Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 9:33 PM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:
>
> "for a trail that anyone can use, but only after buying a permit."
>
> I would use rather fee=yes and toll=yes rather than introducing yet
> another tag value.

That would confuse the heck out of me.  From that tagging I'd think you're
talking about staffed toll both or coin box.

I'd rather do:

access=see_website
operator=East Bay Municipal Utility District
website=
https://www.ebmud.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/Application%20for%20Trail%20Permit.pdf
note=Annual trail use permit must be obtained in advance.



I'd rather have a lot of tags with clear meanings, compared to just a few
tags that are semantically murky!
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Ross]

In Australia as well they are advisory so are therefore not speed 
limits.  You can not be fined for exceeding the advisory signs.


The speed limit, and therefore maxspeed, is sign posted with a sign like 
this:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Australian_60kmh_speed_limit_sign.jpg

So therefore using maxspeed for this is incorrect.  The wiki states that 
maxspeed is the "maximum legal speed"


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

For example, close by where I live is section of road that has a speed 
limit of 100kph.  Several of the corners on it are signposted with 
advisory signs, one as low as 60kph.  In my car I can travel all of this 
road at 100kph without having to slow for the corners. However if I'm in 
my 4x4 I have to slow for the signposted corners as it can not be driven 
and at 100kph around them even though it is legal to do so.



I'd suggest using something like:

maxspeed=80
maxspeed:advisory=50  etc.


For the urban/rural default limits, in Australia for residential areas 
unless signposted it's 50kph.


May areas had been changed by John_Smith with the following:

maxspeed=50
source:maxspeed=default residential limit in Australia

Not sure of the exact wording for the source:maxspeed but it's the 
general idea.


Cheers
Ross


On 11/05/15 09:41, Andrew MacKinnon wrote:

How do you tag speed limits on curves and highway on/off ramps? At
least in Ontario, these speed limits are advisory only and signed with
a yellow sign (and sometimes on curves you will see a curve speed
limit sign and a higher general speed limit sign right beside each
other). I have used ramp_speed and curve_speed for this and taginfo
suggests that maxspeed:advised, maxspeed:advisory, recommended_speed
might be ways to tag this. See
http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/nGxJnKpP2dootXNmp2eV_g for a typical
example of a ramp speed limit in Ottawa, Ontario (this one is 60km/h).

Also how do you tag maxspeed which is unsigned? In Ontario the default
speed limit is 50km/h in urban areas and 80km/h in rural areas when
not signed. However, there have been proposals to lower the lower
speed limit from 50km/h to 40km/h. I have been using maxspeed=national
for this, is there a better way to tag this?

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



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

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

>
> Also, it would break all current data consumers.
>



I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on this
tagging list, then among actual data consumers.

For example:  Any decent data consumer needs to process *both*:



*phone=XXX +*

*contact:phone=XXX*
Else they're missing 100,000 data points.   So even if *phone* was
mechanically retagged to* contact:phone* (or the other way around) data
consumers would* not even notice.*

It's the 18 pages of tag soup from
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/search?q=phone that hides phone numbers
from data consumers, not a potential well discussed and documented
improvement to the tagging architecture.

In fact worst case is not all that bad with a mechanical retag process:
if a data consumer breaks, it's because they're years out of date on
following evolving tag preference.



The access tags, and contact tags are both large tag spaces created before
namespaces.
If invented today, they'd problably use namespaces.
There are strong advantages for data processing, to have them groupable.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Mon, 11 May 2015 00:27:55 -0700
Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:

> I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on
> this tagging list, then among actual data consumers.
> 
> For example:  Any decent data consumer needs to process *both*:
> 
> 
> 
> *phone=XXX +*
> 
> *contact:phone=XXX*
> Else they're missing 100,000 data points.   So even if *phone* was
> mechanically retagged to* contact:phone* (or the other way around)
> data consumers would* not even notice.*

For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread
title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports
for example access:foot.

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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Paweł Marynowski]

2015-05-11 8:53 GMT+02:00 johnw :

> I’m not about to add a aeroway=helipad to the field because it could be
> used for emergency evacuations.
>

In Poland we use emergency=landing_site for this. Check Overpass Turbo
rendering of occurrences - they are located mainly on football pitches or
similar places.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/emergency=landing_site

-- 

*Paweł Marynowski*

Stowarzyszenie OpenStreetMap Polska

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

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread
> title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports
> for example access:foot.
>

I think the point is that transition of tagging practice, even if it takes
a few years, is possible.

foot=yes is widely processed as an access tag, for sure.
dog=, stroller= and fishing_boat= however are far less likely to be
recognized as access tags even if used correctly.
If access: started off with the odd cases, it could build momentum, to
the point where the transition could
be seamless.

Contact and access are huge tag spaces that contain members that are
semantically fuzzy.  Data consumers
tend to ignore tags with too much uncertainty.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Marc Gemis]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:

> foot=yes is widely processed as an access tag, for sure.
> dog=, stroller= and fishing_boat= however are far less likely to be
> recognized as access tags even if used correctly.
> If access: started off with the odd cases, it could build momentum, to
> the point where the transition could
> be seamless.
>

That would be confusing IMHO. Either you have to bite the sour apple and go
(at least propose) for a complete move of access tags to their own name
space or just leave everything as it is now.

regards

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - admin_title=*

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Mon, 11 May 2015 08:44:25 +0200
Friedrich Volkmann  wrote:

> > If a tag
> > such as designation=* when applied to administrative entities were
> > to be widely and consistently applied, and the documentation on the
> > wiki is clear, then developers will find value in supporting such
> > tables.
> 
> According to Andy Allen ("Gravitystorm"), who seems to be the owner of
> Carto, "this is absolutely not how we decide what things to render".

Please, avoid quoting out of context. It was response to "is used
9461 times, it is approved, and it has its wiki page, thus it should be
rendered" (source:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/545 )

Many tags are widely used, have wiki page and will never be rendered in
openstreetmap-carto - and any amount of approvals will not change it
(source tag is an obvious example).

> Only a few people
> have a commit privilegue. And those are reluctant to do anything. I
> made lots of comments and suggestions in their bug tracking systems,
> both old and new, and none of my suggestions was ever implemented.

Note that there are over 300 open issues. Reporting problems and
discussion is useful, but it is not something that may be committed. It
can be done only once somebody writes code - and it may be done by
anyone, commit rights are not necessary to submit a pull request.

About 40 pull requests were processed within last month, with 17
currently waiting.

Within last 50 closed pull requests 36 were merged, 11 were
rejected, 2 were replaced by an improved version and 1 pull request was
a test, not intended as mergeable.

About "are reluctant to do anything" - see
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/commits/master

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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 05/11/2015 09:42 AM, Paweł Marynowski wrote:

2015-05-11 8:53 GMT+02:00 johnw mailto:jo...@mac.com>>:

I’m not about to add a aeroway=helipad to the field because it
could be used for emergency evacuations.


In Poland we use emergency=landing_site for this. Check Overpass Turbo 
rendering of occurrences - they are located mainly on football pitches 
or similar places.

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/emergency=landing_site


In an emergency, the helicopter pilot will use any football pitch he 
fancies... Being an emergency helo pad is implicit to the soccer pitch's 
nature - so why the extra tag ?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Marc Gemis  wrote
>
>
> That would be confusing IMHO. Either you have to bite the sour apple and
> go (at least propose) for a complete move of access tags to their own name
> space or just leave everything as it is now.
>

The transition to a namespace is already underway
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Ahorse
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Abus


The question then becomes: is there energy to hurry that process along, try
and stop that process, or clean up the ones that don't fit like:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Aroof
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/access%3Acustomer
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Simone Saviolo]

2015-05-11 1:41 GMT+02:00 Andrew MacKinnon :

> How do you tag speed limits on curves and highway on/off ramps? At
> least in Ontario, these speed limits are advisory only and signed with
> a yellow sign (and sometimes on curves you will see a curve speed
> limit sign and a higher general speed limit sign right beside each
> other). I have used ramp_speed and curve_speed for this and taginfo
> suggests that maxspeed:advised, maxspeed:advisory, recommended_speed
> might be ways to tag this. See
> http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/nGxJnKpP2dootXNmp2eV_g for a typical
> example of a ramp speed limit in Ottawa, Ontario (this one is 60km/h).
>

I agree with Ross, that a new tag should be used. The sign you talk about
is not related to maxspeed.

