Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - CoreIndoor
Currently nothing breaks when SIT is used and additional ways are added as a stop gap measure to enable "current" routing engines to work a bit in such areas (just as it is common to do with pedestrian areas and so on), and nobody has suggested that such mapping be outlawed (if that was at all possible in an OSM context). What however is being requested is that we add a parallel tagging scheme to SIT based on using ways. That would seem to be turning the clock back 5 years. IndoorOSM, on which SIT is loosely based historically, used areas for corridors and similar elements and had a working routing engine that didn't require adding additional ways in 2012. It would seem silly to spend effort to closely specify something that we want to move away from. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2017/Project_Ideas#Support_for_indoor_routing_.28SIT_schema.29 for something that would allow us to move forward, not backward. Simon Am 19.02.2017 um 12:06 schrieb Richard: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:42:13PM +0100, Tobias Knerr wrote: > >> (2.) Corridors/stairs can use ways >> >> This is probably where opinions will vary the most. The decision in favour >> of area tagging was one of the most fundamental that we made when drafting >> SIT. Because of this, using highway ways for corridors feels like a big >> change away from SIT, not merely an extension. > not really for or against it, but one thing that should be considered is the > large number of buildings mapped without SIT but with some indoor elements > and ways mapped using various other methods eg tunnel=buidling_passage, > highway=corridor, covered etc. > Those should not be orthogonal to SIT but enhance each other where possible. > > Richard > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] knotted willows
There are problems with this approach.
Many trees are pollarded once in their lifetimes: I'm currently looking out at
some Beech trees which were probably pollarded 70 years ago, and there's a
Birch which was pollarded rather crudely 50 years ago in the neighbours garden.
Ancient pollards can be 500 years old. Re-pollarding a tree which has not been
managed in this way for a long time is a rather hazardous operation for the
tree.
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| |
Pollarding - Wikipedia
| |
|
|
If a macrophanerophyte is regularly pollarded then it's probably wrong to call
it a tree. Most coppiced plants will only be allowed to grow to 5-8 m high and
the individual stems will rarely be more than 10cm diameter. In Britain Hazel,
Sallows, and Ash are certainly still coppiced. Oak has been coppiced in the
past as a source of charcoal. However, like pollarded trees neglected coppice
stools can grow into large multi-stemmed trees. A typical scenario is a wetland
site where seedlings of any trees are cut close to ground-level ('coppiced') to
maintain the wetland habitat: this is a relatively easy intervention and can be
repeated. However, once tree cover can no longer be halted, or when the ground
dries out, then the coppice stools will be left to grow of their own accord. In
most former gravel pits in Britain there are numerous examples of 15m high
mutli-stemmed Crack Willows which originated in this way.
In general I don't think coppicing is a useful thing to apply to an individual
tree. Coppicing is more usually a woodland management technique and therefore
belongs to natural=wood and landuse=forest. A typical woodland form in Britain
is a wood which is coppice with standards. The understorey (most usually Hazel,
but in Bradfield Woods it's Ash) is coppiced on a cycle which may be from 5-20
years. Some trees are always retained and form the canopy. Historically the
understorey produced firewood, and poles, the standard trees were felled for
timber.
For individual trees we might recognise the following properties:
- The tree is a pollard (i.e., has been pollarded at least once fairly early
in its life)
- The tree is currently managed by repetitive pollarding
- The tree is multi-stemmed as a result of growing from a coppice stool
- The tree is multi-stemmed as a result of growing from the planting of 2 or
more saplings in a bundle (bundle planting)
Tall Common Limes (Tilia x europea) are often managed by a pollarding-like
process: side branches are removed, the crown is severely reduced, and the
trunk is cut short at the top. I'm not sure if this qualifies as a pollard.
Additionally there are other styles of regular pruning. For instance fruit
trees in the Swiss Mittelland are pruned in a way which is very recognisable,
so that it is quite easy to identify former orchards where the pruning ceased
decades ago. The tree is usually pruned to have a leader and four principle
branches. I suspect this Wikipedia article describes the technique in depth.
Oaks growing in Dehesa (Cork, Holm and Pyrenean) are pruned in a not dissimilar
manner, perhaps with 3 main branches, but the centre of the crown is kept
fairly open. You can see examples here. However I would not choose to add this
information to OSM: it is safe to assume that trees in Spanish Dehesa and Swiss
Orchards will generally be manage this way. Quite beside which there are
something like 37 million oaks in the dehesas of Extremadura.
Jerry
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
||
Dehesa
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| |
Oeschbergschnitt – Wikipedia
| |
|
|
From: joost schouppe
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
Sent: Friday, 17 February 2017, 16:26
Subject: Re: [Tagging] knotted willows
Considering that there are several management styles for individual trees, we
could have something like
tree:managament=pollard
Other values might be none (allowed to grow free), copicce (pruned almost to
the ground), espalier (pruned into a flat vertical surface), etc.
tree:management:operator=* could then be used to indicate who is keeping the
tree pruned.
Maybe tree:pruning_style would be more logical?
2017-02-11 13:34 GMT+01:00 Wolfgang Zenker :
Hi,
* joost schouppe [170211 09:43]:
> One of the defining small landscape elements in Flanders (and probably many
> rural areas in Europe) is the "knotted willow". I'm not sure if this is the
> right term in English, in Dutch "knotwilg" really is a thing.
> How would you tag such a thing? (I could not find any previous discussions
> anywhere)
> natural=tree
> genus=Salix
> +
> management_style=knotted
> Or something like that?
> Apparently there's two words in Dutch:
> - knotwilg: knotted at about 2 meters high
> - grienden: knotted at a hight of maximum 50 cm
apparently english has words for these managements styles:
- "knotwilg" would b
Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge
I've many such things: the material is called brash (sometimes brush) in the UK. It is often just collected in piles or in longer rows (typically at the edge of the area being worked on) and these are usually referred to as brash piles. Brash is also used to deliberately fill gaps to discourage people (& their dogs) from accessing places. Dead hedge is just not a term that I recognise: it certainly isn't standard British English in the conservation sector. Some hedgelaying techniques of interweaving can be used, but these are in the main to reduce the size & profile of the pile. When used as a barrier brash is usually used to plug small gaps rather than to create a continuous barrier. Note that sometimes brash is simply not cleared after chainsaw or brush-cutting and this may appear to a deliberate rather than a transient & accidental barrier. I would therefore suggest barrier=brash_pile or brush_pile, and despite Wikipedia not dead hedge. Like every other native English speaker on this list dead hedge means a hedge where the plants have died. Jerry From: Andy Townsend To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 13 February 2017, 21:02 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge On 13/02/2017 20:46, Chris Hill wrote: > > It's a fence. > +1 to that. Despite both of the refs on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hedge being English ones, it's not an English term I recognise at all, and it could have been designed to confuse. Cheers, Andy ___ 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] Dead hedge
Just re-read the section in the BCTV handbook and the form they describe under "dead hedging" is rather different from the straightforward brash pile. Both exist, although in my experience the latter is commoner, but I don't do conservation work in woodland suffering from too much grazing by deer. Note also the use of cut thorny shrubs to create protective barriers in African villages. Either way I would still strongly advise avoiding "dead hedge" as it is not a term which is likely to be widely understood, and will clearly be mis-understood In construction these are closest to wattle fences, although the construction material which is interwoven is wood brash rather than nice coppice poles. Jerry From: Jerry Clough - OSM To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Sent: Monday, 20 February 2017, 14:18 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge I've many such things: the material is called brash (sometimes brush) in the UK. It is often just collected in piles or in longer rows (typically at the edge of the area being worked on) and these are usually referred to as brash piles. Brash is also used to deliberately fill gaps to discourage people (& their dogs) from accessing places. Dead hedge is just not a term that I recognise: it certainly isn't standard British English in the conservation sector. Some hedgelaying techniques of interweaving can be used, but these are in the main to reduce the size & profile of the pile. When used as a barrier brash is usually used to plug small gaps rather than to create a continuous barrier. Note that sometimes brash is simply not cleared after chainsaw or brush-cutting and this may appear to a deliberate rather than a transient & accidental barrier. I would therefore suggest barrier=brash_pile or brush_pile, and despite Wikipedia not dead hedge. Like every other native English speaker on this list dead hedge means a hedge where the plants have died. Jerry From: Andy Townsend To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 13 February 2017, 21:02 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge On 13/02/2017 20:46, Chris Hill wrote: > > It's a fence. > +1 to that. Despite both of the refs on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hedge being English ones, it's not an English term I recognise at all, and it could have been designed to confuse. Cheers, Andy ___ 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] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
I can't find any ports in my OSM data. I'm afraid I just forgot to add this tag in styles when import.Anyway, what is the correct way to get ports?In openstreetmap.org I can't find them too but I don't know if the port was just not added yet.This is the Rio de Janeiro port. When I query this area I can't get any indications of a port there.https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-22.8789/-43.2068&layers=NPort of Santos (São Paulo, Brazil): No port too.https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/597311#map=15/-23.9656/-46.2833&layers=NThanks."Marinha do Brasil, protegendo nossas riquezas, cuidando da nossa gente" ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 12:58 PM, wrote: > I can't find any ports in my OSM data. I'm afraid I just forgot to add this > tag in styles when import. > Anyway, what is the correct way to get ports? They are "harbours" You can take a look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Harbour Also, we have a local community here in Brazil, which you may also like to join. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
2017-02-20 16:58 GMT+01:00 : > I can't find any ports in my OSM data. I'm afraid I just forgot to add > this tag in styles when import. > Anyway, what is the correct way to get ports? > I would have expected them in man_made but apparently they are "hidden" in seamark subtags, a few hundred landuses (also: harbour) and under "harbour=yes". Here's an overview: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Harbour Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge
In the USA, those would commonly be referred to as a brush pile or brush row. They are commonly seen at the edge of a field that has recently been cleared of bushes and saplings. Sometimes they are left to decay in place, sometimes they are burned, and sometimes they are ground up by a wood-chipper and hauled away. On February 20, 2017 8:19:04 AM Jerry Clough - OSM wrote: I've many such things: the material is called brash (sometimes brush) in the UK. It is often just collected in piles or in longer rows (typically at the edge of the area being worked on) and these are usually referred to as brash piles. Brash is also used to deliberately fill gaps to discourage people (& their dogs) from accessing places. Dead hedge is just not a term that I recognise: it certainly isn't standard British English in the conservation sector. Some hedgelaying techniques of interweaving can be used, but these are in the main to reduce the size & profile of the pile. When used as a barrier brash is usually used to plug small gaps rather than to create a continuous barrier. Note that sometimes brash is simply not cleared after chainsaw or brush-cutting and this may appear to a deliberate rather than a transient & accidental barrier. I would therefore suggest barrier=brash_pile or brush_pile, and despite Wikipedia not dead hedge. Like every other native English speaker on this list dead hedge means a hedge where the plants have died. Jerry From: Andy Townsend To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 13 February 2017, 21:02 Subject: Re: [Tagging] Dead hedge On 13/02/2017 20:46, Chris Hill wrote: It's a fence. +1 to that. Despite both of the refs on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_hedge being English ones, it's not an English term I recognise at all, and it could have been designed to confuse. Cheers, Andy ___ 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] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
Ports and harbours are not the same thing. A harbour is merely a sheltered body of water protected by man made or natural structures. A port, on the other hand, is the whole infrastructure for handling ships & their cargoes. This may include any number of harbour areas, but also wharves, piers, docks, quays, warehouses, terminal buildings, admin & customs offices, etc. So such areas would be better served with a 'port' tag of some kind. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
sent from a phone > On 20 Feb 2017, at 18:15, Malcolm Herring > wrote: > > Ports and harbours are not the same thing. A harbour is merely a sheltered > body of water protected by man made or natural structures. A port, on the > other hand, is the whole infrastructure for handling ships & their cargoes. agreed, the wiki page titled 'Harbour' gives an overview of both, maybe the page should be renamed cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
On 20/02/2017 20:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: agreed, the wiki page titled 'Harbour' gives an overview of both, maybe the page should be renamed I could rename it "Harbours and Ports" and add text to cover ports, but first I need some agreed tagging for ports. That was the question asked in the OP. Most of the instances of "landuse=harbour" are over areas that are in fact port facilities. Other port areas tend to be tagged "landuse=industrial". Maybe someone can propose a port specific tagging? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
PS: I was going to propose "landuse=port" as an obvious choice. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] landuse=industrial with industrial=port
2017-02-21 8:16 GMT+01:00 Malcolm Herring : > On 20/02/2017 20:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> agreed, the wiki page titled 'Harbour' gives an overview of both, maybe >> the page should be renamed >> > > I could rename it "Harbours and Ports" and add text to cover ports, but > first I need some agreed tagging for ports. That was the question asked in > the OP. Most of the instances of "landuse=harbour" are over areas that are > in fact port facilities. Other port areas tend to be tagged > "landuse=industrial". > > Maybe someone can propose a port specific tagging? I use already my proposal, I haven't migrated to the correct page, but it's here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dport Ciao, Stefano > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
