Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Volker Schmidt]

I don't see why this discussion is so complicated.
OSM tags are based on British English terms for historic reasons.
In that contest there is a clean-cut distinction between a roundabout and a
mini-roundabout:
Quote from Wikipedia: "Mini-roundabouts can be a painted circle or a low
dome but must be fully traversable." (from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_roundabout#Mini-roundabouts)
A small round-about, that has an obstacle in the middle (example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pacionfi.JPG), is not a mini_roundabout,
but a roundabout, albeit a small one.

Volker
(Padova, Itlay)

On 9 May 2012 04:10, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> The problems with this tag are the same with most tags. The history
> goes something like:
>
> 1) The original creator has a very specific real-world object in mind:
> painted roundabout patterns on intersections in their local area
> 2) Other people in the local area recognise this real-world concept
> and also apply the tag.
> 3) Soon it makes its way into editors, renderers etc.
> 4) People in other parts of the world see this tag and think they should
> use it.
> 5) They deduce what they think are the salient features: it's small,
> it's painted, you can drive over it physically, you can drive over it
> legally...
> 6) Different kinds of real world objects get mapped with the tag, that
> include some, but not all of the above salient features (eg,
> roundabouts you can drive over, but are physically raised; or
> roundabouts that are just painted but legally you must not drive over
> them...)
> 7) People notice the contradiction between the (poor) documentation
> and current practice, and try to change it
> 8) People who used the tag in step 6 object, because now it doesn't
> match the way *they* use the tag.
>
> I'm not sure what the moral of the story here is, except that whoever
> creates the tag originally has the easiest job, because the tags match
> up beautifully with their local environment. (See highway=footway,
> highway=cycleway, highway=bridleway, which actually appear as words on
> signs in the UK - but compare the difficulty of applying them to
> somewhere like Australia)
>
> I kind of think the only real solution is to have a fairly loose
> coupling between regions about the definition of tags, and tight
> cohesion within regions. So highway=mini_roundabout should universally
> mean something like "small roundabout you could probably drive over",
> but within a single region (either a country, or perhaps smaller), it
> should have a much stricter definition, depending on local road laws,
> building practices etc.
>
> (We do this already with tags like highway=motorway and
> highway=cycleway, but we could be much more systematic.)
>
> Steve
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Erik Johansson  wrote:
> > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Philip Barnes 
> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 13:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Nathan Mills  wrote:
> >>> > So this is not/should not be a mini_roundabout? It seems a little
> silly to
> >>> > call it anything else, since the city just dug a hole in the center
> of the
> >>> > existing intersection, built a circular curb, and planted a tree:
> >>> >
> >>> > http://g.co/maps/e2gsv
> >>> >
> >>> > What about this one? Also a full on roundabout?
> >>> >
> >>> > http://g.co/maps/d6n74
> >>> >
> >>> > This looks more like a roundabout to me:
> >>> >
> >>> > http://g.co/maps/hnbp9
> >>>
> >>> All three are roundabouts, yes.
> >> All 3 are roundabouts, none of them a mini-roundabouts.
> >>
> >> The point of a mini-roundabout is that they can be driven over, hence
> >> whilst cars are supposed to go around them and many are 'speed-hump
> >> raised' to encourage this behaviour. Trucks can pass over them as many
> >> are in places where a truck cannot get around otherwise.
> >>
> >> The first 2 should be mini-roundabouts, as a truck is likely to have
> >> serious issues with them. I cannot imagine that tree will last too long.
> >>
> >> This is a mini-roundabout, which you can see is raised slightly
> >> http://g.co/maps/hm49m
> >> Actually its part of the magic roundabout, which is a roundabout you can
> >> go around in either direction, and at each intersection there is a
> >> mini-roundabout. On osm its here, http://osm.org/go/eumbs5ZIw--
> >>
> >> Phil
> >
> >
> > But Nathan does have a point, mini-roundabouts are not a specifically
> > good name, and the current docs will only make more people tag small
> > roundabouts as highway=mini_roundabouts..
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > /emj
> >
> > ___
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://list

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Vonwald]

I guess(!) the discussion is so complicated, because some people
misinterpreted for whatever reason a mini-roundabout with a small
roundabout, tagged it as mini and now don't want to fix all their
existing tags.

I can understand (but not support) the latter, but I don't understand
why we shouldn't tag new minis correctly. Maybe because drawing a
circle and tagging it with highway=* and junction=roundabout is more
work than simply placing a node and adding highway=mini_roundabout?
This might be a reason, but it doesn't make it right.

Does a plugin for JOSM exist, which replaces a single node on the
connection of two ways, by a circle? Shouldn't be too hard to
implement and might convince a few.

Martin

2012/5/9 Volker Schmidt :
> I don't see why this discussion is so complicated.
> OSM tags are based on British English terms for historic reasons.
> In that contest there is a clean-cut distinction between a roundabout and a
> mini-roundabout:
> Quote from Wikipedia: "Mini-roundabouts can be a painted circle or a low
> dome but must be fully traversable." (from:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_roundabout#Mini-roundabouts)
> A small round-about, that has an obstacle in the middle (example:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pacionfi.JPG), is not a mini_roundabout,
> but a roundabout, albeit a small one.
>
> Volker
> (Padova, Itlay)
>
>
> On 9 May 2012 04:10, Steve Bennett  wrote:
>>
>> The problems with this tag are the same with most tags. The history
>> goes something like:
>>
>> 1) The original creator has a very specific real-world object in mind:
>> painted roundabout patterns on intersections in their local area
>> 2) Other people in the local area recognise this real-world concept
>> and also apply the tag.
>> 3) Soon it makes its way into editors, renderers etc.
>> 4) People in other parts of the world see this tag and think they should
>> use it.
>> 5) They deduce what they think are the salient features: it's small,
>> it's painted, you can drive over it physically, you can drive over it
>> legally...
>> 6) Different kinds of real world objects get mapped with the tag, that
>> include some, but not all of the above salient features (eg,
>> roundabouts you can drive over, but are physically raised; or
>> roundabouts that are just painted but legally you must not drive over
>> them...)
>> 7) People notice the contradiction between the (poor) documentation
>> and current practice, and try to change it
>> 8) People who used the tag in step 6 object, because now it doesn't
>> match the way *they* use the tag.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the moral of the story here is, except that whoever
>> creates the tag originally has the easiest job, because the tags match
>> up beautifully with their local environment. (See highway=footway,
>> highway=cycleway, highway=bridleway, which actually appear as words on
>> signs in the UK - but compare the difficulty of applying them to
>> somewhere like Australia)
>>
>> I kind of think the only real solution is to have a fairly loose
>> coupling between regions about the definition of tags, and tight
>> cohesion within regions. So highway=mini_roundabout should universally
>> mean something like "small roundabout you could probably drive over",
>> but within a single region (either a country, or perhaps smaller), it
>> should have a much stricter definition, depending on local road laws,
>> building practices etc.
>>
>> (We do this already with tags like highway=motorway and
>> highway=cycleway, but we could be much more systematic.)
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Erik Johansson  wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Philip Barnes 
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 13:30 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Nathan Mills  wrote:
>> >>> > So this is not/should not be a mini_roundabout? It seems a little
>> >>> > silly to
>> >>> > call it anything else, since the city just dug a hole in the center
>> >>> > of the
>> >>> > existing intersection, built a circular curb, and planted a tree:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://g.co/maps/e2gsv
>> >>> >
>> >>> > What about this one? Also a full on roundabout?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://g.co/maps/d6n74
>> >>> >
>> >>> > This looks more like a roundabout to me:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://g.co/maps/hnbp9
>> >>>
>> >>> All three are roundabouts, yes.
>> >> All 3 are roundabouts, none of them a mini-roundabouts.
>> >>
>> >> The point of a mini-roundabout is that they can be driven over, hence
>> >> whilst cars are supposed to go around them and many are 'speed-hump
>> >> raised' to encourage this behaviour. Trucks can pass over them as many
>> >> are in places where a truck cannot get around otherwise.
>> >>
>> >> The first 2 should be mini-roundabouts, as a truck is likely to have
>> >> serious issues with them. I cannot imagine that tree will last too
>> >> long.
>> >>
>> >> This is a mini-roundabout, which you can see is raised slightly
>> >> http://g.co/maps/hm49m
>> >> Actually its

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/9 Martin Vonwald :
> I guess(!) the discussion is so complicated, because some people
> misinterpreted for whatever reason a mini-roundabout with a small
> roundabout, tagged it as mini and now don't want to fix all their
> existing tags.


