On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 3:44 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> usually the answer to this is we do not want to be merely redistributing
> authoritative data that OSM mappers can not improve.
Sorry, I am not making myself clear enough. This data can be modified and
improved by OSM mappers. It's no
sent from a phone
> On 29. Dec 2018, at 22:00, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
>
> I want to re-iterate that the intention of this discussion is to find a way
> to tag on OSM buildings that are **officially** defined as Soft Story by the
> appropriate agencies.
usually the answer to this is we do
Hi,
I recently found out that current tagging for substations (power or
pipelines) with substation=* key actually merge two distinct concepts.
It deals with hierarchy levels and specific network functions a substation
can host.
It's hardly possible to document the substation=* key properly with th
On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 12:58 AM Michael Patrick
wrote:
> Because their may not have been very many of these left after multiple
> earthquakes?
>
Interesting theory :) There are hundreds of thousands of these sort of
buildings in California alone: it's a pretty big deal.
First, it might be noti
On 29/12/18 22:52, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Saturday 29 December 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Have you seen any areas of mangroves tagged over water? That is,
outside of the coastline or over natural=water or waterway=riverbank
areas?
[...]
I think this discussion has already been made in t
On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:17 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> indeed, that's what I was suspecting. Would it be possible to give mappers
> summary advice on a short wikipage how to identify potential soft storey
> buildings? Or is this something that requires expert training?
>
This requires expe
Dear all!
I have now updated the "Railway tracks on highway" proposal page based on
discussion and critical comments expressed here.
The updated proposal states that the tag-value should always follow that of the
railway-tag it shadows. For reasons expressed earlier here, I decided to omit
the
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 22:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 19:05, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>>
>> is there a difference to a “cape”? What about a promontory? Shall we
>> distinguish these, and if yes how and according to which criteria?
>
> Same thing then applies to
I really like this solution, it removes one of
conflicts in crossing tagging.
21 Dec 2018, 18:03 by selfishseaho...@gmail.com:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm proposing the new key crossing:island=* to specify whether a
> pedestrian crossing has a refuge island (also known as pedestrian
> island). Thi
On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 at 12:58, Daniele Santini wrote:
> I updated the proposal page with the new tags:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Top_up
> Check it out.
>
The final image on your proposal, of a PayPoint sign, reminded me of yet
another complication (at
least in the UK
I updated the proposal page with the new tags:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Top_up
Check it out.
Kind regards
So, basing on these problems, we could change the proposal to:
> - prepaid_top_up= -> to specify the type of services whose top-ups
> are sold (like mobile_phone
On Saturday 29 December 2018, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> Have you seen any areas of mangroves tagged over water? That is,
> outside of the coastline or over natural=water or waterway=riverbank
> areas?
> [...]
I think this discussion has already been made in the past. The majority
of mangroves th
12 matches
Mail list logo
