Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting -, boundary=aboriginal_lands

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30. Nov 2018, at 00:27, Doug Hembry  wrote:
> 
> >> +1 (mostly). The boundary=protected_area scheme allows rough/detail 
> >> tagging to some degree, I think. I presume you can specify b=p_area 
> >> without adding p_class if you wish


yes, you can do it, but then the tag says too little, because it could be 
anything from a protected habitat of a rare kind of frog to an historic house 
(heritage) to a national monument, to a national forest, to a water or air 
protection area, etc.
What I meant was that the basic level of tagging should already specify 
something “meaningful”.

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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui  wrote:
> 
> We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch


IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar incredibly low 
with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or maybe “welcome_sign”? Or even 
both of them, according to the situation?


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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

What key would you recommend, Martin?

Man_made=entrance_arch?
barrier=...?
Highway=...?
Entrance=welcome_sign?
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui  wrote:
> >
> > We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch
>
>
> IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar incredibly
> low with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or maybe “welcome_sign”?
> Or even both of them, according to the situation?
>
>
> 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] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Warin]

On 30/11/18 20:12, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

What key would you recommend, Martin?

Man_made=entrance_arch?


Not all are entrances, some mark the centre.
No all are aches? An arch is a curved structure - some are rectangular 
.. portals? That is not right either.



barrier=...?

no

Highway=...?

?

Entrance=welcome_sign?


Not a simple sign

Umm
Man_made .. yes ...

information ... umm


On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote:




sent from a phone

> On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui mailto:aguztin...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch


IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar
incredibly low with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or
maybe “welcome_sign”? Or even both of them, according to the
situation?


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



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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Yeah, that was how my thought process went too. Maybe there is no perfect
tag for these.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:26 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 30/11/18 20:12, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> What key would you recommend, Martin?
>
> Man_made=entrance_arch?
>
>
> Not all are entrances, some mark the centre.
> No all are aches? An arch is a curved structure - some are rectangular ..
> portals? That is not right either.
>
> barrier=...?
>
> no
>
> Highway=...?
>
> ?
>
> Entrance=welcome_sign?
>
>
> Not a simple sign
>
> Umm
> Man_made .. yes ...
>
> information ... umm
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> > On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui  wrote:
>> >
>> > We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch
>>
>>
>> IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar incredibly
>> low with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or maybe “welcome_sign”?
>> Or even both of them, according to the situation?
>>
>>
>> Cheers, Martin
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing 
> listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://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] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Tod Fitch]

I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:

man_made=gantry
name=“whatever”
place=neighbourhood

I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical clearance 
that might be of use for routing.

> On Nov 30, 2018, at 3:48 AM, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> Yeah, that was how my thought process went too. Maybe there is no perfect tag 
> for these.
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:26 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
> > wrote:
> On 30/11/18 20:12, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> What key would you recommend, Martin?
>> 
>> Man_made=entrance_arch?
> 
> Not all are entrances, some mark the centre.
> No all are aches? An arch is a curved structure - some are rectangular .. 
> portals? That is not right either.
> 
>> barrier=...?
> no
>> Highway=...?
> ?
>> Entrance=welcome_sign?
> 
> Not a simple sign
> 
> Umm
> Man_made .. yes ...
> 
> information ... umm
> 
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> sent from a phone
>> 
>> > On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch
>> 
>> 
>> IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar incredibly 
>> low with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or maybe “welcome_sign”? Or 
>> even both of them, according to the situation?
>> 
>> 
>> 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 
>> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

Seems very good to me.

  * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry
  * proposal exist: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry

In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?/), but 
that's another story...

I think you found the right key, bravo!

Sergio


On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
> I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:
>
> man_made=gantry
> name=“whatever”
> place=neighbourhood
>
> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
> clearance that might be of use for routing.
>


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing!

See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place

Cheers!

