Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Apr 2017, at 20:04, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
> In Belgium you can e.g buy tax stamps in a post office, and not in a
> courier office.


this could change any time though. In Italy you can buy tax stamps at tobacco 
shops.


> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards.


why? Maybe those mentioned offer only parcel shipping but there are also 
private letter mail operators in some places 


> We also know that you  can do certain money transactions in a post
> office, etc.


technically in the places I am aware, these operations are done in a "bank" 
section of the post office, and not every office does them, and it should be 
considered to tag these parts as banks.

I would expect from the proposal to define which places are to get the tag:

- is public access/a counter required? Or is this also e.g. for an office where 
you would call to have someone pick up your mail?

- what about distribution centers (e.g. huge distribution and sorting 
warehouses alongside big roads and motorways)?

etc.

Currently this is not defined, and would lead to quite different places 
(functionally) getting the same tag

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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Apr 2017, at 20:04, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
> We have different words for the two concepts in many languages, so why
> can't we use those two words in mapping/tagging ?


is it really 2 different concepts and not maybe more?

Ciao, Martin 

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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Paul Johnson]

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> > How is it not a post office that just happens to have an operator other
> than
> > the state?
>
> So if I ask you "where is the nearest post office?" , it is possible
> that you send me to a DHL office ?
>

If it's not unambiguous by context that one is expecting a US Post Office
specifically, I might point you in the direction of a Postal Annex, UPS
Store, FedEx Office or Lone Star Express, since they all offer
approximately the same services (passport photos, shipping and packaging
being the common elements) and are probably closer than a US Post Office.
Now, if someone were to ask me "Where's the post office for 74137", then
I'd give 'em directions to the US Post Office in downtown Jenks, Oklahoma,
which serves that town and adjacent neighborhoods in Tulsa.

I don't believe DHL has customer-facing locations in the US at this point,
though; I seem to recall since they're Germany's national courrier that
they had a bit of a terf spat with the USPS, our national courier.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Paul Johnson]

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards.


Not to sound contrarian, but why not?  When I was homeless, my "permanent
address" was a rental box at a UPS Store by where I went to high school.
FedEx Office is the only courier office that doesn't accept US Mail to send
out and the only one that comes to mind other than Lone Star Express that
doesn't typically have mailboxes to rent.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[muzirian]

> I would expect from the proposal to define which places are to get the
tag:

Made them clear on proposal.



On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>
>> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards.
>
>
> Not to sound contrarian, but why not?  When I was homeless, my "permanent
> address" was a rental box at a UPS Store by where I went to high school.
> FedEx Office is the only courier office that doesn't accept US Mail to send
> out and the only one that comes to mind other than Lone Star Express that
> doesn't typically have mailboxes to rent.
>
> ___
> 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] Why is this building not rendered?

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show
a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an
incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city).  The standard layer
doesn't show it but every other layer does, and it appears normal in
the ID editor.


Seems you refer to this object, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/341791043/history

When I first looked at the map, it was rendered correctly as building and name; however refreshing 
the page made it disappear.


So it looks like a glitch in Carto or in the rendering database. Do not immediately recommend 
tagging changes for such reason.


I have opened in ticket in Carto:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2611


Clicking the the history button shows the area affected by a flurry
of large scale edits including by woodpeck_repair, though I can't
associate edits with specific objects on the main page.


The object history has 4 versions, none if the edits is by by woodpeck_repair.

On 16.04.2017 07:40, Warin wrote:
> I think tagging it both as a amenity=school and building=school has confused 
things.

no that should be fine. If an amenity fills a building, the amenity tag can be 
on the building outline.

> I would remove the amenity=school and place that on a node with the name and 
address stuff.

That would be a mapping regression, since the school fills the building.
In the specific case it looks like the campus should be mapped.

> The wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool says to have
> a single node
> OR
> a way that encompasses the entire site - including buildings, parking, 
playgrounds...

This is not what the wiki says. It says "Mark the boundary of the school using an Area Area or place 
a Node Node in the middle of the site" thus it does not exclude having the amenity on the building.


tom


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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Warin]

On 16-Apr-17 05:34 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:



On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Marc Gemis > wrote:


On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org>> wrote:
> How is it not a post office that just happens to have an
operator other than
> the state?

So if I ask you "where is the nearest post office?" , it is possible
that you send me to a DHL office ?


If it's not unambiguous by context that one is expecting a US Post 
Office specifically, I might point you in the direction of a Postal 
Annex, UPS Store, FedEx Office or Lone Star Express, since they all 
offer approximately the same services (passport photos, shipping and 
packaging being the common elements) and are probably closer than a US 
Post Office.  Now, if someone were to ask me "Where's the post office 
for 74137", then I'd give 'em directions to the US Post Office in 
downtown Jenks, Oklahoma, which serves that town and adjacent 
neighborhoods in Tulsa.




When I ask for a 'post office' in Australia, New Zealand or the UK ... I 
get directed to a government run official Post Office (Australia Post, 
New Zealand Post or Royal Mail).
It has been some time, but when I was last in Greece and asked for a 
'post office' the directions then were also to a government run official 
Post Office.

I would find it most strange to be directed to a courier!

I have had some difficulty in getting some American internet firms to 
'post' stuff rather than 'courier' it.
Once they do it though they seam less reluctant the next time, once I 
even got a email saying how efficient the USPS was for the dispatch.
There are some US firms that only send by USPS! There are others that 
refuse to do so and therefore lack my custom.


My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a 
government run service with international links to other 'Post Offices'.
A 'posted' item would be through the 'Post Office' no mater the sending 
or receiving countries.


A 'couriered' item could be dispatched by one firm and then delivered by 
another firm as some firms do not have worldwide coverage but rely on 
agreements with other firms.


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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Paul Johnson]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a
> government run service with international links to other 'Post Offices'.
> A 'posted' item would be through the 'Post Office' no mater the sending or
> receiving countries.


That's where it gets messy again, since Federal Express was previously an
internal government service, and got spun off and privatized, yet still
handles the USPS's international services, evidently in a way that
parallels the DHL situation.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Marc Gemis]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>> I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards.
>
>
> why? Maybe those mentioned offer only parcel shipping but there are also 
> private letter mail operators in some places

I cannot find anything on the DHL about letters, only about parcels.
And also the price, it costs at least 4 EUR for sending a parcel to a
shop, 6 EUR for home delivery.
Sending a letter via regular post (which might take longer to be
delivered) is cheaper.

Of course this can change in the future and maybe one day there is no
difference anymore. But now there is a IMHO a clear difference in
Belgium. But
we map the current situation, not the future :-)


m.

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

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

[Warin]

On 16-Apr-17 07:54 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show
a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an
incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city).  The standard layer
doesn't show it but every other layer does, and it appears normal in
the ID editor.


Seems you refer to this object, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/341791043/history


When I first looked at the map, it was rendered correctly as building 
and name; however refreshing the page made it disappear.


So it looks like a glitch in Carto or in the rendering database. Do 
not immediately recommend tagging changes for such reason.


I have opened in ticket in Carto:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2611


Clicking the the history button shows the area affected by a flurry
of large scale edits including by woodpeck_repair, though I can't
associate edits with specific objects on the main page.


The object history has 4 versions, none if the edits is by by 
woodpeck_repair.


On 16.04.2017 07:40, Warin wrote:
> I think tagging it both as a amenity=school and building=school has 
confused things.


no that should be fine. If an amenity fills a building, the amenity 
tag can be on the building outline.


> I would remove the amenity=school and place that on a node with the 
name and address stuff.


That would be a mapping regression, since the school fills the building.
In the specific case it looks like the campus should be mapped.

> The wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool 
says to have

> a single node
> OR
> a way that encompasses the entire site - including buildings, 
parking, playgrounds...


This is not what the wiki says. It says "Mark the boundary of the 
school using an Area Area or place a Node Node in the middle of the 
site" thus it does not exclude having the amenity on the building.

Direct and fuller quote from the wiki page I linked to above ..


 "/How to map/

/Mark the boundary of the school using an //Area 
Area 
//or place a //Node 
Node 
//in the middle of the 
site if you are in a hurry (or don't have access to information about 
the boundary and it is not obvious from aerial imagery). /


/This area should envelop the full grounds of the school including all 
the buildings, sports facilities and grounds. //For schools with 
multiple sites the multipolygon 
 relation can be used."


/The playground to the west of the building looks to be part of the 
school going by its name.
And I would think the parking area to the east of the building is also 
part of the school.


However on the information available to me ... I could not reliably map 
the extent of the school .. so I would map it as a node only.
I think this is not regression but removes an assumption (from the 
present tagging) that the school is limited to the building alone.



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

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

[Dave F]

On 16/04/2017 06:40, Warin wrote:


I would remove the amenity=school and place that on a node with the 
name and address stuff.


Leave the building as a 'Plain Jane' building=school.


This would be tagging explicitly for the renderer & making the database 
more inaccurate.


Leaving it as is, is adequate.

However, If you've enough local information, draw a closed polygon 
around the boundary of the school. Transfer all tags to that boundary 
except 'building=school' which should be added to each building within 
the area. Fill in the areas, such as recreation grounds, pitches, 
playgrounds etc, if known. This was successfully done for one of the 
quarterly projects on Talk-GB.



It appears some strange rendering decisions have been made for the 
'standard' carto, such as deciding whether to display either the 
'name=*' or 'add:number=*' of an 'amenity=office' based on it having a 
'building=*' tag.


DaveF


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[Kevin Kenny]

On 04/16/2017 06:01 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> wrote:



My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office'
implies a government run service with international links to other
'Post Offices'.
A 'posted' item would be through the 'Post Office' no mater the
sending or receiving countries. 



That's where it gets messy again, since Federal Express was previously 
an internal government service, and got spun off and privatized, yet 
still handles the USPS's international services, evidently in a way 
that parallels the DHL situation.


Where on Earth did you get that?  Federal Express was founded as a 
private corporation in 1971 by a gentleman by the name of Fred Smith. It 
is and has always been privately owned.


US Postal Service has outsourced its air carriage since the passage of 
the Contract Air Mail Act of 1925. FedEx does indeed hold an exclusive 
contract for international overnight express service at the moment (it's 
up for negotiation again in five years). Domestically, United, UPS, 
Eagle Express, Kalitta Air, Delta and American are the largest mail 
carriers.


The Boeing 727 aircraft you used to see with USPS livery were in fact 
contract aircraft, owned and operated by UPS.


FedEx is not and has never been a government agency nor under government 
ownership.


And (speaking as an American), if someone asked me to direct them to a 
post office, unless they were obviously about to send a parcel, I 
wouldn't send them to FedEx or the local copy shop (most of which offer 
shipping services, and some of which also offer a mailbox service).



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

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

[moltonel]

On 16 April 2017 11:54:19 IST, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>However on the information available to me ... I could not reliably map
>the extent of the school .. so I would map it as a node only.
>I think this is not regression but removes an assumption (from the 
>present tagging) that the school is limited to the building alone.

IMHO moving the tags from the building to a node is mainly a regression. Data 
users would no longer know that the full building is dedicated to the school 
(for example part of it could be residential/commercial/associative).

There is some logic in your POV that "no information is better than faulty 
information" (removing information about the school's geometry would be better 
than leaving a smaller-than-correct geometry), but if we were following that 
logic we'd hardly be able to contribute any data to OSM. Instead we add 
reasonably-correct data (amenity=school on the building) and later improve 
things.

If you can see that the school encompasses more than the building, draw the 
boundary. If you're not sure of the exact extent of that boundary, add a fixme 
tag or a note. Mapping a school as a node is probably only appropriate if the 
node is the only thing you map.
-- 
Vdp
Sent from a phone.

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

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

[muzirian]

>And (speaking as an American), if someone asked me to direct them to a
post office, unless they were obviously about to send a parcel, I wouldn't
send them to FedEx or the local copy shop (most of which offer shipping
services, and some of which also offer a mailbox service).

Thanks for clarifying the case for US, I guess this is the same for most
places.

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

Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

[jc86035]

> Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 09:04:57 +0900
> From: John Willis 
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
>   
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform
>   gates
> Message-ID: <7e170a8b-9d85-4c54-9844-6516eb269...@mac.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> 
> 
> Javbw
> 
>> On Apr 16, 2017, at 12:49 AM, jc86035  wrote:
>>
>> It'd be easier for mappers to just add a tag to the platform
>> or the side of the platform area.
> It might just be a tagged value of the transportation platform (like 
> covered=yes), but unmapped. 
> 
> Or perhaps, since the barrier is quite long is places (100m in Tokyo) and 
> 2/3rds of it is a unmoving wall, perhaps putting it in barrier=* is a good 
> idea, like barrier=platform_protection or similar. Some of the barriers are 
> whole walls with doors in the walls (Korea), or a low wall/fence you can put 
> your elbows on top of, with sliding gates that are also about 1m tall.
> 
> Map it as a way along the edge of the platform polygon, and you could use 
> nodes for the doors and add ref=* as necessary for the door positions (they 
> are all labeled in Tokyo) platform_protection=gate or similar to keep it out 
> of the normal barrier=gate. 
> 
> Javbw. 

I think it might help to have barrier=platform_gates and
barrier=platform_doors to avoid requiring another tag for which type it
is (default material=glass?). Having the nodes as platform_protection=*
(maybe platform_separation=*?) instead of barrier=* seems like a good
idea, since otherwise gates would all be rendered as regular gates.

jc86035

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

Re: [Tagging] Why is this building not rendered?

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 16.04.2017 11:54, Tom Pfeifer wrote:

On 16.04.2017 07:11, Tom Hardy wrote:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.95741/-93.36230 should show
a building=school (with amenity=school and other tags including an
incorrect addr:housenumber and addr:city).  The standard layer
doesn't show it but every other layer does, and it appears normal in
the ID editor.


Seems you refer to this object, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/341791043/history

So it looks like a glitch in Carto or in the rendering database. Do not 
immediately recommend
tagging changes for such reason.

I have opened in ticket in Carto:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2611


Identified as a glitch in the rendering databases, as assumed. See the carto 
ticket above and
https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/156 for explanation.

No need to change any tagging for this (of course the school campus can be 
drawn with local knowledge).

tom

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

Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

[John Willis]

Javbw
> On Apr 17, 2017, at 12:53 AM, jc86035  wrote:
> 
> barrier=platform_gates and
> barrier=platform_doors to avoid requiring another tag for which type it is

Sounds good. I think having a default material is wrong, as they are brushed 
stainless steel +plastic laminate in Tokyo (Keio lines), some with clear 
windows, and then plexiglass & tempered safety glass in (one station I visited) 
in Korea. I imagine they are different all over the world.

Height=* might be a good additional key - but is there an explicit way to say 
"floor-to-ceiling" (or full height)  for the full-height platform walls?
Korea: 
http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/city-hall/story/2012/12/no-seoul-style-platform-doors-for-new-york-subways-even-in-new-stations-00

Tokyo: (bottom of the page) 
http://www.sumidacrossing.org/ReferenceImages/SubwayStationScenery/

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

[Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

[Tom Hardy]

On Sunday, April 16, 2017 10:59:00 PM CDT Tom Pfeifer wrote:
 
> Identified as a glitch in the rendering databases, as assumed. See
> the carto ticket above and
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/156 for
> explanation.
> 
> No need to change any tagging for this (of course the school
> campus can be drawn with local knowledge).

I want to express thanks to all for a bit of education on the manner 
of discussion presented--how to refer to a specific object, how to 
(possibly) open a ticket, etc.  The wiki, for instance, led me to 
believe the way to open a ticket was to hang a note on an object.

I'll be surveying the school some time in the next week.

_Tagging for the Renderer_

The closest I've come is 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780
where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created 
the relation.  Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later 
were gone.  I looked into it and found someone had moved addr:street 
to the relation but had left addr:housenumber on the individual 
buildings, so I "fixed" it.

Justification: all elements of an address belong together.  This is 
obviously right because it keeps the renderer happy.

Comments?

I've been tempted in the case of trailer parks where I've been 
unsatisfied with my tagging efforts, e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/213616682
which is just a closed way with landuse=residential and addressing 
information.  The address is not rendered.

