Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Limitation pour les véhicules "en transit".

[Balaïtous via Talk-fr]

Bonjour,

Merci pour ces réponses. J'ai opté pour la solution de Stéphane (avec
destination au lieu de delivery), d'autant que je viens de tomber sur
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions

qui donne l'exemple:
maxweight=2.5
maxweight:conditional=none @ destination

Balaitous

On mar., 2019-09-10 at 10:20 +0200, Stéphane Péneau wrote:
> Autre possibilité plus précise que j'ai utilisée pour un poids max
> de 
> 7.5 tonnes sauf livraison :
> maxweight=7.5
> maxweight:conditional=none @ delivery
> 
> Stf
> 
> Le 10/09/2019 à 09:30, Stéphane Péneau a écrit :
> > Salut !
> > 
> > hgv=destination n'est pas suffisant ?
> > 
> > Stf
> > 
> > Le 10/09/2019 à 06:55, Balaïtous via Talk-fr a écrit :
> > > Bonjour,
> > > 
> > > Je ne sais pas trop comment traduire une limitation valide
> > > uniquement
> > > pour les véhicules en transit. Il s'agit d'un poids maximal de
> > > 3.5 t.
> > > 
> > > D'après le wiki, il faut compléter le maxweight par un
> > > maxweight:vehicle=???
> > > 
> > > Après recherche sur taginfo, j'ai trouvé que certains
> > > contributeurs ont
> > > déjà utilisé des access=visitors, j'ai donc mis
> > > maxweight:vehicle=visitors.
> > > 
> > > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/access#values
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1083245
> > > 
> > > Ce qu'il faudrait c'est la négation de
> > > maxweight:vehicle=destination.
> > > 
> > > D'autres idées ?
> > > 
> > > Balaitous
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > Talk-fr mailing list
> > > Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-fr mailing list
> > Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Sarah Hoffmann]

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
> Around this area : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/50.9034/14.2763 
>  there is a flagrant 
> misuse and abuse of the usage of the natural=cliff tag. It is used to map the 
> iso altitude lines and not real cliff as stated in the WIKI :
> 
> A cliff  is a vertical or almost 
> vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form 
> of coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
> bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
> ice or other solid materials.  

I know that area very well and I can assure you, that natural=cliff is no misuse
under this definition. The area is full of rock towers like those:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20171124195DR_Lohmen_Basteiaussicht_zum_Sieberturm.jpg

That's what you see on the map.

> I already removed the natural=cliff ways mapped by MichaOSM after asking him 
> to fix this but without response the changeset comment was : 
> 
> "Felsen, Riffe, Topografie nach GeoSachsen digitale Geländemodellhoehenlinien 
> 2.5m, digitales Geländereliefmodell, DTK10, topografische Karte”
> 
> For example this changeset : 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66373825#map=15/50.9016/14.3093 
> 
> 
> It say that it used a 2.5m topographic map to map all these false cliffs in 
> this area, he was mapping the topography (MNT) and this is forbidden in OSM.

You missunderstood, he was mapping rock edges. A terrain model is more helpful
for that task than arial imagery. We have permission to use the terrain model
for OSM as far as I know.

I would kindly request that you reinstate deleted natural=cliffs for
the moment. If you are still not convinced from the photo above that the
tagging is correct then we need to have a fundamental discussion first about
how to tag these kind of rock towers. But that would rather be something for
the tagging mailing list (or talk-de if you want to get the locals involved).

Sarah

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Reports of FB problems to FB rather than to OSM (was: Attribution guideline status update)

[Kathleen Lu via talk]

Andy - what I meant was the hypothetical that Nuno suggested would be
terrible. *If* the Facebook button created a note in OSM, then OSM *would*
be inundated with 1000s of notes re nonactionable Facebook complaints. The
fact that there are several hundred already *without* a button on
Facebook's website auto-creating notes every time someone made a report
seems to support my theory.


On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:14 PM Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 10/09/2019 17:40, Kathleen Lu via talk wrote:
> > Not that I've heard (I don't think that was ever the case), but 1000s
> > of notes about FB on OSM sounds terrible to me - they would only add
> > noise for mappers who check notes for things to fix, and some editors
> > show notes in the interface. My understanding is that FB *is* fixing
> > whatever errors get reported to them, so isn't it better for them to
> > do all that work?
> >
> Quite a lot of the "Facebook" tickets that the DWG currently get are of
> the form "I tried to contact Facebook, nothing happened, so I'm
> contacting you".  I therefore wouldn't assume that FB is fixing
> everything that is reported to them (or even that everything reported to
> them is actually a problem; I mentioned before that quite a few or the
> DMCA tickets that the DWG sees aren't really actionable).
>
> OSM notes are a different issue.  Of the OSM notes mentioning Facebook:
>
> https://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes/search?q=facebook=0
>
> quite a lot are of the "please add company X" variety (some spam, some
> not), but there are also quite a few "Facebook's map of X is wrong"
> too.  I don't know how many there are of these in total as OSM's notes
> API just returns the first 100 matching.  My "finger in the air" guess
> (based on how far back in time 100 notes goes) is that there are ~300 or
> so still open rather than "1000s".
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Cartographie nationale du transport de gaz

[Yves P.]

Bonsoir,

Le ven. 23 août 2019 à 16:01, François Lacombe 
a écrit :

> Vu les nombreux échanges sur le sujet que j'ai eu avec certains, et le
> linéaire déjà conséquent de réseau présent sur OSM (12 500km environ sur 27
> 000), je ne pense pas qu'importer en direct soit pertinent.
>
Je confirme. Les tracés sont un peu simplifiés, ils ne passent pas toujours
sur les bornes et balises.

En revanche cela peut dépanner pour lever des imprécisions, ou trouver des
> bornes, nous aider sur le terrain.
>
Oui ça aide beaucoup (avant je faisait des copies d'écran de cartes que je
recalai et affichai en fond dans JOSM )

Il y a également la cartographie depuis les vues aériennes des périmètres
> des stations, etc...
>
Ce n'est pas le cas (du moins vers Dijon). Mais on voit une petite branche
qui relie le pipeline au poste gaz 

Si jamais vous vous promenez à la campagne, repérer les bornes jaunes est
> un sujet d'intérêt pour OSM, pensez-y.
>
ça marche aussi en voiture : saisir le type d'une borne au bord d'une route
et sa référence est très utile.
(Le "Street view" n'est pas toujours disponible, à jour ou est flou )
Voir :

   - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Apipeline%3Dmarker
   -
   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Utility_markers_proposal#Pipelines


Merci François pour ce lien. 

--
Yves
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Greffon tag2link de JOSM et supports ANFR

[Yves P.]

> Oui, bien sûr (sinon on ne saurait dessiner une carte ;-)) mais tu veux
> faire ça en quoi ?
>
> Tu veux mettre ça dans la base ? Tu veux que le greffon crée le lien ?
>
Je veux générer un lien dans JOSM, Osmose... qui permet d'afficher un
support radio sur Cartoradio.
Le principe de tag2link est d'extraire (avec des expressions régulières)
une valeur d'une clé d'un objet OSM.

Extraire 468046 de ref:FR:ANFR=468046 est trivial...
Par contre extraire lat et lon (les métadonnées de l'objet node OSM) n'est
probablement pas implémenté dans tag2link.

Si Cartoradio proposait l'url
https://www.cartoradio.fr/index.html#/cartographie/all/support/5744989078
je me contenterais de la première solution.
Hors ça n'existe pas.
Mais ça c'est fonctionnel :
https://www.cartoradio.fr/index.html#/cartographie/lonlat/2.4616004/43.2215290

Pour contourner ce problème, il faut donc "récupérer" dans ce greffon les
métadonnées (lat, lon, id...) d'un objet OSM.
Comment faire ?

--
Yves

PS: ça peut-être utile pour d'autres sites ?

Exemple du nœud OSM 5744989078
 :

http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright; license="
http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1-0/;>
  





  


dans le système de requêtes de JOSM, la syntaxe pour récupérer ces
métadonnées est :

   - user:
   - id:
   - version:
   - changeset:
   - timestamp:

(Il n'existe pas lat: et lon: )
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Alberto]

Ciao Luca,
sono l'autore della proposta (a suo tempo approvata) per gli animal_shelter.
I tag che hai cercato sono giusti.
Per la fauna selvatica in generale si usa:

amenity=animal_shelter
+
animal_shelter=wildlife
+
animal_shelter:release=yes

Se invece accolgono solo uccelli o mammiferi, o solo alcune specie, si 
inserisce il valore corrispondente (in inglese) al posto di wildlife.
Ci sono esempi nella pagina del wik [1]i.

Qualche tempo fa avevo iniziato ad inserire i centri recupero fauna selvatica 
in Italia ed in Francia, poi per mancanza di tempo ho dovuto sospendere.
Luca, ma tu vuoi solo estrarre i dati da OSM o inseriresti anche i centri 
mancanti?


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

Ciao
Alberto



---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Removed "WikiProject" prefix

[François Lacombe]

Bonsoir / Hi

La page Télécoms vient d'être renommée, ainsi que le sous-projet français
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telecoms
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telecoms/France

--
i've just moved Telecoms project
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telecoms

French subpage also
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Telecoms/France


All the best

François

Le ven. 6 sept. 2019 à 00:08, François Lacombe 
a écrit :

> Bonsoir / Hi
>
> Le mer. 4 sept. 2019 à 11:55, dcapillae  a écrit :
>
>>
>> WikiProject Power networks/France
>>
>
> Pour celui-ci, je m'en charge.
> Préalablement, j'ai proposé une séparation de ce projet en deux : l'un
> pour la production d'électricité, l'autre pour les réseaux la transportant.
> D'ici une dizaine de jours, si il n'y a pas d'objection explicite,
> j'opérerai la séparation pour toutes les langues, en ne reportant pas le
> WikiProject.
>
> --
> This one is my business
> Before any removal of WikiProject, I prefered propose a split between two
> topics : power generation and power transmission.
> If there is no objection until 10 days, I'll do that split without using
> Wikiproject prefix in new pages names.
>
> Bonne soirée
>
> François
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Wochennotiz Nr. 476 27.08.2019–02.09.2019

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 476 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2019/09/wochennotiz-nr-476/

Wusstet ihr, dass ihr auch selbst Meldungen für die Wochennotiz
einreichen könnt, ohne Mitglied zu sein?  Einfach auf
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login mit eurem OSM-Benutzerkonto
anmelden und dann den Gastzugang benutzen.

Viel Spaß beim Lesen

Euer Wochennotizteam
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[Diego Cruz]

Hola, Iago:

Estoy de acuerdo con todo lo que dices. Ferrol es una ciudad y las
capitales de partidos y comarcas deben ser villas.