On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> Seems very good to me.
>
>   * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry
>   * proposal exist: 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry
>
> In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
> maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?/), 
> but that's another story...
>
> I think you found the right key, bravo!
>
> Sergio
>
>
> On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
>> I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:
>>
>> man_made=gantry
>> name=“whatever”
>> place=neighbourhood
>>
>> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
>> clearance that might be of use for routing.
>>


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

What do you think about this?

    man_made=gantry
    name=“name_of_the_neighbourood”
    usage=welcome_sign

/usage /is used mainly for railways but it is a so generic and useful term that 
I don't think it should be "/hijacked/" by railways.

/welcome_sign/ is already used for board_type in information=board, but welcome 
signs are far from being restricted to boards


On 2018-11-30 18:18, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing!
>
> See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place
>
> Cheers!
>
> On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>>
>> Seems very good to me.
>>
>>   * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry
>>   * proposal exist: 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry
>>
>> In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
>> maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?/), 
>> but that's another story...
>>
>> I think you found the right key, bravo!
>>
>> Sergio
>>
>>
>> On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
>>> I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:
>>>
>>> man_made=gantry
>>> name=“whatever”
>>> place=neighbourhood
>>>
>>> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
>>> clearance that might be of use for routing.
>>>


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Tod Fitch]

One of the listed values of the place tag is “neighbourhood”. And, in the one 
case where I mapped such a overhead sign, it was the entrance to a 
neighborhood. It was, in fact, the location you’d be taken to by the 
motor-rickshaw from the metro station when you gave your destination and was 
part of the address I was given to reach the residence in question.

But that was in another country than I live in. In my own country, it is much 
more likely that a development would have a sign to the side of a main way in. 
Mostly there for advertising. Nobody, or at least almost nobody, would ever use 
it to give directions or use it as a destination itself.

So I guess the use of a place=neighbourhood tag might be dependent on the local 
situation. Is this the landmark the locals use for giving directions? If so, 
then place=neighbourhood is more likely to be usable by a routing engine than 
usage=welcome_sign.

Cheers!

> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:18 AM, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing!
> 
> See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places 
>  and 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place 
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>> Seems very good to me.
>> 
>> already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry 
>> 
>> proposal exist: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry 
>> 
>> In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
>> maxheight:physical=* (what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?), but 
>> that's another story...
>> I think you found the right key, bravo!
>> 
>> Sergio
>> 
>> 
>> On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
>>> I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:
>>> 
>>> man_made=gantry
>>> name=“whatever”
>>> place=neighbourhood
>>> 
>>> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
>>> clearance that might be of use for routing.
>>> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

I understand what you mean (/and it reminds me of my first arrival in India, to 
the neighbourood of Pahrganj in New Delhi!/), but I still think 
place=neighbourood on the way identifing the gantry is wrong. Please let me 
explain why.

A neighbourood occupy an "area", so you should either define that area with a 
polygon, or, if you don't have the information/time to do that, you should put 
a node "close to that area".

I think that in your case you could define the gantry as I suggested (/or in a 
similar way/) and then add a node with place=neighbourood very close to the 
gantry. For routing you'll have the same (/positive/) effects.

It also seems that the wiki have the same idea: place=neighbourood should not 
be used on ways. Please check that on 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aplace%3Dneighbourhood

Cheers!

Sergio


On 2018-11-30 19:19, Tod Fitch wrote:
> One of the listed values of the place tag is “neighbourhood”. And, in the one 
> case where I mapped such a overhead sign, it was the entrance to a 
> neighborhood. It was, in fact, the location you’d be taken to by the 
> motor-rickshaw from the metro station when you gave your destination and was 
> part of the address I was given to reach the residence in question.
>
> But that was in another country than I live in. In my own country, it is much 
> more likely that a development would have a sign to the side of a main way 
> in. Mostly there for advertising. Nobody, or at least almost nobody, would 
> ever use it to give directions or use it as a destination itself.
>
> So I guess the use of a place=neighbourhood tag might be dependent on the 
> local situation. Is this the landmark the locals use for giving directions? 
> If so, then place=neighbourhood is more likely to be usable by a routing 
> engine than usage=welcome_sign.
>
> Cheers!
>
>> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:18 AM, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing!
>>
>> See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>>>
>>> Seems very good to me.
>>>
>>>   * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry
>>>   * proposal exist: 
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry
>>>
>>> In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
>>> maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?/), 
>>> but that's another story...
>>>
>>> I think you found the right key, bravo!
>>>
>>> Sergio
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
 I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:

 man_made=gantry
 name=“whatever”
 place=neighbourhood

 I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
 clearance that might be of use for routing.

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


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

Oh, and, BTW, by doing that the neighbourood will not suddenly disappear if 
they ever take down the gantry...  :-)


On 2018-11-30 21:21, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> I understand what you mean (/and it reminds me of my first arrival in India, 
> to the neighbourood of Pahrganj in New Delhi!/), but I still think 
> place=neighbourood on the way identifing the gantry is wrong. Please let me 
> explain why.
>
> A neighbourood occupy an "area", so you should either define that area with a 
> polygon, or, if you don't have the information/time to do that, you should 
> put a node "close to that area".
>
> I think that in your case you could define the gantry as I suggested (/or in 
> a similar way/) and then add a node with place=neighbourood very close to the 
> gantry. For routing you'll have the same (/positive/) effects.
>
> It also seems that the wiki have the same idea: place=neighbourood should not 
> be used on ways. Please check that on 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aplace%3Dneighbourhood
>
> Cheers!
>
> Sergio
>
>
> On 2018-11-30 19:19, Tod Fitch wrote:
>> One of the listed values of the place tag is “neighbourhood”. And, in the 
>> one case where I mapped such a overhead sign, it was the entrance to a 
>> neighborhood. It was, in fact, the location you’d be taken to by the 
>> motor-rickshaw from the metro station when you gave your destination and was 
>> part of the address I was given to reach the residence in question.
>>
>> But that was in another country than I live in. In my own country, it is 
>> much more likely that a development would have a sign to the side of a main 
>> way in. Mostly there for advertising. Nobody, or at least almost nobody, 
>> would ever use it to give directions or use it as a destination itself.
>>
>> So I guess the use of a place=neighbourhood tag might be dependent on the 
>> local situation. Is this the landmark the locals use for giving directions? 
>> If so, then place=neighbourhood is more likely to be usable by a routing 
>> engine than usage=welcome_sign.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:18 AM, Sergio Manzi >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing!
>>>
>>> See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and 
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>> On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote:

 Seems very good to me.

   * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry
   * proposal exist: 
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry

 In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, 
 maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxheight:virtual=*, maybe?/), 
 but that's another story...

 I think you found the right key, bravo!

 Sergio


 On 2018-11-30 17:53, Tod Fitch wrote:
> I’ve mapped by placing a way across the road tagged with:
>
> man_made=gantry
> name=“whatever”
> place=neighbourhood
>
> I suppose one could add some sort of tagging indicating the vertical 
> clearance that might be of use for routing.
>
>>> ___
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

OK, so man_made=gantry, or in some cases =archway, works for "things"
crossing over the road :-)

But how about vertical posts at the side of the road eg
https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0957659,153.4425762,3a,29y,283.97h,94.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR3ht8iVkS_WU17vUqFuCgw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
?

Guidepost perhaps?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dguidepost

Maybe advertising=totem?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aadvertising%3Dtotem

& I agree with Tod's comment earlier - this is only advertising to say that
this development was marketed as Burleigh Cove. The official suburb is
Burleigh Waters, & the only people that would ever make reference to it
would be real estate agents eg Located at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac in
a gated community of 8 homes in the highly sought after 'Burleigh Cove'! :-)


Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

Doh... every day harder... :-)

I'd say information=board + board_type=welcome_sign

look at it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board_type

Cheers!


