Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pieren]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Sam Vekemans
wrote:

> Hi,
> For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
> direction of the way was not taken into account.  So the tag
> 'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.
>
>
And if the information would have been present then you would have added the
oneway tag as preset ? I'm sometimes scared about the poor experience of
some people in charge of big imports. Because again, the water flow is a
very old convention in OSM, probably since the beginning of the waterway
documentation on the wiki. I cannot imagine people defining tagging presets
for mass imports without checking the existing conventions (or minimum
agreements) first...

Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Cartinus]

On Sunday 12 September 2010 01:24:51 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 7:10 PM, David Groom  
wrote:
> > I think the difference can be summed up as:
> >
> > With the tagging of trees the definition in the wiki was unclear; "lone
> > or significant" can mean different things to different people.
> >
> > With the tagging of waterways the comment that "the way should be drawn
> > in the direction of the water flow" is quite clear, specific, and not
> > really open to any misinterpretation.
>
> That's true, but it's not the whole story. Much of the problem with
> trees is that enough people had tagged them without knowing what the
> wiki said, and so the actual tagging deviated from the documentation
> on the wiki. That's also the case with waterway direction.

If you think that the current convention is not mentioned in enough places in 
the wiki, then you can easily add it to more wiki pages. Nobody is going to 
complain about that.

If you find rivers not mapped according to the current convention, you can fix 
them. Nobody is going to complain about that.

If you are going to advocate the misuse of a tag that means something else, 
then people will complain. Not only because it is misuse, but also because it 
doesn't solve your problem. People mapped those rivers "wrong" because they 
either didn't know the direction of flow, didn't care for the direction of 
flow or were not aware of the current convention. Changing the current 
convention does have _absolutely_ no effect on any of these causes.

Last but not least: What people want to change about trees is after the 
tagging changed. That is documenting what happens. What you want to change 
about rivers, is trying to force your world view onto other people. This last 
is generally considered bad form in OSM.


-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Tobias Knerr]

Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
> about trees and waterways.

Even the opponent(s) of changing the wiki's tree definition didn't try
to argue that the wiki definition was better than the alternative. There
was disagreement over whether changing it would cause a loss of
information, and whether it could be tolerated.

With waterways, some actually seem to like the current definition.

So the difference is that the wiki definition for natural=tree is quite
unanimously considered a bad choice. This makes changing the definition
more attractive than trying to increase acceptance of the definition. If
the definition itself is considered decent, however, educating mappers
and fixing existing errors can be a more appealing option.

Tobias Knerr

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Sam Vekemans
 wrote:

> For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
> direction of the way was not taken into account.  So the tag
> 'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.

oneway=yes has nothing to do with river flow, oneway indicate a legal
issue for transport (in river case it can apply to segment of a river
that is allowed for boat only in oneway).

If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
what would be the reference ?

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Richard Welty]

 On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:

If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
what would be the reference ?


you'd want it to work with respect to the direction of the way, as
is done with oneway.

a waterflow=* tag would probably look very much like oneway,
with -1 for flow which is the reverse of the direction of
the way.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

With the current standard, how do you add a source tag for the
direction? source:direction=I dropped dye into the canal and watched
it dissipate would conflict with a direction=* tag.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[John F. Eldredge]

What properties of a way do you look at to determine whether it was mapped in 
the proper direction?  Do you have to check whether the node IDs increase in 
the desired direction, or is there an easier way?  Also, if it turns out that 
part or all of a way was mapped in the wrong direction, what is the best way of 
correcting that direction, short of deleting the problem section and remapping 
it?

---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From  :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date  :Sun Sep 12 11:29:11 America/Chicago 2010


Sam Vekemans
 wrote:

> For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
> direction of the way was not taken into account.  So the tag
> 'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.

oneway=yes has nothing to do with river flow, oneway indicate a legal
issue for transport (in river case it can apply to segment of a river
that is allowed for boat only in oneway).

If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
what would be the reference ?