De todas formas, el paso de pueblo a villa no debería ser solo en función
de un solo servicio concreto, sino de varios. Es verdad que es difícil
determinar la importancia local de un lugar, pero lo que propones tiene
mucho sentido.

Un saludo
Diego

El mar., 10 sept. 2019 20:02, Iago Casabiell 
escribió:

> En Galicia hay ejemplos de que la clasificación está mal.
> Ferrol no hay duda de que es una ciudad, y aunque ahora esté en horas
> bajas y no llegue a los 75.000 habitantes, tiene un arsenal militar, un
> campus universitario, teatros, museos, auditorios, un puerto exterior,
> barrios, y en conjunción con Narón (30.000 hab), que forma parte de su area
> metropolitana, llegan de sobra a los 100.000 habitantes.
>
> A Estrada, Ribeira, Viveiro, Cee, Lalín, Melide, son para mí claramente
> place=town, porque dominan un territorio inmenso (son las capitales
> comarcales) y aunque no lleguen a los 10,000 hab en la actualidad, tienen
> juzgados, bibliotecas, sedes administrativas a las que tienen que acudir
> desde municipios vecinos, algunas tienen hospital o si no un centro de
> salud con urgencias, y un largo etc. Yo creo que sería necesario meter las
> capitales de comarca (capital=7) y las capitales de partido judicial (los
> antiguos territorios que equivaldrían a admin_level=7).
>
> En cuanto a place=village es muy difícil decir que es lo que hay que
> hacer, porque o bien falta un punto en la escala entre hamlet y village, o
> bien village tiene que incluir muchas más poblaciones que la capital
> municipal de un municipio pequeño. Por ejemplo San Vicenzo en A Baña tiene
> 280 hab, y es capital del municipio (por lo tanto place=village), pero
> Perillo en el municipio de Oleiros tiene 7.941 hab, y Santa Cruz también en
> Oleiros tiene 2.596 hab y obviamente no son place=hamlet, pero tampoco son
> place=suburb, porque no son barrios de Coruña, tienen entidad propia.
> Después está el municipio de Culleredo, cuya capital, Tarrío tiene 509 hab,
> y 2 poblaciones de ese municipio, O Burgo y Acea de Ama, tienen 4.629 y
> 4.364 hab respectivamente.
>
> Mi propuesta en estos momentos poner como normalización para España lo que
> puse como opción A en el mensaje anterior, flexibilizar ligeramente lo que
> ya hay en estos momentos, especialmente con place=village.
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[Iago Casabiell]

En Galicia hay ejemplos de que la clasificación está mal.
Ferrol no hay duda de que es una ciudad, y aunque ahora esté en horas bajas
y no llegue a los 75.000 habitantes, tiene un arsenal militar, un campus
universitario, teatros, museos, auditorios, un puerto exterior, barrios, y
en conjunción con Narón (30.000 hab), que forma parte de su area
metropolitana, llegan de sobra a los 100.000 habitantes.

A Estrada, Ribeira, Viveiro, Cee, Lalín, Melide, son para mí claramente
place=town, porque dominan un territorio inmenso (son las capitales
comarcales) y aunque no lleguen a los 10,000 hab en la actualidad, tienen
juzgados, bibliotecas, sedes administrativas a las que tienen que acudir
desde municipios vecinos, algunas tienen hospital o si no un centro de
salud con urgencias, y un largo etc. Yo creo que sería necesario meter las
capitales de comarca (capital=7) y las capitales de partido judicial (los
antiguos territorios que equivaldrían a admin_level=7).

En cuanto a place=village es muy difícil decir que es lo que hay que hacer,
porque o bien falta un punto en la escala entre hamlet y village, o bien
village tiene que incluir muchas más poblaciones que la capital municipal
de un municipio pequeño. Por ejemplo San Vicenzo en A Baña tiene 280 hab, y
es capital del municipio (por lo tanto place=village), pero Perillo en el
municipio de Oleiros tiene 7.941 hab, y Santa Cruz también en Oleiros tiene
2.596 hab y obviamente no son place=hamlet, pero tampoco son place=suburb,
porque no son barrios de Coruña, tienen entidad propia. Después está el
municipio de Culleredo, cuya capital, Tarrío tiene 509 hab, y 2 poblaciones
de ese municipio, O Burgo y Acea de Ama, tienen 4.629 y 4.364 hab
respectivamente.

Mi propuesta en estos momentos poner como normalización para España lo que
puse como opción A en el mensaje anterior, flexibilizar ligeramente lo que
ya hay en estos momentos, especialmente con place=village.
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[Diego Cruz]

Hola, Iago:

Como ya expresé en el Telegram, me parece muy bien tu propuesta de regular
la categoría de las poblaciones siguiendo también otros criterios que no
sean el número de habitantes, pero no me queda muy claro cómo quieres que
sea según la tabla. ¿Tienes algún ejemplo de poblaciones que cambiarían de
categoría?

Se supone que para que un lugar sea considerado villa, por ejemplo,
¿tendría que tener todos los amenities que indicas o basta con que tenga
uno? Porque mi pueblo (que es una mierda de pueblo) no creo que deba
ascender a villa por tener un banco y una biblioteca municipal.

Para arreglar cualquier desbarajuste que pueda haber en Galicia o el
Cantábrico por su estructura de poblaciones pequeñas y dispersas, a lo
mejor también se puede ver qué es lo que hacen en Portugal.

De todas formas, mi opinión tampoco está muy fundamentada, porque tampoco
me queda muy claro cómo ha sido la clasificación hasta ahora.

Un saludo
Diego

El mar., 10 sept. 2019 18:39, dcapillae  escribió:

> Gracias, Iago.
>
> Por favor, al resto de la lista, opinad sobre la propuesta de Iago. Se lo
> está trabajando y merecería algo más de participación.
>
> ¿Os parece bien? ¿Os parece mal? ¿Qué opináis? ¿Se podría mejorar?
>
> Muchas gracias.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

[OSM-talk] Reports of FB problems to FB rather than to OSM (was: Attribution guideline status update)

[Andy Townsend]

On 10/09/2019 17:40, Kathleen Lu via talk wrote:
Not that I've heard (I don't think that was ever the case), but 1000s 
of notes about FB on OSM sounds terrible to me - they would only add 
noise for mappers who check notes for things to fix, and some editors 
show notes in the interface. My understanding is that FB *is* fixing 
whatever errors get reported to them, so isn't it better for them to 
do all that work?


Quite a lot of the "Facebook" tickets that the DWG currently get are of 
the form "I tried to contact Facebook, nothing happened, so I'm 
contacting you".  I therefore wouldn't assume that FB is fixing 
everything that is reported to them (or even that everything reported to 
them is actually a problem; I mentioned before that quite a few or the 
DMCA tickets that the DWG sees aren't really actionable).


OSM notes are a different issue.  Of the OSM notes mentioning Facebook:

https://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/notes/search?q=facebook=0

quite a lot are of the "please add company X" variety (some spam, some 
not), but there are also quite a few "Facebook's map of X is wrong" 
too.  I don't know how many there are of these in total as OSM's notes 
API just returns the first 100 matching.  My "finger in the air" guess 
(based on how far back in time 100 notes goes) is that there are ~300 or 
so still open rather than "1000s".


Best Regards,

Andy



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[Kathleen Lu via talk]

Not that I've heard (I don't think that was ever the case), but 1000s of
notes about FB on OSM sounds terrible to me - they would only add noise for
mappers who check notes for things to fix, and some editors show notes in
the interface. My understanding is that FB *is* fixing whatever errors get
reported to them, so isn't it better for them to do all that work?

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:44 PM Rihards  wrote:

> On 10.09.19 03:12, Kathleen Lu via osmf-talk wrote:
> >
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DWG_2018_11_15#Facebook_update
>
> A good example of "always assume the best intents" :)
>
> Kathleen, please note that this is about reports going to DWG - that is
> indeed inappropriate.
> Have we seen FB reports going into OSM notes, and negative effects from
> that?
>
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:47 PM Nuno Caldeira
> > mailto:nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> > I was not aware of that. Is that information public or been
> > published somewhere? Also what does it do? notes for OpenStreetMap
> > or the so called "Facebook maps"?
> >
> > Às 19:33 de 09/09/2019, Kathleen Lu escreveu:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:10 PM Nuno Caldeira
> >>  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Today i was check the maps on their website and noticed they
> >> have a report button, which i thought would create a note on
> >> OSM. Oh i was wrong, no note on OSM, wonder where that report
> >> will go to.
> >>
> >>
> >> ??? Nuno, you do realize that DWG complained to Facebook about too
> >> many reports from Facebook users going to OSM and DWG, and asked
> >> Facebook for cooperation in re-directing those? (which as I
> >> understand was accomplished)
> >> It would be terrible for the report button to create a note on
> OSM.--
>  Rihards
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[dcapillae]

Gracias, Iago.

Por favor, al resto de la lista, opinad sobre la propuesta de Iago. Se lo
está trabajando y merecería algo más de participación. 

¿Os parece bien? ¿Os parece mal? ¿Qué opináis? ¿Se podría mejorar?

Muchas gracias.



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 10/09/19 18:16, Federico Cortese ha scritto:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:06 PM Luca Moiana  wrote:
>>
>> ho recuperato un po' di risultati, anche se non tutti hanno il tag 
>> "animal_shelter" valorizzato.
>>
> 
> Qualche tempo fa avevo usato un generico amenity=veterinary per
> l'ospedale degli animali selvatici dell'Osservatorio Faunistico di
> Lecce (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6655365275), ma credo siano
> più opportuni i tag specifici segnalati, quindi correggo.
> 
> Ciao,
> Federico
> 

Cerchi solo quelli della LIPU o tutti i centri in generale?


-- 
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Federico Cortese]

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:06 PM Luca Moiana  wrote:
>
> ho recuperato un po' di risultati, anche se non tutti hanno il tag 
> "animal_shelter" valorizzato.
>

Qualche tempo fa avevo usato un generico amenity=veterinary per
l'ospedale degli animali selvatici dell'Osservatorio Faunistico di
Lecce (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6655365275), ma credo siano
più opportuni i tag specifici segnalati, quindi correggo.

Ciao,
Federico

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[Iago Casabiell]

Pongo aquí lo que puse en el talk de la wiki, en la normalización de
Núcleos de Población para España:

/*El tema de la clasificación de núcleos de población está poco definida
internacionalmente, y creo que en España la clasificación es muy rígida y
veo en el mapa de OSM que no se cumple. Estoy de acuerdo en al menos añadir
a la lista las 11 ciudades de la Ley de Grandes Ciudades de España.
Después de mirarlo en la wiki (páginas en inglés de
place=city/town/village/hamlet), en el telegram de España, en las listas de
tagging internacional y de España, en lo que está mapeado en OSM y darle yo
vueltas a la cabeza, he encontrado 2 opciones viables:
A) flexibilizar un poco (especialmente place=village) lo que ya tenemos
aquí en Normalización:
86 place=city (las 75 que ya están + las 11 de la Ley de Grandes Ciudades
de España)
place=town las capitales municipales a partir de 10.000 hab + todas las
capitales comarcales + todas las capitales de partido judicial.
place=village las capitales municipales de menos de 10.000 hab + toda
población superior a los 1.000 hab
place=hamlet todas las demás que tengan al menos 3 casas
Todas estas serán poblaciones independientes, no
barrios place=suburb etc.Esto cumple el estándar internacional y a la vez
se adapta mejor a lo que ya está mapeado.
B) usar una clasificación por servicios ofrecidos que a la vez cumpla unos
cortes mínimos, esto permite desligarse un poco de la clasificación por
población, que es redundante al haber un tag population=*.
Hice un tabla en una página template del wiki donde poner los criterios
usados por cada país y un criterio
general: Template:Populated_settlements_classification --Iagocasabiell (talk)
16:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC)*/

/* Con formato wiki:
El tema de la clasificación de núcleos de población está poco definida
internacionalmente, y creo que en España la clasificación es muy rígida y
veo en el mapa de OSM que no se cumple. Estoy de acuerdo en al menos añadir
a la lista las 11 ciudades de la Ley de Grandes Ciudades de España
.Después
de mirarlo en la wiki (páginas en inglés de
place=city/town/village/hamlet), en el telegram de España, en las listas de
tagging internacional y de España, en lo que está mapeado en OSM y darle yo
vueltas a la cabeza, he encontrado 2 opciones viables:

   - A) flexibilizar un poco (especialmente place
   =village
   ) lo que ya
   tenemos aquí en Normalización:
  - 86 place =city
   (las 75 que
  ya están + las 11 de la Ley de Grandes Ciudades de España
  
  )
  - place =town
   las
  capitales municipales a partir de 10.000 hab + todas las capitales
  comarcales + todas las capitales de partido judicial.
  - place =village
   las
  capitales municipales de menos de 10.000 hab + toda población superior a
  los 1.000 hab
  - place =hamlet
   todas las
  demás que tengan al menos 3 casas

Todas estas serán poblaciones independientes, no barrios place
=suburb
 etc.Esto cumple
el estándar internacional y a la vez se adapta mejor a lo que ya está
mapeado.

   - B) usar una clasificación por servicios ofrecidos que a la vez cumpla
   unos cortes mínimos, esto permite desligarse un poco de la clasificación
   por población, que es redundante al haber un tag population
   =*.

Hice un tabla en una página template del wiki donde poner los criterios
usados por cada país y un criterio general:
Template:Populated_settlements_classification

 --Iagocasabiell

 (talk
)
16:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
*/
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Simon Poole]

Thanks.

BTW I'm not saying that it is always clear when a "good idea" is
actually controversial or that you and Quincy are not subject to
multiple forces pulling or pushing in opposite directions, but the only
solution can be to escalate such issues to a wider audience before
implementation, when that is or becomes clear. Widely harmless current
example: 
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6836#issuecomment-529988108

Am 10.09.2019 um 17:12 schrieb Bryan Housel:
>>>
>>> The decisions we make in iD with the tags are mostly because 1.
>>> someone asked us to in a ticket or pull request, and we try to give
>>> people what they want..  or 2. we are trying to solve an actual
>>> problem - for example, the explicit tagging of piers and platforms
>>> came from us trying to detect routing islands (we rolled this back
>>> when people complained).  
>> Well that is a -slight- simplification of what happened. We can
>> partially follow it here
>> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-494888256
>> Except that we don't even know why in the end the changes were reverted,
>> insight? External pressure? Or what? Obviously it wasn't just people
>> complaining or else it would have been far earlier.
>
> I said why here:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/2267
>
>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Emanuele Petriglia]

Buonasera,

Ho caricato[0] 129 file GPX raccolte negli ultimi quattro anni, sono
tutte uscite in bici e la maggior parte sono concentrare nel Parco
Regionale dei Castelli Romani, un posto che si trova poco sud di Roma.

Per caricarli ho creato uno script personalizzato[1], oltre a caricare i
file rimuove i punti vicini a delle coordinate fornite per un raggio di
metri fornito (per privacy).

Volevo chiedervi come mi devo comportare ora, so che il GPS è poco
affidabile, sopratutto nei boschi. So però che può essere di aiuto.
Conosco il territorio, ma non ho mai fatto modifiche serie in OSM. Ho
chiesto anche nella mailing list talk-it per chiedere aiuto.

Buona serata!

[0]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ema-pe/traces
[1]:
https://gitlab.com/ema-pe/dotfiles/blob/1903a7e3b7baf68d5f4159e31f0a19af1623e02b/bin/osmgpx

-- 
Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

[Talk-it] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Emanuele Petriglia]

Buonasera,

Ho caricato[0] 129 file GPX raccolte negli ultimi quattro anni, sono
tutte uscite in bici e la maggior parte sono concentrare nel Parco
Regionale dei Castelli Romani, un posto che si trova poco sud di Roma.

Per caricarli ho creato uno script personalizzato[1], oltre a caricare i
file rimuove i punti vicini a delle coordinate fornite per un raggio di
metri fornito (per privacy).

Volevo chiedervi come mi devo comportare ora, so che il GPS è poco
affidabile, sopratutto nei boschi. So però che può essere di aiuto.
Conosco il territorio, ma non ho mai fatto modifiche serie in OSM. Ho
chiesto anche nella mailing list talk-it-lazio per eventuali compaesani.

Buona serata!

[0]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ema-pe/traces
[1]:
https://gitlab.com/ema-pe/dotfiles/blob/1903a7e3b7baf68d5f4159e31f0a19af1623e02b/bin/osmgpx

-- 
Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Licences

[Mateusz Konieczny]

10 Sep 2019, 16:09 by robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com:

> On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 13:49, Stephen Colebourne  wrote:
>
>> I'd like to see some guidance on whether data can be taken directly
>> from a business's website and entered directly into OSM. eg. on the
>> "contact us" page there is often address, postcode, phone number,
>> opening hours. This page
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:postal_code says "You can even
>> look them up on the official website of the place" which suggests you
>> can, but normal copyright of websites would suggest you can't.
>>
>
> My take is that if it's an independent store with a single site, or a
> small group -- say up to about half a dozen premises -- then you can
> use the address(es) listed on their official website, as they're
> un-copyrightable facts. For chains with more stores, the addresses of
> each branch will form part of a database, and then database rights put
> them off-limits for OSM, unless you get specific permission from the
> business.
>
Note
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2019-July/thread.html 

discussion that have some quite 
 arguments that in this case
database rights may not apply.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Bryan Housel]

>> 
>> The decisions we make in iD with the tags are mostly because 1. someone 
>> asked us to in a ticket or pull request, and we try to give people what they 
>> want..  or 2. we are trying to solve an actual problem - for example, the 
>> explicit tagging of piers and platforms came from us trying to detect 
>> routing islands (we rolled this back when people complained).  
> Well that is a -slight- simplification of what happened. We can
> partially follow it here
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-494888256
> Except that we don't even know why in the end the changes were reverted,
> insight? External pressure? Or what? Obviously it wasn't just people
> complaining or else it would have been far earlier.

I said why here:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/2267 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Simon Poole]

Am 10.09.2019 um 16:08 schrieb Bryan Housel:
> Simon you’re completely wrong about this, but I doubt there is anything that 
> I can say that would change your mind.  The "US-corporate bubble" does not 
> care about the tags used by the iD presets as much as you think they do.  

I don't think I remotely implied that the actual tags were at question
in this case.

>
> The decisions we make in iD with the tags are mostly because 1. someone asked 
> us to in a ticket or pull request, and we try to give people what they want.. 
>  or 2. we are trying to solve an actual problem - for example, the explicit 
> tagging of piers and platforms came from us trying to detect routing islands 
> (we rolled this back when people complained).  
Well that is a -slight- simplification of what happened. We can
partially follow it here
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-494888256
Except that we don't even know why in the end the changes were reverted,
insight? External pressure? Or what? Obviously it wasn't just people
complaining or else it would have been far earlier.
>
> Anyway, good luck with tagging.  When you frame the discussion this way, 
> don’t be surprised when we are reluctant to participate.

If there was more upfront transparency and discussion then likely the
whole thing likely wouldn't be needed. I'm not saying there wouldn't be
any disagreement, but it would be centred around the actual changes and
not around your behaviour which is what in the end is causing the high
tension.

Simon

>
> Bryan
>
>
>
>> On Sep 10, 2019, at 9:55 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:
>>
>> Roland
>>
>> I can't help noticing that you are tiptoeing a bit around the actual
>> issue which started the whole discussion: unilateral changes by the iD
>> maintainers (everybody else doesn't have enough leverage to enforce
>> their position, so it is not me specifically picking on them, it is
>> simply a consequence of the power they can wield). And these changes are
>> not just questions of which tags to use, but far more fundamental
>> questions, for example implicit vs. explicit tagging (which seems to be
>> something the US-corporate bubble whispered to them, likely that unknown
>> organisations holding the purse strings).
>>
>> If you don't address that I'm not quite sure what the point of the whole
>> discussion is.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> Am 10.09.2019 um 06:50 schrieb Roland Olbricht:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have got into the duty to talk about tagging governance on the SotM
>>> and I would like to develop that opportunity towards something that is
>>> rather helpful in the long term.
>>> To ensure that I am on the right track and not unintentionally after a
>>> personal agenda I would like to ask you to comment on the findings so
>>> far listed below.
>>>
>>> To encourage a widespread discussion, I have spread this message on
>>> German and French lists as well (these two because I understand the
>>> languages) and will do so in addition on the tagging list. Feel free to
>>> spread this message further as long as you remember to channel back all
>>> feedback.
>>>
>>>
>>> Imperfect Flow of Information
>>>
>>> Although many parts of the OpenStreetMap project are well translated,
>>> the tagging documentation has substantial deficiencies. Over a random
>>> sample of 10 tags the number of declared languages varies between 2 and
>>> 18, but only few are complete and up to date (sample: 2 of 10 for
>>> German, 3 of 10 for French).
>>>
>>> Another kind of imperfect information flow is that tag definitions can
>>> be changed on the wiki page long after the tag is in widespread use.
>>>
>>> The converse case that a tag is introduced without any documentation is
>>> also happening. While this happens by ordinary users usually slow enough
>>> to make sense of the added data, an import or organized edit might be
>>> able to substantially skew the de facto meaning of a tag, regardless
>>> whether it is in widespread use, documented, both, or none.
>>>
>>>
>>> More Structure needed
>>>
>>> The translation issues have been conflated with a different problem:
>>> Different features may look very different between regions. E.g.
>>> highway=primary and highway=unclassfied versus highway=track
>>> need different sets of examples in Germany and the urban US on the one
>>> hand and Iceland or rural Africa on the other. It is easy to mix this
>>> with the translation into the predominant language in the area,
>>> but the tagging challenges in Belgium, Canada, and Niger are
>>> substantially different, although all three countries happen to have
>>> French as official language. Conversely, there is no sane reason to
>>> change tagging rules every block of houses in Brussels.
>>>
>>> Additionally, people often have different search terms than the British
>>> English tag names or their translations, and the wiki search engine is
>>> infamous for its bad performance. Having explicit keywords to direct the
>>> attention of a mapper to the list of 

