> addr:city=
> addr:city:ru=
> addr:street=
> addr:street:ru=
> addr:housenumber=123
It's unnecessary.
addr:city=
addr:street=
addr:housenumber=123
Is enough, all kind of translations might be taken from matched street/city
as good as any kind of old_names or alt_names
Ofc. any scheme might be
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:11:23PM +0100, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
> On 16.01.2015 05:48, Ineiev wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:53:13PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >>
> >> you could use polygons (e.g. 2 distinct multipolygons, one for each
> >> address), and add a note to inform you
Andrew, and what is the difference?
And why they are mapped in the same way as addresses?
And why they appears in real life in a same way as addresses,
and used by people in a same way as addresses?
If something looks like a duck, and acts like duck maybe it's a duck.
There is a lots of situa
Markus, there is no problems with distinct addresses at all
if you treat them as first class citizen in your database.
Table address
id, scheme, hn, street, quarter, neighbourhood, city, e.t.c
Table POI
id, name, brand, operator, something, else
Table POI_Addr
POI (POI.id), addr (address.id)
So we have 2 millions things in OSM going against OSM modeling tradition:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr%3Aconscriptionnumber
It's same story, two addresses for one object.
First: hn-street-city
Second: hn-city
Scheme is different, but principle is the same, two addresses for one objec
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Dmitry Kiselev wrote:
> Clifford,
> "If the business only uses one of the addresses, then the problem is solved
> with two nodes, ideally inside a building polygon."
>
> No both addresses is in use, if you open yellow pages - there is two
> addresses, even more
Hi,
Am 2015-01-18 um 19:02 schrieb fly:
> Additional to below I want to mention that on a micromapping style a
> traffic_signal is placed one the pedistrian crossing or the stop_line. I
> even came across ones one the stop_line and an addition highway=crossing
> on the pedestrian crossing.
>
> I
Dmitry,
Conscription numbers are not double addresses, you're mixing things up.
--
Cheers,
Andrew
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Addresses are funny beasts. They may mean something different for the
delivery guy, the mailman, the administration, the owner of the building,
the cab driver who needs to let out a passenger.
Maybe we should also indicate whether we mapped the ground parcel, the
building, the doorbell, the mailbo
On 18 January 2015 at 22:11, Dan S wrote:
> 2015-01-18 20:52 GMT+00:00 Markus Lindholm :
>> On 17 January 2015 at 22:16, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
>>> With the addrN schema, we need one object (a node tagged shop=* and
>>> addrN:*=*) for a shop.
>>> With the provides_feature relation we need one
2015-01-18 20:52 GMT+00:00 Markus Lindholm :
> On 17 January 2015 at 22:16, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
>> With the addrN schema, we need one object (a node tagged shop=* and
>> addrN:*=*) for a shop.
>> With the provides_feature relation we need one node for the shop, one node
>> for each address,
On 17 January 2015 at 22:16, Friedrich Volkmann wrote:
> With the addrN schema, we need one object (a node tagged shop=* and
> addrN:*=*) for a shop.
> With the provides_feature relation we need one node for the shop, one node
> for each address, and one relation.
And if there are two shops that
I have found a previous topic, so let's continue.
It's not an another solution, there is some mess with wiki pages but
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AddrN
and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/addrN
Are the same scheme
Andrew, I have already written, why point's isn't a g
Am 17.01.2015 um 23:11 schrieb Friedrich Volkmann:
> On 16.01.2015 05:48, Ineiev wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:53:13PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>>
>>> you could use polygons (e.g. 2 distinct multipolygons, one for each
>>> address), and add a note to inform your fellow mapping coll
Additional to below I want to mention that on a micromapping style a
traffic_signal is placed one the pedistrian crossing or the stop_line. I
even came across ones one the stop_line and an addition highway=crossing
on the pedestrian crossing.
I am tagging direction=* for the direcion it faces.
To
Well, we already have two systems which work well together to get all
tagged.
1. the already mentioned destination*:lanes=* system
2. additionally the relation type=destination_sign
So the only thing I would miss are some tags to better tag the
properties of the sign itself like direction=*, supp
On 17.01.2015 23:47, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> But imagine for a minute that you are back in
> the 1990s (without GPS) in a third-world country and you only have a paper
> map. If you are given a restaurant to visit with an address such as #45
> Ayala Avenue, you would, in the worst case, go dow
Streetlamp mapping does not help.
All our city cycleways are within the lighting radius of street lamps, but
- they are often interspersed with street-linign trees.
- lamps may be on the opposite side of the street than the cyclepath
- street lamps have illumination bodies pointing at str
On 18.01.2015 09:18, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Oh no, why one more proposal?
Sorry, my fault. Dmitry did it first.
--
Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@open
> Am 18.01.2015 um 12:16 schrieb Volker Schmidt :
>
> Assume you have a 100m stretch with nice illumination but there is a tiny
> S-bend exactly overshadowed by an evergreen tree, which produces a pitch dark
> spot of 10m at a dangerous point. What do you do? Put an illumination value
> eve
My main suggestion would be to re-use the same scheme as
Key:opening_hours to define the time when the waterway is likely to
flow.
I would also discard rare/frequent as too subjective. Instead:
approximate duration are not perfect but should improve mutual
understanding.
For instance as in:
waterw
Would be great to get a bit more feedback. Maybe also on the talk page.
Just want to keep this alive ;)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/leisure%3Dfitness_centre
Just had the great idea to suggest tagging gyms/fintess centres for the
German a weekly task (new year's r
Sorry but I'm sceptical about the scheme. It adds very little value compared
to its own complexity. In particular the timing of the lights is highly volatile
in modern cities, and it seems impossible to collect the ground truth as a
mapper just by observing them.
Take the 2050 traffic lights in B
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:14:53PM -0800, Tod Fitch wrote:
> >
> > usually you will assume it if there are ponds of open water or swamps
> > in several places along a valley.
>
> A pond/swamp/oasis/cienega in an arid or even semi-arid area is a significant
> feature that deserve mapping in its
I am very cautious about any of this kind of measurement for the following
reasons:
1) the results will be very difficult to standardise
2) the effort is far beyond that what a mapper can reasonably do.
If you wanted to do it properly you needed to mount a measuring device in
such a way that it lo
On 18/01/2015 5:14 PM, tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 00:14:36 -0600
From: "John F. Eldredge"
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
, Volker Schmidt
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging road illumination quality
Message-ID:
<14afbadb528.27a5.8
Oh no, why one more proposal?
Another broken "solution" for a problem which is already solved.
--
Cheers,
Andrew
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
27 matches
Mail list logo