Here in Italy, for example, this is achieved through square signs with a
blue background, which qualifies them as "information" signs. Instead, max
speed is indicated by round signs with a white background and a red border,
which means they are "prescription" signs.

Also how do you tag maxspeed which is unsigned? In Ontario the default
> speed limit is 50km/h in urban areas and 80km/h in rural areas when
> not signed. However, there have been proposals to lower the lower
> speed limit from 50km/h to 40km/h. I have been using maxspeed=national
> for this, is there a better way to tag this?


In Italy we've been using something like

maxspeed=50; source:maxspeed=IT:urban
maxspeed=90; source:maxspeed=IT:rural

Ciao,

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

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[André Pirard]

  
  
On 2015-05-11 09:27, Bryce Nesbitt
  wrote :


  

  On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM,
Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

  Also, it would break all current data consumers.




  
  I think the concern about data consumers in general is far
  higher on this tagging list, then among actual data
  consumers.
  

For example:  Any decent data consumer needs to process
  both:
  

    phone=XXX
 +
  
    contact:phone=XXX
  

Else they're missing 100,000 data points.   So even if
  phone was mechanically retagged to contact:phone
  (or the other way around) data consumers would not even
notice.
  

  


The problem is that if you don't find a phone number you may miss a
phone call but that if you use wrong access or routing tags you will
instantly have GPSes send cars, bikes or pedestrian on the wrong
road.
It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software
blindly obeys rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same
rules for the GPSes to work.  The many many routing tags errors are
a real PITA.  Even wrong instructions in the documentation causing
contributors to be misinformed.  Is OSM suitable for GPS 

Cheers



  

  André.

  



  


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

[Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

I believe there is some overlap between the shop values

confectionery
pastry
candy
sweets

shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K vs. 300
vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite generic.
For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's confections)
and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at least
without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often", because in
some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other contexts there
might be shops that are offering both kind.

If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections, finding a
shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be helpful
but rather a big annoyance.

>From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember that
"pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's confections,
so the term might be less appropriate.

"sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki and can
maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for candy/sugar
confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what the
natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional information with
respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
completely.

I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:

a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level tags and
suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have only mixed
shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the more
specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).

b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag and use
subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or sugar_confectionery=yes to
make the distinction

c) your suggestion here

Personally I favor b). What do you think?

Cheers,
Martin

For reference see also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confectionery
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dconfectionery
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:42 AM, André Pirard  wrote:
> It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software blindly obeys 
> rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same rules for the GPSes to 
> work.  The many many routing tags errors are a real PITA.  Even wrong 
> instructions in the documentation causing contributors to be misinformed.  Is 
> OSM suitable for GPS 


That remains to be seen.

But it's an advantage for the more verbose tags.  "hgv=designated" is
not all that clear to a starting mapper.  "access:hgv=designated" at
least gives a hint to those who read English.

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

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2015-05-11 9:27 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt :

>
> It's the 18 pages of tag soup from
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/search?q=phone that hides phone numbers
> from data consumers, not a potential well discussed and documented
> improvement to the tagging architecture.
>



actually if you have a look at this list (here the most used values):

494 060
*phone* 
99 706
contact:*phone* 
10 592
payment:tele*phone*_cards

10 045
openGeoDB:tele*phone*_area_code

8 093
communication:mobile_*phone*

1 648
emergency_tele*phone*_code

1 079
tele*phone* 

These are not actually telephone numbers (besides the first 2) but mostly
other telephone related attributes (have a look at the values, e.g. here:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.com/keys/telephone#values ) with a few
exceptions (low usage).

What come after these on the following 16 pages are tags with very few
usage (all below 1000) and will be fixed sooner or later or is not about a
phone number.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Eric Sibert]

In Italy we've been using something like

maxspeed=50; source:maxspeed=IT:urban
maxspeed=90; source:maxspeed=IT:rural


+1 in France:

maxspeed=50; source:maxspeed=FR:urban
maxspeed=90; source:maxspeed=FR:rural
maxspeed=130; source:maxspeed=FR:motorway
maxspeed=30; source:maxspeed=FR:zone30
maxspeed=20; source:maxspeed=FR:living_street

Although for the last two, speed limit is included in the  
corresponding traffic sign design.



http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source:maxspeed

Eric



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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[althio]

Forwarding to HOT activation working group.

Activation WG,
Please see an ongoing discussion about tagging:leisure=common for
potential helicopter landings

Tagging group,
Tentative answers inline.


Andreas Goss  wrote:
> 
>
> Look for a clear area in the village away from houses and hills. Shift to
> Opencyclemap layer to evaluate if this area is flat enough, with a minimum
> width of 30 meter. The Scale bar can help to evaluate the distances. The
> image above help also to evaluate what should look like such area. If there
> is no flat area, do not trace a polygon leisure=common.
>
> Trace a polygon tag leisure=common
>
> http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/1023#task/2
> 
>
>
> Can anybody explain to me why we use one of the most unlcear tags for this?
> Is this just tagging for the render or why is it so complicated to come up
> with a more fitting tag?

As far as I understand, the explanation (not an approval):
It started as tagging for the end-users because GIS people and pilots
were looking for leisure=common for unofficial landing sites in some
places such as West Africa.



Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> This is certainly a very bad idea [SNIP]

We will politely ask and try to improve on it.
Please consider being extra nice and somehow patient because HOT
members are in the biggest activation ever and under heavy pressure
right now.


> "leisure=common" can very well be hilly, or in the vicinity of houses,
> or smaller than 30 metres; the tag should not be redefined for areas of
> HOT activity to mean "a helicopter can land here".
>
> By all means, define a tag "hot:potential_helicopter_landing_site=yes"
> or whatever. That's what our tagging freedom is for...


johnw  wrote:
> The sports pitch in the middle of our local school sports stadium is also the 
> staging grounds for wildfire fighting helicopters.
>
> I’m not about to add a aeroway=helipad to the field because it could be used 
> for emergency evacuations.

I would say that is precisely what happened for using leisure=common
and not adding aeroway=helipad.

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

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[André Pirard]

On 2015-05-10 15:33, Volker Schmidt wrote :
> We do have here roads where access with motor vehicles is limited to
> residents plus residents of the town, where the road is.
> Example: http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/H5QZAcvCLQBwhbF4u2mq7w (zoom
> in to read the details)
>
> How do I tag such situation?
Same (as "we") in Belgium. Specifically (as exception to access
restrictions):
"Excepté circulation locale" (must stop within with a reason to go)
"Exceptés riverains" (local residents (no river needed ;-) ))

Cheers

André.



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

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[James Mast]

Well, in the US, I've just been tagging the 'ramp' speeds ( 
https://goo.gl/maps/Bw8Is ) as a normal 'maxspeed'.  I know several other users 
here in the US have been doing it the same way.

However, I wouldn't be opposed if we wanted to tag them as 'maxspeed:ramp=35 
mph', but only if we could get the routers on board as that does help in the 
time estimates and also to harp a user if he's going, say, 20 mph over the 
'ramp' speed.

Plus, while the cops can't pull you over and give you a ticket for exceeding 
the 'ramp' speed (if they do, you can challenge it in court if it's just a 
normal speeding ticket), they can however, nail you with a reckless driving 
ticket/charge if you wipe out and wreck while exceeding it.  That's why I said 
we need to get the routers on board if we add a new tag for the ramps where 
these signs are posted so they can continue to alert drivers who go over the 
ramp speed (if that option is turned on).

-James
  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Mon, 11 May 2015 11:02:38 +0200
althio  wrote:

> Forwarding to HOT activation working group.
> 
> Activation WG,
> Please see an ongoing discussion about tagging:leisure=common for
> potential helicopter landings

Note also that using leisure=common for places that are potential
helicopter landings has additional problem
- this tag may be correctly used to tag place utterly unusable for that
  purpose.

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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Andreas Goss]

On 5/11/15 09:42 , Paweł Marynowski wrote:

In Poland we use emergency=landing_site for this. Check Overpass Turbo
rendering of occurrences - they are located mainly on football pitches
or similar places.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/emergency=landing_site


Can you please document tags when you import that many...

I created a page in the Wiki. Guess we have to have some clear rules 
where to use this and where helipad. Also maybe have 
landing_site=helicopter or something in addition.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dlanding_site
__
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


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

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2015-05-11 11:04 GMT+02:00 James Mast :

> Plus, while the cops can't pull you over and give you a ticket for
> exceeding the 'ramp' speed (if they do, you can challenge it in court if
> it's just a normal speeding ticket), they can however, nail you with a
> reckless driving ticket/charge if you wipe out and wreck while exceeding
> it.



I believe the situation in Germany is similar, e.g. if there is a 130 km/h
maxspeed recommendation (which is there implicitly on the whole network)
but you drive at 250 km/h and someone else gets frightened and makes an
accident the fault might be attributed to you. I recall several cases where
test drivers of Mercedes caused deadly accidents on the highways around the
main production plant (A8, A81, A5), there is even a wikipedia article in
English about one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_on_the_Bundesautobahn_5

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 11 May 2015, althio wrote:
> >
> > Can anybody explain to me why we use one of the most unlcear tags
> > for this? Is this just tagging for the render or why is it so
> > complicated to come up with a more fitting tag?
>
> As far as I understand, the explanation (not an approval):
> It started as tagging for the end-users because GIS people and pilots
> were looking for leisure=common for unofficial landing sites in some
> places such as West Africa.

And that by the way is the very definition of cargo cult 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science)

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

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

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[phil]

On Mon May 11 10:03:48 2015 GMT+0100, André Pirard wrote:
> On 2015-05-10 15:33, Volker Schmidt wrote :
> > We do have here roads where access with motor vehicles is limited to
> > residents plus residents of the town, where the road is.
> > Example: http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/H5QZAcvCLQBwhbF4u2mq7w (zoom
> > in to read the details)
> >
> > How do I tag such situation?
> Same (as "we") in Belgium. Specifically (as exception to access
> restrictions):
> "Excepté circulation locale" (must stop within with a reason to go)
> "Exceptés riverains" (local residents (no river needed ;-) ))
> 
I have always read that as the equivalent to the UK 'except for access'. I know 
the literal translation is residents,  but a delivery driver or a friend 
visiting would be allowed to drive there.
I would use access = destination in these cases.

Phil ( trigpoint )

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 2:04 AM, James Mast  wrote:
> However, I wouldn't be opposed if we wanted to tag them as 'maxspeed:ramp=35
> mph', but only if we could get the routers on board as that does help in the
> time estimates and also to harp a user if he's going, say, 20 mph over the
> 'ramp' speed.

It's broader than ramp.
It's any yellow "advisory" speed limit, that should have a new tag.

USA: white=regulatory
yellow=advisory

There are many examples of each, not just speed limits.
All signs in the USA must conform to the http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

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

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2015-05-11 0:22 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt :

> I'd say the simple answer is "access=private".
> Anyone who has access knows they have access, and don't need OSM to tell
> them.
>




"private" might be a good value for cases where you do need a written
permission, IMHO this "residents" should be looked at more precisely: do
you have to apply for a permission or do you simply have to live there? Is
it OK to take this road if you are visiting someone or delivering something
to someone living there? The latter 2 would better expressed with
"destination". "access" as a key is in any case too generic, I'd make this
"motorcar" (at least in Germany, not 100% sure for Italy) because
motorbikes, mofas, bicycles, pedestrians etc. do not seem to be covered by
the restriction.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2015-05-11 11:25 GMT+02:00 :

> s'. I know the literal translation is residents,  but a delivery driver or
> a friend visiting would be allowed to drive there.
> I would use access = destination in these cases.
>


in Italy there are cases where "destination" doesn't hit it, because you
are only exempted from the restriction if you have applied for a resident's
permit (typically including the payment of an annual fee), there might be
exceptions for delivery, but not for friends or family (the permit is for
the car / number plate, not the people).

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Bryce Nesbitt]

At some point you throw up your hands and ask "what does it say on the sign"?

access:motorcar=see_note
barrier=sign
sign:text=Requires campus NL permit with toll tag transponder.
Delivery excepted.

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

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[pmailkeey .]

UK Max speed advisory signs:

Sign


With additional info 

Variable





-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

I believe the solution for the problem has already been mentioned: the used
tag "maxspeed:advisory"=* seems a good way to make the distinction between
actual maxspeeds and advisory maxspeeds:
http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/maxspeed%3Aadvisory#values

Let's document this in the wiki, e.g. here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?action=edit&title=Key:maxspeed%3Aadvisory

I have added a paragraph here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Speed_limits&oldid=1176298
Feel free to modify / correct / amend it.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Paul Johnson]

On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Andrew MacKinnon 
wrote:

> How do you tag speed limits on curves and highway on/off ramps? At
> least in Ontario, these speed limits are advisory only and signed with
> a yellow sign (and sometimes on curves you will see a curve speed
> limit sign and a higher general speed limit sign right beside each
> other).


These would be advisory speeds, not speed limits.


> Also how do you tag maxspeed which is unsigned? In Ontario the default
> speed limit is 50km/h in urban areas and 80km/h in rural areas when
> not signed. However, there have been proposals to lower the lower
> speed limit from 50km/h to 40km/h. I have been using maxspeed=national
> for this, is there a better way to tag this?
>

I usually maxspeed an explicit value with maxspeed:note indicating what's
going on.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:04 AM, James Mast 
wrote:

> Well, in the US, I've just been tagging the 'ramp' speeds (
> https://goo.gl/maps/Bw8Is ) as a normal 'maxspeed'.  I know several other
> users here in the US have been doing it the same way.
>

Please don't, as this is confusing.  Advisory speeds are not limits,
maxspeed=* is the limit, not the advisory.


> However, I wouldn't be opposed if we wanted to tag them as
> 'maxspeed:ramp=35 mph', but only if we could get the routers on board as
> that does help in the time estimates and also to harp a user if he's going,
> say, 20 mph over the 'ramp' speed.
>
> Plus, while the cops can't pull you over and give you a ticket for
> exceeding the 'ramp' speed (if they do, you can challenge it in court if
> it's just a normal speeding ticket), they can however, nail you with a
> reckless driving ticket/charge if you wipe out and wreck while exceeding
> it.  That's why I said we need to get the routers on board if we add a new
> tag for the ramps where these signs are posted so they can continue to
> alert drivers who go over the ramp speed (if that option is turned on).
>

Also handy for consumers like Osmand that might use this information to
display a warning if you're coming up on something fast, similar to how
it'll alert on stop signs audibly if it doesn't detect you're starting to
slow down.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[moltonel 3x Combo]

On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> I believe there is some overlap between the shop values
>
> confectionery
> pastry
> candy
> sweets
>
> shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K vs. 300
> vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite generic.
> For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's confections)
> and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at least
> without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often", because in
> some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other contexts there
> might be shops that are offering both kind.
>
> If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections, finding a
> shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be helpful
> but rather a big annoyance.
>
> From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember that
> "pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's confections,
> so the term might be less appropriate.
>
> "sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki and can
> maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for candy/sugar
> confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what the
> natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional information with
> respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
> completely.
>
> I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:
>
> a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level tags and
> suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have only mixed
> shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the more
> specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).
>
> b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag and use
> subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or sugar_confectionery=yes to
> make the distinction
>
> c) your suggestion here
>
> Personally I favor b). What do you think?