Re: [talk-cz] SotM CZ 2019 v rámci konference OpenAlt v Brně

[Jiri Vlasak]

On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 02:56:11PM +0200, Tom Ka wrote:
> po 9. 9. 2019 v 12:27 odesílatel Jiri Vlasak  napsal:
> > rád bych oživil téma SotM CZ & SK na OpenAlt. Trochu jsem doufal, že se mi
> > podaří navázat Missing Maps Meeting na SotM, ale asi úplně míjím komunikaci,
> > kde se tohle řeší.
> >
> > Vypadá to, že s organizátory OpenAlt komunikuje Tom Ka - můžu mít dotaz 
> > přímo
> > na tebe? Je možné Missing Maps Meeting udělat v rámci SotM? Třeba v neděli, 
> > jak
> > jsem psal? Může být v rámci SotM v sobotu mapathon?
> 
> Zdravim,
> 
> zatim davam dohromady program za OSM, prozatim to vypada na stejny
> casovy plan jako 2017, tedy ze zabereme jednu mistnost na Sobotu na
> cely den. Vic budu vedet, jak dam dohromady aktualne zname prednasky
> cca koncem tydne.

Super, díky za informaci. Budu moc rád pak za ten program. Počítám tedy s tím,
že Missing Maps Meeting uděláme v neděli po obědě, abychom se nekryli.
Přednášky zaregistrujeme do sekce "OpenStreetMap - SotM CZ+SK".

Pěkný den,
jiri

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Bryan Housel]

Simon you’re completely wrong about this, but I doubt there is anything that I 
can say that would change your mind.  The "US-corporate bubble" does not care 
about the tags used by the iD presets as much as you think they do.  

The decisions we make in iD with the tags are mostly because 1. someone asked 
us to in a ticket or pull request, and we try to give people what they want..  
or 2. we are trying to solve an actual problem - for example, the explicit 
tagging of piers and platforms came from us trying to detect routing islands 
(we rolled this back when people complained).  

Anyway, good luck with tagging.  When you frame the discussion this way, don’t 
be surprised when we are reluctant to participate.

Bryan



> On Sep 10, 2019, at 9:55 AM, Simon Poole  wrote:
> 
> Roland
> 
> I can't help noticing that you are tiptoeing a bit around the actual
> issue which started the whole discussion: unilateral changes by the iD
> maintainers (everybody else doesn't have enough leverage to enforce
> their position, so it is not me specifically picking on them, it is
> simply a consequence of the power they can wield). And these changes are
> not just questions of which tags to use, but far more fundamental
> questions, for example implicit vs. explicit tagging (which seems to be
> something the US-corporate bubble whispered to them, likely that unknown
> organisations holding the purse strings).
> 
> If you don't address that I'm not quite sure what the point of the whole
> discussion is.
> 
> Simon
> 
> Am 10.09.2019 um 06:50 schrieb Roland Olbricht:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I have got into the duty to talk about tagging governance on the SotM
>> and I would like to develop that opportunity towards something that is
>> rather helpful in the long term.
>> To ensure that I am on the right track and not unintentionally after a
>> personal agenda I would like to ask you to comment on the findings so
>> far listed below.
>> 
>> To encourage a widespread discussion, I have spread this message on
>> German and French lists as well (these two because I understand the
>> languages) and will do so in addition on the tagging list. Feel free to
>> spread this message further as long as you remember to channel back all
>> feedback.
>> 
>> 
>> Imperfect Flow of Information
>> 
>> Although many parts of the OpenStreetMap project are well translated,
>> the tagging documentation has substantial deficiencies. Over a random
>> sample of 10 tags the number of declared languages varies between 2 and
>> 18, but only few are complete and up to date (sample: 2 of 10 for
>> German, 3 of 10 for French).
>> 
>> Another kind of imperfect information flow is that tag definitions can
>> be changed on the wiki page long after the tag is in widespread use.
>> 
>> The converse case that a tag is introduced without any documentation is
>> also happening. While this happens by ordinary users usually slow enough
>> to make sense of the added data, an import or organized edit might be
>> able to substantially skew the de facto meaning of a tag, regardless
>> whether it is in widespread use, documented, both, or none.
>> 
>> 
>> More Structure needed
>> 
>> The translation issues have been conflated with a different problem:
>> Different features may look very different between regions. E.g.
>> highway=primary and highway=unclassfied versus highway=track
>> need different sets of examples in Germany and the urban US on the one
>> hand and Iceland or rural Africa on the other. It is easy to mix this
>> with the translation into the predominant language in the area,
>> but the tagging challenges in Belgium, Canada, and Niger are
>> substantially different, although all three countries happen to have
>> French as official language. Conversely, there is no sane reason to
>> change tagging rules every block of houses in Brussels.
>> 
>> Additionally, people often have different search terms than the British
>> English tag names or their translations, and the wiki search engine is
>> infamous for its bad performance. Having explicit keywords to direct the
>> attention of a mapper to the list of possibly fitting tags might help.
>> 
>> A substantial problem source of the concept of proposals is
>> that it interacts with lots of tags in a nontrivial way and is
>> practically never properly applied to all affected tag definitions.
>> A proposal currently is an extra page although it should have much more
>> an impact like a Git commit, grouping changes across various tag
>> definition pages in a single changeset.
>> 
>> 
>> Legitimacy and Governance
>> 
>> What legitimation has a process if only a handful of people have that
>> have the time to write mails on a mailing list and to write wiki pages
>> are involved? In particular, if the proposals end up as being full of
>> contradictions or vague terms and leave necessary answers undefined.
>> Yet these still are the people that have shown the necessary long-term
>> endurance to assure maintenance and that 

[talk-ph] [Tabang-AI] Siquijor road mapping project

[maning sambale]

Hi,

In collaboration with our local contacts in Lazi, Siquijor, we have
just launched our very fist AI-assisted road mapping project for the
province of Siquijor [0]!
Please help improve/complete the roads in Siquijor in the tasking
manager linked in the ticket.

Beyond mapping we would love to hear feedback on workflow and how we
can do it better.

Happy mapping!

[0] https://github.com/OSMPH/Tabang-AI/issues/10
-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
https://github.com/maning
http://twitter.com/maningsambale
--

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Simon Poole]

Roland

I can't help noticing that you are tiptoeing a bit around the actual
issue which started the whole discussion: unilateral changes by the iD
maintainers (everybody else doesn't have enough leverage to enforce
their position, so it is not me specifically picking on them, it is
simply a consequence of the power they can wield). And these changes are
not just questions of which tags to use, but far more fundamental
questions, for example implicit vs. explicit tagging (which seems to be
something the US-corporate bubble whispered to them, likely that unknown
organisations holding the purse strings).

If you don't address that I'm not quite sure what the point of the whole
discussion is.

Simon

Am 10.09.2019 um 06:50 schrieb Roland Olbricht:
> Hi all,
>
> I have got into the duty to talk about tagging governance on the SotM
> and I would like to develop that opportunity towards something that is
> rather helpful in the long term.
> To ensure that I am on the right track and not unintentionally after a
> personal agenda I would like to ask you to comment on the findings so
> far listed below.
>
> To encourage a widespread discussion, I have spread this message on
> German and French lists as well (these two because I understand the
> languages) and will do so in addition on the tagging list. Feel free to
> spread this message further as long as you remember to channel back all
> feedback.
>
>
> Imperfect Flow of Information
>
> Although many parts of the OpenStreetMap project are well translated,
> the tagging documentation has substantial deficiencies. Over a random
> sample of 10 tags the number of declared languages varies between 2 and
> 18, but only few are complete and up to date (sample: 2 of 10 for
> German, 3 of 10 for French).
>
> Another kind of imperfect information flow is that tag definitions can
> be changed on the wiki page long after the tag is in widespread use.
>
> The converse case that a tag is introduced without any documentation is
> also happening. While this happens by ordinary users usually slow enough
> to make sense of the added data, an import or organized edit might be
> able to substantially skew the de facto meaning of a tag, regardless
> whether it is in widespread use, documented, both, or none.
>
>
> More Structure needed
>
> The translation issues have been conflated with a different problem:
> Different features may look very different between regions. E.g.
> highway=primary and highway=unclassfied versus highway=track
> need different sets of examples in Germany and the urban US on the one
> hand and Iceland or rural Africa on the other. It is easy to mix this
> with the translation into the predominant language in the area,
> but the tagging challenges in Belgium, Canada, and Niger are
> substantially different, although all three countries happen to have
> French as official language. Conversely, there is no sane reason to
> change tagging rules every block of houses in Brussels.
>
> Additionally, people often have different search terms than the British
> English tag names or their translations, and the wiki search engine is
> infamous for its bad performance. Having explicit keywords to direct the
> attention of a mapper to the list of possibly fitting tags might help.
>
> A substantial problem source of the concept of proposals is
> that it interacts with lots of tags in a nontrivial way and is
> practically never properly applied to all affected tag definitions.
> A proposal currently is an extra page although it should have much more
> an impact like a Git commit, grouping changes across various tag
> definition pages in a single changeset.
>
>
> Legitimacy and Governance
>
> What legitimation has a process if only a handful of people have that
> have the time to write mails on a mailing list and to write wiki pages
> are involved? In particular, if the proposals end up as being full of
> contradictions or vague terms and leave necessary answers undefined.
> Yet these still are the people that have shown the necessary long-term
> endurance to assure maintenance and that do the work. Thus every change
> to replace processes with better processes must be geared towards
> broadening not narrowing the base of long-term maintainers.
>
> Conversely, I fully understand mappers that are wary of sudden changes
> in the rendering or the access to tags in edting software. A lot of
> people whould probably appreciate to better understand what happens on
> the way from a tag discussion to a final change in the renderer or
> editing software. These processes are not secret, but often
> under-documented.
>
> Again, the various discussion channels and the lacking information flow
> between them contribute to the bad mood. Even worse, the ratio between
> people and channels means that evil or just plainly incompetent people
> could easily take over some channels and contribute substantially to the
> confusion. Good ideas how to redirect people and close down some of the
> 

[OSM-talk-fr] SotM 2019: available Community ticket

[André Maroneze]

Hello,

I got a Community ticket for SotM 2019 but I am unable to go due to work
constraints. I'd like to give mine to someone who can use it, so more
people can attend the event.

