouthink :) ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

2017-09-08 Thread marc marc
Le 08. 09. 17 à 11:14, Janko Mihelić a écrit : > 20155.9894568543 ft your unreasonable example has nothing to do with elevation. in any tag, nothing prevents a tool from being rational in the values it saves or displays. I do not know what is the best possible accuracy but an altitude measurement

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

2017-09-07 Thread marc marc
Le 07. 09. 17 à 05:48, Nick Hocking a écrit : > Do we have a tagging scheme for emergency shelters > to be used in times of natural disasters? why not, it could be consistent with the other emergency feature. > emergency=shelter > open=yes/no except this one. what do you mean ? for me a closed

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-08-30 Thread marc marc
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: >> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rkV >> I guarantee that every single one of these shop=boutique in the Dakar >> Peninsula are these shop=(convenience|kiosk) that most French-speaking >> West-Africans name "boutique" Le 30. 08. 17 à 10:01,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:architecture:preromanesque

2017-08-30 Thread marc marc
> El 24/8/2017 12:41, "Andy Townsend" escribió: > if you find a tag useful, just use it (and > if it's not documented, document it). +1 There was no opposition It is a good idea to have spoken here, but the vote seems useless on this very specialized point so just do it :)

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-08-30 Thread marc marc
Simon Poole a écrit : >>> Translations for shop=boutique >>> iD: Petit magasin de mode >> JOSM uses "Haute Couture" > on the OSM website, fixed that too. 1) for boutique : We need a specific criterion to describe this tag Ask the french mailing to agree on a common translation for iD / wiki /

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-08-30 Thread marc marc
Le 30. 08. 17 à 20:16, Daniel Koć a écrit : > W dniu 30.08.2017 o 19:36, marc marc pisze: >> Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit : >>> That's why I haven't proposed an example value for it in my >>> clothes/shoes subtag proposal >> sorry I didn't see

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion

2017-08-30 Thread marc marc
Le 30. 08. 17 à 18:20, Marc Gemis a écrit : > shop=boutique is Q1068824 (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1068824) > and the label is how such a shop is called in each language. > > But I have the impression that the French label & description for > this shop is incorrect in Wikidata. When I

[Tagging] phone validity - phone "preset"

2017-09-05 Thread marc marc
Hello, on the french-speaking mailing, a contributor noticed a high rate of incorrect value for the tag "phone". the most common error is using the national format number instead of the international format. A monthly project 'll maybe fix some of those errors. Some quality tool can help those

Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters

2017-09-07 Thread marc marc
Le 07. 09. 17 à 17:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : >> emegency:social_facility=shelter > social_facility shelter in osm is used with a different meaning, > so it seems quite odd. +1 :( 2017-09-07 13:41 GMT+02:00 tomoya muramoto : > hazard_type=* feel free to add some info in the wiki

Re: [Tagging] Fire_hydrant: check_date

2017-09-12 Thread marc marc
Le 12. 09. 17 à 22:52, Viking a écrit : > In the discussion page [0] someone says that check_date=* is a synonymous of > survey:date=* in common usage. Is this correct? Should we use another tag > functional_check=* ? But I don't like to introduce a new tag. > > [0] >

Re: [Tagging] Fire_hydrant: check_date

2017-09-13 Thread marc marc
Le 13. 09. 17 à 02:04, Warin a écrit : > If you need to tag a specific check than possibly check_date:flow=* it doesn't say how the check was done... if you read flow number from a info panel, an opendata database or do a functional check. it just mean "you do a check related to the flow" >

Re: [Tagging] Fire_hydrant: tagging namespace documentation

2017-09-12 Thread marc marc
Le 12. 09. 17 à 10:33, François Lacombe a écrit : > But taginfo shows approximately 70 keys in this namespace. > The most of them aren't documented. > Where can I find additional information about keys ? > fire_hydrant:street (Key page redirects to emergency=fire_hydrant > without any mention of

Re: [Tagging] Devices key

2017-09-28 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 28. 09. 17 à 16:32, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > I prefer the generic solution (node relation) over a specific device > solution, which still doesn't allow for more details (different > properties, layering order, etc.) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:devices devices

Re: [Tagging] Devices key

2017-09-28 Thread marc marc
Le 28. 09. 17 à 17:02, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > we have the tag "step_count", maybe a simple > "transformer_count" would be an alternative? What would be the advantage of creating a "X_count" tag for each object that needs it when a single tag devices is enough to do the same thing ?