--
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

John F. Eldredge  wrote:

> What properties of a way do you look at to determine whether it was mapped
> in the proper direction?  Do you have to check whether the node IDs
> increase in the desired direction, or is there an easier way?  Also, if
> it turns out that part or all of a way was mapped in the wrong
> direction, what is the best way of correcting that direction, short of
> deleting the problem section and remapping it?

Using JOSM it's a one click.
JOSM show the drawing direction of ways (with arrows when selected or
always depending on settings) and a simple button reverse the selected
way(s).

Potlach has a little icon with an arrow that show he "global direction"
of the selected way and the same icon reverse the way.
Not so easy but not difficult.

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Richard Welty  wrote:

>   On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> > If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
> > And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
> > what would be the reference ?
> >
> you'd want it to work with respect to the direction of the way, as
> is done with oneway.
> 
> a waterflow=* tag would probably look very much like oneway,
> with -1 for flow which is the reverse of the direction of
> the way.

So the reference for direction would be the direction (drawing) of he
way. It would be close to what it's now as it's this drawing direction
that should indicate the flow.
But it would be explicit.

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Cartinus]

On Sunday 12 September 2010 19:39:01 Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Richard Welty  wrote:
> >   On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> > > If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
> > > And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
> > > what would be the reference ?
> >
> > you'd want it to work with respect to the direction of the way, as
> > is done with oneway.
> >
> > a waterflow=* tag would probably look very much like oneway,
> > with -1 for flow which is the reverse of the direction of
> > the way.
>
> So the reference for direction would be the direction (drawing) of he
> way. It would be close to what it's now as it's this drawing direction
> that should indicate the flow.
> But it would be explicit.

And then you would only tag the special cases. We don't put oneway=no on every 
road either.

-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[John F. Eldredge]

I am using my phone at the moment, not my PC, so I can't test this.  What 
happens if the way, or section of a way, that you have selected has a portion 
mapped in one direction, and another portion mapped in the opposite direction 
(which could easily happen if different parts of the way had been mapped by 
different people)?  Do you get an error message, or do JOSM and Potlatch go by 
the majority direction?

---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From  :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date  :Sun Sep 12 12:39:02 America/Chicago 2010


John F. Eldredge  wrote:

> What properties of a way do you look at to determine whether it was mapped
> in the proper direction?  Do you have to check whether the node IDs
> increase in the desired direction, or is there an easier way?  Also, if
> it turns out that part or all of a way was mapped in the wrong
> direction, what is the best way of correcting that direction, short of
> deleting the problem section and remapping it?

Using JOSM it's a one click.
JOSM show the drawing direction of ways (with arrows when selected or
always depending on settings) and a simple button reverse the selected
way(s).

Potlach has a little icon with an arrow that show he "global direction"
of the selected way and the same icon reverse the way.
Not so easy but not difficult.

--
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:38 PM, John F. Eldredge  wrote:
> I am using my phone at the moment, not my PC, so I can't test this.  What 
> happens if the way, or section of a way, that you have selected has a portion 
> mapped in one direction, and another portion mapped in the opposite direction 
> (which could easily happen if different parts of the way had been mapped by 
> different people)?  Do you get an error message, or do JOSM and Potlatch go 
> by the majority direction?

Then it's mapped incorrectly. If you have a way from A to B and you
extend it from A, it now goes from C to B. If the nodes went A-B-C the
portion between A and B would be mapped twice.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

John F. Eldredge  wrote:

> I am using my phone at the moment, not my PC, so I can't test this.  What
> happens if the way, or section of a way, that you have selected has a
> portion mapped in one direction, and another portion mapped in the
> opposite direction (which could easily happen if different parts of the
> way had been mapped by different people)?  Do you get an error message,
> or do JOSM and Potlatch go by the majority direction?

Don't know for Potlach but JOSM revert all ways selected. In the context
you expose, you must select only the portion in the wrong way then
revert or you can merge wrong way section with a right way section (JOSM
ask you the direction).

If the river (multiple sections) has been include in the waterway
relation (1), you can easily check sections with JOSM by opening the
relation window and sort the way, it qwill display the continuity (with
small icons on the right) so you can see if the whole river is correctly
ordered (all ways in the same direction).

note :
In France we began using widely this relation tag and it's also very
good tool to check river mapping advancement and to use efficiently
waterway (2).