If you know someone who qualifies as a community member and would like to
go, please tell them to contact me so I can transfer the ticket.

Best regards,
André
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Licences

[Jez Nicholson]

A 'database' of stores maybebut I believe that Stephen are talking
specifically about a single address communicated via a contact page. If the
postcode is copyrighted, then the company shouldn't be displaying it, and
you should never write it on an envelope

On Tue, 10 Sep 2019, 13:57 Silent Spike,  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:49 PM Stephen Colebourne 
> wrote:
>
>> I'd like to see some guidance on whether data can be taken directly
>> from a business's website and entered directly into OSM. eg. on the
>> "contact us" page there is often address, postcode, phone number,
>> opening hours. This page
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:postal_code says "You can even
>> look them up on the official website of the place" which suggests you
>> can, but normal copyright of websites would suggest you can't. A clear
>> statement one way or the other would be useful (I may have missed
>> it...)
>>
>
> I'm almost certain you need permission from the company to use such data
> and that wiki page should probably be changed. There are a few companies
> I'm aware of which have granted OSM permission to use website data (at
> least in the UK), it's on another wiki page somewhere.
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Licences

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 13:49, Stephen Colebourne  wrote:
> I'd like to see some guidance on whether data can be taken directly
> from a business's website and entered directly into OSM. eg. on the
> "contact us" page there is often address, postcode, phone number,
> opening hours. This page
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:postal_code says "You can even
> look them up on the official website of the place" which suggests you
> can, but normal copyright of websites would suggest you can't.

My take is that if it's an independent store with a single site, or a
small group -- say up to about half a dozen premises -- then you can
use the address(es) listed on their official website, as they're
un-copyrightable facts. For chains with more stores, the addresses of
each branch will form part of a database, and then database rights put
them off-limits for OSM, unless you get specific permission from the
business.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Unusual tagging of scouting clubs

[David Morais Ferreira]

Hello Marco,

 

Thanks for the encouragement! 

I retagged the relevant POIs [1]. I also noticed that there were a couple of
sport=scouting POIs, which I also retagged.

 

 

Greetings

 

David (dmlu)

 

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74305582

 

From: Marco van der Heide  
Sent: 05 September 2019 19:29
To: OpenStreetMap NL discussion list 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-nl] Unusual tagging of scouting clubs

 

Hi David,

 

Thanks for contacting the community about this.

 

I presume that the "leisure=scouting" has been added by someone without
knowing that "club=scout" is the correct way to tag scouting POIs.

I would have no problem (even encourage it) that you retag the scouting POIs
in the Netherlands to the correct tags.

 

Thanks for your efforts in cleaning OSM and making OSM better and better!

 

Regards,

Marco van der Heide (mvanderheide)

The Netherlands

OSM Foundation member

 

  _  

From: David Morais Ferreira mailto:david.moraisferre...@gmail.com> >
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 6:30:02 PM
To: talk-nl@openstreetmap.org 
mailto:talk-nl@openstreetmap.org> >
Subject: [OSM-talk-nl] Unusual tagging of scouting clubs 

 

Hello everyone,
While fixing some scouting POIs in Luxembourg, I noticed that there is
a weird tag "leisure=scouting" that can be found 10 times in the world
[1], 7 of which in the Netherlands. Furthermore, someone used the
correct key, "club", but unfortunately used the "scouts" value instead
of "scout".

As I don't want to just re-tag them without informing the local
community, I thought it would be best if I sent an email asking
whether getting rid of "leisure=scouting" and adding "club=scout" [2]
is a good idea.

I can also perform the changes myself, if nobody else volunteers :)


Greetings from Luxembourg
David (dmlu)

[1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/leisure=scouting#overview
[2] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/club=scout

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org  
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [Talk-ca] Saints in street names in Ontario

[john whelan]

Looks good to me and if Matthew has cast his eye over it and not spotted
anything major then I think we can safely say Ottawa is happy with it.

Cheerio John

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019, 9:57 PM Pierre Béland via Talk-ca, <
talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Cela semble bien préciser, mais les collègues d'Ontario pourront mieux
> répondre.
>
> Pierre
>
> Envoyé à partir de Yahoo Courriel sur Android
> 
>
> Le lun., sept. 9 2019 à 3:11 PM, Jarek Piórkowski
>  a écrit :
> Hi Pierre,
>
> (I responded via email at first, but realized one more thing, so
> adding on and sending to talk-ca:)
>
> The proposed wiki addition does start with "In Ontario". However
> thanks bringing this up, as I realized I forgot to account for parts
> of Ontario where streets will be named in French - this change should
> not apply to those.
>
> I am changing the suggested wording to:
>
> In parts of **Ontario** that primarily name streets in English,
> street and road names containing initial "St." or "St" should only be
> expanded to "Saint" when "Saint" is common usage for that street. To
> be clear, this overrides the general rule
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29
> for "St." which does not stand for "street". As with other names in
> OSM, factors you might want to consider when determining common usage
> include spellings posted on street signs ("on the ground" rule),
> spellings used in local media, GeoBase street name data, and spellings
> used by official municipal sources including open data datasets. See
> discussion on talk-ca [0].
>
> Would this wording be fine for Ottawa and other bilingual areas, or am
> I missing a pitfall?
>
> Thanks,
> --Jarek
>
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 at 08:51, Pierre Béland  wrote:
> >
> > Marek
> >
> > Ces instructions ne s'appliquent pas à toutes les provinces. Il faudrait
> donc indiquer sur la page wiki à quelles provinces elles s'appliquent
> >
> > Pierre
> >
> > Envoyé à partir de Yahoo Courriel sur Android
> >
> > Le lun., sept. 9 2019 à 2:51 AM, Jarek Piórkowski
> >  a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm following up on the thread about saints and lack thereof in street
> > names from a couple of months ago (see archives [1] [2]).
> >
> > I would like to suggest the following wording added to Canadian
> > tagging guidelines at
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canadian_tagging_guidelines#Street_names
> > :
> >
> >In Ontario, street and road names containing initial "St." or "St"
> > should only be expanded to "Saint" when "Saint" is common usage for
> > that street. To be clear, this overrides the general rule
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29
> > for "St." which does not stand for "street". As with other names in
> > OSM, factors you might want to consider when determining common usage
> > include spellings posted on street signs ("on the ground" rule),
> > spellings used in local media, GeoBase street name data, and spellings
> > used by official municipal sources including open data datasets. See
> > discussion on talk-ca [0].
> >
> > where [0] would be a link to this message/thread archive. (Comments on
> > the wording and suggestions appreciated!)
> >
> > Is anyone opposed to this change?
> >
> > I have attempted to advertise/announce this proposed change. This was:
> > - posted in this mailing list in March/April of this year (some quoted
> > below, see list archives for more discussion)
> > - I posted a note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1741334 in
> > Toronto with a link to this thread (supportive responses from Kevo and
> > DannyMcD)
> > - on April 10, sent a message [2] with a link to the note to editors
> > who were showing up as top editors on
> > http://osmstats.neis-one.org/?item=countries=Canada
> > (they aren't necessarily representative of the community, but it's
> > really the closest we can reasonably do given our current tooling) [3]
> > (no private message responses)
> > - posted on OSM Canada Slack on 17 August
> > https://osm-ca.slack.com/archives/CASP8UQNT/p1566053199044200
> > (supportive responses from Matthew Darwin and Eric Geiler)
> > - on August 27, sent a few more private messages to editors in top 50
> > on the stats page who had done Ontario edits [4] (no private message
> > responses)
> >
> > If you know of anyone else who might have a further opinion on this,
> > please forward as possible.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Jarek
> >
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[john whelan]

If the discussion takes place in a mailing list there is a record of it.

Slack is restricted and I'm not certain if a record is available.  Same for
chat or mumble discussions.  Both are valuable but not for formally
recording why a decision was made and the reasons behind it.

Cheerio John

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019, 6:54 AM Valor Naram,  wrote:

> Hello Roland and other "talkers",
>
> I also thought about creating a new better channel for tagging discussions
> where all sites (mappers (newbies, experienced), developers, researchers
> etc.) come into play. E.g. we could create IRC rooms for discussions for
> each tag and have one main IRC room where one can "advertise" for a tag
> discussion in an IRC room. Votes can still take place in the wiki. But this
> would just solve one of many OSM issues.
>
>
> I also mentioned in "tagging" the problem of "multiple tags for one
> purpose" but the emerging discussion there was not kind of discussion I
> hoped for. I also think that Mailing list isn't the right format for
> discussions. I think a chat is better suited for discussions. Telegram
> groups like @osm_de show that it can work throw chatting.
>
> Cheers
>
> Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram
>
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance
> From: Christoph Hormann
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> CC:
>
>
>
> Hello Roland,
>
> not sure if you have seen - i already gave my initial thoughts on this
> on
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/imagico/diary/390599
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Luca Moiana]

Grazie,

con questa query:

amenity=animal_shelter AND animal_shelter NOT LIKE dog AND animal_shelter NOT 
LIKE cat in italy

ho recuperato un po' di risultati, anche se non tutti hanno il tag 
"animal_shelter" valorizzato.

L


From: Maurizio Napolitano 
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 10:47 AM
To: openstreetmap list - italiano 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

direi amenity=animal_shelter
anche se vedo che c'è una proposta sul tema della fauna selvatica
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:36 PM Luca Moiana  wrote:
>
> Ciao,
>
> dovendo compilare un elenco del "Centri di recupero della fauna selvatica" ho 
> provato a fare una ricerca con overpass, senza risultato.
>
> Volendo inserirli, quali tag dovrei usare?
>
> grazie
>
> L
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it



--
Maurizio "Napo" Napolitano
http://de.straba.us

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] sauna in albergo

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Il mar 10 set 2019, 11:16 emmexx  ha scritto:

> Per descrivere saune di vario tipo esistono alcuni tag indicati qui:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sauna
>
> Volevo inserire delle informazioni più precise per un albergo che
> permette l'accesso (gratuito) ai clienti e a pagamento per gli esterni.
> Inoltre le saune presenti sono 2, una di tipo finlandese ed una tipo
> bagno turco.
> Non volevo creare 2 nodi ad hoc ma aggiungere queste informazioni
> all'edificio associato all'albergo.
>
> Mi date un parere su questi tag:
>
> sauna=hot;steam
> sauna:hot:temperature=85
> sauna:hot:capacity=10
> sauna:steam:capacity=10
> sauna:description=clothing_optional
> sauna:opening_hours=Mo-Su 12:00-21:00
>
> sauna:fee dovrebbe essere no per chi alloggia nell'abergo e yes per i
> clienti esterni. Come si può rendere?
>
>
>
> Ciao maxx,

Di solito si usa:

 *:fee=customers

per indicare che chi è cliente non ha una fee... Quindi:

sauna:fee=customers

Dovrebbe chiarire la situazione e implicare che l'accesso al servizio per
esterni avrà un costo.

Saluti,
Francesco

>
> grazie
> maxx
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-lt] Elektromobilių įkrovos stotelių duomenys

[Jurkis]

Sveiki
Gal kas nors domėjotės galimybe iš http://eismoinfo.lt/#!/news/8592 užkrauti
elektromobilių įkrovos stotelių duomenis? Kaip suprantu, galima net
pateikti stotelių užimtumą.


Jurijus
___
Talk-lt mailing list
Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Valor Naram]

Hello Roland and other "talkers",I also thought about creating a new better channel for tagging discussions where all sites (mappers (newbies, experienced), developers, researchers etc.)  come into play. E.g. we could create IRC rooms for discussions for each tag and have one main IRC room where one can "advertise" for a tag discussion in an IRC room. Votes can still take place in the wiki. But this would just solve one of many OSM issues.I also mentioned in "tagging" the problem of "multiple tags for one purpose" but the emerging discussion there was not kind of discussion I hoped for. I also think that Mailing list isn't the right format for discussions. I think a chat is better suited for discussions. Telegram groups like @osm_de show that it can work throw chatting.CheersSören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging GovernanceFrom: Christoph Hormann To: talk@openstreetmap.orgCC: Hello Roland,not sure if you have seen - i already gave my initial thoughts on this onhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/user/imagico/diary/390599-- Christoph Hormannhttp://www.imagico.de/___talk mailing listtalk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Maurizio Napolitano]

direi amenity=animal_shelter
anche se vedo che c'è una proposta sul tema della fauna selvatica
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:36 PM Luca Moiana  wrote:
>
> Ciao,
>
> dovendo compilare un elenco del "Centri di recupero della fauna selvatica" ho 
> provato a fare una ricerca con overpass, senza risultato.
>
> Volendo inserirli, quali tag dovrei usare?
>
> grazie
>
> L
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it



-- 
Maurizio "Napo" Napolitano
http://de.straba.us

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Luca Moiana]

Ciao,

dovendo compilare un elenco del "Centri di recupero della fauna selvatica" ho 
provato a fare una ricerca con overpass, senza risultato.

Volendo inserirli, quali tag dovrei usare?

grazie

L
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-GB] (no subject)

[Jez Nicholson]

I just updated the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines#Copyright_Infringement
 section.

Your input (on the wiki) to assist new and existing UK mappers would be
greatly appreciated.

It does seem heavily Ordnance Survey dominated. I'm sure that other data
sources have been ratified as usable.

Regards,
 Jez
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Christoph Hormann]

Hello Roland,

not sure if you have seen - i already gave my initial thoughts on this 
on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/imagico/diary/390599

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Traductions de page wiki OSM en français

[osm . sanspourriel]

Le 10/09/2019 à 10:10, Jean-Claude Repetto - jrepe...@free.fr a écrit :

Il reste à améliorer la traduction de sorting_name, et à traduire
"User defined" dans name:left (pas trouvé comment faire).

Jean-Claude


+1 pour le second cas mais ce n'est jamais que "and"  (j'ai traduit
"User defined").

C'était simple en fait. Par contre pour le and je n'ai pas trouvé.

| [[{{{name:key|key:name}}} | name:left]] et [[{{{name:key|key:name}}} |
name:right]]

et

|{{{name:key|key:name}}} | name:left]] et {{{name:key|key:name}}} |
name:right

ne marchent pas

Pour la traduction de sorting_name, c'est correct, pas pire que l'original.

Pour rappel :

/Nom, utilisé pour un tri correct des noms — Seulement nécessaire quand
le tri des noms ne peut être basé seulement sur l'orthographe
(utilisation d'algorithme de classement avec tables de tri adapté par
langue ou par écriture ou quand les listes de tri comprennent des noms
écrits dans plusieurs langues ou écritures différentes) mais nécessite
d'ignorer certaines parties comme : /

 * /ignorer les articles principaux/
 * /diminuer l'importance relative des prénoms placés devant le nom de
   famille/
 * /ignorer la partie générique placée avant le nom spécifique ( ex. en
   français avec "rue", "boulevard", "place", etc.),/

//

/chacune d'elles étant ignorée au niveau de tri principal et
difficilement détectable par un algorithme de prétraitement des données. /

Et je me pose la question du sens de mettre ça dans une langue comme le
français.

Car cette clé n'étant pas imposée, les cas 1 et 3 vont :

- être inutiles si on met un algorithme en place les traitant

- mettre un ordre pourri si on n'a pas l'algo les rendant inutiles. Car
on aurait {name=Rue Quest, sorting_name=Quest} avant {name=Rue Péneau}
parce que le second n'a pas précisé le nom sans type de voie.

Pour le cas 2, c'est un peu plus subtile à cause des prénoms utilisés
comme noms. Là si on supprime le premier prénom, en général ça va tomber
juste.

En France , grosso modo quelqu'un le
met sur les tombes (suppression des prénoms) d'autres sur les noms de
commerces commençant par un article défini.

Jean-Yvon
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-it] sauna in albergo

[emmexx]

Per descrivere saune di vario tipo esistono alcuni tag indicati qui:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sauna

Volevo inserire delle informazioni più precise per un albergo che
permette l'accesso (gratuito) ai clienti e a pagamento per gli esterni.
Inoltre le saune presenti sono 2, una di tipo finlandese ed una tipo
bagno turco.
Non volevo creare 2 nodi ad hoc ma aggiungere queste informazioni
all'edificio associato all'albergo.

Mi date un parere su questi tag:

sauna=hot;steam
sauna:hot:temperature=85
sauna:hot:capacity=10
sauna:steam:capacity=10
sauna:description=clothing_optional
sauna:opening_hours=Mo-Su 12:00-21:00

sauna:fee dovrebbe essere no per chi alloggia nell'abergo e yes per i
clienti esterni. Come si può rendere?


grazie
maxx

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-talk-fr] Greffon tag2link de JOSM et supports ANFR

[Yves P.]

Bonjour,

Comme le site Cartoradio ne permet pas (encore) de lien direct vers un
"support", la solution est d'afficher la carte aux coordonnées de l'objet
OSM (nœud représentant un mat, tour, antenne...).

Est-il possible d'obtenir les coordonnées d'un nœud (ou le centroïde d'un
chemin, et à défaut, les coordonnées du premier nœud) ?

La règle serait :



  
 https://www.cartoradio.fr/index.html#/cartographie/all/lonlat/%lon%/%lat%;
/>
   


--
Yves
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Limitation pour les véhicules "en transit".

[Stéphane Péneau]

Autre possibilité plus précise que j'ai utilisée pour un poids max de 
7.5 tonnes sauf livraison :

maxweight=7.5
maxweight:conditional=none @ delivery

Stf

Le 10/09/2019 à 09:30, Stéphane Péneau a écrit :

Salut !

hgv=destination n'est pas suffisant ?

Stf

Le 10/09/2019 à 06:55, Balaïtous via Talk-fr a écrit :

Bonjour,

Je ne sais pas trop comment traduire une limitation valide uniquement
pour les véhicules en transit. Il s'agit d'un poids maximal de 3.5 t.

D'après le wiki, il faut compléter le maxweight par un
maxweight:vehicle=???

Après recherche sur taginfo, j'ai trouvé que certains contributeurs ont
déjà utilisé des access=visitors, j'ai donc mis
maxweight:vehicle=visitors.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/access#values
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1083245

Ce qu'il faudrait c'est la négation de maxweight:vehicle=destination.

D'autres idées ?

Balaitous



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Traductions de page wiki OSM en français

[Jean-Claude Repetto]

Le 09/09/2019 à 14:04, gnrc69 via Talk-fr a écrit :
Je viens de faire la traduction de la page 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Names .

Merci à ceux qui souhaiteraient faire une relecture ! ! !

gnrc69 - OSM Lyon




Bonjour,

Merci pour la traduction. J'ai effectué quelques corrections, car 
certaines parties étaient difficilement compréhensibles en français. Il 
y avait aussi qq fautes de grammaire et contresens.
Attention aux faux-amis: ne pas confondre depreciated (déprécié) et 
deprecated (déconseillé).


Il reste à améliorer la traduction de sorting_name, et à traduire "User 
defined" dans name:left (pas trouvé comment faire).


Jean-Claude


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-es] Toponimia en Galicia

[dcapillae]

Buenos días.

Gracias por tu comentario, Paúl. Creo que básicamente estamos de acuerdo en
casi todo, así que no discutiré tus argumentos. Son perfectamente
razonables.

Respecto a mi apasionamietno, ya dije en un mensaje anterior que intentaría
poner de mi parte para que este foro fuera un lugar más agradable de
visitar. Estoy intentándolo, aunque tienes que entender mi situación. Si has
seguido el hilo desde el principio, sabrás por qué lo digo. Cuando os
censuren injustamente y os acusen de algo que no habéis hecho, espero que os
mostréis apasionados, indignados, intolerante, incluso abiertamente hostiles
contra quienes abusan de vuestra confianza. Y por encima de todo, espero que
contéis con el apoyo de esta comunidad y no solo con su silencio, como me ha
pasado a mí.
 
Respecto a mi invitación a no usar la etiqueta «official_name» si no es
necesario, lo digo únicamente por lo que he leído en el wiki. Esta etiqueta
se usa cuando el nombre oficial no coincide con el nombre común. Se usa en
casos como éste:

name=Chile
official_name=República de Chile

En el wiki dice lo siguiente [1]: «[official_name] has been created for
country names but we need a clarification for other cases between "name",
"int_name", "loc_name" and "official_name". Example: official_name=Principat
d'Andorra (where "name" is name=Andorra)». No me parece que sea de
aplicación en una ciudad cuyo nombre común y nombre oficial coinciden. Por
eso digo que me parece una etiqueta superflua. No es conflictiva, en todo
caso, pero absolutamente innecesaria. 

Yo vivo en la ciudad de Málaga, cuyo nombre oficial es Málaga. No tiene
sentido un etiquetado como éste:

name=Málaga
official_name=Málaga

Tendríamos que ponerlo en todas las localidades de España, lo cual resulta
no solo contrario a las convenciones de OSM sino hasta un poco absurdo. El
nombre común y el nombre oficial ¡son el mismo nombre! Dicho esto, si
alguien se empeña en ponerlo, no voy a perder ni un minuto en discutir. Le
recordaré lo que dicen las convenciones de OSM respeto al uso de esta
etiqueta y que el mapeador use su capacidad de discernimiento para saber si
debe usarla o no. Yo no la usaría.

Gracias de nuevo por tu comentario, Paúl.

