Re: [Tagging] The return of namespacing + yes/no topic vs ;-list

[bkil]

See also:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-December/041650.html

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:59 PM François Lacombe
 wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> While the power substation proposal is still under voting, I got some 
> comments regarding the chosen logic with subkeys and yes/no values.
> They explicitly describe expected transformer or converter is missing in a 
> given substation.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Substation_functions#Vote
>
> A point has been added here to give more explanations.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Namespace#.3B-lists_vs_namespacing_and_yes.2Fno_values
>
> Feel free to contribute if you have concerns regarding this.
> Missing values from a ;-list (as any missing feature on the map) can't solve 
> the indetermination of the corresponding feature existence.
>
> All the best
>
> François
> ___
> 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] Ferry routes as relations?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 24.03.2019 um 04:19 schrieb marc marc :
> 
> if the building is the plateform (where passager wait until the ferry is 
> there), it's usefull for routing : route the pedestrian to the platform 
> with a pedestrian profil, switch to the associated stop_position, route 
> to the desired stop_position with the vehicule profil, switch to the 
> associated platform and continue pedestrian routing


I would expect a ferry route to go from the departing port to the destination 
port (or small station, ferry routes cover quite different features, from short 
pedestrian connections over a river or lake, to big car ferries over the sea), 
eventually by passing through via ports, but I would not expect or suggest to 
add buildings and other landbased infrastructure (e.g. waiting areas, ticket 
offices, customs, ...) to the route. The latter are part of the port, not the 
route.

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

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier :
> 
> Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall):
> amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim
> 
> So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the 
> buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, 
> multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome)


+1, I’ve always considered landuse=religious unnecessary, specific features 
will have religion=*

Cheers, Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] Values in namespaces/prefixes/suffixes Considered Harmful - Or: Stop over-namespacing and prefix-fooling

[bkil]

What about these (also added to the wiki talk page)?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:currency#Subtags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment#Keys
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:drink#Keys
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brewery#Usage
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:diet#Tagging
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fuel
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:socket#Tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:authentication#List_of_sub_tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmonitoring_station#Required
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref#Key_variations
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:recycling#Materials
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:recording
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:monitoring:weather#Instruments
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kathmandu_Living_Labs/exposuresurvey#Services_rendered
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dgaelic_games
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dkneipp_water_cure#Tagging

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toll
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org//search?q=toll%3A

Although this one had a reasonable purpose of describing performance,
most values seem to be "yes":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:generator:output

Some correctly documented ones are misused quiet often:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:use
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=building%3Ause%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:vending
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=vending%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:playground
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=playground%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seasonal
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=seasonal%3A

TagInfo reveals many more combinations for the above documented ones,
but here exist undocumented ones too:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=project%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=sells%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=tickets%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=communication%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=emergency%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=shop%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=medical_service%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=language%3A

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=education_system%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=education_level%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=education_form%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Education_2.0

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=health_specialty%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=counselling_type%3A
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=medical_system%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=provided_for%3A
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0/Specialties

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 2:24 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 07/01/19 10:27, Stefan Keller wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After an answer by Rtfm/ti-lo at namespace wiki page [1] (thanks!) I
> > have to add some thoughts, especially regarding the multiple values!
> >
> > Initially I thought it's just about namespaces which I'm calling
> > "prefix-fooling" or pseudo-boolean-namespaces. "Pseudo" because users
> > start adding other values to yes/no like yes/no/maybe.
> >
> > My main concern with prefix-fooling or pseudo-boolean-namespaces is
> > not against namespaces in principle. But this "new-style" tagging has
> > a strong tendency to defragment OSM and to loose a sense of
> > reusability. I've listed several problems above. See e.g. "Shop
> > subtags proposal" [2] as a negative example well because it's key
> > fragmentation in the form
> > ":=yes/no". Looking at the example
> > in [2]:
> >
> > Now I realize, that there are three fundamental questions behind this
> > "new-style" tagging:
> >
> > First it's about how to describe objects which contain two 'top-level'
> > tags, like shop=bicycle and shop=motorcycle (see rationale on [2]). We
> > have had this issue with businesses for long time on how to combine
> > e.g. restaurant, bar, hotel, bakery etc.. => IMO I'd handle this as
> > separate POIs as long as possible.
>
> I would like to see the same system used for these features that sell things, 
> rather than have each business develop tags that are incompatible.
>
> For example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service has 2 different 
> methods .. depending on which shop your detailing ... Why?
>
> I would think a set of common tags for all shops and similar features that 
> can use them, should be developed and then any other tags depreciated.
>
>
> >
> > Second, it's about grouping subtags: Namespaces are an attempt to
> > this. But this is aka redundant to curated presets...
> >
> > The third and to me most important issue is about handling multiple
> > values 

[Tagging] Feature proposal - Rejected - Substations functions

[François Lacombe]

Hi all

The substations functions proposal has been rejected after a 15 days voting
period
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Substation_functions

First of all, the document was reviewed by 61 contributors which is great
for such a specific and technical topic. So thank you to anyone involved in
this review.

Vote comments show that clarification is still needed regarding some points.
Proposed features and improvements will be reworked individually and then
re-voted in new proposals.

Find here the remaining points and my comments
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Substation_functions#Consequences_of_the_proposal

All the best

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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Police Facilities

[Jan S]

Hey guys,

There are no more open discussions around the police facilities proposal. I've 
hence decided to open it for voting. I'm looking forward to your opinions.

Vote here: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Police_facilites

Best, Jan___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Police Facilities

[Mateusz Konieczny]

It is much better than the initial version but I am still
against overly specific landuse=police and suggesting that amenity=police 
should be deprecated
in future.


Mar 24, 2019, 6:32 PM by grimpeu...@gmail.com:

> Hey guys,
>
> There are no more open discussions around the police facilities proposal. 
> I've hence decided to open it for voting. I'm looking forward to your 
> opinions.
>
> Vote here: > 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Police_facilites 
> 
>
> Best, Jan
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Police Facilities

[François Lacombe]

Hi

Didn't notice the vote was opened 15 minutes prior to my comment regarding
police:type
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_Features/Police_facilites#Police:type_key

Would be relevant to look after it

This key with type prefix is a no go for me while I really like the
police=* and classification effort made.

All the best

François


Le dim. 24 mars 2019 à 18:51, Mateusz Konieczny  a
écrit :

> It is much better than the initial version but I am still
> against overly specific landuse=police and suggesting that amenity=police
> should be deprecated
> in future.
>
>
> Mar 24, 2019, 6:32 PM by grimpeu...@gmail.com:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> There are no more open discussions around the police facilities proposal.
> I've hence decided to open it for voting. I'm looking forward to your
> opinions.
>
> Vote here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Police_facilites
>
> Best, Jan
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Power transformers wiki page translations

[François Lacombe]

Hi

While we were discussing about power substations this weekend, some points
rose regarding power transformers.

The German, Italian, Polish, Russian and Japanese translations of this page
are outdated relatively to English since last reviewed proposal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtransformer

As I don't speak nor write all those languages, would it be possible to
update corresponding pages with appropriate tagging please?
I lost the template name to indicate the translation is outdated, may
someone remind me its name please?

Thanks in advance

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

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

[Phake Nick]

So, If I understand correctly, Mosque are more like a Islamic version
Monastery?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Power transformers wiki page translations

[Tobias Knerr]

On 24.03.19 20:55, François Lacombe wrote:
> I lost the template name to indicate the translation is outdated, may
> someone remind me its name please?

You may be looking for the "translation out of sync" template:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Translation_out_of_sync

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

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

[Warin]

On 24/03/19 21:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier :

Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall):
amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim

So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the 
buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, 
multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome)


+1, I’ve always considered landuse=religious unnecessary, specific features 
will have religion=*



So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :)


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

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 24.03.2019 um 23:38 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> 
> So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :)


if you consider the specific parking a “religious landuse” then you will also 
be able to state which religion it is associated with. 


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

Re: [Tagging] Ferry routes as relations?

[Joseph Eisenberg]

This issue was recently brought up on the Openstreetmap-Carto Github page:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3726 where
it was noted that piers that were tagged as part of a relation were
being rendered incorrectly.

Some of the maintainers suggested that the actual path of the ferry
across the water should always be tagged as a linear way, so that this
alone is needed for most rendering and most routing functions, while
the relation can include other features without problems. This is also
what is done for tram tracks or railways; the path the train follows
is a linear way, but the route is a relation.

Are there people who think it is necessary to map the actual
over-water path of the ferry with relations, or should the wiki page
be clarified to recommend that this be tagged as a linear way?

On 3/24/19, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> Am 24.03.2019 um 04:19 schrieb marc marc :
>>
>> if the building is the plateform (where passager wait until the ferry is
>> there), it's usefull for routing : route the pedestrian to the platform
>> with a pedestrian profil, switch to the associated stop_position, route
>> to the desired stop_position with the vehicule profil, switch to the
>> associated platform and continue pedestrian routing
>
>
> I would expect a ferry route to go from the departing port to the
> destination port (or small station, ferry routes cover quite different
> features, from short pedestrian connections over a river or lake, to big car
> ferries over the sea), eventually by passing through via ports, but I would
> not expect or suggest to add buildings and other landbased infrastructure
> (e.g. waiting areas, ticket offices, customs, ...) to the route. The latter
> are part of the port, not the route.
>
> 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] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

[Warin]

On 25/03/19 10:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


Am 24.03.2019 um 23:38 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :)


if you consider the specific parking a “religious landuse” then you will also 
be able to state which religion it is associated with.




When it is associated with a shop, a parking lot will also sell something.
If part of a medical practice the parking lot will also be a dentist .. etc


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

Re: [Tagging] Power transformers wiki page translations

[François Lacombe]

Le dim. 24 mars 2019 à 21:54, Tobias Knerr  a écrit :

> You may be looking for the "translation out of sync" template:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Translation_out_of_sync
>

Exactly. thank you Tobias

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

[Tagging] tags for a rain gauge

[Warin]

Hi

What tags would you suggest for a rain gauge?

Of 5 with the 'name', only one has tags

 *

   man_made=monitoring_station

 *

   monitoring:weather=yes

 *

   name=Rain Gauge

 *

   recording:automated=yes

Arr there is on the wiki a list and that has

weather:ombrometer=yes .. I have add that ombrometer is commonly called a rain 
gauge.

I think a wiki redirect for rain gauge will help...

So tags for a rain gauge are;

man_made=monitoring_station

monitoring:weather=yes

weather:ombrometer=yes

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:monitoring:weather#Precipitation

Note. I'd much rather use weather:rain_gauge=yes.
Thoughts?

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

Re: [Tagging] Ferry routes as relations?

[marc marc]

Hello,

Le 25.03.19 à 00:34, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :

> Are there people who think it is necessary to map the actual
> over-water path of the ferry with relations, or should the wiki page
> be clarified to recommend that this be tagged as a linear way?

did you mean "don't map route=ferry as relation but only if the way
have the route tag put in a relation for all-except ferry ?"

it seem that some mappers are using relation
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/route=ferry
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Hkz
1569 relation for route=ferry + 239 route_master
osm-carto may of course stop the render of ferry route.
but I don't see the improvement/rational to keep the render with a 
way-with-route-tag but not if a relation is used (in this case, way 
member of course doesn't duplicate relation tag).
the rational is unclear 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3726#issuecomment-475943580

On 3/24/19, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> I would
>> not expect or suggest to add buildings and other landbased infrastructure
>> (e.g. waiting areas, ticket offices, customs, ...) to the route. 
>> The latter are part of the port, not the route.

So the plateform/waiting area for a route=bus is part of the route 
relation but not a plateform/waiting area of a route=ferry ?
I don't see the rational of having differend rules depending
the "vehicule" used.
imho the ferry relation MAY (if someone want to add it) have a role 
plateform

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

Re: [Tagging] Ferry routes as relations?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 25.03.2019 um 01:34 schrieb marc marc :
> 
> So the plateform/waiting area for a route=bus is part of the route 
> relation but not a plateform/waiting area of a route=ferry ?


the platform / waiting area of a bus isn’t part of the bus route either. The 
stop is part.

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