I like to see addresses on the map because I like to use the map as 
a visual aid to mental routing, the old fashioned way.

-- 
Tom Hardy 


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

Re: [Tagging] historic=tank and surprises with tags like car-sharing

[André Pirard]

On 2017-04-16 00:20, Michal Fabík wrote:
> Hi,
> I just mapped my third tank in about a month and I'm still wondering why it 
> isn't documented in the Wiki alongside historic=aircraft, historic=locomotive 
> etc. There's quite a few of them mapped already, according to Taginfo. One 
> could argue that tanks are more often than not parts of war memorials (like 
> here: 
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Starovi%C4%8Dky-pam%C3%A1tn%C3%ADktankov%C3%A9bitvy-1.JPG/1067px-Starovi%C4%8Dky-pam%C3%A1tn%C3%ADktankov%C3%A9bitvy-1.JPG)
>  so they don't have to be mapped as stand-alone objects, but this is not 
> always the case (today, I mapped a tank that's an open air museum exhibit, 
> the other day I saw one serving as a mascot of a military school). Is it 
> perhaps because the word "tank" can also mean a container for liquids? Maybe 
> we should use something like historic=armoured_vehicle?
> Regards,
For the nearby tanks, one is a historic=monument
 and the other a
tourism=attraction, attraction=tank
.
To me, tourism attraction sounds disrespectful for the men who died and
I prefer memorial=tank.
Usual OSM inconsistencies.
Other searches seem to show that "tank" is known around the world, so,
adding historic=tank or better memorial=tank is a +1 to me.
Else, it would be *=war_tank, but nobody would search for that.
And what's the problem with tank anyway, is there anything like a
historic liquid container anyway?

That problem is a mild one.
I asked how to tag posts where people wait for cars to pick them, both
subscribed to a system called fr:covoiturage=en:car-sharing.  Nobody
would answer.
So, I tagged them as car-sharing with a sub-tag indicating hike-sharing.
They were nicely showing on OSM.org and I showed samples to the organizers.
But in the meantime they had that rendering removed and I sounded like a
fool.
That's the way OSM goes. Your perfect tagging is turned to mistakes too
without warning.
And that's what's unhappily turning me away from OSM much.

Cheers

André.



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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the Renderer (Was: Why is this building not rendered?)

[Tom Pfeifer]

On 17.04.2017 01:27, Tom Hardy wrote:

The closest I've come is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5322780
where I drew and addressed the individual buildings, then created
the relation.  Addresses were shown on the rendered map, but later
were gone.  I looked into it and found someone had moved addr:street
to the relation but had left addr:housenumber on the individual
buildings, so I "fixed" it.


Multipolygon is not for tying two houses of a motel together. What you can do here, remove the 
relation, draw the campus of the motel including their houses and parking, tag that 
landuse=commercial and tourism=motel plus the name and motel details. As the houses have individual 
house numbers, that can remain on the buildings. If the motel has an address it is registered at, 
that can be added to the campus outline.


It is irrelevant if this map shows the house number or not, they are for multiple purposes including 
navigation, so it is important they are in the database.



I've been tempted in the case of trailer parks where I've been
unsatisfied with my tagging efforts, e.g.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/213616682
which is just a closed way with landuse=residential and addressing
information.  The address is not rendered.

I like to see addresses on the map because I like to use the map as
a visual aid to mental routing, the old fashioned way.


House numbers are currently not rendered on areas other than buildings, however they are still in 
the database. The default map cannot render everything. You can of course learn how to render your 
own maps and include any features important for you.


You can however use a single address node at the entrance of the trailer park.

tom


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

Re: [Tagging] Platform screen doors and automatic platform gates

[jc86035]

I think just using platform door tags instead of platform gate tags
should be enough, since there isn't a way to say something is
ceiling-height yet (this matches the aforementioned door=* proposal,
where doors are supposed to control ventilation etc.).

jc86035

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2017, at 9:12 PM, John Willis  wrote:
> Height=* might be a good additional key - but is there an explicit way to say 
> "floor-to-ceiling" (or full height)  for the full-height platform walls?

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