Un cordial saludo.

Atentamente,
Daniel

P. D.: Más allá de mi apasionamiento en este foro, por las causas que ya
conocéis, me considero una persona bastante tranquila, escéptica y
tolerante. Todo el que haya colaborado conmigo de tú a tú sin la
intermediación de esta comunidad debería saberlo. A mí me gusta colaborar
con todo el mundo y lo hago habitualmente, en todo momento, con mapeadores
de todo el mundo. Lo que no tolero es que se falte a la verdad o que se
cometan injusticias. Entonces, sí, me comporto de forma apasionada e
intolerante.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

[OSM-talk] Re : Tagging Governance

[Pierre Béland via talk]

Hi Roland
It would help To better see the structure of
1.main tags2.attributes adding detailed infos To these tags
Also cases like polygons that should not be overlapped when related   To 
landcoverie. Amenity=university vs landuse=retail
Pierre

Envoyé à partir de Yahoo Courriel sur Android 
 
  Le mar., sept. 10 2019 à 6:54 AM, Roland Olbricht a 
écrit :   Hi all,

I have got into the duty to talk about tagging governance on the SotM
and I would like to develop that opportunity towards something that is
rather helpful in the long term.
To ensure that I am on the right track and not unintentionally after a
personal agenda I would like to ask you to comment on the findings so
far listed below.

To encourage a widespread discussion, I have spread this message on
German and French lists as well (these two because I understand the
languages) and will do so in addition on the tagging list. Feel free to
spread this message further as long as you remember to channel back all
feedback.


Imperfect Flow of Information

Although many parts of the OpenStreetMap project are well translated,
the tagging documentation has substantial deficiencies. Over a random
sample of 10 tags the number of declared languages varies between 2 and
18, but only few are complete and up to date (sample: 2 of 10 for
German, 3 of 10 for French).

Another kind of imperfect information flow is that tag definitions can
be changed on the wiki page long after the tag is in widespread use.

The converse case that a tag is introduced without any documentation is
also happening. While this happens by ordinary users usually slow enough
to make sense of the added data, an import or organized edit might be
able to substantially skew the de facto meaning of a tag, regardless
whether it is in widespread use, documented, both, or none.


More Structure needed

The translation issues have been conflated with a different problem:
Different features may look very different between regions. E.g.
highway=primary and highway=unclassfied versus highway=track
need different sets of examples in Germany and the urban US on the one
hand and Iceland or rural Africa on the other. It is easy to mix this
with the translation into the predominant language in the area,
but the tagging challenges in Belgium, Canada, and Niger are
substantially different, although all three countries happen to have
French as official language. Conversely, there is no sane reason to
change tagging rules every block of houses in Brussels.

Additionally, people often have different search terms than the British
English tag names or their translations, and the wiki search engine is
infamous for its bad performance. Having explicit keywords to direct the
attention of a mapper to the list of possibly fitting tags might help.

A substantial problem source of the concept of proposals is
that it interacts with lots of tags in a nontrivial way and is
practically never properly applied to all affected tag definitions.
A proposal currently is an extra page although it should have much more
an impact like a Git commit, grouping changes across various tag
definition pages in a single changeset.


Legitimacy and Governance

What legitimation has a process if only a handful of people have that
have the time to write mails on a mailing list and to write wiki pages
are involved? In particular, if the proposals end up as being full of
contradictions or vague terms and leave necessary answers undefined.
Yet these still are the people that have shown the necessary long-term
endurance to assure maintenance and that do the work. Thus every change
to replace processes with better processes must be geared towards
broadening not narrowing the base of long-term maintainers.

Conversely, I fully understand mappers that are wary of sudden changes
in the rendering or the access to tags in edting software. A lot of
people whould probably appreciate to better understand what happens on
the way from a tag discussion to a final change in the renderer or
editing software. These processes are not secret, but often
under-documented.

Again, the various discussion channels and the lacking information flow
between them contribute to the bad mood. Even worse, the ratio between
people and channels means that evil or just plainly incompetent people
could easily take over some channels and contribute substantially to the
confusion. Good ideas how to redirect people and close down some of the
channels (e.g. wiki discussion pages) might be worth pursuing. On top of
that the wiki history is so much less helpful than what developers are
nowadays used to from version control systems that borrowing methaphors
and paradigms from there to the tag documentation is worth consideration.

This hopefully helps to foster that the authors of the documentation and
the mappers using a tag actually agree on its meaning.


Best regards,

Roland

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-de] Spielregeln fürs Tagging

[Markus]

Hallo Roland,

das finde ich super:

> bei der SotM werde ich eine Stunde zum Thema Tagging moderieren

m.E. sind die meisten Probleme systematische.
(werden aber als inhaltliche missverstanden und entsprechend
chaotisch/konfliktär diskutiert - mit allen negativen Folgen für OSM)

> Mängel im Informationsfluss

Mich behindert die seit Jahren zunehmende Fixierung auf Englisch.

Nach dem 80/20-Prinzip sollten die mapperseitig verbreitetsten Sprachen
als Mastersprachen verwendet werden.

Durch die Hin- und Her-Übersetzerei entstehen zusätzlich
Missverständnisse - wo es doch schon genügend historisch gewachsene
Verwirrung gibt.

Bilder und Bildbeschreibungen für ein- und ausschliessende Beispiele,
auch in Bezug zu ähnlichen tags, könnten helfen.


> Bedarf nach mehr Struktur
>
> verschiedene Features können sehr unteschiedlich in verschiedenen
> Regionen aussehen.

Da gibt es seit Urzeiten eine unsinnige Vermischung von Klassen.
Funktion, Beschaffenheit und Nutzung werden wild durcheinandergemischt
und verwechselt. Sowohl im Tagging als auch im Rendering.
Eine Hauptverkehrsader sieht in EU und in Afrika anders aus.
Und wenn dann für den Renderer getaggt wird, oder der Renderer eigene
Wege geht, dann ist die Verwirrung komplett.

Ein an Beispielen klar beschriebene Unterscheidung der Klassen und ihrer
Zuordnung zu tags könnte helfen. Auch da sind Bilder hilfreich.
Regionale Unterschiede müssen - immer Klassen-konform -
sprachübergreifend beschrieben sein.

> Suchbegriffe und Tag-Namen

Tag-Namen müssen eindeutig übersetzt und beschrieben sein.
Herausforderung sind Begriffe, die in verschiedenen Sprachen gleich
lauten, aber unterschiedliche Bedeutung haben, oder die in einer Sprache
verschiedene Bedeutungen haben und sich deshalb nicht eindeutig
übersetzen lassen.

Auch hier helfen erklärende Bilder und Bildbeschreibungen.

> "How to Map a ..."

und ein bebildertes Glossar in verschiedenen Sprachen sind gute Wege.

> wechselwirken

Eine Schein-Wechselwirkung entsteht durch Vermischung/Verwechslung von
Klassen.

Wenn Klassen sauber definiert sind, ist auch die Wechselwirkung klarer
und damit einfacher zu beschreiben/dokumentieren.

> Spielregeln und deren Legitimation
>
> Personen mit der nötigen Zeit

Das ist ein ungelöstes Problem in "demokratischen" Strukturen.
(in der Politik im Zusammenhang mit Populismus gut erkennbar)

Auch Technokratie ist problematisch.
(Renderer-, Editor-, DB-Entwickler, Wiki-Vorlagen).

Lösungen sind m.E. nur über gemeinsame Werte und Ziele möglich.

> unabgestimmte Änderungen im Rendering oder der Editier-Software

Taggingschema und Rendering bedingen sich zwingend gegenseitig.
Wenn Werte und Ziele nicht übergreifend klar sind, versuchen sich die
drei Ebenen Tagging, Editor, Rendering konkurrierend zu übertrumpfen.

> Auch hier trägt die Vielzahl der Diskussionskanäle und der mangelnde
> Informationsfluss dazwischen dazu bei die Stimmung zu verderben.

Die verschiedenen Kanäle sind nur Mittel.
Sie können konstruktiv oder strategisch als Machtmittel genutzt werden.

> bösartige oder inkompetente

Die meisten Konflikte sind Missverständnisse...

> History des Wiki vs. Versionskontrollsysteme

Kannst Du das etwas genauer beschreiben? Vision?
Gibt es da schon Überlegungen, wie man moderne Versionssysteme in die
Mediawiki-SW implementieren kann?

> wenn Dokumentatoren und Mapper (und Renderer und Editoren)
> die gleiche Bedeutung anwenden

Gibt es schon Idealbeispiele?
Daran könnten wir uns ja schon mal orientieren :-)
Und Verfahrensregeln daraus ableiten...

Mit herzlichem Gruss,
Markus

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Limitation pour les véhicules "en transit".

[Stéphane Péneau]

Salut !

hgv=destination n'est pas suffisant ?

Stf

Le 10/09/2019 à 06:55, Balaïtous via Talk-fr a écrit :

Bonjour,

Je ne sais pas trop comment traduire une limitation valide uniquement
pour les véhicules en transit. Il s'agit d'un poids maximal de 3.5 t.

D'après le wiki, il faut compléter le maxweight par un
maxweight:vehicle=???

Après recherche sur taginfo, j'ai trouvé que certains contributeurs ont
déjà utilisé des access=visitors, j'ai donc mis
maxweight:vehicle=visitors.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/access#values
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1083245

Ce qu'il faudrait c'est la négation de maxweight:vehicle=destination.

D'autres idées ?

Balaitous



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-es] Toponimia en Galicia

[Paúl Sanz]

Estoy en general de acuerdo con la posición de dcapillae, si bien me parece
que su apasionamiento no ayuda a mantener tranquilo el debate. Sin embargo,
no coincido con su opinión de que 'official_name' es innecesario.

En general, en los topónimos gallegos hay que tener en cuenta la historia
(lingüística y de la otra). Mi madre era gallega, del Barbanza, y jamás
dijo *Rianjo, *Santa Eugenia de Ribera ni *Puebla del Caramiñal, pese a que
en tiempos pasados y peores eran esos los nombres oficiales. Siempre fue
'Rianxo' o 'Ribeira', y sí que llegó a haber topónimos deturpados como
'Puebla do Caramiñal', que es como decía mi madre. Hoy es evidente que los
topónimos interferidos deben arreglarse y, puesto que nadie (que yo sepa)
dice 'Puebla del Caramiñal', la solución es galleguizar el nombre, pues en
realidad no existe el exónimo español. En cambio, mi padre, que era
segoviano, sí decía Rianjo. Sin embargo, hoy no oigo jamás Rianjo, excepto
en la Wikipedia española, que ya sabemos que es más papista que la RAE.
Otra situación diferente es la de 'Porto do Son', que fue españolizado
durante el franquismo como 'Puerto del Sonido' y hoy se puede encontrar en
la Wikipedia como 'Puerto del Son', versiones que me parece, no se han
usado nunca en la vida cotidiana. Insisto, son impresiones personales, pero
me parecen significativos.
Lo que quiero decir es que habría que ir caso por caso en todas las
localidades gallegas con nombres castellanos, conocer su historia. Aquí el
trabajo de la comunidad local me parece importante. Pero negar que millones
de personas siguen diciendo 'La Coruña' me parece, en el mejor de los
casos, *wishful thinking*.