My initial reaction was "there's no overlap between pastry and
confectionery, they are totally different things". Some cultural
background: in France, shops selling candys are very rare, but shops
selling pastries are very common because bread shops are everywhere
and usually also sell pastries and danishes. Pastry-only shops are
quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).

But using shop=confectionery and refining that into raw sug^W^Wsubtags
makes sense too.

For the subtag itself, I'm not a fan of FOO_confectionery=yes: I think
that confectionery=FOO follows established tag-creation best practices
better. It's used a bit in the db already. And if one needs to tag
multiple types, either "confectionery=FOO;BAR" or
"confectionery:FOO=yes confectgionery:BAR=yes" works for me (but I
prefer the later).

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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[johnw]

> On May 11, 2015, at 6:02 PM, althio  wrote:
> 
> johnw mailto:jo...@mac.com>> wrote:
>> The sports pitch in the middle of our local school sports stadium is also 
>> the staging grounds for wildfire fighting helicopters.
>> 
>> I’m not about to add a aeroway=helipad to the field because it could be used 
>> for emergency evacuations.
> 
> I would say that is precisely what happened for using leisure=common
> and not adding aeroway=helipad.


i think what we’re trying to say is that (me being a bit of a noob)

addeding leisure=common to places 

then

searching for leisure=common to find landing sites 

is not good. 


tag the area as what it is (a meadow, a farm filed, a soccer pitch, etc)

and then put a special tag you make up on it: emergency=landing_site is 
interesting, but make up what description meets your needs 
(areoway=improvised_landing_site, etc)

to find spots, search for the tag you made up rather than searching for 
leisure=common


if you are just tagging leisure=common to get a rendering in OSM carto that 
shows up on whatever map system you’re using (printed, onscreen, etc),

 then that isn’t good either, because a sports pitch or a meadow isn’t really a 
common, and tagging them as grass or a soccer pitch doesn’t have the same 
access privileges implied that leisure=common gives them.

your choice of landing site tags should be tagged uniquely with your tags, not 
by tagging everything as leisure=common.

I think that is what we’re trying to say, I think.

Javbw


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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[pmailkeey .]

There are a number of reasons we shouldn't tag random places as potential
emergency helipads:

   - Ground conditions
   - overhead obstructions
   - don't think we're qualified to make assessment (without site visit and
   heli knowledge)
   - A heli pilot wouldn't use our info - he'd always make his own
   assessment on the day - so little point in having 'data'.
   - etc.


-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[pmailkeey .]

On 11 May 2015 at 11:40, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:04 AM, James Mast 
> wrote:
>
>> Well, in the US, I've just been tagging the 'ramp' speeds (
>> https://goo.gl/maps/Bw8Is ) as a normal 'maxspeed'.  I know several
>> other users here in the US have been doing it the same way.
>>
>
> Please don't, as this is confusing.  Advisory speeds are not limits,
> maxspeed=* is the limit, not the advisory.
>
>

Maxspeed does not imply 'limit' by name.

Perhaps we should have

maxspeed:advisory=* and
maxspeed:limit=*

and continue

maxspeed:hgv=*

etc ?

-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

[pmailkeey .]

On 10 May 2015 at 13:19, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> I don't think it's the same.
>
> I am interpreting and using these two tags like this:
>
> *pebblestones* is a road surface where pebbles are set in sand or mortar
> (?) and is typically seen in old cities. Example:
> http://mapillary.com/map/im/2KnVHcwLqcyy6Qis4iWF1Q
>
> *pebbles* is similar to gravel, only that loose pebbles are used in place
> of the gravel. The pebbles are bigger than the gravel pieces, and rounded.
> They are not set in any way. (example:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/171367286 - no photo available)
> *pebbles* is also used as beach surface. Example:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/189789251
>


That's my interpretation too - even before I read this :)

-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

[pmailkeey .]

On 10 May 2015 at 15:34, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On 10 May 2015 at 13:19, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>
> > pebblestones is a road surface where pebbles are set in sand or mortar
> (?)
> > and is typically seen in old cities. Example:
> > http://mapillary.com/map/im/2KnVHcwLqcyy6Qis4iWF1Q
>
> In British English, those are cobbles or cobblestinoes:
>


Those are pebbles - or pebblestone

Cobbles are rounded and difficult to walk on

esp. when wet

Then there's setts 
- squarer blocks



-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Maxspeed

[Ross]

Well if you read the wiki:

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

that's exactly what maxspeed implies.

and

maxspeed:hgv etc is also there

Cheers
Ross


On 11/05/15 21:08, pmailkeey . wrote:



On 11 May 2015 at 11:40, Paul Johnson > wrote:


On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:04 AM, James Mast
mailto:rickmastfa...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

Well, in the US, I've just been tagging the 'ramp' speeds (
https://goo.gl/maps/Bw8Is ) as a normal 'maxspeed'.  I know
several other users here in the US have been doing it the same
way.


Please don't, as this is confusing.  Advisory speeds are not
limits, maxspeed=* is the limit, not the advisory.


Maxspeed does not imply 'limit' by name.

Perhaps we should have

maxspeed:advisory=* and
maxspeed:limit=*

and continue

maxspeed:hgv=*

etc ?

--
Mike.
@millomweb 
 - For all 
your info on Millom and South Copeland

via *the area's premier website - *
*
*
*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, 
property & pets*

*
*
T&Cs 


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


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

Re: [Tagging] Proposed tag shop=wholesale

[Dave Swarthout]

shop=supermarket and membership=yes is more accurate than shop=wholesale
for a business like Costco and Sams. Only true wholesalers should be tagged
as such.

+1  Agree. Costco is not a wholesale shop because they sell to any consumer
who is willing to buy a membership. And they sell many items in quantities
of one.

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 2:40 AM, johnw  wrote:

> >
> > A lot of Costco's customers are small businesses who buy wholesale
>
>
> 25 years ago this was their business model. (Price club).
>
> 15 years ago this was still true.
>
> This is not true any more.
>
> They still have business accounts (my friend has one), but I’ll bet you %
> of customers and % items bought and % of money spent at costco goes *at
> least* 80-20  end-consumers vs resellers. My guess is it is probably closer
> to 90-10.
>
> This seems to be true in the US and Japan. the amount of moms with kids
> and elderly people wandering around shopping for ice cream and batteries
> are not resellers. Anyone buying tires, glasses, clothes, books, movies,
> computer electronics, toothbrushes, or frozen food is also not a reseller
> (no reseller selling TVs is buying a single TV every few months). The
> parking lot is completely full of families. Besides certain bulk food
> supply aimed at restaurants (60 eggs) or is easily resellable in small
> amounts (canned drinks), all the stocked items are now completely targeted
> at consumers. Anything with a Kirkland logo is meant for end-consumers,
> otherwise there was no reason to create the KS line of products.
>
> All of their secondary services - glasses, food court, pharmacy, tire
> center, photo Prints, and other stuff through third parties (garage doors,
> cars, tax prep, etc) is all for consumers as well - so that should *really*
> tell you who is walking through costco’s doors.
>
>
> Javbw
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[SomeoneElse]

On 11/05/2015 08:32, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

On Mon, 11 May 2015 00:27:55 -0700
Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:


I think the concern about data consumers in general is far higher on
this tagging list, then among actual data consumers.


Agreed.

For phone data it may be true, but for access tags (note the thread 
title) it is certainly not true - it is unlikely that anybody supports 
for example access:foot



For my own use I've been doing it for a while, ever since (some) people 
started using it:


https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L351

You could argue that prefixing all access tags with "access:" might 
"make it easier for mappers", but only if you simultaneously submit 
patches for iD, P2, JOSM, Vespucci, et al, _and_ get a general concensus 
that the existing accepted values should be mechanically edited.  Good 
luck with that.


