On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote:
prima-facia speed limits in most of the US
At least with relatively simple examples (such as the county-wide and
city-wide speed limits found commonly in Oklahoma, Kansas, northern Texas
and southeastern Colorado, posted
On 8/18/2015 10:01 AM, Torsten Karzig wrote:
As mentioned earlier part of the problem is a confusion between tagging what is
there (landcover) and what it is used for (landuse). In the wiki we actually
have a consistent approach (Approach 1) to make this distinction. Using
natural=wood as a
There are a number of traffic laws that are not always posted and vary for each
administrative area. U-turns in Oregon, prima-facia speed limits in most of the
US, etc. I think there should be a way of tagging the bounding polygon or
boundary relation with that information to see the defaults a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Brian May b...@mapwise.com wrote:
Also I think its been mentioned the boundary should be tagged as
boundary=protected_area which handles the overall mission of national
forests is to conserve our forests. However, the issue comes up that there
are different
Tod Fitch writes:
We are using British English here and timber appears to mean
production of wood for building. See, for example,
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/timber
You may define casual wood gathering of firewood a timber operation
but I am pretty sure the forest
On Aug 18, 2015, at 4:17 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
Torsten Karzig wrote:
Remove the landuse=forest tag except for regions that are clearly used for
forestry.
Now, slow down here. It has been (and is, I argue) quite reasonable to tag
National Forests
Torsten Karzig wrote:
As mentioned earlier part of the problem is a confusion between
tagging what is there (landcover) and what it is used for
(landuse). In the wiki we actually have a consistent approach
(Approach 1) to make this distinction. Using natural=wood as a
landcover tag and
On 8/18/2015 1:58 PM, Ben Discoe wrote:
As someone who has worked on protected areas in OSM globally, it has
always been obvious that the landuse tags and the boundary tags
serve clear and different purposes.
US National Forests are boundaries around land which contain many
uses(*), and
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:02 AM Torsten Karzig torsten.kar...@web.de
wrote:
As mentioned earlier part of the problem is a confusion between tagging
what is there (landcover) and what it is used for (landuse). In the wiki we
actually have a consistent approach (Approach 1) to make this
Yeah, I've had some problem edits from the MapBox paid editors as well not
paying attention and believing that the Tiger data and Bing is pretty much
'always right'. They most of the time don't even check the history of ways
before they edit and add back in stuff that another 'on-the-ground'
As mentioned earlier part of the problem is a confusion between tagging what is
there (landcover) and what it is used for (landuse). In the wiki we actually
have a consistent approach (Approach 1) to make this distinction. Using
natural=wood as a landcover tag and landuse=forest for areas of
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:18 PM Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote:
The common meaning of forest is a large tract of land covered with
trees and underbrush; woodland[1] However, many parts of US National
Forests do not have trees, and either will never have trees, or will not
have them
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
A colleague pointed out that there are areas (towns) where U turn
restrictions are in place that govern all streets in that area. I wonder:
1) Does anyone know if this is common? I don't have any anecdotal
experience.
2) Is there a known tagging scheme for this? Area based traffic
resctrictions?
No, but it would be handy, because there's literally no way anybody's
tagging this for every approach of every intersection with a traffic
light, HAWK or half-signal in Oregon that doesn't have an
Just to chime in..
As someone who has worked on protected areas in OSM globally, it has
always been obvious that the landuse tags and the boundary tags
serve clear and different purposes.
US National Forests are boundaries around land which contain many
uses(*), and landuse=forest is only one of
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
That'd have to be some super-script, aware of sightlines
What would you need besides elevation information in order to be able to
more or less do that?
___
Talk-us mailing list
On 8/18/2015 10:27 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
Some other mapper has updated the area to remove the old buildings and streets
and marked the area as under construction. All of that seems correct from what
I’ve read in the paper and what little I can see on the ground.
But it means the area differs
Hi all,
I really appreciate the productive discussion that ensued my initial
question!
In the mean time, a mapper approached me with concerns about my removing
the landuse tags from the National Forests in Utah, so I reverted those
changes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33419230 -- I
Hi,
A colleague pointed out that there are areas (towns) where U turn
restrictions are in place that govern all streets in that area. I wonder:
1) Does anyone know if this is common? I don't have any anecdotal
experience.
2) Is there a known tagging scheme for this? Area based traffic
19 matches
Mail list logo
