Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
On 19. November 2010 13:40 Andrew Errington [a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk] wrote: > I wish to tag an island with its name. Except that the name refers to a > group of islands, and each of these islands have their own name. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.24164&lon=131.86871&zoom=16&layers=M > The name is Dokdo (-do is Korean for 'island'), but this is the name of > the group of islands (two main ones and some smaller named rocks around > them). There is no single island called Dokdo. The two main islands in > the group are Seodo (Seo is 'West') and Dongdo (Dong is 'East'). > So I suppose there are two questions: > 1) What is the correct way to tag a group of islands with their well-known > name when the names of the individual islands are not well-known or > commonly used and are different to the name of the group? > 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so, > why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly? 1) Imho it's mapped correctly using a multipolygon relation. 2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't and imho shouldn't try to control this. Two examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963669 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963209 Happy mapping Willi ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Willi wrote: >> 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so, >> why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly? > 2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't > and imho shouldn't try to control this. > > Two examples: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963669 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/963209 Since it's obviously not rendered in any renderer., the question is how to make this renderable, not how to write the relation in a nice way.. This problem exist all over and a fix is badly needed, e.g. 1. buildings/entrances 2. islands 3. metro stations/entrances 4. water areas -- /emj ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to tag a (main) entrance to a large feature?
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Mike N. wrote: >> I don't know if it's legal to park here and walk around the gate into >> the park, but assume for the sake of argument that it is. How do we >> tell the router to instead use the main entrance to the south? > > In this case, the way in the photo can be properly tagged as a > service/driveway and /or track to help direct routers to another entrance. I > recently found this exact situation where hordes of lost park-goers coming > from the north were directed to the back gate which is permanently locked. I > was able to tag the back entrance as service/driveway because the gate is > never open and the only normal access is for the ranger - even though I > think the road is still named as Lake Road in the official county records > (which I cannot access). > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=41.85594&mlon=-89.9528&zoom=15&layers=M Hum... Should private access roads really render as ordinary roads in zoom 14 and less? Bug in mapnik? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
Erik Johansson schrieb: On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Willi wrote: 2) If the answer is 'use a relation', have I done it properly, and if so, why isn't Mapnik rendering the name properly? 2) If and how a feature is rendered is up to the renderer. The mapper can't and imho shouldn't try to control this. Since it's obviously not rendered in any renderer., the question is how to make this renderable, not how to write the relation in a nice way.. This problem exist all over and a fix is badly needed, e.g. 1. buildings/entrances 2. islands 3. metro stations/entrances 4. water areas Well at least 1 and 3 (site relation with apropriate roles) as well as 2 (multipolygon archipelago) _are_ yet renderable - it just has to be done - by the renderer. As said above. So the answer could only be: ticket / patch for mapnik, osmarender, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
what are people doing for this? the truck oriented access tags in the wiki are oriented towards UK legal categories whereas i'm basically looking at a simple sign that says "no trucks". the wiki would have me use goods=no hgv=no whereas truck=no seems like a logical extension of the current access tags. thanks, richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck? You're correct that HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does "truck" have one in the US? If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count? What something like an El Camino? Cheers, Andy * Westminster Council via Google reckons that: The technical definition of an HGV is a 'mechanically propelled vehicle that is: * of a construction primarily suited for the carriage of goods or burden of any kind; and * designed or adapted to have a maximum weight exceeding 3,500 kilograms when in normal use and travelling on a road laden.' ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 11/19/10 8:27 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck? You're correct that HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does "truck" have one in the US? If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count? What something like an El Camino? that would be up to the local ordinance, but generally pickup trucks and smaller things don't count for a no truck sign. there are way too many people using those for their personal transportation. also truck prohibitions are not intended to prevent lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new refrigerator) and the like from carrying out normal business. i guess you could say truck=destination even though the sign says no trucks. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 19/11/2010 13:40, Richard Welty wrote: On 11/19/10 8:27 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: It might seem a silly question, but what's a truck? You're correct that HGV in the UK has a specific legal meaning*, but does "truck" have one in the US? If it doesn't, would something like a Ford F-series count? What something like an El Camino? that would be up to the local ordinance, but generally pickup trucks and smaller things don't count for a no truck sign. From memory in the Western US I've seen "no trucks" and then in smaller writing "over 6 tons" or similar. Some kind of note about what the local rules are likely to be (or something explicit, if it's explicit). I'm sure other people can suggest how they'd tag max weight for a road (it's not something that I've done). Cheers, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to tag a (main) entrance to a large feature?