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

2017-10-03 Thread marc marc
Le 03. 10. 17 à 11:52, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > 2017-10-03 11:34 GMT+02:00 Thilo Haug >: > > Please describe which 'problems' you fear to appear if it's not deleted. > > If everybody creates feature pages for his personal, low usage features,

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-21 Thread marc marc
Le 21. 08. 17 à 10:26, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : >> On 18. Aug 2017, at 22:33, Moritz wrote: >> I think it's a language issue here. >> Here in Germany these dry hydrants are called suction point (actually the >> German word for it) with proper signs. > suction point

Re: [Tagging] iD news: v2.4.0 released

2017-08-26 Thread marc marc
Thanks. Le 26. 08. 17 à 07:47, Bryan Housel a écrit : > `ideditor:walkthrough_started=yes` (“yes” if the user started the > walkthrough) > `ideditor:walkthrough_started=yes` (“yes” if the user completed all > walkthrough sections) both have the same tag name and value :)

Re: [Tagging] Toll road sections

2017-08-28 Thread marc marc
If it is a ref, ref:HU:edid Le 28. 08. 17 à 11:50, Dömötör Ákos a écrit : > it's only for HGVs so inserting "hgv:" might be sensible > as well. Is there another ref for cars on the same object ? If yes it would be useful to add hgv But if there is a single reference, only use by trucks users,

Re: [Tagging] Toll road sections

2017-08-28 Thread marc marc
Please avoid creating a new key like toll_ref All references refer to something, but we don't create road_ref, shop_ref, hydrant_ref, building_ref, we just use "ref" key sometimes with a subname HU for the country (in capital) sometimes with another subname for the source name If you really want

Re: [Tagging] shop=fashion shop=boutique

2017-08-31 Thread marc marc
Le 30. 08. 17 à 19:19, Daniel Koć a écrit : > deprecate shop=fashion I agree that shop=fashion is a "no meaning" tag > shop=boutique as part of making things clear in this field. for shop=boutique, I think you are wrong. A shop=boutique (except from the translation+wiki being corrected) is

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-08-31 Thread marc marc
Le 28. 08. 17 à 00:18, Viking a écrit : About flow_rate and capacity. The number indicated on the hydrant is IMHO a capacity, it is the maximum that the hydrant is able to do. The flow rate will depend on the use. In this sense it comes closer to capacity (like the maximum parking space) rather

Re: [Tagging] Tagging data where position is not yet known

2017-09-04 Thread marc marc
Le 03. 09. 17 à 23:35, ralph.ayt...@ntlworld.com a écrit : > I want to know how you feel about adding the market and water_pump > data that does not yet exist on the map. > I wish to add this data > to the map near the name of the community with a fixme stating that > the existence has been

Re: [Tagging] Fire hydrants vs suction_point

2017-09-04 Thread marc marc
Le 01. 09. 17 à 00:54, Viking a écrit : > In this sense flow_rate is more appropriate. ok > I think we should find a solution also for 10% of hydrants that don't have a > type/pressure/water_source, or we will never have a definitive solution. > Considering that in some countries pressurized

[Tagging] colour gray or grey ?

2017-10-04 Thread marc marc
Hello, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:colour gray or grey ? I don't understand why wiki have 2 values. Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

2017-11-28 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 28. 11. 17 à 12:34, Jo a écrit : > The wikidata key itself should only occur on a single OSM object. > When trying to add it to linear features, this poses a problem, as it's > possible to split such features. isn't that like having the same problem as the is_in tag ? Wouldn't it be

Re: [Tagging] part_of:wikidata key

2017-11-28 Thread marc marc
the discussion has completely veered off course. question was part_of <> relation and not wikidata <> other linking system Le 28. 11. 17 à 15:25, Jo a écrit : > I like relations as much as the next guy, probably more so. I've been > editing and correcting thousands upon thousands of them. One

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

2017-11-24 Thread marc marc
Le 25. 11. 17 à 00:05, Selfish Seahorse a écrit : > > > Is barrier = yes (+ bicycle = yes + foot = yes + motor_vehicle = no) > enough information for routing engines? This sign doesn't block mofa. I tag this as : motorcar=no

Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref <> no ref

2017-11-29 Thread marc marc
Le 29. 11. 17 à 12:06, Andy Mabbett a écrit : > On 29 November 2017 at 00:40, marc marc wrote: > >> my query shows you that you can get the same without wikidata. > > Please demonstrate how you would write a query that lists all the > buildings whose architect is (hypot

Re: [Tagging] Permanent IDs RFC (was part_of:wikidata)

2017-11-30 Thread marc marc
Le 30. 11. 17 à 20:30, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit : > If I create a road, and use an ID for that road somewhere, I would like > that ID to continue working even if the road gets broken up into > multiple segments. why not use the existing overpass features ? you can define which criteria determine

Re: [Tagging] wikidata <> other ref

2017-11-28 Thread marc marc
Le 28. 11. 17 à 21:29, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > Having nonvolatile ID's for ways really is technically infeasible it's impossible but here it is "s/toT" a id that match all osm id for highway "Avenue des Champs-Élysées" in Paris taged as node, way, type=associatedStreet relation and type=route.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Fire Hydrant Extensions (part 3))

2017-12-18 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 17. 12. 17 à 18:35, Viking a écrit : > I think we can go on refining hydrant tags, so I formally call a Request For > Comments on this page [1]. > I remember that someone had pictures of different wrenches: can he/she add > them to the table on [1]? check_date tag is very imprecise.