(1) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Waterway

(2) http://beta.letuffe.org/cron/etat-cours-eau/suivi-cours-eau.php
 http://beta.letuffe.org/ressources/cartes/hydrographie-france.png

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Cartinus  wrote:
> And then you would only tag the special cases. We don't put oneway=no on every
> road either.

But, in my experience, we do put oneway=yes on every motorway.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[John F. Eldredge]

Tagging oneway=yes on a motorway is an example of tagging a special case.  The 
general assumption on roads is that they are two-way unless tagged otherwise.  
Tagging the motorway as oneway=yes makes sure that routing calculations will 
work correctly.  Sections of motorways sometimes become two-way (usually with a 
safety barrier down the middle) when the other half of the motorway is closed 
for road construction.

---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From  :mailto:nerou...@gmail.com
Date  :Sun Sep 12 13:53:47 America/Chicago 2010


On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Cartinus  wrote:
> And then you would only tag the special cases. We don't put oneway=no on every
> road either.

But, in my experience, we do put oneway=yes on every motorway.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:09 PM, John F. Eldredge  wrote:
> Tagging oneway=yes on a motorway is an example of tagging a special case.  
> The general assumption on roads is that they are two-way unless tagged 
> otherwise.  Tagging the motorway as oneway=yes makes sure that routing 
> calculations will work correctly.  Sections of motorways sometimes become 
> two-way (usually with a safety barrier down the middle) when the other half 
> of the motorway is closed for road construction.

Actually highway=motorway implies oneway=yes:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Nathan Edgars II 
wrote:

> Actually highway=motorway implies oneway=yes:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway

And river implies boat=yes...

Those are special cases not the standard assumption for highway=* or
waterway=*

Idon't really understand where we are going in this discussion.

Did you want to use oneway for river ?

Or did you want a special tag to explicitly express rover flow (based on
the drawing direction) ?

I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
direction is flow direction) is allready there.
If they do not read the actual wiki, why do they read the new one ?

But perhaps should the wiki be more precise on this point.

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange  wrote:
> I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
> direction is flow direction) is allready there.
> If they do not read the actual wiki, why do they read the new one ?

This isn't just for newbies. I've been here for almost a year and I
just found out about this convention a few weeks ago. I'm the kind of
person that doesn't bother to read the manual unless necessary, and
the meaning of most tags is clear from their rendering or name. A tag
like flow=downstream on waterways would have told me that I needed to
figure out what this tag means.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Nathan Edgars II 
wrote:

> > I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> > know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
> > direction is flow direction) is allready there.
> > If they do not read the actual wiki, why do they read the new one ?
> 
> This isn't just for newbies. I've been here for almost a year and I
> just found out about this convention a few weeks ago. I'm the kind of
> person that doesn't bother to read the manual unless necessary, and
> the meaning of most tags is clear from their rendering or name. A tag
> like flow=downstream on waterways would have told me that I needed to
> figure out what this tag means.

Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ? 
You must read a "manual" to know that.

I we decide (not both of us, we must be more) to change river flow
convention (from drawing direction to flow tag), we're facing a problem
with river allready drawn correctly (a majority in France where we
conduct a project for that). We have to ask many user to redo their job
be adding a new tag.

On the orher side, a flow tag is explicit (but need to be read in the
manual, noone can invent it) and tell directly what is the flow
direction.

My point of view on the "problem" is that flow is not so important in
OSM. 
For example, I do not know map that render flow actually ; but it could
be in the future.

And also that users, to know that they must add a flow tag to river,
will have to read the wiki. And the actual wiki explain own thing works
for flow (drawing direction). 
In fact i do not believe adding this tag will help. 
In fact, i think it will change nothing. 
If people do not read the wiki they will continue to ignore conventions.

The only positive thing with flow tag would be to solve problem to know
if a river was mapped with its flow or not. But the negative seems to
heavy for me (need to modifying all existing river correctly mapped).