Cheers,

Andy

PS: Not OSM or map related in any way, but sometimes very relevant to 
this list:


http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog18.html



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

Re: [Tagging] access tags (was contact: tags)

[SomeoneElse]

On 11/05/2015 09:42, André Pirard wrote:


The problem is that if you don't find a phone number you may miss a 
phone call but that if you use wrong access or routing tags you will 
instantly have GPSes send cars, bikes or pedestrian on the wrong road.
It's really difficult to have it understood that GPS software blindly 
obeys rules and that tags must also strictly obey the same rules for 
the GPSes to work.  The many many routing tags errors are a real 
PITA.  Even wrong instructions in the documentation causing 
contributors to be misinformed.  Is OSM suitable for GPS 


Hell yes*  :)

Seriously, I presume that's a rhetorical question.  I've been using OSM 
data in a car satnav (in the UK) for years, and when in someone else's 
car sometimes end up playing the "BMW-vs-Google-vs-OSM-on-an-eTrex" 
game, and (apart from postcodes, which is a different issue to access 
tags) OSM pretty much always wins.  I suspect that that might not be the 
case in e.g. raw TIGER-infested areas of the US, but in the UK and in 
Australia I genuinely haven't had a problem.


Cheers,

Andy

* Sorry, I've been been watching far too much general election coverage 
over the last few weeks.


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

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[John Willis]

This is a group doing some kind of specialized mapping for their pilots. 

We' discussing the best way for them to tag things for their use.

This is not a "tag all the soccer pitches helicopters could land on" 
discussion. 

Javbw 

> On May 11, 2015, at 8:00 PM, pmailkeey .  wrote:
> 
> There are a number of reasons we shouldn't tag random places as potential 
> emergency helipads:
> Ground conditions
> overhead obstructions
> don't think we're qualified to make assessment (without site visit and heli 
> knowledge)
> A heli pilot wouldn't use our info - he'd always make his own assessment on 
> the day - so little point in having 'data'.
> etc.
> 
> -- 
> Mike.
> @millomweb - For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
> via the area's premier website - 
> 
> currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property & 
> pets
> 
> T&Cs
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[Paweł Marynowski]

2015-05-11 9:59 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier :

>  On 05/11/2015 09:42 AM, Paweł Marynowski wrote:
>
>  2015-05-11 8:53 GMT+02:00 johnw :
>
>> I’m not about to add a aeroway=helipad to the field because it could be
>> used for emergency evacuations.
>>
>
> In Poland we use emergency=landing_site for this. Check Overpass Turbo
> rendering of occurrences - they are located mainly on football pitches or
> similar places.
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/emergency=landing_site
>
>
> In an emergency, the helicopter pilot will use any football pitch he
> fancies... Being an emergency helo pad is implicit to the soccer pitch's
> nature - so why the extra tag ?
>

In this case: because these places are officialy in use by Polish Medical
Air Rescue (they have unique ID, etc.).

@Andreas Goss: thanks for wiki entry!

-- 

*Paweł Marynowski*

Stowarzyszenie OpenStreetMap Polska

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 68, Issue 35

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am 10.05.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Lists :

>> +1 for pebbles.
> 
> Don’t create a ridiculous amount of surface values, for roads there are 
> mainly 3 interesting values (paved/unpaved/setting stones), and for non-road 
> usage it should be free to cover about any exposed surfaces, i.e. beaches can 
> be sand/pebbles/rock, tennis courts can be clay/synthetic/asphalt (and other 
> values?), a soccer field can be grass/synthetic/asphalt?


glad you mention pebbles: I always wondered what were the right values for 
crushed rock (angular rock) in the size classes 5mm to 32mm/64mm, as both, 
gravel and pebbles seem to refer to naturally created, smooth, small pieces of 
stone (eg from rivers), while most streets I am aware of are made from crushed 
rock (at least around here).

For reference, in German the terms are Bruchsand (<5mm), Splitt (2-32mm) and 
Schotter (32-64mm) as opposed to pieces of natural provenience (German: Kies). 
I'm particularly interested in the term(s) for Splitt.
(I guess it is chippings, but this is not a common value for surfaces in Osm 
(strangely just 5 occurrences)).

cheers 
Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Brad Neuhauser]

In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better tagged as
bakery. Even if they only sell pastries (ie no bread), they do have to bake
them, right? :)

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, moltonel 3x Combo 
wrote:

> On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> > I believe there is some overlap between the shop values
> >
> > confectionery
> > pastry
> > candy
> > sweets
> >
> > shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K vs. 300
> > vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite
> generic.
> > For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's confections)
> > and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at least
> > without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often", because in
> > some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other contexts
> there
> > might be shops that are offering both kind.
> >
> > If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections, finding
> a
> > shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be helpful
> > but rather a big annoyance.
> >
> > From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember that
> > "pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's
> confections,
> > so the term might be less appropriate.
> >
> > "sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki and can
> > maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for candy/sugar
> > confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what the
> > natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional information with
> > respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
> > completely.
> >
> > I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:
> >
> > a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level tags and
> > suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have only
> mixed
> > shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the more
> > specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).
> >
> > b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag and use
> > subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or sugar_confectionery=yes to
> > make the distinction
> >
> > c) your suggestion here
> >
> > Personally I favor b). What do you think?
>
> My initial reaction was "there's no overlap between pastry and
> confectionery, they are totally different things". Some cultural
> background: in France, shops selling candys are very rare, but shops
> selling pastries are very common because bread shops are everywhere
> and usually also sell pastries and danishes. Pastry-only shops are
> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>
> But using shop=confectionery and refining that into raw sug^W^Wsubtags
> makes sense too.
>
> For the subtag itself, I'm not a fan of FOO_confectionery=yes: I think
> that confectionery=FOO follows established tag-creation best practices
> better. It's used a bit in the db already. And if one needs to tag
> multiple types, either "confectionery=FOO;BAR" or
> "confectionery:FOO=yes confectgionery:BAR=yes" works for me (but I
> prefer the later).
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Janko Mihelić]

I would be more in favor of a+b) because you might want to tag a place with
shop=pastry because 95% of their assortiment is pastry, but they have 5%
candy so you add candy=yes.

Janko

pon, 11. svi 2015. 17:12 Brad Neuhauser  je
napisao:

> In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better tagged as
> bakery. Even if they only sell pastries (ie no bread), they do have to bake
> them, right? :)
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, moltonel 3x Combo 
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> > I believe there is some overlap between the shop values
>> >
>> > confectionery
>> > pastry
>> > candy
>> > sweets
>> >
>> > shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K vs. 300
>> > vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite
>> generic.
>> > For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's
>> confections)
>> > and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at least
>> > without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often", because in
>> > some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other contexts
>> there
>> > might be shops that are offering both kind.
>> >
>> > If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections,
>> finding a
>> > shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be
>> helpful
>> > but rather a big annoyance.
>> >
>> > From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember that
>> > "pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's
>> confections,
>> > so the term might be less appropriate.
>> >
>> > "sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki and
>> can
>> > maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for
>> candy/sugar
>> > confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what the
>> > natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional information
>> with
>> > respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
>> > completely.
>> >
>> > I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:
>> >
>> > a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level tags and
>> > suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have only
>> mixed
>> > shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the more
>> > specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).
>> >
>> > b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag and use
>> > subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or sugar_confectionery=yes to
>> > make the distinction
>> >
>> > c) your suggestion here
>> >
>> > Personally I favor b). What do you think?
>>
>> My initial reaction was "there's no overlap between pastry and
>> confectionery, they are totally different things". Some cultural
>> background: in France, shops selling candys are very rare, but shops
>> selling pastries are very common because bread shops are everywhere
>> and usually also sell pastries and danishes. Pastry-only shops are
>> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>>
>> But using shop=confectionery and refining that into raw sug^W^Wsubtags
>> makes sense too.
>>
>> For the subtag itself, I'm not a fan of FOO_confectionery=yes: I think
>> that confectionery=FOO follows established tag-creation best practices
>> better. It's used a bit in the db already. And if one needs to tag
>> multiple types, either "confectionery=FOO;BAR" or
>> "confectionery:FOO=yes confectgionery:BAR=yes" works for me (but I
>> prefer the later).
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Volker Schmidt]

My original question refers to the case of several roads where:
(a) motor_vehicles=destination  applies for everyone
plus
(b) residents of a specific village have full motor_vehicle access
(indepenently of their destination)


On 11 May 2015 at 11:43, Bryce Nesbitt  wrote:

> At some point you throw up your hands and ask "what does it say on the
> sign"?
>
> access:motorcar=see_note
> barrier=sign
> sign:text=Requires campus NL permit with toll tag transponder.
> Delivery excepted.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Satoshi IIDA]

There are Japanese "non-baked" confectioneries.
(I believe similar confectioneries in other countries. esp. in Asia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagashi

If we take only a) plan, I'm afraid of we could not represent cultural
variations.

+1 to Janko's a+b),
and to express the specialty, moltonel's "confectionery:FOO=yes
confectionery:BAR=yes".



2015-05-12 0:24 GMT+09:00 Janko Mihelić :

> I would be more in favor of a+b) because you might want to tag a place
> with shop=pastry because 95% of their assortiment is pastry, but they have
> 5% candy so you add candy=yes.
>
> Janko
>
> pon, 11. svi 2015. 17:12 Brad Neuhauser  je
> napisao:
>
>> In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better tagged
>> as bakery. Even if they only sell pastries (ie no bread), they do have to
>> bake them, right? :)
>>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, moltonel 3x Combo 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>>> > I believe there is some overlap between the shop values
>>> >
>>> > confectionery
>>> > pastry
>>> > candy
>>> > sweets
>>> >
>>> > shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K vs.
>>> 300
>>> > vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite
>>> generic.
>>> > For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's
>>> confections)
>>> > and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at least
>>> > without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often", because in
>>> > some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other contexts
>>> there
>>> > might be shops that are offering both kind.
>>> >
>>> > If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections,
>>> finding a
>>> > shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be
>>> helpful
>>> > but rather a big annoyance.
>>> >
>>> > From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember that
>>> > "pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's
>>> confections,
>>> > so the term might be less appropriate.
>>> >
>>> > "sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki and
>>> can
>>> > maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for
>>> candy/sugar
>>> > confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what the
>>> > natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional information
>>> with
>>> > respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
>>> > completely.
>>> >
>>> > I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:
>>> >
>>> > a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level tags and
>>> > suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have only
>>> mixed
>>> > shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the more
>>> > specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).
>>> >
>>> > b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag and
>>> use
>>> > subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or sugar_confectionery=yes to
>>> > make the distinction
>>> >
>>> > c) your suggestion here
>>> >
>>> > Personally I favor b). What do you think?
>>>
>>> My initial reaction was "there's no overlap between pastry and
>>> confectionery, they are totally different things". Some cultural
>>> background: in France, shops selling candys are very rare, but shops
>>> selling pastries are very common because bread shops are everywhere
>>> and usually also sell pastries and danishes. Pastry-only shops are
>>> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>>>
>>> But using shop=confectionery and refining that into raw sug^W^Wsubtags
>>> makes sense too.
>>>
>>> For the subtag itself, I'm not a fan of FOO_confectionery=yes: I think
>>> that confectionery=FOO follows established tag-creation best practices
>>> better. It's used a bit in the db already. And if one needs to tag
>>> multiple types, either "confectionery=FOO;BAR" or
>>> "confectionery:FOO=yes confectgionery:BAR=yes" works for me (but I
>>> prefer the later).
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


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

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Bryce Nesbitt]

In the USA one occasionally sees "local traffic only" signed.
It's meant to counter cut-through traffic by commuters and delivery trucks.



One city installed physical barriers to such use:
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=8238#Diverters
http://quirkyberkeley.com/fire-hydrants-and-traffic-barriers/
Deliberately breaking up the street grid to force through traffic onto
main streets.

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

Re: [Tagging] Roads with motor vehicle access limited to residents of a specific town

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Bryce Nesbitt 
wrote:

> In the USA one occasionally sees "local traffic only" signed.
> It's meant to counter cut-through traffic by commuters and delivery trucks.
>

Usually that would be access=destination.  Not quite the same that you can
only drive it if you're _from_ that street...


> One city installed physical barriers to such use:
> http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=8238#Diverters
> http://quirkyberkeley.com/fire-hydrants-and-traffic-barriers/
> Deliberately breaking up the street grid to force through traffic onto
> main streets.


Enough cities have done this now that I'm thinking Tulsa's actually
relatively rare in that it's bicycle boulevards are *not*
motor_vehicle=destination
with lots of bicycle exempt turn restrictions.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 68, Issue 35

[Volker Schmidt]

I only now, after having lived for many years in the UK, I realise that the
definition of gravel is wider than the equivalent of the German Splitt. I
thought them equivalent.

Looking it up in the English Wikipedia I found contradictory information.

In
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravel_road
"gravel" is "crushed stone" and raoughly aequivalent to the German Splitt

But in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravel
"gravel" is more generic and can, for example,  also be pebbles of
different sizes.



On 11 May 2015 at 15:42, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Am 10.05.2015 um 15:29 schrieb Lists :
>
> +1 for pebbles.
>
>
> Don’t create a ridiculous amount of surface values, for roads there are
> mainly 3 interesting values (paved/unpaved/setting stones), and for
> non-road usage it should be free to cover about any exposed surfaces, i.e.
> beaches can be sand/pebbles/rock, tennis courts can be
> clay/synthetic/asphalt (and other values?), a soccer field can be
> grass/synthetic/asphalt?
>
>
>
> glad you mention pebbles: I always wondered what were the right values for
> crushed rock (angular rock) in the size classes 5mm to 32mm/64mm, as both,
> gravel and pebbles seem to refer to naturally created, smooth, small pieces
> of stone (eg from rivers), while most streets I am aware of are made from
> crushed rock (at least around here).
>
> For reference, in German the terms are Bruchsand (<5mm), Splitt (2-32mm)
> and Schotter (32-64mm) as opposed to pieces of natural provenience (German:
> Kies). I'm particularly interested in the term(s) for Splitt.
> (I guess it is chippings, but this is not a common value for surfaces in
> Osm (strangely just 5 occurrences)).
>
> cheers
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Andreas Goss]

Pastry-only shops are
quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).


But is pastry = patisserie ?

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/03/de/f0/35/el-tawhid-pastry.jpg

http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/05/28/25/df/patisserie-richard.jpg

Because the first image is what every bakery in Germany usually sells, 
too. But the 2nd one while you can often find some limited selection at 
bakeries, is what we usually buy at a Konditorei which has a much larger 
selecter with higher quality and looks like this:


http://www.reschinsky.com/online/media/Torten_2.jpg
__
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 11.05.2015 18:18, Andreas Goss napisał(a):

Pastry-only shops are
quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).


But is pastry = patisserie ?


Yet another item just for sugar?... =}

I was about to create an icon for shop=confectionery in default map 
style, because it looked like an easy thing with so high tag occurrence. 
Now I see the problem is complicated than only drawing the best I can:


https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1534

We may just choose tagging scheme like "this and that", but I would also 
like to know which icon should be associated with each of suggested 
tags, so kind of a category tree (like "candy is more specific than 
confectionery") would be very helpful.


--
Piaseczno Miasto Wąskotorowe

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

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

[John F. Eldredge]

Speaking as an American, I would refer to that as a mix of cobbles and setts 
(some of the stones in the photo look rounded, some squared, and some 
irregular). They appear ti be about the size of a human palm. I think of 
pebbles as rocks of finger-diameter or less, such as the pea gravel often used 
on the surface of concrete driveways, for ornamental reasons.