+1


> Does a plugin for JOSM exist, which replaces a single node on the
> connection of two ways, by a circle?


I am not aware of a plugin, but you can draw a way with 2 nodes
(diameter) and hit "SHIFT+O", this will create a circle (you can set
the default node amount for the circle in advanced preferences). You'd
then tag this correctly, ensure that it points in the right direction
and that the roads connect ("j"oin), SHIFT+delete-click to remove the
inner parts of the roads and the center node.

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Volker Schmidt]

There is one annoying complication of the "real" roundabout in comparison
with the mini-roundabout (and for which I also have "cheated" in some
cases) and that is the handling of bus and cycle route relations. These
have to be split at every roundabout into two halves with role "forward".
>From that point of view it might me nice to have a node "small_roundabout",
but I see the immediate problem of how to define the difference between a
small and a normal roundabout.
The splitting of the roundabout for the route relations is also causing a
lot of unintentional "vandalism", where mappers add a roundabout, and do
not check for the existence of routes. I often do not add roundabouts (in
cities) because I don not want to disturb an existing public transport
network that I do not know (I am a "travelling" mapper in the sense that I
map what I encounter when riding my bike, also in areas far from home).

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Vonwald]

2012/5/9 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> I am not aware of a plugin, but you can draw a way with 2 nodes
> (diameter) and hit "SHIFT+O", this will create a circle (you can set
> the default node amount for the circle in advanced preferences). You'd
> then tag this correctly, ensure that it points in the right direction
> and that the roads connect ("j"oin), SHIFT+delete-click to remove the
> inner parts of the roads and the center node.

Thanks for the SHIFT+O - I didn't know that up to now.

Though this helps a lot, I doubt it would be easy enough - at least
not for everyone.

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Pieren]

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> The splitting of the roundabout for the route relations is also causing a
> lot of unintentional "vandalism", where mappers add a roundabout, and do not
> check for the existence of routes. I often do not add roundabouts (in
> cities) because I don not want to disturb an existing public transport
> network that I do not know (I am a "travelling" mapper in the sense that I
> map what I encounter when riding my bike, also in areas far from home).

In my country, we have a large consensus about this : we do not split
roundabouts for routes. Data consumers should manage the case.

Pieren

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Auctioneer

[John Sturdy]

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM, D4RK-L3G10N  wrote:
> Dear fellow mappers,
>
> I have created a proposal to map an auctioneer

Note that in Ireland (at least in the southwest, which is the only
part I've lived in) the term "auctioneer" is used to refer to what in
the UK are called "estate agents", i.e. people selling real estate,
not necessarily by auction.  So I think that, at least in Ireland,
"shop=auction_house" is less confusing.

(also added to talk page)

__John

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

[Tagging] symbol=* documentation?

[Ferenc Veres]

Hi,

Can somebody please write a brief documentation to

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:symbol

I'm not sure I understand the tag's use. We are currently discussing the
use on the Hungarian mailing list, would be great to have some pointers,
"standard".

IDEAS ONLY - please copy to wiki, adjust, or rewrite

The symbol tag is used for describing hiking trails by a human readable
name. It is usually accompanied with {{Key|osmc:symbol}}, which contains
a machine readable description of the hiking trail. Example:

symbol = red bar
osmc:symbol = red:white:red_bar

Implementing software may choose to use a local database for connecting
osmc:symbol to an icon and to a name, or it can choose to loud read the
value of the symbol tag, if no local naming is available.

A routing software may say: "Follow red bear for two kilometers".

