2014-07-08 11:44 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de:
We could use a single polygon per terminal tagged as in the proposal
(similar to other landuse types) if we need to go in detail. If needed
using also multiple values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolon)
If you read the
Most ports handle many different types of cargoes, so a single value is
insufficient. It would be better to tag the individual terminal objects
within a port with a type rather than assign a type to the port object.
___
Tagging mailing list
We could use a single polygon per terminal tagged as in the proposal
(similar to other landuse types) if we need to go in detail. If needed
using also multiple values (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolon)
If you read the page you will see that it pretty much says: DON'T USE
To be consistent with the IHO definitions, any use of the word harbour
should be used for the area of sheltered water and not any land areas.
Those land areas adjacent to the harbour water should be classified
according to their function (terminal, wharf, etc.) Therefore the tag
2014-07-05 14:02 GMT+02:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com:
For port proposal and voting page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport
In this case there is hardly a definition, it is hidden under a
differences between harbour and port but there is no clear
2014-07-07 16:50 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de:
This proposal needs EXAMPLES, EXAMPLES and more EXAMPLES!!!
Hi Andreas,
thanks for the email..
I will try to follow your suggestion :-)
I would like to see some examples that show everything in one picture:
habour, ports, port
2014-07-07 17:09 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2014-07-05 14:02 GMT+02:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com:
For port proposal and voting page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dport
In this case there is hardly a definition, it is hidden
2014-07-07 17:47 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
2014-07-07 17:21 GMT+02:00 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com:
As I explained in the talk page previously, I would like to stay with roro
as a value, because it's more common in the usage.
I still believe you should expand
Dear all,
I edited the two proposals as required.
Regarding the intermodal_terminal, I added a definition and some pictures.
Considering the port proposal, I made more extensive changes to make it
more similar to other tags, as suggested by Martin. Mainly the idea is to
have categories in the
On 06/07/2014 08:24, nounours77 wrote:
= So this would imply that port is a individual facility inside a
harbour.
In fact it is the other way round. A port my contain one or more
harbours. (In turn, a harbour may contain zero or more docks and a dock
may contain zero or more basins.) A port
2014-07-06 9:48 GMT+02:00 Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com:
On 06/07/2014 08:24, nounours77 wrote:
= So this would imply that port is a individual facility inside a
harbour.
In fact it is the other way round. A port my contain one or more harbours.
(In turn, a harbour may
On 06/07/2014 10:45, sabas88 wrote:
Let me know how I can edit / disambiguate.
The important distinction is that a port is an administrative boundary
(which may have several disjunct areas) whereas harbours, terminals,
docks, wharves, basins, quays, etc. are physical features. Since those
2014-07-06 12:48 GMT+02:00 Malcolm Herring malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com:
On 06/07/2014 10:45, sabas88 wrote:
Let me know how I can edit / disambiguate.
The important distinction is that a port is an administrative boundary
(which may have several disjunct areas) whereas harbours,
13 matches
Mail list logo
