Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 14:59, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > There are various 'prisons'. The OSM one is one kind. Police can have > small ones they hold people in e.g. while drunk, or before sending on to > court, courts can have their own too. > > In American English, that’s a jail. Usually these

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

Hi Paul, On 09/03/19 17:18, Paul Allen wrote: On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 16:02, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: are we going to connect all roadside parking to the center of the road ,th

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

> There are various 'prisons'. The OSM one is one kind. Police can have small ones they hold people in e.g. while drunk, or before sending on to court, courts can have their own too. In American English, that’s a jail. Usually these are for short-term detention, from one night to several months. C

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

On 10/03/19 14:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 06:51, Jan S > wrote: I have written up a draft of a police scheme. Good start Jan. A first few thoughts. police=naval_base sounds very dramatic & possibly a bit over the top? That suggests

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 06:51, Jan S wrote: > I have written up a draft of a police scheme. > Good start Jan. A first few thoughts. police=naval_base sounds very dramatic & possibly a bit over the top? Having said that, none of the other common options seem quite right either eg mooring / dock

[Tagging] tags for tutor or coaching out of school

Hi There are a fair number of commercial tutor/coaching establishments that provide after school hours tuition in various subjects/courses. e.g. https://www.alcentres.co.uk/small-group-tuition/  https://talent-100.com.au/ How to tag them? They are not schools in that they are not large l

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

On 10/03/19 09:10, Jan S wrote: Am 9. März 2019 22:34:39 MEZ schrieb marc marc : police:name : it's not what should be in operator or network ? or simply use the name=* tag? police:type : type is a no-meaning tag despite I currently no idea for a good name. I think you have police:specia

Re: [Tagging] shop=clothes vs shop=fashion

I'm in favour of deprecating shop=fashion because of its unclear meaning, but i prefer to keep shop=boutique for (and only for) small shops selling high-priced clothes and accessories. Speaking of accessories: what i'm missing is a tag for shops that sell various fashion accessories, such as bags,

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Am 9. März 2019 22:34:39 MEZ schrieb marc marc : > >police:name : it's not what should be in operator or network ? > >police:type : type is a no-meaning tag despite I currently no idea for >a >good name. >I also fail to understand the dif with police:name. >what's the police:name of CRS ? >what'

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

all police=* except police=station shouldn't be mapped as amenity=police so your idea look good, but it's a bad idea to promote police=* with wrongly mapped object that are currently wrongly taged with amenity=police police:name : it's not what should be in operator or network ? police:type : ty

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

Giovanni, I have severe problems with your process. First, yes it is an import. You called it an import yourself ("manually importing") here, and on the Italien list where you first asked about the tagging [2]. Where did you see a "100 nodes" limit documented? You are copying from one database

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Hi everyone, I have written up a draft of a police scheme. It would be a pretty fundamental modification of the current way of tagging police facilites, but I think that given the current state of the map, that does not allow to differentiate police stations that provide emergency services and oth

Re: [Tagging] Pets allowed

pet=permissive? although if the operator does straight out say 'pets allowed' without any further suggestion (be it images, small print or whatever) I guess it would be yes until proven otherwise or further explained/surveyed. if this does get put in an article it may be worth noting that it's

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Line attachments

On 2019-03-08 00:35, François Lacombe wrote: > Hi all > > The line attachments proposal has been updated according to comments received > all along past weeks. Thanks to TOGA and Nakaner mainly. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Lines_clamps > > It is not restricted to power

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

I might have missed it, but what about area:highway = parking_lane https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Street_area Am 09.03.2019 um 17:07 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: sent from a phone On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: I see extending the parking area to the h

[Tagging] Proposed features - Voting - Power/pipeline substation functions

Hi all, After a few months of RFC, the power/pipeline substation functions proposal is now open for vote. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Substation_functions Thank you to TOGA and Steenbuck for the time spent to bring comments on the Talk page. A chapter is dedicated to con

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Line attachments

Hi Nakaner and thank you for your contribution Le sam. 9 mars 2019 à 09:41, Michael Reichert a écrit : > In order to circumvent the semicolon issue, I propose to introduce round > braces for all cables of one level. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Pole_multi_attachement.png > would

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 16:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: > > But there could be roads adjacent to two sides of a parking > space, only one of which actually connects to it and the router could > guess wrong. > > > are we going to connect all roadsid

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

sent from a phone > On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: > > I see extending > the parking area to the highway as the best trade-off we have, you disagree. indeed, I would see the misrepresentation of the size a killer issue, and if there are things between the parking and the road (

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

sent from a phone > On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: > > But there could be roads adjacent to two sides of a parking > space, only one of which actually connects to it and the router could guess > wrong. are we going to connect all roadside parking to the center of the road ,ther

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

sent from a phone On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: >> no, just in the editor. In the rendering the parking area will probably be >> on the road ;-) > > If you tweak it enough, and check at all zoom levels. no, I would tweak nothing. Simply draw the perimeter of the parking and l

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

sent from a phone On 9. Mar 2019, at 14:03, Paul Allen wrote: >> There are efforts to map roads also as areas though, and sooner or later >> this kind of mapping will be established (in built up areas and particularly >> where the shape is not regular, so that it actually makes sense to do i

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

AFAIK <100 nodes don't fall in import category. >> > I see 586 blue elements on the umap, or am I missing something? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Pets allowed

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 18:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: We should strive for least specific tagging restrictions necessary to > describe what we want. > pet=no (generally no animals allowed) > dog=yes (but dogs are) > bird=yes (birds as well) > parrot=no (but parrots not) > etc. > > For allowance

Re: [Tagging] Possibility to draw parking properties as an area

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 18:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Right, there's this "incompatibility" of the highway graph with the rest of > our data. There are efforts to map roads also as areas though, and sooner > or later this kind of mapping will be established (in built up areas and > particularly

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

[1] http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/it/map/turismo-fvg_295722 Il sab 9 mar 2019, 12:18 Cascafico Giovanni ha scritto: > In short (I'm on phone)... > Please find here [1] umap used for manual conflation. For source data and > license, follow footer info link. > > AFAIK <100 nodes don't fall in impor

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

In short (I'm on phone)... Please find here [1] umap used for manual conflation. For source data and license, follow footer info link. AFAIK <100 nodes don't fall in import category. Il sab 9 mar 2019, 11:46 Tom Pfeifer ha scritto: > On 09.03.2019 10:10, Cascafico Giovanni wrote: > > Well, hote

[Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

On 09.03.2019 10:10, Cascafico Giovanni wrote: Well, hotels dataset I'm manually importing has a boolean baby-sitting field (as for "pets" in other ML thread). I think that a generic info is better than no info, particularly if hotel features childcare=yes and whatever contact tag. Giovanni,

Re: [Tagging] Baby-sitting

Well, hotels dataset I'm manually importing has a boolean baby-sitting field (as for "pets" in other ML thread). I think that a generic info is better than no info, particularly if hotel features childcare=yes and whatever contact tag. Il ven 8 mar 2019, 20:45 Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto: >

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Line attachments

Hi François, Am 08/03/2019 um 00.35 schrieb François Lacombe: > The line attachments proposal has been updated according to comments > received all along past weeks. Thanks to TOGA and Nakaner mainly. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Lines_clamps > > It is not restricted to

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Am 8. März 2019 19:02:08 MEZ schrieb Martin > >what about other police facilities that are also tagged with >amenity=police >now, should they key the basic tag as well? That wouldn't be useful, I guess. Maintaining amenity=police would already be a concession to existing mapping and rendering