(note that i also do not allways reading f*** manual, but for OSM a use
a lot the wiki, doesnt mean i do not make mistake of course)

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[John F. Eldredge]

One type of map that would benefit from showing the direction of waterway flow 
would be one intended for use with canoes, rowboats, or other muscle-powered 
small boats.  Paddling in the same direction as a river's current is much less 
effort than paddling against the current.

---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From  :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date  :Sun Sep 12 15:37:45 America/Chicago 2010


Nathan Edgars II 
wrote:

> > I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> > know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
> > direction is flow direction) is allready there.
> > If they do not read the actual wiki, why do they read the new one ?
>
> This isn't just for newbies. I've been here for almost a year and I
> just found out about this convention a few weeks ago. I'm the kind of
> person that doesn't bother to read the manual unless necessary, and
> the meaning of most tags is clear from their rendering or name. A tag
> like flow=downstream on waterways would have told me that I needed to
> figure out what this tag means.

Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
You must read a "manual" to know that.

I we decide (not both of us, we must be more) to change river flow
convention (from drawing direction to flow tag), we're facing a problem
with river allready drawn correctly (a majority in France where we
conduct a project for that). We have to ask many user to redo their job
be adding a new tag.

On the orher side, a flow tag is explicit (but need to be read in the
manual, noone can invent it) and tell directly what is the flow
direction.

My point of view on the "problem" is that flow is not so important in
OSM.
For example, I do not know map that render flow actually ; but it could
be in the future.

And also that users, to know that they must add a flow tag to river,
will have to read the wiki. And the actual wiki explain own thing works
for flow (drawing direction).
In fact i do not believe adding this tag will help.
In fact, i think it will change nothing.
If people do not read the wiki they will continue to ignore conventions.

The only positive thing with flow tag would be to solve problem to know
if a river was mapped with its flow or not. But the negative seems to
heavy for me (need to modifying all existing river correctly mapped).

(note that i also do not allways reading f*** manual, but for OSM a use
a lot the wiki, doesnt mean i do not make mistake of course)

--
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to 
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange  wrote:
> Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
> You must read a "manual" to know that.

By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
know about it, at least you aren't doing anything wrong by leaving it
off.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:46 PM, John F. Eldredge  wrote:
> One type of map that would benefit from showing the direction of waterway 
> flow would be one intended for use with canoes, rowboats, or other 
> muscle-powered small boats.  Paddling in the same direction as a river's 
> current is much less effort than paddling against the current.

It's also useful from an environmental standpoint: where does
pollution from this factory end up?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tall masts supported by guy wires

[Steve Bennett]

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 12:00 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:

> (I am not really sure if this is nice: tagging as a tower, which it
> technically isn't, and then specify in the tower-subtag, which kind of
> "non-tower" it really is. Though we (? some?) do this with tunnels as
> well (I don't actually, I prefer covered)).

Personally I think this is fine. It may not be perfectly "semantically
clean", but it poses no difficulties in terms of implementation in
editors, renderers etc. So, this works fine:

man_made=tower
tower=radio_mast

One test to apply when considering stuff like this: what would happen
if a renderer supported "man_made=tower" but none of the sub-tags.
Would it be the end of the world if a radio mast and an air traffic
control tower were rendered the same? (Answer: no, it would be
perfectly fine)

> Another approach would be to tag man_made=antenna (or mast) with maybe
> other subtags.

That would be fine too. The only risk is that more often, the thing
doesn't get rendered at all, because it's yet one more tag that
everything needs to support.

Steve

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] social facility

[Steve Bennett]

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Sean Horgan  wrote:
> social_facility=emergency_shelter (a shelter for homeless people e.g. in
> case of a disaster)

The description there looks horribly confusing to me. The words
"homeless shelter" leap off the page, even though that's not what it's
describing.

> social_facility=emergency

That tag strikes me as not intuitive - you need an accompanying
description to have any idea what it's describing.

That's my first glance reaction, which is worth what you paid for it.

Steve

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Nathan Edgars II 
wrote:

> > Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
> > You must read a "manual" to know that.
> 
> By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
> know about it, at least you aren't doing anything wrong by leaving it
> off.

Thats a good point.

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging