Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks
sent from a phone > On 11 Sep 2023, at 08:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes? as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t make a lot of sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or „foot:forward“ as alternatives that follow the generic way of tagging restrictions. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#Pedestrians ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Postal verses locational addresses
The fundamental issue is that there are postal addresses and what might
be called "civil addresses" or "physical addresses" ('locational' I
understand but is not normal English usage). In the US, we also have
"911 dispatchable location" which is all about getting there physically
and is US-bureaucatic-speak.
OSM has decided to tag postal addresses on address points. I find this
an odd choice, and I think it really doesn't mean this, as companies
that use PO boxes are not tagged that way, but with the street address.
The only fix I think of is to have a separate set of tags paddr: and a
rule that those should be set if they are different from the addr: tags
(which are postal). except postcode, which is a postal-only.
It is further messy that there are postal addresses, and then addresses
that Fedex, UPS, DHL etc. deliver to. In the US mostly the post office
(USPS) maintains a database and people verify/match against it and those
are used as legitimate physical delivery addresses by non-USPS carriers.
All in all I think it was a mistake to tag postal addresses. Maybe we
can just redefine addr:foo to be the physical address, except
addr:postcode is the code assigned by the government/monopoly delivery
service. And then add some mailing address tag for things that need
them.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging for the renderer : One-way "flow" bicycle tracks
Not arguing, but oneway:foot = 5024 foot:backward = 394 foot:forward = 300 Personally, I would interpret that as time that the wiki had a rewrite! :-) Thanks Graeme On Mon, 11 Sept 2023 at 19:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 11 Sep 2023, at 08:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes? > > > > as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t make a lot > of sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or „foot:forward“ as > alternatives that follow the generic way of tagging restrictions. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#Pedestrians > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