On 2018-11-30 23:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> OK, so man_made=gantry, or in some cases =archway, works for "things" 
> crossing over the road :-) 
>
> But how about vertical posts at the side of the road eg 
> https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0957659,153.4425762,3a,29y,283.97h,94.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR3ht8iVkS_WU17vUqFuCgw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?
>
> Guidepost perhaps? 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dguidepost
>
> Maybe advertising=totem? 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aadvertising%3Dtotem
>
> & I agree with Tod's comment earlier - this is only advertising to say that 
> this development was marketed as Burleigh Cove. The official suburb is 
> Burleigh Waters, & the only people that would ever make reference to it would 
> be real estate agents eg Located at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac in a gated 
> community of 8 homes in the highly sought after 'Burleigh Cove'! :-)
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

[Warin]

On 29/11/18 22:21, Sergio Manzi wrote:


*At the end of the day... I think this proposal has same serious 
issues: the use of an antenna system can be decided only if you have 
internal knowledge of what it is actually used for, not just looking 
at the antenna.  Also, either we define a very broad range of usage 
cases or a very fine list of them (in the hundreds, I guess...). *I'll 
probably vote against...*

*



Don't give up! *
*Still thinking about this. Perhaps 'use' is the wrong term? Could 
'system' be better?  After all TV is a 'system'?

It is all about the words and there meaning.

Mappers come to associate a particular antenna with TV so they map it as 
a TV antenna, not realising that the antenna frequency and polarization 
are specific to their area of the world. That is fine... it may not be 
as precise as an 'expert' would map it as but it is a start. Better than 
just mapping it as an antenna, has just a little more detail. The 
use/system is what most mappers appear to be tagging.

*
*


**

On a broader account, do we really want OSM to become a "database of 
the world", with all its details/, /even fine technical details which 
IMHO are more fit to the blueprints of an infrastructure?




Unfortunately mappers will map things as they see them. And some will 
want to add more and more detail.
Keeping that detail in some order is what I am on about here. At present 
it is all going into antenna:type, system, polarization, configuration 
... everything ..
I'd prefer some more organisation than simply lumping it all together 
under one tag.



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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 08:26, Sergio Manzi  wrote:

> Doh... every day harder... :-)
>

What, you want easy??? :-)

> I'd say information=board + board_type=welcome_sign
>
> look at it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board_type
>

That sort of works, but do we need something to say it's a big rock, or
cement column?

Thanks

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

[Tagging] Astronomy telescopes vs tourist terrestrial telescopes

[Warin]

Hi

I think I have come across tourist terrestrial telescopes tagged as 
man_made=telescope.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5627184804

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5627184805

While this is technically correct it gets rendered as an astronomy telescope.

Should this be better mapped as tourism=viewpoint perhaps with telescope=yes?
This would also present the opportunity to add binocular=yes as a distinction 
from a telescope.
A fee could also be tagged with with fee:telescope=yes or telescope:fee=yes?

Possibly the definition of man_made=telescope needs to include the word 
astronomy?


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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:59 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> That sort of works, but do we need something to say it's a big rock, or
>> cement column?
>>
> The 'description' tag, perhaps? Things eventually get to the point where
even the obsessive classifiers on this list might as well admit that even
if they do introduce a taxonomy, it is likely that no data consumer will
use it.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Sergio Manzi]

This! This! This! :-)

On 2018-12-01 00:12, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> The 'description' tag, perhaps? Things eventually get to the point where even 
> the obsessive classifiers on this list might as well admit that even if they 
> do introduce a taxonomy, it is likely that no data consumer will use it. 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[Warin]

On 01/12/18 10:12, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:59 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:


That sort of works, but do we need something to say it's a big
rock, or cement column?

The 'description' tag, perhaps? Things eventually get to the point 
where even the obsessive classifiers on this list might as well admit 
that even if they do introduce a taxonomy, it is likely that no data 
consumer will use it.


Agreed!

Unfortunately mappers tend to add more and more detail possibly having 
run out of usefull  things to map in 'their' area.
Rather than have them abuse tags into a mess some of us try to present 
methods that might help keep some methodical tagging so someone might be 
able to actually make use of the information.



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

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

[Warin]

On 01/12/18 09:49, Warin wrote:

On 29/11/18 22:21, Sergio Manzi wrote:


*At the end of the day... I think this proposal has same serious 
issues: the use of an antenna system can be decided only if you have 
internal knowledge of what it is actually used for, not just looking 
at the antenna.  Also, either we define a very broad range of usage 
cases or a very fine list of them (in the hundreds, I guess...). 
*I'll probably vote against...*

*



Don't give up! *
*Still thinking about this. Perhaps 'use' is the wrong term? Could 
'system' be better?  After all TV is a 'system'?

It is all about the words and there meaning.


Better again .. application? antenna:application=* ?

Hams (radio amateurs) have such a wide variety of antennas and 
application I don't think any non expert is going to be able to classify 
them .. description=radio amateur is about the best i could do generically




Mappers come to associate a particular antenna with TV so they map it 
as a TV antenna, not realising that the antenna frequency and 
polarization are specific to their area of the world. That is fine... 
it may not be as precise as an 'expert' would map it as but it is a 
start. Better than just mapping it as an antenna, has just a little 
more detail. The use/system is what most mappers appear to be tagging.

*
*


**

On a broader account, do we really want OSM to become a "database of 
the world", with all its details/, /even fine technical details which 
IMHO are more fit to the blueprints of an infrastructure?




Unfortunately mappers will map things as they see them. And some will 
want to add more and more detail.
Keeping that detail in some order is what I am on about here. At 
present it is all going into antenna:type, system, polarization, 
configuration ... everything ..
I'd prefer some more organisation than simply lumping it all together 
under one tag.





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

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:50 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Unfortunately mappers will map things as they see them. And some will want
> to add more and more detail.
> Keeping that detail in some order is what I am on about here. At present
> it is all going into antenna:type, system, polarization, configuration ...
> everything ..
> I'd prefer some more organisation than simply lumping it all together
> under one tag.
>

Equally on point, though, is that we need a way to keep things simple for
the mapper armed with only a pair of eyeballs, some survey equipment such
as a phone-GPS, and common knowledge of the world. I don't think we devote
enough effort to ensuring that such a person can still map the basics of
what's there on the ground. I surely don't want anyone to have to do
research before even roughing something in.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 11:38, Kevin Kenny  wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:50 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately mappers will map things as they see them. And some will
>> want to add more and more detail.
>>
>
> Equally on point, though, is that we need a way to keep things simple for
> the mapper armed with only a pair of eyeballs, some survey equipment such
> as a phone-GPS, and common knowledge of the world.
>

Yep, this
https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.1021508,153.4242644,3a,60y,177.95h,111.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcT3AiOK4QyKpuF45oC9Aw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
is a 2-way radio antenna of some sort, & that's about all I'm qualified, &
interested :-), in saying!

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

[Warin]

On 01/12/18 13:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:




On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 11:38, Kevin Kenny > wrote:


On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:50 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
> wrote:

Unfortunately mappers will map things as they see them. And
some will want to add more and more detail.


Equally on point, though, is that we need a way to keep things
simple for the mapper armed with only a pair of eyeballs, some
survey equipment such as a phone-GPS, and common knowledge of the
world.


Yep, this 
https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.1021508,153.4242644,3a,60y,177.95h,111.88t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEcT3AiOK4QyKpuF45oC9Aw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 
 
is a 2-way radio antenna of some sort, & that's about all I'm 
qualified, & interested :-), in saying!


From the image;

At the top of the guyed mast is a vertical whip  antenna.

Part way down is a second antenna,  vertically polarised probably a yagi 
...




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

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

[AgusQui]

For nothing was for the render, when we decided, almost 6 years ago, artwork
was not rendered by Mapnik or any application, we decided on the basis of
the tags approved at that time, inventing the sub-tag city_entrance. If now
they want to discuss the correct tag, great!. Regarding a simple welcome
sign recently I discovered tourism=information + information=board +
board_type=welcome_sign

Saludos, Agustín-

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 29. Nov 2018, at 04:27, AgusQui  wrote:
> >
> > We consider it as generic for any type of entrance arch
>
>
> IMHO this is tagging for the renderer. You set the artwork bar incredibly
> low with this. Why not call them “entrance_arch” or maybe “welcome_sign”?
> Or even both of them, according to the situation?
>
>
> Cheers, Martin




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Tagging-f5258744.html

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