Similar to {{Key|name}}, you can use international naming options too,
for example:

symbol = piros sáv   (this is Hungarian)
symbol:en = red bar

end of ideas---

However, usage of symbol= does not follow this translation method,
because some countries use English naming while others use local naming.
I'd recommend to follow "name:LANG" for consistency.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Slovakia/Hiking_routes#Hiking_Routes_Marker_Symbols

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/symbol#values

This seems to have some related documentation in German:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OSMC_Reitkarte#Wie_mu.C3.9F_eine_markierte_Route_aussehen.3F

Thanks,
Ferenc

-- 
Ferenc Veres
http://www.openstreetmap.hu

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/9 Volker Schmidt :
> There is one annoying complication of the "real" roundabout in comparison
> with the mini-roundabout (and for which I also have "cheated" in some cases)
> and that is the handling of bus and cycle route relations. These have to be
> split at every roundabout into two halves with role "forward".


yes, but that's also what the routes do in the real world: they only
make half a turn. What is exactly the problem? The routers for
instance should be able to deal nicely with a roundabout that is made
up of 2 or more smaller ways. (I am aware that not all do, but this is
less a data problem IMHO).


> The splitting of the roundabout for the route relations is also causing a
> lot of unintentional "vandalism", where mappers add a roundabout, and do not
> check for the existence of routes. I often do not add roundabouts (in
> cities) because I don not want to disturb an existing public transport
> network that I do not know


if the route is correct before you split the roundabout it should be
no problem even without local knowledge to adjust it after you split
the roundabout (you can see where the route enters and leaves the
roundabout from the route itself).

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/9 Pieren :
> In my country, we have a large consensus about this : we do not split
> roundabouts for routes. Data consumers should manage the case.


Around here we do split roundabouts for routes (as we don't want to
have a route on a way part where it isn't). Data consumers should
manage the case. ;-)

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] symbol=* documentation?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/9 Ferenc Veres :
> The symbol tag is used for describing hiking trails by a human readable
> name. It is usually accompanied with {{Key|osmc:symbol}}, which contains
> a machine readable description of the hiking trail. Example:
>
> symbol = red bar
> osmc:symbol = red:white:red_bar
>
> Implementing software may choose to use a local database for connecting
> osmc:symbol to an icon and to a name, or it can choose to loud read the
> value of the symbol tag, if no local naming is available.
> Similar to {{Key|name}}, you can use international naming options too,
> for example:
>
> symbol = piros sáv       (this is Hungarian)
> symbol:en = red bar


I think it would be better to use

symbol=red_bar
symbol:hr (or whatever the lc for Hungarian is) = piros_sáv

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] POI for Hotel

[Tobias Johansson]

> Somebody should  start an OpenServicesDatabase-project, that would
> host information about hotels, restaurants, cafes, museums and parks
> with detailed description of amenities provided along with user
> reviews.
>
> /Markus

Great idea +1

/Thod

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Anthony]

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Martin Vonwald  wrote:
> I can understand (but not support) the latter, but I don't understand
> why we shouldn't tag new minis correctly. Maybe because drawing a
> circle and tagging it with highway=* and junction=roundabout is more
> work than simply placing a node and adding highway=mini_roundabout?

Yes, exactly.  Same reason we don't usually split a way for a traffic
island that is 2 meters long.

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Anthony]

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> There is one annoying complication of the "real" roundabout in comparison
> with the mini-roundabout (and for which I also have "cheated" in some cases)
> and that is the handling of bus and cycle route relations. These have to be
> split at every roundabout into two halves with role "forward".
> From that point of view it might me nice to have a node "small_roundabout",
> but I see the immediate problem of how to define the difference between a
> small and a normal roundabout.

Just call it "roundabout", and define the difference as "I didn't feel
like micromapping it".  Anyone who cares enough can go and fix it
themselves.

At least then people people won't be as tempted to use the
"mini_roundabout" tag, which can be reserved for roundabouts which
meet those strict criteria outlined previously.

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Anthony]

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Anthony  wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Martin Vonwald  wrote:
>> I can understand (but not support) the latter, but I don't understand
>> why we shouldn't tag new minis correctly. Maybe because drawing a
>> circle and tagging it with highway=* and junction=roundabout is more
>> work than simply placing a node and adding highway=mini_roundabout?
>
> Yes, exactly.  Same reason we don't usually split a way for a traffic
> island that is 2 meters long.