Re: [Tagging] New tag for major recipient postcodes

2017-12-18 Thread marc marc
Hello, In stead of creating an additional tag and thus an additional country specific rule, why not using addr:full (or in the contact namespace if some prefer) to put this special addr that doesn't follow the standard country rule ? Regards, Marc Le 17. 12. 17 à 22:25, Rainer a écrit : >

Re: [Tagging] tower types, cooling towers etc.

2017-11-16 Thread marc marc
Le 16. 11. 17 à 13:05, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > B. man_made=tower I like the idea to have all tower in a main tag (it allow a mapper to map it as a tower and after refine it depending of the use) > tower:type=communication_tower I dislike the "no-meaning" type suffix. Type could be the

Re: [Tagging] tower types, cooling towers, etc.

2017-11-17 Thread marc marc
Le 17. 11. 17 à 17:30, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > I'm setting up a proposal, Please read Francois's reply. How to map a tower where the usage is unknwon or multiple ? I find better to have a "step by step" tag You see a tower ? you map a tower. You see how it's used ? you add a tag for its

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

2017-11-10 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 10. 11. 17 à 15:30, Ilya Zverev a écrit : > After six weeks of discussion and improvements, I am happy to start the > voting on my proposal about mapping metro stations and lines: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Metro_Mapping with so many modifications, it

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

2017-11-10 Thread marc marc
Le 10. 11. 17 à 17:45, Ilya Zverev a écrit : > Your "why change" argument looks weird with this sentence, by the way. I will rephrase my question. What are the benefits of your proposal ? What is the problem with the current situation and how does your proposal improve it ? the main change

Re: [Tagging] Additional sub tags for survey mark

2017-11-21 Thread marc marc
Le 21. 11. 17 à 02:07, Andrew Harvey a écrit : > My only question is the wiki page currently says "Since multiple survey > points are possible on one object (eg. a benchmark on a triangulation > point/pillar) then in order to avoid multiple values within one key, > such as a semicolon-delimited

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

2017-11-18 Thread marc marc
Le 18. 11. 17 à 21:50, Ilya Zverev a écrit : > marc marc wrote: >> what do you think of the different issues raised? whether your >> proposal is adopted or rejected, it will be difficult to implement. >> Would it not be better to cancel the current vote in order to imp

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

2017-11-18 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 18. 11. 17 à 14:32, Ilya Zverev a écrit : > not on the quality of the proposal what do you think of the different issues raised? whether your proposal is adopted or rejected, it will be difficult to implement. Would it not be better to cancel the current vote in order to improve the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Metro Mapping

2017-11-16 Thread marc marc
On 16. Nov 2017, at 23:17, José G Moya Y. wrote: >> you can press the intercom button, wait for response, and get the door >> opened without having to buy another ticket wheelchair=limited ___ Tagging mailing list

[Tagging] name on city_limit traffic sign and guidepost

2017-11-16 Thread marc marc
Hello, On the french speaking mailing, a mapper think that the name of traffic_sign=city_limit or on a guidpost it not really a name. it's the name of a feature (a city, a forest, a peak) that is nearby of the sign itself. what do you think about ? should a better keyname be used ?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Sinkholes refinement

2017-11-16 Thread marc marc
Hello, Am 2017-11-14 20:31, schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >> Perhaps it should be altered after the voting? Don't change the content of the proposal page once the vote has started. Fix the "typo" on the pages of the keys. Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing

Re: [Tagging] Emergency phones with blinking lights

2017-11-02 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 02. 11. 17 à 19:15, Éric Gillet a écrit : > light:blinking=yes light:blinking doesn't exist yet. so maybe it's better to use this one light:flash=yes (80 uses) Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

[Tagging] building=maisonette(s)

2017-12-02 Thread marc marc
Hello, https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=maisonette https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=maisonettes Nearly all in England. In french, a "maisonette" is a small detached house or a tiny house or a shed. Did this word also exist in english or thoses tags are a bad use of

Re: [Tagging] a tag for "really-really-freestores"

2017-12-04 Thread marc marc
Hello, Le 04. 12. 17 à 16:37, thomas schwaerzler a écrit : > if there is a tag for really-really-freestore shop=* fee=no :-) Regards, Marc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Multiple offices at the same address - (Multiple values for one key)

2017-10-28 Thread marc marc
Le 28. 10. 17 à 23:16, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit : > My reasoning is that my navigation program (OSMAND) doesn't appear to > find street numbers if they're only part of the address, but will if > they're a separate node. I know a lot of area (for exemple Brussels, Belgium) having housenumber

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >