Re: [Tagging] Confusion bicycle_road <> cyclestreet

[Jeroen Hoek]

On 26-08-2020 14:42, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> What is the "saving" n using the cyclestreet=yes tagging? […] 
> Basically I see no need for separate tags like bicycle_road and 
> cyclestreet, as you can easily describe their properties with 
> existing tags. Add to this the confusion between the two tags, and 
> then add to the mix the myriad of variants on the subject in 
> countries other than Germany and Belgium, respectively.

I can't comment on bicycle_road, but as for cyclestreet the wiki gives a
fair description:

> A cyclestreet is a street that is designed as a bicycle route, but 
> on which cars are also allowed. However, this car use is limited by
> the character and layout of the cyclestreet.
> 
> Bicycles are the primary users of the street, while motor vehicles 
> are secondary.

All other tags like maxspeed and overtaking:motorcar are useful, but
tell the consumer nothing about the inherent nature of the cyclestreet,
which is a shared road that is by design bicycle-friendly. This goes
beyond taggable properties (e.g. traffic flow to and from such streets
in the broader city grid is taken into account, there are no speed
barriers that are bicycle-unfriendly).

The tag cyclestreet=yes can serve some purposes I can think of:

* Rendering these streets differently on (cycling) maps (like a blend
between a normal street and highway=cycleway)

* Prefer them in cycling routing engines over streets lacking cycling
facilities

* Penalize them in car routing engines

It is analogous to highway=cycleway: you can easily use highway=service
and add a bunch of tags making it a cycleway in terms of access rights,
but a cycleway implies much more than that (like safety and
suitability). The cyclestreet=yes tag is similar in this respect.

Jeroen Hoek

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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

"by policy they _should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality 
image is also available"only when it is an exact duplicate - not just photo of 
the same object

Aug 26, 2020, 21:45 by bkil.hu...@gmail.com:

> Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken links? 
> (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago should clear 
> up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they _should_ delete the 
> lower quality image if a better quality image is also available)
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 8:49 PM Paul Allen <> pla16...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 19:39, Mateusz Konieczny <>> 
>> matkoni...@tutanota.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In practice you need horrific image quality,
>>> to the point of unasibility for deletion to 
>>> succeed
>>>
>>
>> So maybe the chance of deletion is low enough that we can drop the
>> argument that "wikimedia might delete it" when discussing using
>> wikimedia images.
>>
>>>
>>> They have backlog of copyright violations,
>>> and tricky cases where legality is not clear.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, in that case we might need a bot that works in the other direction.
>> Not one that tells wikimedia we've used one of its images but one
>> that tells us that one of the wikimedia images we used has gone.
>>
>>
>>> People making backlog worse by making
>>> such "low quality, delete" would not be
>>> appreciated or encouraged there
>>>
>>
>> We don't appreciate or encourage people who make ill-judged
>> edits to the map, but it happens.
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>>  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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

Then there's OpenTrailView as a viable alternative (neither Mapillary, nor
OpenStreetCam has a free server component), although in the long term, I
think we should follow an IPFS, P2P or federated-systems route to scale
costs.

I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of
our street level imagery to them. If we for whatever reason wanted to stick
to a centralized solution, OSMF should be the one paying the costs, but
then we would pay dearly (someone on Reddit did some estimates).

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:59 AM Thibault Molleman <
thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> - I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
> - some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to
> use mapillary  so we need to have an alternative
>
>  And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put
> multiple images into one tag
>
> Cheers
> Thibault
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil  wrote:
>
>> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or
>> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
>> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> sent from a phone
>>>
>>> > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
>>> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in
>>> ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the
>>> node.
>>> > A unique fountain deserves its own category
>>>
>>>
>>> I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient.
>>> Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides
>>> and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the
>>> outside and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and
>>> you can’t do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city
>>> gate seems overkill too in many cases).
>>>
>>> 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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging]

I would ask on Commons whatever it would be acceptable, I would not just assume 
that
this is unwanted.

Aug 27, 2020, 12:18 by bkil.hu...@gmail.com:

> Then there's OpenTrailView as a viable alternative (neither Mapillary, nor 
> OpenStreetCam has a free server component), although in the long term, I 
> think we should follow an IPFS, P2P or federated-systems route to scale costs.
>
> I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of 
> our street level imagery to them. If we for whatever reason wanted to stick 
> to a centralized solution, OSMF should be the one paying the costs, but then 
> we would pay dearly (someone on Reddit did some estimates).
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:59 AM Thibault Molleman <> 
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> - I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
>> - some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to use 
>> mapillary  so we need to have an alternative
>>
>>  And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put 
>> multiple images into one tag
>>
>> Cheers
>> Thibault
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil <>> bkil.hu >> +>> 
>> a...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or whatever 
>>> comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <>>> 
>>> dieterdre...@gmail.com>>> > wrote:
>>>


 sent from a phone
  
  > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging < 
 tagging@openstreetmap.org > wrote:
  > 
  > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in 
 ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the 
 node. 
  > A unique fountain deserves its own category 
  
  
  I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient. 
 Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides 
 and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
  
  On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the 
 outside and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and 
 you can’t do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city 
 gate seems overkill too in many cases).
  
  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

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[bkil]

I would assume that this is unwanted based on my above citations from
their scope document. Was this not your reading on this question? Although,
if we ask, they _may_ decide to change their scope based on our needs, but
as estimated, this would greatly increase their expenses.

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:23 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I would ask on Commons whatever it would be acceptable, I would not just
> assume that
> this is unwanted.
>
> Aug 27, 2020, 12:18 by bkil.hu...@gmail.com:
>
> Then there's OpenTrailView as a viable alternative (neither Mapillary, nor
> OpenStreetCam has a free server component), although in the long term, I
> think we should follow an IPFS, P2P or federated-systems route to scale
> costs.
>
> I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of
> our street level imagery to them. If we for whatever reason wanted to stick
> to a centralized solution, OSMF should be the one paying the costs, but
> then we would pay dearly (someone on Reddit did some estimates).
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:59 AM Thibault Molleman <
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> - I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
> - some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to
> use mapillary  so we need to have an alternative
>
>  And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put
> multiple images into one tag
>
> Cheers
> Thibault
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil  wrote:
>
> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or
> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in
> ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the
> node.
> > A unique fountain deserves its own category
>
>
> I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient.
> Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides
> and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
>
> On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the outside
> and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and you can’t
> do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city gate seems
> overkill too in many cases).
>
> 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
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Jake Edmonds via Tagging]

Can you elaborate on how IPFS would work? From my understanding, if I add a 
file (in this case an image) to my node then a unique address is generated. But 
the file is only permanently stored on my node unless someone else manually 
pins it on theirs? 

Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone

> On 27 Aug 2020, at 12:20, bkil  wrote:
> 
> 
> Then there's OpenTrailView as a viable alternative (neither Mapillary, nor 
> OpenStreetCam has a free server component), although in the long term, I 
> think we should follow an IPFS, P2P or federated-systems route to scale costs.
> 
> I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of 
> our street level imagery to them. If we for whatever reason wanted to stick 
> to a centralized solution, OSMF should be the one paying the costs, but then 
> we would pay dearly (someone on Reddit did some estimates).
> 
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:59 AM Thibault Molleman 
>>  wrote:
>> - I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
>> - some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to use 
>> mapillary  so we need to have an alternative
>> 
>>  And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put 
>> multiple images into one tag
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Thibault
>> 
>>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil  wrote:
>>> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or whatever 
>>> comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>>> 
 On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
  wrote:
 
 
 sent from a phone
 
 > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging 
 >  wrote:
 > 
 > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in 
 > ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the 
 > node. 
 > A unique fountain deserves its own category 
 
 
 I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as sufficient. 
 Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from all sides 
 and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an impression.
 
 On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the outside 
 and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and you 
 can’t do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city gate 
 seems overkill too in many cases).
 
 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
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Thibault Molleman]

This video explains it well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uj6uR3fp-U

Basically IPFS is a protocol, just like how http is protocol.
IPFS is meant to create a torrent like network of data. Every piece of data
is linked to a hash which identifies that piece of data.
Anybody can help host data on the IPFS network. (so that means that people
with spare resources like bandwidth or storage can contribute).
Using IPFS directly is maybe not the best solution for this. But there MANY
(been doing more research the last couple days) platforms that are built ON
TOP of IPFS.
Such an example is Textile which have a 'bucket' system similar to how
Amazon has S3 bucket storage. https://docs.textile.io/buckets/
Because it is decentralised by nature, you don't pay directly for storage.
You can however pay companies or individuals (or soon the network itself
like a cryptocurrency) to help host those files.

But I think with a community aspect like Openstreetmap has, I wouldn't be
surprised if there were people who would want to help create this storage
pool or system

My explanation was simplified but hopefully helps you understand what IPFS
has in terms of potential

Cheers,
Thibault

On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 at 12:38, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Can you elaborate on how IPFS would work? From my understanding, if I add
> a file (in this case an image) to my node then a unique address is
> generated. But the file is only permanently stored on my node unless
> someone else manually pins it on theirs?
>
> Sent from Jake Edmonds' iPhone
>
> On 27 Aug 2020, at 12:20, bkil  wrote:
>
> 
> Then there's OpenTrailView as a viable alternative (neither Mapillary, nor
> OpenStreetCam has a free server component), although in the long term, I
> think we should follow an IPFS, P2P or federated-systems route to scale
> costs.
>
> I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of
> our street level imagery to them. If we for whatever reason wanted to stick
> to a centralized solution, OSMF should be the one paying the costs, but
> then we would pay dearly (someone on Reddit did some estimates).
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:59 AM Thibault Molleman <
> thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> - I'm doubtful of the future of openstreetcam
>> - some people don't like Facebook to the point where they don't want to
>> use mapillary  so we need to have an alternative
>>
>>  And that still doesn't solve the problem of not having a system to put
>> multiple images into one tag
>>
>> Cheers
>> Thibault
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil  wrote:
>>
>>> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or
>>> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
>>> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>


 sent from a phone

 > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging <
 tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
 >
 > Sorry, I meant that images of generic drinking fountains can go in
 ‘Drinking fountains in ’ and only need one image linked to the
 node.
 > A unique fountain deserves its own category


 I named the fountains as an example where I see one image as
 sufficient. Of course you could also make tens of each, with details, from
 all sides and so on, but for me 1 is completely ok, serves to give an
 impression.

 On the other hand, city gates should have at least 2, one from the
 outside and one from the inside, in those cases I have recently seen, and
 you can’t do it with the image tag (a category for every individual city
 gate seems overkill too in many cases).

 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
>
> ___
> 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] Tagging multiple images on one object

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 at 11:20, bkil  wrote:

>
> I don't feel it's fair to overload Commons by shifting the costs of all of
> our street level imagery to them.
>

It would be unfair to Commons by treating them as an alternative to
Mapillary
or OpenStreetCam.  Also pretty much against their policy, as I read it.  But
images of POIs appear to be well within their policy.  Particularly if we
link to images others have already uploaded because they are of general
interest.

Yeah, it could impose a significant load on their servers.  But they appear
to
be happy with that, as long as it serves an educational or informational
purpose.

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

[Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Richard Welty]

i've had a little discussion of this over on the slack tagging channel.

i'm currently working on some historic World's Fair/Exhibition sites,
and also have reviewed a number of fair grounds in the US.

we really don't have any tagging specific to these sorts of structured
park-like areas that have extensive exhibition spaces. park and
recreation ground are not quite there.

so i'd like to propose one of these two

landuse=fairground
leisure=fairground

i'm ok with either. the idea is that these represent a structured
area with pavilions or exhibition spaces, perhaps a midway, and
so forth. it would be applicable both to such things as the periodic
"World's Fairs" and to the many local fairgrounds (they're all over
the US, tied to county and state fairs during the summer.)
fairgrounds in the US are currently tagged somewhat erratically as
mappers guess at what tags apply.

richard
-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search

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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Andy Townsend]

On 27/08/2020 17:04, Richard Welty wrote:

so i'd like to propose one of these two


"fairgrounds" is more of an American rather than a British English way 
of referring to these sorts of things, I think.  See 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-February/thread.html#24188 
for a discussion on the GB list, and the first reply to that links to 
previous discussions.  Also on this list 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2020-February/thread.html#51268 
etc.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Paul Allen]

On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 at 17:19, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 27/08/2020 17:04, Richard Welty wrote:
>
> "fairgrounds" is more of an American rather than a British English way
> of referring to these sorts of things, I think.


As is fair.  Without further qualification, I'd interpret "fair" as a
(temporary, mobile) funfair: an annual event with fairground rides,
stalls, etc. I think American usage may tend more towards trade fairs.

As for mapping the temporary funfair thing, that's difficult, at least
around
here.  Every November the town's biggest car park is closed to parking
for a week and is used for several fairground rides and a couple of food
stalls.
As part of the same event, for a couple of days most of the town centre is
closed to traffic and the streets are filled with market stalls selling all
sort
of things of varying quality, from real bargains to absolute garbage (like
eBay made physical).  Hard to map.

There is also an annual agricultural-based show held in some large fields.

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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Richard Welty]

On 8/27/20 12:35 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> As is fair.  Without further qualification, I'd interpret "fair" as a
> (temporary, mobile) funfair: an annual event with fairground rides,
> stalls, etc. I think American usage may tend more towards trade fairs.
> 
> As for mapping the temporary funfair thing, that's difficult, at least
> around
> here.  Every November the town's biggest car park is closed to parking
> for a week and is used for several fairground rides and a couple of food
> stalls.
> As part of the same event, for a couple of days most of the town centre is
> closed to traffic and the streets are filled with market stalls selling
> all sort
> of things of varying quality, from real bargains to absolute garbage (like
> eBay made physical).  Hard to map.
> 
> There is also an annual agricultural-based show held in some large fields.

i'm fine with a british english equivalent if there is one.

temporary fairgrounds in the US are things on the order of the world's
fairs, which are really international and frequently last for two
seasons, the long side of temporary.

again in the US, state and county fairgrounds are permanent facilities
which function as event space when the fair is not actually going on.
the midway is usually temporary, but the buildings for, say,
agricultural exhibits are permanent, as is the race track (at many
fairs), which might be for horses or cars.

all of the following are fair grounds in upstate NY

washington county fair grounds:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/43.09455/-73.54859

rensselaer county fair grounds:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/42.90539/-73.58926

altamont fairgrounds:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/42.69712/-74.02660

NY State fairgrounds:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/43.0749/-76.2197

tagging is wildly inconsistant because there is not clear guidance
on these structured fairgrounds in the wiki. and they are all over the
US. this is a just a quick sampling.

while i recognize that at the present time, OHM concerns are of limited
interest here, tagging historic fairs is a use cae for this tagging as
well. my map of the 1964-5 NY World's Fair (a work in progress) is a
case in point:

https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/#map=16/40.7465/-73.8439&layers=O

so these things do exist, a fair number of them in the US, and are
not really temporary.

richard
-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search

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

Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

[Vucod via Tagging]

Ok, I will use that with the tag for the physical obstructions.

Thanks all for the discussion

August 24, 2020 7:07:08 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg  
wrote:
RE: "Would something like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = 
sitting be more clear?"

While this is somewhat less ambiguous, it looks and sounds quite strange in 
English, and it's quite long.

How about "lying_down=obstructed", "sitting=obstructed", "skating=obstructed" 
or something like that?

I also think it would be a good idea to tag the physical obstructions, like 
width=, length=, slope=, arm_rests=, spikes=, skatestoppers=, etc, as others 
have mentioned.

– Joseph Eisenberg

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:46 AM Vucod via Tagging  
wrote:
>
> Just to clarify an important point. The hostile_architecture key was 
> suggested as a main/category tag to go along with specific keys 
> (lying_hindrance, sitting_hindrance).
> Used alone, I agree that it would be very vague and could be difficult to 
> verify. I would say to only use it in combination with specific keys but I 
> don't know how this would be followed by mappers...
>
> On the specific tags:
>
> @Josepth Eisenberg(mail below):
>
> As others have said, no_* and *=prohibited loose the notion of hindrance that 
> is crucial if we want to map physical and visible things. Would something 
> like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = sitting be more 
> clear? And yes, the goal is to make clear that {lying|sitting|...} is 
> physically obstructed (no relation to legal usage).
>
> @Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> "what about benches being completely removed (or never installed), it’s 
> equally hostile but not mappable. Or shops who are right away not built in a 
> way that you could sit down on their facade."
>
> With tags like lying_hindrance and sitting_hindrance, we don't look for the 
> intentions of the builders but we just look for these hindrances. So, we 
> would not map your examples.
>
> "quite common in Rome are inside corners of buildings filled with masonry 
> (typically up to 1,5m) so people do not urinate (not a recent feature, most 
> look as if they were hundreds of years old). And in this case, it’s also 
> probably more beneficial than hostile in the general perception. At least I 
> guess many of us would deny a right of public urination in the city?"
>
> Yes with the term "hostile", an opinion could be seen behind it but the term 
> "hostile architecture" refers to the enforcement/prevention of some
> behaviors whether it is good or not. In German and French, they use defensive 
> architecture/ defensive urban design where it is less opinionated.
>
> @Mateusz Konieczny : ""length was refused as an official key for bench" Why? 
> Is there some valid reason, or maybe it was part of proposal that failed for 
> other reasons."
>
> length and width keys on benches were refused because they judged that it was 
> going too much into details 
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Attributes)
>
>
> On the generic tag:
>
> As info:
>
> - "Hostile architecture", a Wikipédia article, a subreddit and 150 000 google 
> results
> - "Hostile design", 20 000 google results
>
> Vucod
>
> August 23, 2020 10:22:38 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg 
>  wrote:
>
> The term "hostile architecture" is too vague. As an alternative 
> "anti-homeless" is also not precise enough. We are getting closer with the 
> initial suggestion that the feature is to prevent lying down, sleeping or 
> sitting.
>
> However, I think the tags "sitting_hindrance=" and "lying_hindrance" are not 
> clear enough in English. The term "lying" is ambiguous, since it can refer to 
> "telling lies" (falsehoods) as well. Also, in English syntax it sounds 
> strange to say something is a "lying hindrance", because this would normally 
> be an obstacle which is lying down, rather than a hindrance to a person lying 
> down. 
>
> So it would be better to change the order of words in the tags, e.g. 
> "no_lying=" and "no_sitting=" , or just simplify to "sitting=prohibited" and 
> "lying_down=prohibited" or similar. But I admit that none of those options 
> are perfectly clear. Perhaps someone else has a better phrase? 
>
>
> We want to make it clear that lying down or sitting down is not allowed or 
> physical obstructed, right?
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 10:38 AM Paul Allen  wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 18:22, Oliver Simmons  wrote:
> >
> >> Someone else can probably think of a better suggestion
> >
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
> >
> > --
> > Paul
> >
> > ___
> > 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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 15:29 -0400, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 8/27/20 12:35 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
> > As is fair.  Without further qualification, I'd interpret "fair" as
> > a
> > (temporary, mobile) funfair: an annual event with fairground rides,
> > stalls, etc. I think American usage may tend more towards trade
> > fairs.
> > 
> > As for mapping the temporary funfair thing, that's difficult, at
> > least
> > around
> > here.  Every November the town's biggest car park is closed to
> > parking
> > for a week and is used for several fairground rides and a couple of
> > food
> > stalls.
> > As part of the same event, for a couple of days most of the town
> > centre is
> > closed to traffic and the streets are filled with market stalls
> > selling
> > all sort
> > of things of varying quality, from real bargains to absolute
> > garbage (like
> > eBay made physical).  Hard to map.
> > 
> > There is also an annual agricultural-based show held in some large
> > fields.
> 
> i'm fine with a british english equivalent if there is one.
> 
In British English they are showgrounds.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48473181

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35432806

Phil (trigpoint)




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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 05:31, Richard Welty  wrote:

>
> again in the US, state and county fairgrounds are permanent facilities
> which function as event space when the fair is not actually going on.
> the midway is usually temporary, but the buildings for, say,
> agricultural exhibits are permanent, as is the race track (at many
> fairs), which might be for horses or cars.
>

As Phil said for the UK, in Australia they are Showgrounds, with just about
every country town having their own.

As per your description, the show is usually only on for one weekend a
year, but there are permanent buildings & facilities on site, & the area
is  frequently used as a caravan / tourist park for the rest of the year.

The few I've just checked are currently tagged with a mixture of either
leisure=park or landuse=recreation_ground. Personally, of the two options,
I'd prefer rec. ground, which I notice a few of your samples were also
tagged as.

Thanks

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

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

[Warin]

On 28/8/20 8:05 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:




On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 05:31, Richard Welty > wrote:



again in the US, state and county fairgrounds are permanent facilities
which function as event space when the fair is not actually going on.
the midway is usually temporary, but the buildings for, say,
agricultural exhibits are permanent, as is the race track (at many
fairs), which might be for horses or cars.


As Phil said for the UK, in Australia they are Showgrounds, with just 
about every country town having their own.


As per your description, the show is usually only on for one weekend a 
year, but there are permanent buildings & facilities on site, & the 
area is  frequently used as a caravan / tourist park for the rest of 
the year.



In Australia:

"The Show" (where ever it is) as Graeme says, is once a year for a week 
or two. However other events are also held at the same venue.


For example via a quick web search, the Mt Isa Show 1 week per year in 
June, Mt Isa Roedo 1 week per year in August, Mt Isa Motor Show and Swap 
Meet 1 day per year in August and there are others.


Presently in OSM as a recreation ground as Way: Buchannan Park 
Racecourse 455194137. I would assume racing takes place here as well as 
the above 'shows'.



The few I've just checked are currently tagged with a mixture of 
either leisure=park or landuse=recreation_ground. Personally, of the 
two options, I'd prefer rec. ground, which I notice a few of your 
samples were also tagged as.


Thanks

Graeme



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