Re: [Tagging] Different postal codes in each side of the street

In the Netherlands having the same postal code on both sides of the streets is a great exception. We always put all address information on the individual address. On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 9:08 PM, Fernando Trebien wrote: > In Brazil some streets have a different postal code on each side. > There se

Re: [Tagging] Is linear man_made=pier supposed to be assumed as implying highway=footway, unless tagged otherwise?

My own strategy for this kind of cases is "man_made=pier; foot=yes" Andre Engels https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail"; target="_blank">https://ipmcdn.avast.com/imag

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: "slogan" tag. Opinions?

Yes, trademark issues should not be a problem. Trademark infringement is in general only relevant when the usage falsely implies that you are the infringed brand, or connected to it. However, I too would think this is not something appropriate for OSM. We collect geographical information, not compa

Re: [Tagging] Setting a preferred routing

actually be the best choice. Andre Engels On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > Hi, > I came across an interesting routing problem the other day. A section of the > Richardson Highway in Alaska was relocated in 2015 by the Alaska DOT in > anticipation of erosion or flo

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Svavar Kjarrval wrote: >>> where the footway ends >>> prematurely, the routing software doesn't know it may suggest such a >>> "jump" onto the street or not, >> the end of the footway must be connected to the street if you are >> able/allowed to switch to the str

Re: [Tagging] Formally informal sidewalks

My strategy in this kind of case is to add those driveways and virtual crossings that are useful for routing purposes. So if there is a junction, if there is a driveway opposite it, I will add that driveway (or maybe just the part of the driveway upto the sidewalk), if there is none, but people can

Re: [Tagging] Routing in Liège (consulting Michelin)

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:51 AM, joost schouppe wrote: > Using copyrighted material to spot errors in OSM is still copyright > violation (well, a specialist in copyright should confirm that). That's great nonsense. YOU CANNOT COPYRIGHT FACTS ONLY THE PRESENTATION OF THOSE FACTS -- André Engels

Re: [Tagging] WG: how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

I think the one to contact there is SimMoonXP - in the tiger upload these were highway=residential, he is the one who changed them to highway=unbuilt. André Engels On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Hans De Kryger wrote: > The example above i mentioned > (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5987185/

Re: [Tagging] landuse=military

From the wiki page [[Tag:access=designated]]: "NOTE! The exact key/value combination access=designated should never appear on an object." "xxx=designated" means that a road has been specifically designated for vehicle type xxx. "access=designated" would mean that it was _specifically_ designated

Re: [Tagging] RFD tag:shop=camera?

I would say that fits very well with shop=photo, which can be found further down the page under "art, music, hobbies", and to which the link that you created now redirects (because someone in 2011 already thought "shop=camera" would better be "shop=photo") On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Warin <

Re: [Tagging] Wood+Coastline conflict

The first one is a no-no in my opinion. natural=coastline has a rather special way of being used, not good to encumber it with a semicolon-notation. My preference would be to have two separate ways, both using the same nodes. On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Torstein Ingebrigtsen Bø wrote: > Hi,

Re: [Tagging] problem with bicycle=designated

I myself, and I think more Dutch mappers, are using bicycle=designated (along with highway=residential or perhaps highway=unclassified) for a so called "fietsstraat" ("cyclestreet"). It's a road that has been set up for bicycles, but has access for all road users. Often they have a board like http

Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes (again) (and again)

What does the router have to do with the traffic sign? What information does it get from it that can not be easier got from the topology? André On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > This is not so obvious, because it has to be directional (for the router). > If you start yo

Re: [Tagging] shop: area or way?

On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Markus Semm wrote: > Hi all, > > I´m currently trying to improve the wiki in regards of shops=*. > > While preparing this activity I found a discrepancy where I would need > your guidance. > > > > Example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=shoes > > > >

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a terrace?

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:27 AM, fly wrote: > On 17.12.2013 00:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > 2013/12/16 Fabrizio Carrai > > > > > > highway=pedestrian (like a square) > > > > > > > > You will have to add area=yes to the relation I believe, even thou

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

And why not? What's the difference between "road: you may not cycle, cyclepath: you may cycle" and "road: you may only cycle on the cyclepath, cyclepath: you may cycle"? And if it's such an important difference, why only use this for cyclists? Why not put a "motor_vehicle:use_carriageway" on the cy

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Ole Nielsen wrote: > > At least in the Netherlands you have to distinguish between bicycle=no and > bicycle=dismount. Some pedestrian streets are explicitly signed with no > bicycle pushing. In other words you may not bring your bicycle here. Thus > you need bicyc

Re: [Tagging] cycle hierarchy

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > One of the first things you point out is that the "highway"-classification > was a classification made for motorized vehicles, but this is not > completely true, instead, it is the classification of the road network (and > admittedly as

Re: [Tagging] tagging of "sticker"

On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Shu Higashi wrote: > She encountered many barriers as a wheelchair rider at restaurants and > shops, > so she decided to take some action for herself. > She set up a website named "heart barrier free" and started a project. > http://www.heartbarrierfree.com > (sorr

Re: [Tagging] bicycle-no on motorways

On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 2:41 AM, Dave F. wrote: > Around my area in the UK a user is presently adding bicycle=no to all > motorways. There was a discussion a while back whether it that tag was > implied for motorways. If I remember, it was claimed there were some places > (not UK) that allowed bic

Re: [Tagging] Source tag - deprecated for use on objects?

>> Secondly, any changeset can have multiple sources so adding the source tag >> to a changeset is not flexible enough. > > We use semicolons for all tags as a separator. But it's less precise. Recently I had made a survey, and one of the things I found was a new road. So I added that. Close to it

Re: [Tagging] Coastline around a bridge?

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:56 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > English almost always refers to a large body of fresh water as a lake; the > only exception that comes to mind is the Sea of Galilee, and that is probably > a direct translation from Latin. Caspian Sea, Dead Sea, Aral Sea -- André En

Re: [Tagging] Water supply facility

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > The county has a bunch of "water supply facilities" that I presume are used > to store water as an intermediate step in the water supply chain (and not > for wastewater). How should I tag them? The best option seems to be man_made=reservo

Re: [Tagging] traffic lights

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Anthony wrote: > Yes. The problem is that an intersection is not a single point. > > > http://maps.google.com/maps?q=van+dyke+and+north+dale+mabry,+tampa&hl=en&ll=28.127814,-82.502552&spn=0.0007,0.000603&sll=28.0725,-82.548614&sspn=0.015847,0.01929&vpsrc=6&t=h&z=2

Re: [Tagging] Missing only_u_turn?

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: > On the turn restrictions page, there is no mention of only_u_turn, yet I've > found these to exist in the real world. > > Any objection to adding this restriction? If not, how do I go about telling > consumers about the change? > It sounds to m

Re: [Tagging] tagging monasteries, convents and

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:00 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > looking at the available data and in the wiki I'm currently missing > some tags for monasteries. > > All I found is this: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonastery > > which suggests to tag former monasteries as hist

Re: [Tagging] Vote / Opinion poll about history=event

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM, John Smith wrote: >> Yes, they already do use it: >> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/historic%3Aevent#values > > No, I meant more like historic=pa > > I have no idea what it means, but there is 2100 uses... > > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/historic#val

Re: [Tagging] difference between cycletrack and cycleway

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Sander Deryckere wrote: > The problem with this tagging method is that the tag "highway=cycleway" is > now used for two completely different features. A cycle track next to a road > is something completely different from a cycleway where there is no other > traffi

Re: [Tagging] Nature reserves

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > But the same (adding landcover information) also applies to > conservation and parks, which are still rendered as solid fills. What > was the reason for the change? You'll have to ask the people working on Mapnik. It's our task to speci

Re: [Tagging] Nature reserves

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > I see that leisure=nature_reserve is now rendered "transparently" > (example: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.7687&lon=-81.4594&zoom=12&layers=M). > Does this mean that there should be another landuse-type tag on it as > well? It l

Re: [Tagging] tag groupings

On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Daniel Tremblay wrote: > I've suggested a shoulder=yes/no tag.  Somebody came out with a complex > structure (probably valid) for shoulders.  Does it really have to be that > complicated? I don't know.  You, speclists, know better than me. The issue is that there

Re: [Tagging] Tagging U-Turns (Was: [OSM-talk] Divided/Non-Divided Intersection)

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: > Tag where it's signed, which is generally the exception to the default. In > places where the law is no-U-turn by default, I would expect to see "U-turn > OK" signs where they are allowed. In places where the law is that U-turns > are allowed b

Re: [Tagging] football or soccer ?

