I agree that we should focus our mapping efforts primarily on landmark antennae.
Although, there could exist other reasons to map one. For example, I
map broadcast FM radio or TV masts even if they are only a few meters
high, as that helps listeners point their (directional) receiving
antennae.
On 07/03/19 20:50, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Am Do., 7. März 2019 um 09:57 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg
mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>>:
It's good that radio telescopes have been mentioned. While considering
this issue, you should also take a look at towers with
Am Do., 7. März 2019 um 09:57 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> It's good that radio telescopes have been mentioned. While considering
> this issue, you should also take a look at towers with
> tower:type=communication and tower:construction=dish
>
> I'm not sure if it
It's good that radio telescopes have been mentioned. While considering
this issue, you should also take a look at towers with
tower:type=communication and tower:construction=dish
I'm not sure if it is sensible to tag a large satellite dish as a
"tower" but that is currently an option that has
On 06/03/19 18:52, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On 3/6/19 6:00 AM, Warin wrote:
So .. what is the best way to map them?
My proposal would be a straightforward main tags chain to describe the
physical landmark features - and then all the extra sauce specialists
might want, but in a way that
On Wed, March 6, 2019 2:37 pm, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> I still fail to see _who could benefit_ from that fragmentary, sparse,
> information of unknown quality: I surely would not
I do not know either - but I'll let those who do have their fun and make
sure that it does not interfere with the
Am Mi., 6. März 2019 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi :
> To put things in perspective, and just as an example, we have about
> 186000 amenity=drinking_water, that is an antenna every 26 water taps...
>
>
not really astonishing, because everybody is interested in obtaining
drinking water when
On 2019-03-06 08:46, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 3/6/19 3:31 AM, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>> My friend, there are 88 persons who have mapped 520 antennas
>> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/antenna).
>>
>> Compare it to the billions of antennas out there and I think we are far
>> below the
On 3/6/19 6:00 AM, Warin wrote:
So .. what is the best way to map them?
My proposal would be a straightforward main tags chain to describe the
physical landmark features - and then all the extra sauce specialists
might want, but in a way that won't complicate the basics. So...
On 3/6/19 3:31 AM, Sergio Manzi wrote:
My friend, there are 88 persons who have mapped 520 antennas
(https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/antenna).
Compare it to the billions of antennas out there and I think we are
far below the "/noise level/" and that all energy "invested" in trying
to
On 06/03/19 13:31, Sergio Manzi wrote:
On 2019-03-06 03:20, Warin wrote:
On 06/03/19 12:38, Sergio Manzi wrote:
Also, if on the other hand you don't expect all TV antennas to be
mapped, what will be the value of such fragmentary and sparse
information? "/Cui prodest/"? Who is going to benefit
On 2019-03-06 03:20, Warin wrote:
> On 06/03/19 12:38, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>> Also, if on the other hand you don't expect all TV antennas to be mapped,
>> what will be the value of such fragmentary and sparse information? "/Cui
>> prodest/"? Who is going to benefit from such information? Those
On 06/03/19 12:38, Sergio Manzi wrote:
Also, if on the other hand you don't expect all TV antennas to be
mapped, what will be the value of such fragmentary and sparse
information? "/Cui prodest/"? Who is going to benefit from such
information? Those with a concrete interest in such information
On 2019-03-05 23:48, Warin wrote:
> On 05/03/19 21:30, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-03-05 11:14, Warin wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/03/19 20:08, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
This
On 05/03/19 21:30, Sergio Manzi wrote:
On 2019-03-05 11:14, Warin wrote:
On 05/03/19 20:08, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
This is a way to solve most of the problem, but it fails the
On 2019-03-05 11:14, Warin wrote:
> On 05/03/19 20:08, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
>> On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
>> This is a way to solve most of the problem, but it fails the "map it as I
>> see it" test.
>>
>>
On 2019-03-05 10:08, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
> This is a way to solve most of the problem, but it fails the "map it as I
> see it" test.
>
> man_made=antenna +
On 05/03/19 20:08, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
This is a way to solve most of the problem, but it fails the "map it as I
see it" test.
man_made=antenna + antenna:reflector=dish does map
On Mon, March 4, 2019 11:20 pm, Warin wrote:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/antenna:use
This is a way to solve most of the problem, but it fails the "map it as I
see it" test.
man_made=antenna + antenna:reflector=dish does map the satellite
communications antenna I
On 04/03/19 21:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I would expect the "uplink" information to be relevant, as most
satellite antennas are used for receiving only (those private tv
reception antennas).
Do not counter this with "not sufficiently relevant for mapping", as
you'll see people will likely
On 2019-03-04 11:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Do not counter this with "not sufficiently relevant for mapping", as you'll
> see people will likely tag it ;-)
Personally I counter this for lack of observability/verifiability.
From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability
"At
I would expect the "uplink" information to be relevant, as most satellite
antennas are used for receiving only (those private tv reception antennas).
Do not counter this with "not sufficiently relevant for mapping", as you'll
see people will likely tag it ;-)
Subtagging (or a property) seems
22 matches
Mail list logo
