Just letting you know that something has happened to the page in that the
normal voting options to copy don't appear when you go to Edit Source?
Somebody may have accidentally pasted in the wrong spot on the page?
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
There may be a misunderstanding here: what I mean about forest parcels is a
piece of forest which is numbered and whose number is displayed on site, with a
plate or a painted text. Such data can be useful for orientation in a forest
and, until some years ago, these numbers were displayed on maps
Looking around my local area and trying to fix issues flagged by the iD editor,
I came across a number of road sections on the approach to roundabouts, tagged
as “junction=approach”. I can find no documentation in the Wiki to support
this usage and it seems illogical to me, as “junction=*” shou
> This can be handled by looking at
> roads/cycleways building relation,
> right?
Not really, the good metrics here would rather be the traffic (amount of
traffic, type of motor vehicles, destination) rather than the underlying
infrastructure and OSM at the moment has no such tagging possibility.
Hi all
The vote is now open on the proposal regarding utility markers, until
October 26.
Many comments allowed to find a nice and versatile tagging for markers
useful to be added in OSM.
It have been under test in France for the last month and didn't show any
significant issue.
https://wiki.openst
On 12/10/19 20:13, John Willis via Tagging wrote:
On Oct 12, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
A new route_type= tag on the relation would be a
good way to go.
Route=
cycle_touring
road_touring
cyclist
road_cyclist
road_cycling
?
I think the word “race” should be left out, unless
Netherlands usage is: the route must have some physical representation on the
roads. Preferably waymarked all the way. But long routes tend to use
local/regional/national sections as parts, so the waymarking does not have to
be the same everywhere. Also, some routes are scarcely or even barely s
On Oct 12, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
A new route_type= tag on the relation would be a
good way to go.
Route=
cycle_touring
road_touring
cyclist
road_cyclist
road_cycling
?
I think the word “race” should be left out, unless it is for mapping actual
racing routes.
Javbw
_
Phyks wrote:
> * Some are dedicated to a very particular category of cyclists,
> often racing bikes. We have `route=mtb` for mountain bikes,
> we might have `route=racing_bikes` for racing bikes? Typical
> example is https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/163266
> (which might actually fall int
