Re: [Tagging] Shop=tailor vs craft=tailor

I do not map 'craft'. Nor would I map 'profession', 'trade', 'occupation', 'skill', etc. I try to map physical things, like shops, roads. A tailor would get supplies from places that sell fabric haberdashery On 18 March 2018 at 13:19, James wrote: > https://github.com/gravityst

Re: [Tagging] windthrow areas (=forest destroyed by winds, =windfall)

Would the trees naturally regenerate? There should be seeds left behind by the old trees that would grow to replace the old trees. So the area should be covered with trees .. young trees but still trees. I much prefer landcover=* to natural and would use landcover=trees for this situation. On 16

Re: [Tagging] Rivers classification

Sadly, neither of these stream orders are correlated with the discharge of the river, which could then send a wrong impression on the rendered map if they would indicate the river width. Cheers On 6 August 2017 17:30:20 CEST, "Daniel Koć" wrote: >W dniu 06.08.2017 o 13:32, Richard pisze: >> as

Re: [Tagging] bus networks in Hong Kong

a lot. It would be a shame to have some out of date data… Frank -- frank.villaro-dixon.eu - PGP: 6F36914A Envie d'électricité 100% verte ? Enercoop.fr What is a Velomobile ? www.sans-essence.eu ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstr

Re: [Tagging] bus networks in Hong Kong

On 16-08-02 15:29:11, Michael Tsang, wrote 1.0K characters saying: On Monday 01 August 2016 23:55:56 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone > Il giorno 01 ago 2016, alle ore 17:51, Michael Tsang > ha scritto: > > What should I type in for the network=* tag for the bus routes such that >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for palapa

On 16-07-25 05:48:29, Marc Gemis, wrote 2.6K characters saying: what about amenity=shelter + shelter_type=palapa ? A curious question, but what would be the difference between: shelter_type=palapa and shelter:type=palapa ? Cheers -- frank.villaro-dixon.eu - PGP: 6F36914A Envie d'électri

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (highway=fake_speed_camera)

On 16-04-07 09:34:27, Marco Predicatori, wrote 2.4K characters saying: I was thinking about a new tag altogether because it wouldn't require any change on the rendering side, or on the navigation apps. Besides, a "speed_camera" tag should mean that *there is* a camera, just like a building or a b

[Tagging] RFD Camp ground Kitchens and their fittings

Hi, Follow a thread on another forum (non OSM, but talking about side issues) I think the following things should be mapped to add information to the map in regards some, mainly commercial, camp grounds that have communal kitchens; stove top (no, not a bbq) microwave_oven fridge (or refriger

[Tagging] The tag voting system - time for reform?

On 24/01/2015 11:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: ON the subject of man_made=tap On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Pieren > wrote: On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan mailto:kotya.li...@gmail.com>> wrote: > As of today, a total of 16 votes have been

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

For me the difference between bus routes (or walking routes, or cycling routes or . routes) and a collection of McD locations, represented in OSM by POIs (or buildings), is that you can traverse a specific route only by using the roads and paths along that route but you can navigate any way

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

node networks (or walking node networks) I fear, from the responses so far.) From: Marc Gemis Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 10:11 PM To: Frank Little ; Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

Nodes currently are placed (where relevant) in both cycling and walking networks. If one did not include nodes in route relations (I do that and prefer it; Jo, as he said earlier, does not), or in the network relation, or in both (slight redundancy, but quite useful IMO) then the cycling or hik

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

Could you please explain why you believe route relations are likely to change, necessitating an update to the network relations? Once a cycle node network has been established, there are few changes (few new routes). Older networks may be updated with a few new nodes and new relations. But (at l

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

llection itself instead of creating a relation for that). Existing relations could be modified along the way when people are contribution around them. @Frank I agree that the wiki should formalize the practice but not all practices in OSM have to be followed. Pieren _

Re: [Tagging] "Relations are not categories" excepted for "type=network" ?

The cyclenode networks we are talking about are specific, published networks with route signage and node signs and/or information panels. They are not a loose connection of nodes which mappers have decided to gather together in OSM for convenience. You will find them in Belgium (where they were

Re: [Tagging] highway=track access

Richard Fairhurst wrote: Hi all, There are almost 8m highway=track objects in the database (thanks taginfo!), third only to =residential and =service (thanks TIGER!). I'm interested to know what level of access people believe this implies in their home countries. On the Dutch Forum we’ve b

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

Sunday, May 18, 2014 2:43 PM John Pakker wrote: >Honest question: are there capitals for something besides countries and states? Italy has both regions and provinces. For example: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abruzzo (Region) Capital: L'Aquila - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Province_of_Chiet

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

Fernando Trebien wrote: Alright. I see that "applying layer to long ways" is bad for several reasons. Surely this could be turned into a validation warning. But what's the difference between tagging the bridge with layer=1 and tagging the river underneath with layer=-1? Some people seem to think

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 14/mar/2014 um 15:51 schrieb Fernando Trebien : Do you agree that the river can be tagged with layer=-1 as long as this value is correct in relation to the layer of other nearby/crossing ways? I would discourage you to do so. Layer tags should only be applied to

Re: [Tagging] tag man_made=campanile to be replaced withman_made=belfry?

Andreas Labres wrote: For me those are rather synonym (but different regions/cultures obviously build them much different). In German the word "Glockenstapel" doesn't exist (at least in our latitude, 48°). The Nordic "Klockstapel" as well as the Italian "Campanile" translate to "Glockenturm

Re: [Tagging] tag man_made=campanile to be replaced with man_made=belfry?

"St Niklaas" wrote: Volker and Dave, There some in Holland as well, about 230 in totall. http://nl.ask.com/wiki/Lijst_van_klokkenstoelen_in_Nederland?qsrc=3044&lang=nl Many of these without a surrounding tower structure are tagged as man_made=bell_cage. There's a page for this proposed feature

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 53, Issue 13

"St Niklaas" wrote: Volker and Dave, There some in Holland as well, about 230 in totall. http://nl.ask.com/wiki/Lijst_van_klokkenstoelen_in_Nederland?qsrc=3044&lang=nl Many of these without a surrounding tower structure are tagged as man_made=bell_cage. There's a page for this proposed feature

Re: [Tagging] How to tag an imaginary oneway barrier

Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Bryce Nesbitt wrote: does not represent what's on the ground: there won't be a "one way street" sign. Dual carriage roads don't have one way signs, either, but the parts have oneway=yes. I just noticed that the relatively recently changed description on the Key:oneway w

Re: [Tagging] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?

In other words, trying to define whether it 'is' a guest house or a bed & breakfast (or a small hotel) won't work. Different people will name the same thing differently. So we need to define the facilities offered, not the name. (IMHO.) - Original Message - From:

Re: [Tagging] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?

Presence or absence of a kitchen for the traveller does not define for me whether it is a guest house or not. I've stayed in places in Egypt and Pakistan which our company certainly called 'the guest house' which had kitchens. They did not have live-in owners or staff (but did have people to prep

Re: [Tagging] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?

+1 to that. Just returned from a week's stay in a short-let apartment in Brussels, which was certainly completely different from the hotels, guest houses or bed & breakfast places I could have stayed in (and I chose it specifically for that reason). This was a single apartment; I've often stayed

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

As others have pointed out, bicycle=no may have also been used by mappers to exclude bicycles not just to exclude cycling; I'd say we can't know what people meant (though I imagine mostly it will have had the meaning of 'no cycling'). I looked to the wiki for clarity on usage, but the Bicycle

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

Nice summary: thanks, Robert. In the Netherlands: (a) Yes, this is true: if there is no sidewalk (very common outside the built-up area). (b) This is only true if there is a sidewalk; if there is no sidewalk, see (a). Different countries have different rules. (c) This is generally true on footp

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

That depends where you are located, Mike. The rules in Germany, for example, are different from the Netherlands. Martin's statement is not necessarily true in the Netherlands (and perhaps that is where the confusion begins). In the Netherlands, the law states: pedestrians use the sidewalk; if t

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

It's cycleway all the way down, under the bridge, and up the other side. We don't get to decide whether it's a cycleway or not. That's what the signs are for. If it had changed into a footpath, there would be a sign (the Dutch are good at that). I agree that if there was a pedestrian sign, it

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

Here's an example from the Netherlands: http://www.eemsbode.nl/nieuws/18774/oplossing-gemeente-delfzijl-fietsers-afstappen-bij-tunnel/ It's a cycleway (mopeds also allowed). No change in highway type here. It's cycleway all the way down. There were accidents. The local authority decided that the

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

Yes, the intention is to stop people pushing their bikes in a pedestrian area. No limitation on prams, wheelchairs, luggage trolleys, etc. It's just aimed at bikes (which in a country with lots of bikes, like the Netherlands, is understandable). Again: this really is not what bicycle=dismount

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

It is no longer clear to me what is being proposed since two different situations are involved. 1. There are situations where there are signs telling a cyclist to dismount. He/she can continue on the way, pushing the bike. To tag these situations the current solution is to tag "bicycle=dismoun

[Tagging] Unsuscribe

Unsuscribe ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Substation Refinement

e, I'd love to see a pratical example ;) ). Anyway, the RFC is very well done ;) > It is possible that a future vote on the proposal will be split into two > separate votes according to the 'subproposals'. > > Ole N Frank -- Frank Villaro-Dix

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Extended tags for Key:Surveillance

On 14/02/13 19:27, John F. Eldredge wrote: Frank Villaro-Dixon wrote: focal length (camera:focal ?) isn't a bad idea, but I think that the most important tag is camera:direction. I would think that information such as focal length would be difficult to learn; the security author

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Extended tags for Key:Surveillance

On 14/02/13 16:53, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2013/2/14 Frank Villaro-Dixon : it's been some years now that this proposed feature has been in the draft section. I think it's now the time to RFC on this feature, what do you think ? The future goal is to starting to import/add correctl

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Extended tags for Key:Surveillance

;) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extended_tags_for_Key:Surveillance -- Frank Villaro-Dixon - PGP: 6F36914A http://frank.villaro-dixon.eu ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] information desk at train stations etc.

Peter, How about information=kiosk? It can also be a value for shops [1]. Or is it something even less office-like? In the Netherlands there are manned information stands which are basically desks. Those can be found in large train stations and shopping malls. Frank [1] http

Re: [Tagging] Coastline around a bridge?

, which is bad. (The bigger lakes are freshwater lakes.) Shouldn't coastlines be reserved for the coasts of seas and oceans only? Frank Quoting Martin Koppenhoefer : 2012/10/3 Martin Vonwald : Hi! Any reason why the coastline should go around a bridge? http://tools.geofabrik.de

[Tagging] tagging vivariums in a zoo

accepted? If no, I neither like leisure=park for it nor zoo= because it neither is a park nor does it specify a type of zoo. What about landuse=enclosure/compound/vivarium? And second name=species sounds also wrong for me because it isn't the name of the vivarium. Any thoughts?