erely making an educated guess. His
changeset comment suggests he has also added some "pipeline reserves"
although a quick look doesn't turn any up.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Ross Scanlon <mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com>> wrote:
This is the aerial imagery of the area t
This is the aerial imagery of the area the original poster is talking about:
https://binged.it/2kN1tfC
To all intents it could be a park.
In osm it's at:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073
Cheers
Ross
On 08/02/17 19:51, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Yes, I see n
> Animal shelter appropriate in those cases, but not in the case of
Boarding Kennels, or Boarding Catteries where you take your pet to be
cared for whilst you go on holiday. For these I would propose
amenity=boarding_kennel and amenity=boarding_cattery.
A few do take cats and dogs, but in my exp
No. The router should know not to do this. Likewise as below the router
should not make u turns at traffic lights.
Based on what? How does the router know that the two ways are two
carriageways of a single road? Couldn't they be a straight road, that
becomes a oneway street at a certain point,
In one case there is a road where a two way section comes to a divider
and becomes two one way sections for a while. The suggested route came
along one of the one way sections, then turned about 340 degrees to go
down the other side of the road. It may be legal to do a u-turn there,
but I don't th
On 06/03/12 03:32, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 03/05/2012 08:12 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes_and_complex_intersections_visual_approach
User Cmuelle8 insists on adding it to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lane_tagging_comparison#A_visual_approach
as
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:10 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> > a) you will add a note or FIXME to express this to the following
> > mapper. At least you have a 50% chance that it is already right.
>
> Perhaps you can explain how I or anyone else will determine the
> direction of this waterwa
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 01:04:09 -0400
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> There doesn't seem to be a tag on the wiki for either handicapped
> parking spots in a larger lot or a dedicated handicapped lot.
amenity=parking
capacity:disabled=yes or number of spaces.
It's on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap
> > Typical.
> >
> > NFI about database use so you resort to slinging mud.
> >
> >
> > I have a significant idea about how osm works as I have to integrate it
> > into programs I write or contribute to.
> >
> > If the database was normalised then I'd have a reduction of about 1000
> > lines of co
> > ...
> > The renderers would simply have to look in the tagging table to see what
> > needs to be displayed.
>
> Sounds to me that you have absolutely no clue how OSM is actually working.
>
> Regards, ULFL
Typical.
NFI about database use so you resort to slinging mud.
I have a significan
You may also want to have a read of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_normalization
--
Cheers
Ross
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:03:42 +0200
Ulf Lamping wrote:
> Am 24.08.2010 09:36, schrieb Ross Scanlon:
> >> Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion
> >> comes up again and again because we don't have:
> >> a) clear tagging
> Well, I will take a change to 'troll' again about it. This discussion
> comes up again and again because we don't have:
> a) clear tagging guidelines (*not* rules)
> b) mechanism to replace tags
Agree totally.
This (b) would be easily recitified by normalising the database in regards to
tags.
> I hope we are flexible enough to allow our tagging to evolve and
> improve.
> > especially not, if a lot of people actually disagree with that change.
>
> Fair enough, but what if many people agree with the change? What if
> convincing arguments are given for, many people agree with them, and
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:04:21 +1000
John Smith wrote:
> On 17 August 2010 17:44, Sebastian Klein wrote:
> > Michael Barabanov wrote:
> >>
> >> Seems like double work to me. Ross's suggestion may just work. If
> >> there're no objections, I'll update the wiki.
> >
> > Please not, this is a crude
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:30:26 -0700
Michael Barabanov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How would one tag a turn restriction (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active say
> 6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be sufficient for
> one time interval.
>
> Michael
> Work out why it doesn't appear (5 min - your patch is actually very
> slightly wrong btw, can you spot your mistake?)
Spotted my friday afternoon coding did you. Glad to see someones on the ball!!
> However the above is just for fun - lets replace my original statement
> with 'a lot of time' a
> I just don't see an ambulance/fire station as an emergency. I mean, if
> you fall down and injure yourself you don't try & get to the station you
> 'phone up & get an ambulance to come to you.
The suggestion is to have fire, police and ambulance as emergency.
--
Cheers
Ross
__
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:05:19 +0100
Emilie Laffray wrote:
> On 30 July 2010 16:26, Ross Scanlon wrote:
>
> >
> > Total time 6 minutes
> >
> > Hundreds of hours, yeah right.
> >
> > The program I've been talking about uses osm2pgsql and mapnik so I&
> Well done. Pretty much none of the others do. I look forward to your
> patches :)
Heres the patch for the default.style for osm2pgsql
node,way emergency text nocache,polygon
Wasn't worth a diff patch as it's only one line. (30 seconds)
> Mapnik for instance has manual rules
> Better yet - just don't change it. This sort of change just isn't
> worth the pain and hundreds of developer hours that could be better
> spent on moving the project forward. Yes - this sort of change might
> make the tag heirachy prettier - but not enough to justify the work.
Garbage.
It's n
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 02:29:46 +1000
John Smith wrote:
> > 1st October 2010
> >
> > Gives time to get the rendering resolved.
>
> Does anyone have a problem, or see any problems, shifting the
> following tags into the emergency=* tag space?
>
> amenity=police -> emergency=police_station
> amenity
> On 29 July 2010 19:15, Ross Scanlon wrote:
> > Just need to make sure that a date is set to remove the "old" amenity tags.
>
> What would a reasonable time frame be?
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Actually we could do both, we could add emergency=* tags to existing
> POIs without any problems as far as I know, and in future remove the
> old amenity tag.
I think this is a better option.
Just need to make sure that a date is set to remove the "old" amenity tags.
--
Cheers
Ross
_
> The right long term solution for this stuff is to use country-specific
> tags, (eg, in australia we could use amenity=ses_station or
> something), and to centrally define (in machine-readable terms) what
> those country-specific tags are. But I think we're a fair way from
> being able to implemen
> Should we be tagging where it's allowed or where it's not allowed or
> where it's signed specifically one way or the other?
Only where it's signed.
--
Cheers
Ross
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/lis
26 matches
Mail list logo