On May 11, 2015 6:46:10 AM CDT, "pmailkeey ."  wrote:
>On 10 May 2015 at 15:34, Andy Mabbett 
>wrote:
>
>> On 10 May 2015 at 13:19, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>>
>> > pebblestones is a road surface where pebbles are set in sand or
>mortar
>> (?)
>> > and is typically seen in old cities. Example:
>> > http://mapillary.com/map/im/2KnVHcwLqcyy6Qis4iWF1Q
>>
>> In British English, those are cobbles or cobblestinoes:
>>
>
>
>Those are pebbles - or pebblestone
>
>Cobbles are rounded and difficult to walk on
>
>esp. when wet
>
>Then there's setts
>
>- squarer blocks
>
>
>
>-- 
>Mike.
>@millomweb 
>-
>For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
>via *the area's premier website - *
>
>*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
>property
>& pets*
>
>T&Cs 
>
>
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] surface=brick -> surface=bricks?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Neither is documented at wiki but meaning seems clear and synonymous.

surface=bricks is used 1997 times, surface=brick 541 times.

surface=bricks is also consistent with plural form of popular
countable surface values - surface=paving_stones and
surface=concrete:plates

Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
surface=bricks?

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging village sign

[John F. Eldredge]

In the USA, such signs are more commonly at or near the edge of the community, 
so that you see what community you are entering, rather than at its center. 
Also, while some communities have a public square, not all do so.


On May 8, 2015 4:50:37 AM CDT, "Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)" 
 wrote:
>On 7 May 2015 at 23:11, pmailkeey .  wrote:
>> Tips on tagging a village sign please.
>>
>> Village sign: an ornate sign located fairly central to the village -
>such as
>> on the village green.
>
>There are lots of these signs near where I live. See
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_sign for examples.
>
>I've always used man_made=village_sign to tag them -- which seems to
>have a number of uses according to
>http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=village+sign#values
>(although a good proportional of them are probably down to me).
>
>The village name shown on the sign should also be recorded, and for
>that I've used name=*. I know that perhaps doesn't quite fit with the
>usual use of name=*, as here it's the name being shown, rather than
>the name of the sign, but I thought it was close enough. But if anyone
>has any better suggestions there...
>
>Robert.
>
>-- 
>Robert Whittaker
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] HOT: potential Helicopter landings leisure=common

[John F. Eldredge]

This is definitely something that needs a site survey.


On May 11, 2015 6:00:29 AM CDT, "pmailkeey ."  wrote:
>There are a number of reasons we shouldn't tag random places as
>potential
>emergency helipads:
>
>   - Ground conditions
>   - overhead obstructions
>- don't think we're qualified to make assessment (without site visit
>and
>   heli knowledge)
>   - A heli pilot wouldn't use our info - he'd always make his own
>   assessment on the day - so little point in having 'data'.
>   - etc.
>
>
>-- 
>Mike.
>@millomweb 
>-
>For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
>via *the area's premier website - *
>
>*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
>property
>& pets*
>
>T&Cs 
>
>
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[John F. Eldredge]

In the same way, there is a tradition of "boiled cookies" in the USA, that are 
on the borderline between cookies (biscuits, in British terminology) and candy. 
They involve a sticky, sweetened grain, most commonly oatmeal (rolled oats).  
Here is an example:



On May 11, 2015 10:47:43 AM CDT, Satoshi IIDA  wrote:
>There are Japanese "non-baked" confectioneries.
>(I believe similar confectioneries in other countries. esp. in Asia)
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagashi
>
>If we take only a) plan, I'm afraid of we could not represent cultural
>variations.
>
>+1 to Janko's a+b),
>and to express the specialty, moltonel's "confectionery:FOO=yes
>confectionery:BAR=yes".
>
>
>
>2015-05-12 0:24 GMT+09:00 Janko Mihelić :
>
>> I would be more in favor of a+b) because you might want to tag a
>place
>> with shop=pastry because 95% of their assortiment is pastry, but they
>have
>> 5% candy so you add candy=yes.
>>
>> Janko
>>
>> pon, 11. svi 2015. 17:12 Brad Neuhauser  je
>> napisao:
>>
>>> In my experience, most places that sell pastries would be better
>tagged
>>> as bakery. Even if they only sell pastries (ie no bread), they do
>have to
>>> bake them, right? :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, moltonel 3x Combo
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On 11/05/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
 > I believe there is some overlap between the shop values
 >
 > confectionery
 > pastry
 > candy
 > sweets
 >
 > shop=confectionery is used much more often than the other 3 (10K
>vs.
 300
 > vs. 100 vs. 50) and is likely covering all of these, but is quite
 generic.
 > For the very reason it can be used for both: pastry (baker's
 confections)
 > and candy (sugar confections), it is often less useful IMHO (at
>least
 > without subtag, which is currently not documented). "often",
>because in
 > some countries these tend to be distinct shops, but in other
>contexts
 there
 > might be shops that are offering both kind.
 >
 > If you are looking for sugar confections or baker's confections,
 finding a
 > shop that only sells the other variant of confections will not be
 helpful
 > but rather a big annoyance.
 >
 > From previous discussions on this matter I believe to remember
>that
 > "pastry" is actually not covering the entire subset of baker's
 confections,
 > so the term might be less appropriate.
 >
 > "sweets" is not very specific neither, is not defined in the wiki
>and
 can
 > maybe cover both, candy and pastry, or might be a synonym for
 candy/sugar
 > confections (I am not sure about this, would be nice to hear what
>the
 > natives say). It also doesn't seem to add any additional
>information
 with
 > respect to confectionery, so I would suggest to deprecate its use
 > completely.
 >
 > I think we could deal with this situation in several ways:
 >
 > a) use confectionery, pastry and candy as competing top-level
>tags and
 > suggest to be the most specific where possible (i.e. aim to have
>only
 mixed
 > shops tagged with the generic confectionery tag and recommend the
>more
 > specific pastry and candy tags where applicable).
 >
 > b) recommend to only use confectionery as the main top level tag
>and
 use
 > subtags like bakers_confectionery=yes and/or
>sugar_confectionery=yes to
 > make the distinction
 >
 > c) your suggestion here
 >
 > Personally I favor b). What do you think?

 My initial reaction was "there's no overlap between pastry and
 confectionery, they are totally different things". Some cultural
 background: in France, shops selling candys are very rare, but
>shops
 selling pastries are very common because bread shops are everywhere
 and usually also sell pastries and danishes. Pastry-only shops are
 quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).

 But using shop=confectionery and refining that into raw
>sug^W^Wsubtags
 makes sense too.

 For the subtag itself, I'm not a fan of FOO_confectionery=yes: I
>think
 that confectionery=FOO follows established tag-creation best
>practices
 better. It's used a bit in the db already. And if one needs to tag
 multiple types, either "confectionery=FOO;BAR" or
 "confectionery:FOO=yes confectgionery:BAR=yes" works for me (but I
 prefer the later).

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

>>>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/li

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick -> surface=bricks?

[pmailkeey .]

On 11 May 2015 at 21:40, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:

> Neither is documented at wiki but meaning seems clear and synonymous.
>
> surface=bricks is used 1997 times, surface=brick 541 times.
>
> surface=bricks is also consistent with plural form of popular
> countable surface values - surface=paving_stones and
> surface=concrete:plates
>
> Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
> surface=bricks?
>
>

   1. Is there any good reason for changing 'brick' to 'bricks' ? If that's
   what you're searching for, look for 'brick', it won't matter if there's ans
   on the end
   2. 'Bricks' clearly describes "bricks" but does 'brick' describe
   'brick-like' as in material [brick dust, (bricks dust)].

We are perhaps familiar with brick walls but not bricks wall - raising the
question should the pluralising s be removed ?

If it's not hurting anyone, leave it alone ?


-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

[pmailkeey .]

On 11 May 2015 at 21:35, John F. Eldredge  wrote:

> Speaking as an American, I would refer to that as a mix of cobbles and
> setts (some of the stones in the photo look rounded, some squared, and some
> irregular). They appear ti be about the size of a human palm. I think of
> pebbles as rocks of finger-diameter or less, such as the pea gravel often
> used on the surface of concrete driveways, for ornamental reasons.
>
>
>
Pebbles to me are 'rounded stones' (aka 'cornerless) of any size as found
washed up on a beach having been ground by rubbing against each other with
tidal action. What you describe, I think we'd call 'shingle'.

There ought to be an American translation of the wiki and osm interfaces.