2010/11/19 Erik Johansson : >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=41.85594&mlon=-89.9528&zoom=15&layers=M > > > Hum... > > Should private access roads really render as ordinary roads in zoom 14 > and less? Bug in mapnik? I think you are right. It would probably better not to display them at all in low zooms, where no access is displayed. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
2010/11/19 Nathan Edgars II : > Probably use a multipolygon with place=island. -1. I agree for the multipolygon but I wouldn't put place=island, because IMHO that would mean that there is one island where in this example in the real world there are actually two. I would simply put the name in the relation and the islands as role outer. Then the single islands would have the place=island and their name. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > what are people doing for this? the truck oriented access tags in the > wiki are oriented towards UK legal categories whereas i'm basically > looking at a simple sign that says "no trucks". the wiki would have > me use Another problem is that even if the sign says no trucks, the actual legal status is probably *=destination or *=delivery (what's the difference?) since otherwise there's no way for a moving truck, for example, to get to a residence. Add to this that different places have different rules (sometimes, like on NYC parkways, it's 'no commercial vehicles', while I've seen 'no trucks over * gross vehicle weight' and 'no vehicles requiring a commercial driver's license') and it's a big mess. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:02 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/11/19 Nathan Edgars II : >> Probably use a multipolygon with place=island. +1 place=island is used to identify noteworthy places that are isolated enough to justify a label at a low zoom. Unfortunately, people started applying it to tiny non-isolated islands (eg in rivers), so the rendering seems to be suppressed. So it would be wrong to apply it to a single island in a group, and correct to apply it to a multipolygon. Which doesn't mean it will be rendered, however. These, for instance are universally known as the Scilly Isles. Except on OSM. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.92&lon=-6.306&zoom=9&layers=M Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
2010/11/19 Richard Mann : > place=island is used to identify noteworthy places that are isolated > enough to justify a label at a low zoom. ...So it would be wrong to apply it > to a single island in a group... I don't know where you get this impression from (especially that place=island is used for more then one island), it can't be from the wiki: "An island is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water and isolated from other significant landmasses." cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
HGV = Heavy Goods Vehicle. It seems to be broadly identical (give or take a couple of tons/tonnes) with a US "truck" so hgv=destination (or hgv=no) would seem to be correct Feel free to add a note on the wiki that hgv is en-gb for "truck" Or feel free to use truck=destination (or truck=no), and if it catches on put it in the wiki. hgv is currently running at about 2 uses in Europe, truck only 10 Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/11/19 Richard Mann : > "An island is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water > and isolated from other significant landmasses." That definition is correct - for single islands. "piece" should probably be changed to "piece (or group of pieces)" to make it work for archipelagos, and fit with the general intention of the key (to determine what priority should be given to labels) Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
2010/11/19 SomeoneElse : > From memory in the Western US I've seen "no trucks" and then in smaller > writing "over 6 tons" or similar. Some kind of note about what the local > rules are likely to be (or something explicit, if it's explicit). I'm sure > other people can suggest how they'd tag max weight for a road (it's not > something that I've done). Yes, I'd say that's best represented with maxweight. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maxweight The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
2010/11/19 Richard Mann : > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> 2010/11/19 Richard Mann : >> "An island is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water >> and isolated from other significant landmasses." > > That definition is correct - for single islands. "piece" should > probably be changed to "piece (or group of pieces)" to make it work > for archipelagos, and fit with the general intention of the key (to > determine what priority should be given to labels) I don't agree with extending the definition. If you want to tag something that is different from what is described, invent another tag (place=archipelago for example). IMHO those would be better fitting in natural anyway (like bay, etc.). Place used to be for settlements (which is since "locality" probably not true anymore). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Richard Mann wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> 2010/11/19 Richard Mann : >> "An island is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water >> and isolated from other significant landmasses." > > That definition is correct - for single islands. "piece" should > probably be changed to "piece (or group of pieces)" to make it work > for archipelagos, and fit with the general intention of the key (to > determine what priority should be given to labels) It's not exactly unheard of to extend the class "island" this way; for instance search http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/ for name "islands" and feature class island. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Groups of islands, how to tag?