Otro usuario comentaba que un problema real de usar name:es=La Coruña
estaría en el uso de los datos de  OSM por parte de organismos oficiales.
Me parece que la etiqueta official_name sirve para dos fines:
- Elimina el problema legal de que una administración no quiera/pueda usar
OSM porque los nombres no sean los oficiales.
- Deja claro que el nombre oficial es el que es, sin negar otras versiones
en otros idiomas.

Me parece muy razonable lo que hace la Wikipedia catalana sobre esta
ciudad:

La Corunya[1] (en gallec i oficialment: A Coruña)

Esto, traducido a etiquetas, sería:
name:ca=La Corunya
name:gl=A Coruña
official_name=A Coruña

Me parece que lo propio es que cada comunidad señale sus exónimos. La
comunidad española no puede exigir a la italiana que cambien 'Napoli' por
'Nápoles', pero sí podemos añadir la etiqueta 'name:es=Nápoles' y, de la
misma manera, la comunidad gallega no puede imponer a la castellana A
Coruña. Hay que recordar que el castellano/español (me da igual el nombre,
espero que así se entienda) es, básicamente, una lengua americana. Por
ahora, en este debate, nos hemos manifestado colaboradores peninsulares,
pero es más importante saber cómo lo dicen los mexicanos, colombianos,
venezolanos, argentinos... Creo —insisto, es una creencia, no tengo datos y
si encuentro datos diferentes, los aceptaré sin problema— que es muy
mayoritario el uso de 'La Coruña', por lo que el name:es debe ser ese. Mi
propuesta, siguiendo con el ejemplo coruñés, sería:

name:ca=La Corunya
name:gl=A Coruña
official_name=A Coruña
name:es=A Coruña
alt_name=Coruña

Los debates sobre toponimia en España se contaminan de enfrentamientos
políticos con mucha facilidad y, por eso mismo, es mejor trascender España
y que los hispanoamericanos, que son la mayoría de hablantes de
castellano/español, aporten y, puesto que son mayoría, influyan en la
decisión más que nosotros.

*Disclaimer*: soy profesor de Lengua Castellana. Eu non falo galego, aínda
que podo comprendelo, pero dame moita vergoña falalo.

El lun., 9 sept. 2019 a las 20:00, dcapillae ()
escribió:
>
> Buenas tardes.
>
> En OSM hay etiquetas para casi todo. El conflicto entre idiomas es
> completamente artificial. Ese problema ya está resuelto. Por favor,
> centremos el debate en cómo usamos las etiquetas para resolver casos
> particulares que no sabemos cómo etiquetar. Planteemos el problema para
que
> entre todos intentemos encontrar la mejor solución, sin tratar de imponer
> nada a nadie. Aquí estamos para ayudarnos los unos a los otros, para
> colaborar unos con otros, no para enfrentarnos los unos con los otros en
> polémicas estériles.
>
> Hablemos, pues, de etiquetas, de cómo etiquetamos las cosas en OSM. Voy a
> resolver el caso planteado por Miguel tal como yo lo resolvería si me lo
> encontrase en el mapa: una ciudad que tiene un nombre común en una lengua
> local, que además ese nombre es el nombre oficial, tanto en esa lengua
como
> en español, y que además tiene otros nombres, que no son oficiales ni
falta
> que les hace.
>
> Primero aclarar que lo que yo llamo «nombre común» es lo que en OSM se
> conoce como tal, es decir, el nombre principal de la característica
(name).
> Hay quien prefiere llamarlo «nombre genérico». Bueno, pues vale. Lo mismo
> es. El caso es que ése es el nombre principal, el nombre por el que 

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[stevea]

My zwei Pfennige (two cents) worth.  I am somewhat multilingual (in my context 
of a largely-monolingual USA):  I grew up hearing familial Polish and 
Hungarian, studied seven years of foreign language (Spanish and French) in 
middle and high schools and at university double majored in linguistics and 
computer science.  In the '90s I was an employee at Apple and Adobe in 
multilingual environments, helping to either translate or "localize" software, 
data or documentation in many, many contexts.  When I signed up for OSM over a 
decade ago, I did so with a passion knowing I was joining a worldwide community 
of many languages:  a truly global project.  I have written many wiki pages and 
done much mapping, mostly local (California, USA), though I travel and map 
around the world, too.

I am aware of some of the history of OSM's origin story in the UK, and its 
almost unbelievably enthusiastic adoption in Western Europe, especially 
Germany, BeNeLux countries (do people still say that?!) and around the world.  
(I am especially heartened to see similar enthusiasm in Africa and Asia:  OSM 
is truly global).

Yes, as I read (and write) wiki, wanting to conscientiously bridge the "how do 
we? / how should we?" gaps in the map compared to how we actually DO map by 
contributing to wiki, I have noticed a distinct English-centrism in the wiki.  
At first I attributed this to OSM's UK origins (and British English still 
prevails in tagging, it is helpful to know the reasons why) yet I also noticed 
there was a "chase" or "lag" in both wiki-as-documenting how we DO tag and 
wiki-as-documenting how we SHOULD tag (the so-called "descriptive vs. 
prescriptive" argument about what a wiki page is actually "documenting").  At 
the same time, German-speaking influences have come on strong, showing the deep 
passion for OSM in this part of the world.

Roland mentions an "Imperfect Flow of Information."  What I notice in this 
regard is that people often map without checking wiki, people sometimes write 
wiki without checking the map, and people who either read or write wiki seem to 
be in a distinct minority.  I have no "basis in fact" for saying the latter, 
but I have had much experience in OSM of people who want to map well, they have 
all the required enthusiasm to be excellent mappers, but they seem to abhor 
reading documentation (our wiki, to a large extent it IS our project-wide 
documentation of "how we do things").  A lot of "wheels have been invented" (as 
in the phrase "don't re-invent the wheel (as you don't have to)" and yet people 
see fit to invent their own (wheels) tagging standards, when all that would 
have been required is a five-minutes tour through some fairly-well-written wiki 
pages.  While a certain amount of this is "Goldilocks, 'just right'" (and we 
have votes and talk-discussions and questions-and-answers on our forum and 
local MeetUp groups where beers are drunk and several people all agree "that's 
a pretty good way to tag that!") we sometimes see our "plastic" (free-form) 
tagging taken too far.  Or, people are quick to put their own interpretation on 
things, when the community has already reached consensus, and this is 
documented in our wiki pages.

But coining new tags and spilling them all over the map isn't the major "abuse" 
that I see, it is merely a symptom.  The real "sickness" that seems to continue 
to plague OSM is the very great difficulty it seems to take to reach wide, 
often world-wide agreement.  We have MANY different forums / technologies / 
websites /  chat rooms to discuss, we have MANY different views, we have many 
agendas (whether hidden or open), we have (and use!) MANY methods for "playing 
nice" vs. "being rough" for advancing these ideas "into the map."  Now, most of 
us realize that what we're talking about here, achieving consensus (especially 
on the specifics of tagging) in a worldwide map, in a worldwide community, is 
and is going to be difficult.  I see no way around that.  Yet I am encouraged 
that Roland brings up these topics and at least initiates a wider discussion 
that there MUST be "ways forward" through what feels like a morass of poor 
communication, what is known as "stovepiped" information (very 
compartmentalized, or paid attention to by people who make it their business to 
watch certain highly-specialized aspects of the project) and many other 
problems plaguing OSM.  It isn't simply many languages, esoterica, data vs. 
code, the cacophony of all the various communication methods (including 
proprietary ones like Twitter, Slack and other "secret sauce walkie talkies" 
that require signing a contract to use them, which deserve no good place in an 
"open" project like OSM, in my opinion).  No, it is as Roland says, "More 
Structure needed."  I don't know where the sweet spot between "free form" and 
"More Structured" is, but we're on a path where we are devolving into "too 
little structure" and it seems to be hurting us.  How do we BUILD 

Re: [OSM-ja] 位置参照情報（町丁目の階層づくり）について

[Satoshi IIDA]

いいだです。

ありがとうございます。
京都の地名（カテゴリの4）について、neighbourhoodにする、ということで
日本語版のWikiページを編集しました。

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:MLIT_ISJ/import2019_outline

また、合成（コンフレーション）の手順と、細かいマージ方針について、
ワークフローのWikiページを別途作成しました。

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:MLIT_ISJ/import2019_outline/workflow

9月後半は僕の手が空かないと思うので、
10月に入ったあたりで英訳の確認をして、Imports MLに投稿しようと思っています。






2019年9月6日(金) 0:30 tomoya muramoto :

> muramotoです。
>
> > ref:ISJ_JP
> 不要だと思います。
> quarterとneighbourhoodへの分割はlocal
> knowledgeで自由にやって構わないという指針を出すのであれば、ref:ISJ_JPを付けていてもほぼ無意味ですし、local
> knowledgeで分割したタグを元に戻してしまうおそれもあります。
>
> > localty (カテゴリ0)の扱いについて
> neighbourhoodにすることに賛成です。
> 京都市の例を見る限りでは、neighbourhoodもしくはquarterのように見えます。
>
> > 京都の町名重複箇所
>
> 特別な扱いは不要に思います。同じ町名が隣接しているようであればrefを付けて統合されるのを防ぐこともありえたかもしれませんが、京都の鍵屋町は、それぞれ独立して位置しているようですし。
>
> 参考リンク
> 〒 604-0832 鍵屋町（間之町通二条下る、間之町通押小路上る）
>
> https://www.google.com/maps/place/%E3%80%92604-0832/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x6001088601abdecf:0x98f547acb8b968b7?sa=X=2ahUKEwix9u7k-bnkAhWLvZQKHSW_CpoQ8gEwCnoECAwQBA
>
> 〒 604-0801 鍵屋町（丸太町通堺町東入、丸太町通堺町西入、丸太町通柳馬場東入、丸太町通高倉東入）
>
> https://www.google.com/maps/place/%E3%80%92604-0801/@35.0154105,135.760706,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x6001088824110691:0x2eed52938bc4c001!8m2!3d35.0173529!4d135.7631684
> ___
> Talk-ja mailing list
> Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja
>


-- 
Satoshi IIDA
mail: nyamp...@gmail.com
twitter: @nyampire
___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-it] FOSS4G it 2020

[canfe]

+1



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] FOSS4G it 2020

[canfe]

+1



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it