It's also what the wiki tells us to do (in some places):  "Small
roundabouts are just represented as a node which is tagged
highway=mini_roundabout."
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout)

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2012/5/9 Anthony :
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Martin Vonwald  wrote:
>> I can understand (but not support) the latter, but I don't understand
>> why we shouldn't tag new minis correctly. Maybe because drawing a
>> circle and tagging it with highway=* and junction=roundabout is more
>> work than simply placing a node and adding highway=mini_roundabout?
>
> Yes, exactly.  Same reason we don't usually split a way for a traffic
> island that is 2 meters long.



This depends on the mapper and the general detail in the area and it
is done sometimes. There is more and less important spots of this
kind, and while 2 meters seem really small, most situations where the
island is 10 or 20 meters also are not mapped with split highways. On
the other hand if there is something on the island (e.g. subway
entrance, underground parking access, telephone booth, ...) you would
want to map also very small traffic islands because otherwise you will
get topology problems.

Cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Vonwald]

2012/5/9 Anthony :
> It's also what the wiki tells us to do (in some places):  "Small
> roundabouts are just represented as a node which is tagged
> highway=mini_roundabout."
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout)

Hm.. ok, this is just plain wrong. And what I really like (read: hate)
here, is that in the german article it reads "geringere Abmessungen
und ohne bauliche Trennung in der Mitte", i.e. it correctly states
there, that a mini-roundabout has to be small and the island must not
be separated. Is it really to much to ask, to update the english
article as well? (I know, the answer will be yes, but I say no).

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
> I am not aware of a plugin, but you can draw a way with 2 nodes
> (diameter) and hit "SHIFT+O", this will create a circle (you can set
> the default node amount for the circle in advanced preferences). You'd
> then tag this correctly, ensure that it points in the right direction
> and that the roads connect ("j"oin), SHIFT+delete-click to remove the
> inner parts of the roads and the center node.

There is a coming enhancement for Potlatch 2 that does something like
this. It's still waiting to be reviewed. It's actually a bit more
streamlined: you select the intersection node, move the mouse to where
the roundabout should be, press 'A', and voila. It even sorts out all
the tags and relations for you.

Steve

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] First bona fide mini-roundabout spotted

[Martin Vonwald]

2012/5/9 Steve Bennett :
> There is a coming enhancement for Potlatch 2 that does something like
> this. It's still waiting to be reviewed. It's actually a bit more
> streamlined: you select the intersection node, move the mouse to where
> the roundabout should be, press 'A', and voila. It even sorts out all
> the tags and relations for you.

That's exactly what I was thinking about. Any chance this will find
its way into JOSM any time soon?

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

Re: [Tagging] symbol=* documentation?

[Sander Deryckere]

In Belgium, we use it for some types of walking routes, and we do it this
way:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Walking_Routes#Natuurpunt

So we have standard symbols (square, rectangle, triangle ...) which are
combined with a colour tag. But sometimes a logo is used, and in that case,
we just name the logo.

The majority of hiking routes doesn't have those symbols though (those
six-sided signs are more common).

Cheers,
Sander

2012/5/9 Martin Koppenhoefer 

> 2012/5/9 Ferenc Veres :
> > The symbol tag is used for describing hiking trails by a human readable
> > name. It is usually accompanied with {{Key|osmc:symbol}}, which contains
> > a machine readable description of the hiking trail. Example:
> >
> > symbol = red bar
> > osmc:symbol = red:white:red_bar
> >
> > Implementing software may choose to use a local database for connecting
> > osmc:symbol to an icon and to a name, or it can choose to loud read the
> > value of the symbol tag, if no local naming is available.
> > Similar to {{Key|name}}, you can use international naming options too,
> > for example:
> >
> > symbol = piros sáv   (this is Hungarian)
> > symbol:en = red bar
>
>
> I think it would be better to use
>
> symbol=red_bar
> symbol:hr (or whatever the lc for Hungarian is) = piros_sáv
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] beer details, draught beer

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

I'd like to note for pubs, cafes, bars, restaurants and similar if
they offer draught beer.

My suggestion would be
draught_beer=yes

or maybe the value could be a selection of brands (or beer types),
seperated by semicolons, which would still be easily valuable (not
"no" or NULL) as long as you are not interested in the details.