2010/11/19 Nathan Edgars II : >> That definition is correct - for single islands. "piece" should >> probably be changed to "piece (or group of pieces)" to make it work >> for archipelagos, and fit with the general intention of the key (to >> determine what priority should be given to labels) > > It's not exactly unheard of to extend the class "island" this way; for > instance search http://geonames.usgs.gov/domestic/ for name "islands" > and feature class island. I wouldn't do it like this, even if the USGS does it like this. I would use island for a single island and something else for a group of islands. I wouldn't use "islands" either, because that is too close. Archipelago sounds OK. I wouldn't even require a place tag. A name on the multipolygon could be sufficient (as suggested in my first post). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation > has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different > value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki. > > No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the "Heavy Goods Vehicle" definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a different name just because the speed limit is different in each country: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 19 Nov 2010, at 8:58 , Pieren wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation > has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different > value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki. > > > No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the "Heavy Goods > Vehicle" definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same > thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. > Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a > different name just because the speed limit is different in each country: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions fully agree, the legislation is very similar in US and Europe. just the weight limits differ. hgv is a generic term yhst we shouldn't use 3.5t. And in some countries there are 2 limits. one for small trucks and real heavy trucks ( around 7t). usually only the heavy trucks are limited. trucks above 3.5t need a different drivers license but are rarely limited for access. a tag like hgv shouldn't have a exact weight limit. instead a router can use the implicit limits defined by local legislation or aan explicit limit on signs > > Pieren > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight limit. I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to turn around. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US From :mailto:ascho...@gmail.com Date :Fri Nov 19 11:25:38 America/Chicago 2010 On 19 Nov 2010, at 8:58 , Pieren wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation > has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different > value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki. > > > No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the "Heavy Goods > Vehicle" definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same > thing. This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. > Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a > different name just because the speed limit is different in each country: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Maxspeed > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions fully agree, the legislation is very similar in US and Europe. just the weight limits differ. hgv is a generic term yhst we shouldn't use 3.5t. And in some countries there are 2 limits. one for small trucks and real heavy trucks ( around 7t). usually only the heavy trucks are limited. trucks above 3.5t need a different drivers license but are rarely limited for access. a tag like hgv shouldn't have a exact weight limit. instead a router can use the implicit limits defined by local legislation or aan explicit limit on signs > > Pieren > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 11/19/2010 07:40 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > also truck prohibitions are not > intended to prevent > lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new > refrigerator) and > the like from carrying out normal business. This is true only if the "Except Local Deliveries" or similar add-on signs are used in conjunction with the "No Trucks" sign. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
2010/11/19 Pieren : >> The hgv-class is defined for vehicles over 3.5 t, if your legislation >> has different weight limits I'd suggest to introduce a different >> value/key and document that on the access-page in the wiki. >> > > No, why ? If the min/max weight is different, then improve the "Heavy Goods > Vehicle" definition to local laws and don't create a new key saying the same > thing. it is not the same thing. Do you have "goods" in France? In Germany we don't have this class and nobody had the idea to "improve the definition" and invent a use for something that isn't applicable. > This will simplify to live of editors, developers and data consumers. no, it would horribly complicate their lifes, as they would have to figure out for every feature where it is in order to understand the meaning of the tag. It is not impossible but it is time consuming. > Look what was done for primaries, secondaries, etc. They don't have a > different name just because the speed limit is different in each country: because they don't imply any speed limit. Speedlimits are maxspeed. It is a difference if a abstract key like cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight limit. I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to turn around. we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just use maxweight where it's appropriate. the no trucks sign i saw yesterday in Schenectady (on Wendell Avenue) was clearly intended to prevent big trucks from using a quiet residential street as a shortcut. there was no posted weight limit on the sign. probably if the wiki entry for hgv were revised to reflect weight limits are per applicable ordinance that'd do the job. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 11/19/10 2:47 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On 11/19/2010 07:40 AM, Richard Welty wrote: also truck prohibitions are not intended to prevent lawn services, delivery services (UPS, Fedex, the guy with the new refrigerator) and the like from carrying out normal business. This is true only if the "Except Local Deliveries" or similar add-on signs are used in conjunction with the "No Trucks" sign. this is going to vary based on local ordinance. i would be really, really shocked if Schenectady intended that UPS, Fedex, and Sears were denied access to part of Wendell Avenue for legitimate business reasons. richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: >> >> I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight >> limit. I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to >> trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, >> because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to >> turn around. >> > we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in > these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that > fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just > use maxweight where it's appropriate. At the other extreme are signs like this: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.25903,-81.764159&spn=0.031828,0.082397&t=k&z=15&layer=c&cbll=28.259019,-81.764282&panoid=Xn0O_XTCa26l3-SxRHJrkA&cbp=12,323.76,,0,11.47 Usually you see them at bridges (since different truck configurations will put different loads on the bridge) but I don't recall there being a bridge on this road. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] tagging no truck access in US
On 11/19/2010 06:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Richard Welty > wrote: >> On 11/19/10 1:25 PM, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: >>> >>> I agree that it makes more sense to have a separate tag for the weight >>> limit. I would also not be surprised to find certain roads forbidden to >>> trucks over a certain length, or forbidding trucks with tandem trailers, >>> because the road in question doesn't have room for a vehicle that size to >>> turn around. >>> >> we already have maxweight, and weight limits are common in >> these parts (i suspect the county is trying to make sure that >> fully loaded gravel trucks are limited to state highways). i just >> use maxweight where it's appropriate. > > At the other extreme are signs like this: > http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.25903,-81.764159&spn=0.031828,0.082397&t=k&z=15&layer=c&cbll=28.259019,-81.764282&panoid=Xn0O_XTCa26l3-SxRHJrkA&cbp=12,323.76,,0,11.47 > Usually you see them at bridges (since different truck configurations > will put different loads on the bridge) but I don't recall there being > a bridge on this road. Bridges aren't the only highways susceptible to load stress, however. Forest service, county and especially privately owned roads are often heavily patched chipseal and can potentially contain some really steep grades that simply make some configurations physically impassable or unaffordably expensive to maintain if they are subjected to heavier loads. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