In my opinion, football being multi-interpretable, the name should not be used for either. sport=soccer is 100% clear, sport=american_football also is. sport=football can be different things, and therefore is to be avoided except if for whatever reason you know something is used for some kind of fo

Re: [Tagging] What classification for a connecting link?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > Seeing the pictures, in fact, I wouldn't tag them as links either. > IMHO, they're not really links, they're just streets that happen to > offer a connection between the two main roads. I agree, _link does not seem to apply well to that ty

Re: [Tagging] differences on wiki about roles of relation route.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:48 PM, fly wrote: > Anyway there is a forward_stop/backward_stop which differs in its meaning to > forward:stop/backward:stop that way. I'd say there it is the English explanation which is obviously the correct one: The way will always have a defined direction, the relat

Re: [Tagging] differences on wiki about roles of relation route.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:36 PM, fly wrote: > There exists major differences on wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route > between german and english. > > All the roles with ...:number are striped out on the german page. > > There is no role link on the german page. > > The definition in german

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation only based on population

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > It's not a matter of getting the label to look cool. If you are > looking for objective data, then tag the population. The definition of > "city" and its differences from "town" varies from culture to culture, > and from country to country.

Re: [Tagging] Roadside maps

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:54 AM, John Smith wrote: >> cautious than we need to be. Why do we consider what's written on a >> street sign to be a "fact", but the same words written on a map to be >> copyrightable? And many similar examples. > > A map is a collection of facts, which may or may not

Re: [Tagging] Roadside maps

On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 9:48 PM, John Smith wrote: > On 16 May 2010 05:27, Jonas Minnberg wrote: >> The time these come in handy is when they show the streets in a residential >> area that don't otherwise have clear streetnames - usually when there are >> lots of small ways in between the buildin

Re: [Tagging] City Walls and multipolygons in Osmarender

On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Seventy 7 wrote: > I have been finishing off some of the city walls in York around here: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.96193&lon=-1.08694&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF > > The existing walls have been tagged historic=citywalls which render as a > thick grey lin

Re: [Tagging] Beaches

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:03 AM, John Smith wrote: > On 9 April 2010 10:34, Cartinus wrote: >> For everyone who has never seen the sea > > Seeing the sea isn't the problem, the sea is only a few blocks from here. > >> Commonly a sandy beach consists of a dry part with loose sand above the hig

Re: [Tagging] US Speed Limits, truck routes, bike routes, access

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Alan Mintz wrote: > 1. How should one tag "suggested" speeds (usually around curves) like > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MUTCD_W1-4.svg with > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Advisory_Curve_Speed_English_25.svg ? > Should I tag them as maxspeed=*? I can se

Re: [Tagging] Dutch cafes

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 4:55 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/1/21 Alan Mintz >> >> - cannabis=yes (bringing it back around to the subject of the thread :) ) > > if that's the question I would tag it amenity=coffeeshop and not > amenity=cafe, cannabis=yes. IMHO the difference between a cafe

Re: [Tagging] Dutch cafes (was: What's a power=station?)

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:00 PM, David Earl wrote: > I still think the most important criterion is what the owner of the > establishment says it is, not on the subjective judgement of the surveyor. This sounds very good at first sight, but absolutely unworkable at second. Do you really go into "T

Re: [Tagging] Dutch cafes (was: What's a power=station?)

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: > 2010/1/19 David Earl >> >> In the case of Dutch cafe though, the word has been usurped for a >> purpose other than its original French meaning (which is pretty much >> universal I think - French cafes and English cafes are different in >>

Re: [Tagging] Dutch cafes (was: What's a power=station?)

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 4:23 PM, David Earl wrote: > In the case of Dutch cafe though, the word has been usurped for a > purpose other than its original French meaning (which is pretty much > universal I think - French cafes and English cafes are different in > character, sure, but they are all r

Re: [Tagging] Dutch cafes (was: What's a power=station?)

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: >> Well, I would say it is part of what we call a "café". The problem is >> more that Dutch uses the same word for what in OSM are three terms: >> bar, cafe and pub. And moreover, the same place often having the >> function of all three. To m

[Tagging] Dutch cafes (was: What's a power=station?)

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Ben Laenen wrote: > Maybe the English speaking world should start joining the rest of the world > which have to learn definitions of each tag anyway. So OSM may have awkward > tags for English speaking persons, but if we really have to try to resolve all > tags th

Re: [Tagging] Should 'highway=incline[_steep]' be discouraged?

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > John Smith wrote: >>> You certainly cannot tell the orientation of the speed bump from the >>> node alone... >> >> Ummm speed bumps aren't usually anything but in line with the road, > > Exactly. Just like inclines. But there's a big

Re: [Tagging] Tagging highway=cycleway without explicit knowledge of the law?

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Dave F. wrote: > Andre Engels wrote: >>>> That's what I want to say to _you_. Tag what you can actually see. And >>>> where I live, that usually does not include municipial regulations. >>>> Whether a path is me

Re: [Tagging] Tagging highway=cycleway without explicit knowledge of the law?

>> That's what I want to say to _you_. Tag what you can actually see. And >> where I live, that usually does not include municipial regulations. >> Whether a path is meant for cyclists or just for pedestrians, is >> something I decide from the path and what's around it, > See Andre? This is where y

Re: [Tagging] Tagging highway=cycleway without explicit knowledge of the law?

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Dave F. wrote: >> highway=cycleway only used for well-engineered & public/permanant >> cycle tracks (ie could you safely do 20kph on it) > > ??? > It's only a cycleway only if it's signed or documented as a cycleway. > > Your logic is flawed: > "Cycle up a steep h

Re: [Tagging] bicycle=no

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:09 PM, David Calder wrote: > As a travelling cyclist I need to know if I am going to be able to take a > particular road or not before I get there. I know bicycles are not permitted > on motorways/autobahns/autovias etc so I suspect that it is implied that > bicycle=no on

Re: [Tagging] bicycle=no

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: > Isn't this what Mike was referring to when he said "... access to > non-copyright information on legal status ... is reasonably available > in the public domain in England and Wales" ? So there are actually law books there that say "road so-a

Re: [Tagging] bicycle=no

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: > Definitely a step in the right direction, i.e. separating "legal > status" from "defacto status". > > I'd be tempted to also use bicycle:signed=yes/no to clarify when the > (legal?) status is derived from evidence on the ground as opposed to a

Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Richard Mann wrote: > I wasn't aware of any distinction between cycleway=track and > highway=cycleway, other than that the first doesn't render (yet) and the > second renders badly. I don't think there's much difference in nature, it's more a difference in the wa

Re: [Tagging] More cycleway=* values needed

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: > Yeah, but it's really just an enhanced bike lane - a path for bikes that > closely follows the road. To me, the "follows the road" is the crucial > distinction, so it's a kind of cycleway=lane, possibly with another tag. I disagree; cycleway

Re: [Tagging] bicycle=no

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Dave F. wrote: > Steve Bennett wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Dave F. > > wrote: >> >>     Then don't mark it with bicycle=* at all. >> >> >> That's abdicating my interpretation. > Err? > > Anyway... > > As Richard M. allud

Re: [Tagging] bicycle=no

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > Though I still have trouble deciding for a lot of paths around here if it's > really "bicycle=yes" (implying some sort of deliberate intention that bikes > are allowed and a suitability for them) or "bicycle=no" implying a strict > prohibitio

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] connection between 2 islands

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Cartinus wrote: > On Monday 30 November 2009 23:36:27 Simone Saviolo wrote: >> I'm not sure I understood the WIki correctly - either that, or Osmarender >> doesn't do what the wiki says. In this place [1], the railway runs on a >> raised finger of land, as described