Or has anyone already developped a tagging scheme for this?

cheers,
Martin

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

Re: [Tagging] beer details, draught beer

[Graham Jones]

There was a similar discussion on the UK list last year when we were making
our BrewMap .

I think we settled on real_ale=yes, but I suspect that was more on the
basis that draught beer was an expectation and we wanted to know if it was
'real' beer/ale/ciderbut I never quite got around to extending the map
to pubs, so I am not using that tag at the moment.

Graham.

On 9 May 2012 20:57, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> I'd like to note for pubs, cafes, bars, restaurants and similar if
> they offer draught beer.
>
> My suggestion would be
> draught_beer=yes
>
> or maybe the value could be a selection of brands (or beer types),
> seperated by semicolons, which would still be easily valuable (not
> "no" or NULL) as long as you are not interested in the details.
>
> Or has anyone already developped a tagging scheme for this?
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Graham Jones
Hartlepool, UK.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] symbol=* documentation?

[Ferenc Veres]

Hi,

I just found this page, which links to country specific mapping of 
hiking paths:


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walking_Routes

But as I can see, some of these use human-readable explanation of the 
"symbol", so I think my description for the tag was OK and I'll add it 
to the Wiki page if there are no oppositions.  (Using English name in 
"symbol", as Martin recommended.)


From "osmc:symbol":

"Don't invent a new tag, simply use text/textcolor or refrain from using 
osmc:symbol altogether."


I think we should remove this and allow users to add new values as they 
require.


If this table is "hardcoded" here, everybody will go their own way 
instead using and extending the standard.


All colors should allow all shapes. E.g. currently "blue round" is not 
allowed, but "green round" is allowed as background. This should be up 
to software implementors whether they support specific combinations, but 
not limit MAPPERS from entering real-world information.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:osmc:symbol

Sander, your Belgian tagging could use "color" and "symbol" in one tag, 
that makes it easier for software to read and mappers to write. For 
computer-processed value you could still use osmc:symbol.


Ferenc

Sander Deryckere írta, 2012-05-09 18:05 keltezéssel:

In Belgium, we use it for some types of walking routes, and we do it
this way:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Walking_Routes#Natuurpunt

So we have standard symbols (square, rectangle, triangle ...) which are
combined with a colour tag. But sometimes a logo is used, and in that
case, we just name the logo.

The majority of hiking routes doesn't have those symbols though (those
six-sided signs are more common).

Cheers,
Sander

2012/5/9 Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>>

2012/5/9 Ferenc Veres mailto:l...@netngine.hu>>:
 > The symbol tag is used for describing hiking trails by a human
readable
 > name. It is usually accompanied with {{Key|osmc:symbol}}, which
contains
 > a machine readable description of the hiking trail. Example:
 >
 > symbol = red bar
 > osmc:symbol = red:white:red_bar
 >
 > Implementing software may choose to use a local database for
connecting
 > osmc:symbol to an icon and to a name, or it can choose to loud
read the
 > value of the symbol tag, if no local naming is available.
 > Similar to {{Key|name}}, you can use international naming options
too,
 > for example:
 >
 > symbol = piros sáv   (this is Hungarian)
 > symbol:en = red bar


I think it would be better to use

symbol=red_bar
symbol:hr (or whatever the lc for Hungarian is) = piros_sáv

cheers,
Martin



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

Re: [Tagging] symbol=* documentation?

[Sander Deryckere]

> Sander, your Belgian tagging could use "color" and "symbol" in one tag,
> that makes it easier for software to read and mappers to write. For
> computer-processed value you could still use osmc:symbol.
>
> Ferenc
>


For clarity, those conventions are 3 years old, even before I joined OSM:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Walking_Routes&diff=prev&oldid=277433

I don't say that it shouldn't be re-thought, but I don't see a need to
change our tagging schema. It was just an example of how we do it.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] beer details, draught beer

[Alan Mintz]

At 2012-05-09 12:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

I'd like to note for pubs, cafes, bars, restaurants and similar if
they offer draught beer.


Seems like there some discussion about detailed tagging, including 
micro-breweries etc. I'm thinking it was related to the California 
coastline somewhere, maybe the central coast (south of San Francisco). You 
might also check the San Diego area.


--
Alan Mintz 


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