-- 
Mike.
@millomweb  -
For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
via *the area's premier website - *

*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property
& pets*

T&Cs 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick -> surface=bricks?

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> Neither is documented at wiki but meaning seems clear and synonymous.
>
> surface=bricks is used 1997 times, surface=brick 541 times.
>
> surface=bricks is also consistent with plural form of popular
> countable surface values - surface=paving_stones and
> surface=concrete:plates
>
> Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
> surface=bricks?


In American English the term "brick wall" sounds fine.  "Bricks wall" is
odd.
If you asked "what's the bike shed made of?" either "bricks" or "brick"
would be fine answers.


I think that data consumers should accept both, and thus it does not matter
how people tag it.
Describe both on the wiki as redirects to the same place.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[moltonel 3x Combo]

On 11/05/2015, Andreas Goss  wrote:
>> Pastry-only shops are
>> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>
> But is pastry = patisserie ?

To me it is, but deserts are very tied to the local culture, so I'm
sure opinions will differ.


> http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/03/de/f0/35/el-tawhid-pastry.jpg
>
> http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/05/28/25/df/patisserie-richard.jpg
>
> Because the first image is what every bakery in Germany usually sells,
> too. But the 2nd one while you can often find some limited selection at
> bakeries, is what we usually buy at a Konditorei which has a much larger
> selecter with higher quality and looks like this:
>
> http://www.reschinsky.com/online/media/Torten_2.jpg

A french "patisserie" will sell both kinds. A "boulangerie" will
almost always also sell croisants (the first kind) even if it sells no
other sweet stuff. For what it's worth, the first kind is generally
refered to "vienoiseries" in France (where I come from) and "danish
pastry" in Ireland (where I live).

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[moltonel 3x Combo]

On 11/05/2015, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 11.05.2015 18:18, Andreas Goss napisał(a):
>>> Pastry-only shops are
>>> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>>
>> But is pastry = patisserie ?
>
> Yet another item just for sugar?... =}

Blaspheme ! :p You shouldn't compare Haribo-type sweets which *are*
mostly sugar with the deserts sold in a patisserie which can be
relatively healthy (yes, you need to double-check with the
boulangère). There's no sugar at all in the traditional croissant
recipe, and the butter-less version is common. Come and visit some
day, I'll bake you my no-sugar yes-beetroot brownie which is tastyer
than the classic brownie :)

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[johnw]

> On May 12, 2015, at 12:47 AM, Satoshi IIDA  wrote:
> 
> 
> There are Japanese "non-baked" confectioneries.
> (I believe similar confectioneries in other countries. esp. in Asia)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagashi 
> 
> If we take only a) plan, I'm afraid of we could not represent cultural 
> variations.
> 
> +1 to Janko's a+b),
> and to express the specialty, moltonel's "confectionery:FOO=yes 
> confectionery:BAR=yes”.


I guess there are Wagashi shops, but I never notice them. 

I usually see “desert bakeries” - little cakes and bigger cakes for sale (Mon 
Cherie?) 

and regular Japanese パンや “bread shops” selling curry-pan, melon-pan, and sliced 
bread and whatnot, and then “traditional sweets” shops, selling the little mint 
sticks, star candy, and other old style confectionaries. 

Aren’t the wagashi usually found at the “traditional” sweet shops? 

I have not seen a shop in Japan selling only modern candy (snickers bars, gummy 
snacks, etc) like you would find in a mall in America. 

my favorite dessert shop in japan is a big chain called  “シャトレーゼ” Chateraise 
which is a cake bakery, Ice Cream Shop, and also sells cookies and their 
special wine via BYO bottle. 

http://www.chateraise.co.jp/products/itemcatelist.php

If you want to segment up sweets, it might be a good idea to me more inclusive 
with other “prepared” desert items, like ice cream, ice cream cakes, and such -

so confectionary would be part of a greater “desserts” category.

シャトレーゼ:
desserts:bakery_confections=yes desserts:cakes=yes 
desserts:sugar_confections=no  desserts:gelatin=yes  
desserts:single_icecream=yes desserts:bulk_icecream=yes desserts:soft_serve=no 
desserts:shakes=no


 

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

Re: [Tagging] surface=pebbles -> surface=pebblestone ?

[John F. Eldredge]

In American usage, by contrast, the mixed-sizes, rounded rocks you would find 
on a rocky beach are shingle. Only the smaller of such rocks would be referred 
to as pebbles. Pea gravel refers specifically to pea-sized pebbles, generally 
mined from a stream bed or river bed.


On May 11, 2015 5:50:26 PM CDT, "pmailkeey ."  wrote:
>On 11 May 2015 at 21:35, John F. Eldredge  wrote:
>
>> Speaking as an American, I would refer to that as a mix of cobbles
>and
>> setts (some of the stones in the photo look rounded, some squared,
>and some
>> irregular). They appear ti be about the size of a human palm. I think
>of
>> pebbles as rocks of finger-diameter or less, such as the pea gravel
>often
>> used on the surface of concrete driveways, for ornamental reasons.
>>
>>
>>
>Pebbles to me are 'rounded stones' (aka 'cornerless) of any size as
>found
>washed up on a beach having been ground by rubbing against each other
>with
>tidal action. What you describe, I think we'd call 'shingle'.
>
>There ought to be an American translation of the wiki and osm
>interfaces.
>
>
>-- 
>Mike.
>@millomweb 
>-
>For all your info on Millom and South Copeland
>via *the area's premier website - *
>
>*currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family,
>property
>& pets*
>
>T&Cs 
>
>
>
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=confectionery / pastry / candy / sweets

[John F. Eldredge]

Minor nitpick: desserts are sweet foods, usually eaten at the end of a meal. 
Deserts are areas with little rainfall, and sparse or no vegetation.


On May 11, 2015 6:17:08 PM CDT, moltonel 3x Combo  wrote:
>On 11/05/2015, Andreas Goss  wrote:
>>> Pastry-only shops are
>>> quite rare. See also shop=patisserie (62 uses).
>>
>> But is pastry = patisserie ?
>
>To me it is, but deserts are very tied to the local culture, so I'm
>sure opinions will differ.
>
>
>>
>http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/03/de/f0/35/el-tawhid-pastry.jpg
>>
>>
>http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/05/28/25/df/patisserie-richard.jpg
>>
>> Because the first image is what every bakery in Germany usually
>sells,
>> too. But the 2nd one while you can often find some limited selection
>at
>> bakeries, is what we usually buy at a Konditorei which has a much
>larger
>> selecter with higher quality and looks like this:
>>
>> http://www.reschinsky.com/online/media/Torten_2.jpg
>
>A french "patisserie" will sell both kinds. A "boulangerie" will
>almost always also sell croisants (the first kind) even if it sells no
>other sweet stuff. For what it's worth, the first kind is generally
>refered to "vienoiseries" in France (where I come from) and "danish
>pastry" in Ireland (where I live).
>
>___
>Tagging mailing list
>Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick -> surface=bricks?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Mon, 11 May 2015 23:42:00 +0100
"pmailkeey ."  wrote:

> On 11 May 2015 at 21:40, Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
> 
> > Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
> > surface=bricks?
> >
> >
> 
>1. Is there any good reason for changing 'brick' to 'bricks' ?

Yes - surface key has many, many values. There is also plenty of 
quite popular values and merging ones that are indistinguishable from
each other makes easier to process this data.

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

Re: [Tagging] surface=brick -> surface=bricks?

[Andrew Errington]

"Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
surface=bricks?"

Yes.  In English, brick can be an adjective as well as a noun.  As an
adjective, as it is here, it should have no "s".

On 12 May 2015 at 05:40, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:

> Neither is documented at wiki but meaning seems clear and synonymous.
>
> surface=bricks is used 1997 times, surface=brick 541 times.
>
> surface=bricks is also consistent with plural form of popular
> countable surface values - surface=paving_stones and
> surface=concrete:plates
>
> Is there any good reason to avoid changing existing surface=brick to
> surface=bricks?
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging