On Sat, 21 Mar 2020 at 12:24, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
>
> disused:building=service
>
This, and:
man_made=nesting_site
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dnesting_site
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2020 at 19:13, s8evq wrote:
>
>> Hi every
For what it's worth, some previous related discussions:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-September/030048.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-January/041817.html
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 10:58, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On some hik
Hi tagging, hi Warin,
Sorry to interrupt, but I disagree at this point.
* * *
TL;DR:
changing_table: "A tag for tagging changing tables"
was indeed bad.
changing_table: "provides a surface for changing the nappy (diaper) of
an infant or young child"
is just right (explains that "table" can be a "
goes against 1 feature, 1 element.
It would prevent basic operations like counting the schools in a city.
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ki needs to be updated
to the practice.
-- althio
[1]: if I am somehow wrong and it is indeed (remotely) possible to
apply route relation membership with namespacing, I beg, please leave
me ignorant.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
ht
A few links
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=mounting_block#values
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-August/038689.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-August/038707.html
-- althio
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019, 21:37 Dave F via Tagging
wrote
On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 23:13, "Christian Müller" wrote:
> Suggesting forward and backward as tag
> values is a rather bad thing, as these
> are values for route relation roles.
>
"rather bad thing"?!? Who says? Source?
This is not what exists in the wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wik
>
> > "cycleway:left=lane"
> > "cycleway:left:oneway=-1"
> >
> > as the currently preferred method and have been mapping/tagging like
> > this for a while now.
> >
> > Just my two cents
> >
> > Hubert87
> &g
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > If this seems viable, I would expand the proposal by a migration proposal
> > from amenity=police to police=station
>
> I don’t think we should abandon amenity=police and it will likely not happen
> unless people tag so many different things with the tag that it be
Discussed: maybe there
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036164.html
Decided : I don't know
> Cmuelle introduces rather complex combinations of tags such as
> cycleway:left=lane + cycleway:left:oneway=-1, that should in his view be used
> instead of cycleway:left=opposit
e objects are related
to the nearest highway or the nearest crossing between several highways
(use buffers accordingly in the pre-treatment).
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
/*
This kind of scheme seems to allow incremental mapping which is in my
opinion desirable.
-- althio
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 13:36, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 08:29, Mateusz Konieczny
> wrote:
>
>>
>> You may prefer to use landuse=logging or somet
That sounds strange to me.
I would not say we "map the needs", I would say we "map features or
equipment", for people with particular needs (such as people with
disabilities).
I preferred "mapping _for_ the needs..."
-- althio
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 10:15, Se
e; no @ stay<1h
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 00:31, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The page could be about those OSM tags that are relevant for Disabled
> features,
> how to map these things .. not about 'missing tags' nor "information relevant
> for disabled persons"
>
> Perhaps a new page - "Mapping accessibi
I agree this position is debatable and finally arbitrary.
And I find this particular position (for North America node) rather
strange, it feels too much North, as if it was biased for Mercator
projection maybe.
As arbitrary as it is, we could accept by definition something like
https://en.m.wikipe
…
-- althio
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018, 14:11 Paul Allen wrote:
>
> In some situations, where name=* is already used for one thing but a
> reference number is also needed, it makes
> sense. In other situations t doesn't make sense (to me) to use ref, which
> isn't r
I am happy with shop=wholesale and would prefer to change slightly the
definitions and descriptions ["A place selling products or services", no
mention of retail] on pages
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shops
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
ase.
> [1] http://www.pavingexpert.com/cobble01.htm
> [2] http://www.pavingexpert.com/setts01.htm
> [3] http://www.pavingexpert.com/blocks.htm
Great pages!
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
terial=*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:material
-- althio
On Jan 15, 2018 7:16 AM, "Leon Karcher" wrote:
> I'm not sure about 'paving_stones'. This is rather for stones which are
> made of concrete. Maybe I missed some information, but those stones look
> very natural,
I think they are much more flat, smooth than regular sett.
I guess surface=paving_stones is a good option.
-- althio
On 14 January 2018 at 22:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 19:21:52 -0200
> Fernando Trebien wrote:
>
>> surface=cobblestone
>
> Rather s
ed:amenity=school
Regarding end dates, a best guess is enough if you are not able to
find out precisely. ~C19 or ~C20 or whatever seems best, but not
required anyway.
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
he local mappers to decide,
> obviously, but I
> don't think it would be a problem to classify it as cathedral.
Amen! :)
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
rg/wiki/Talk:Key:boundary#
Religious_authority_boundaries
boundary=religious_administration religion=*
denomination=*
admin_level=*
> size is not everything, surely you have noticed this is from the nineth
century?
Well, the Wikipedia page reads: built as a royal chapel, not buil
, ...)
2a - contact:addr:* space for contact (postal) address (used for
detailed information about one POI)
if 2a is not suitable, consider any of:
physical:addr vs [contact|post|postal|snailmail]:addr
-- althio
On 18 December 2017 at 20:43, Simon Poole wrote:
>
>
> Am 17.12.2017 um 21:2
official_name=Mt. Lebanon
short_name, alt_name if need for other variations
My 2 cents
-- althio
On 26 July 2017 at 12:18, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Clifford Snow
> wrote:
>>
>> Saint Paul - but that certainly is an exception.
>>
>> I wa
aisins, table grapes and non-alcoholic
grape juice.
-- althio
On Jul 9, 2017 4:32 AM, "Graeme Fitzpatrick" wrote:
> I'd agree with you there Warin, the crop is what is being harvested, not
> the trees themselves.
>
> Another one I noticed on that page is
>
> *cr
On 26 June 2017 at 14:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> 2017-06-26 10:05 GMT+02:00 althio:
>>
>> + bus=minibus
>
> bus, according to the wiki, is a legal access restriction. Or do you suggest
> to use the same tags in different ways, according to the context?
Hi Martin
different type bus route, something similar to:
type = route
+ route = tour_bus / sightseeing_bus
+ tour_bus = double_decker / land_train /
+ fee = *
+ key_for_hop_on_hop_off = *
+ capacity?
+ network, operator
see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trackless_train
UK: land train, road train, Tschu-Tsc
+1 to all that, this looks good to me:
type=route
+ route=bus
+ bus=minibus
+ network=*
+ operator=*
-- althio
ps: splitting the discussion about sightseeing/tourist
On 26 June 2017 at 06:39, John Willis wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 1:02 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>>
Hi,
I started to gather some info about existing practices to map and tag
bus stops without infrastructure.
Please read there:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:public_transport%3Dplatform#Bus_stop_without_infrastructure
I would appreciate your comments and additions.
-- althio
ave started with:
building=prefabricated
prefabricated=quonset/nissen/...
and optionally all subtags suggestions, they do seem to fit:
building:levels=0
roof:levels=1
building:material=steel/...
roof:material=steel/...
roof:shape=round
roof:orientation=along
- althio
_
I agree with Martin and I must insist: no abbreviations or acronyms please.
My ideas are about:
alcohol=yes/no/bring_your_own
wine=yes/no/bring_your_own
- althio
On 11 April 2017 at 00:13, ajt1...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=byo
>
> Finds 3 "
Well then as Thilo said, if it is not
"tourism=apartment"
it is
"tourism=chalet"
On 12 March 2017 at 16:35, Lorenzo "Beba" Beltrami
wrote:
> 2017-03-12 16:10 GMT+01:00 althio :
>>
>> From your description, I understand that tourism=apartment is a
ter
water=lake
lake=stream_pool
or
natural=water
water=stream_pool
-- althio
On 11 March 2017 at 10:24, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course
in the building".
tourism=apartment
number_of_apartments=*
capacity=*
-- althio
On 11 March 2017 at 12:28, Lorenzo "Beba" Beltrami
wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm searching a valid tag for an holiday house rented to groups.
>
> It's something like tourism=apartment, but it
oes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorting_office
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sorting-office
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/sorting-office
Cheers
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.o
lier)
post_office=sorting_center
18 from https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/post_office=sorting_center
all instances strangely in one place:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22post_office%22%3D%22sorting_center%22+global&R
-- althio
On 22 February 2017 at 20:56, Dave F wrote:
> Hi
>
> A
://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Seaway for
this attempt.
I hope this is relevant for your proposal.
-- althio
On 21 February 2017 at 19:34, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Please comment on:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Seaway
>
> Thank you,
>
n intervene if necessary.
But that is not a reason, quite the contrary, to start another war
between local community and remote/global community. Especially when
there is no disagreement locally. Even more so when there was
disagreement locally and it is settled now.
-- althio
unused)
And I read here you seem to agree.
> The longer I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion, that
> having an official langage tag as Simon suggested might be the ways to go.
> This way producers of maps can avoid using "name" at all.
-- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hi Dave,
> Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> I'd prefer avoiding the word "official", in favor of eg default or
>> on-the-ground etc.
+1
Dave F wrote:
> Isn't that what we have atm & where much of the ambiguity stems from?
>
> 'official' names appears the correct way to proceed
-1
>
> Ideally,
a special type, motorways are another
> special type and so on.
> So anything that is a highway but is none of these special types, then it's a
> service.
-1, not my understanding
-- althio
On 2 November 2016 at 07:23, Tijmen Stam wrote:
> In the local Dutch forum there was a dis
Hi,
I added a comment in the wiki discussion [Please see documented and
already in use tag Tag:highway=raceway].
-- althio
On 15 October 2016 at 23:11, Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have drafted this proposal about a dedicated tag for racing circuits.
> Please have a l
we could introduce a way to store fuzzy areas
>>without using polygons, or by using more than one polygon as one object
>
>May be: Using a minimum (core area) and maximum (extension area) estimation as
>one relation.
- althio
On 27 March 2016 at 11:08, David Marchal wrote:
&g
ry.
Is this suitable tracing and tagging (6 years ago)?
- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
to have rough mapping and let it improve over time.
Back to OP question:
Once you trace a rough outline for multiple buildings, what is the tag?
building=yes? or another value?
with a note=*? a fixme=*?
- althio
___
Tagging mai
=residential vs building=???
- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37272932
Best course in my opinion would be to contact directly mapper(s) via OSM
changesets discussion to welcome and explain.
See you all
- althio
On Feb 18, 2016 7:57 AM, "Gerd Petermann"
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
> in the last da
exhibition and sales):
shop = artwork
+ artwork = painting / photography / ...
(note: we have also tourism = artwork for public pieces of art, not for
sale)
For "art shops":
shop = interior_decoration / furniture / carpet / antiques / ...
understand why you seem to support the wiki in this current state.
- althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Colin,
Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Paris
and tell me if it answers your questions and if I understood your concerns.
- althio
On 28 January 2016 at 12:10, Colin Smale wrote:
> What do you mean with "institution"? Is that a single building housi
On 28 January 2016 at 11:47, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On 28 January 2016 at 11:43, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> Only problem: if an institution
>> serves several levels we will either loose information (e.g. by using only
>> the highest level) or deal with multiple values (but that's no dif
> Thanks for getting this discussion started.
I agree, thank you Colin
Colin, Matthijs, good luck on this one, I hope something will come out
positively.
> One thing to take into account in this discussion is that multi-valued
> keys often move the problem to the data consumer. For that reason I
brings too much confusion, I take it for a bad case of duck tagging.
I would like :
- discourage tourism=gallery
- subtype of tourism=museum, museum=art just like
museum=railway/history, and further art=painting/...
- also redirect towards shop=art for badly tagged items
althio
On 25 Januar
to the list and use that.
althio
On 19 January 2016 at 21:43, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> I know that there is shop=copyshop ("A shop that offers photocopying
> and printing services.").
>
> I want tag place offering photocopying and printing supplies - printers,
> i
On 24 June 2015 at 14:36, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (I note that event_venue is not on the wiki so I am unable to find what
> restrictions this would place on its use other than the amenity key.)
>
Low numbers but the wiki page exists:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity
Kotya Karapetyan wrote:
> 2) For large cemeteries, mapping of sections/sectors is essential for the
> map to be of any use. There is a proposal for this
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Cemetery_sector, but
> it seems to be abandoned. I would restart it, but I have a doubt:
Forwarding to HOT activation working group.
Activation WG,
Please see an ongoing discussion about tagging:leisure=common for
potential helicopter landings
Tagging group,
Tentative answers inline.
Andreas Goss wrote:
>
>
> Look for a clear ar
Please have a look at:
man_made=village_sign
+ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:inscription
- althio
On 8 May 2015 at 11:50, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
wrote:
> On 7 May 2015 at 23:11, pmailkeey . wrote:
>> Tips on tagging a village sign please.
>>
>> Village
I would re-use coworking_space like:
amenity=coworking_space
craft=artist [/photographer/sculptor/...]
cheers
althio
On 26 April 2015 at 06:58, Dave F. wrote:
> On 26/04/2015 09:02, André Pirard wrote:
>
> The major skill of an artist being to be inventive, be prepared for
&g
> >> I use Stack Exchange a lot and it's great, very well designed for its
> >> purpose. BUT Stack Exchange is not designed for community decision
> >> making. There are tools/forums that are actually designed for that
> >> purpose.
> > 1) Can you point in the direction of the tools you mean ("des
On Mar 11, 2015 7:44 PM, "Markus Lindholm"
wrote:
>
> On 11 March 2015 at 18:04, althio wrote:
> > The trouble is there is no definition yet of city_block
>
> Not so. When I added it to osm wiki I also put there a reference to
> the definition found in Wikipedia an
On 11 March 2015 at 18:14, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 11/03/2015 18:04, althio wrote:
>
>>
>> To Séverin,
>>
>> For your particular case with your students and considering your time
>> frame I would say:
>> IMO it is taggable, no need to avoid in
Hi Jean-Marc,
Thank you for your detailed input and review on this idea.
It indeed looks to fit well within the existing scheme as a more refined
urban territorial subdivision.
place = city/town > suburb > neighbourhood > city_block/block / plot
The trouble is there is no definition yet of city_
I do not have the answer but I wanted to look towards place=* tagged as area.
A few possibilities may include:
place=block [taginfo ~1 200 as area] [no wiki]
place=city_block [taginfo ~900 as area] [wiki documentation, mostly in
Stockholm, Sweden]
place=plot [taginfo ~900 as area] [no wiki]
p
On 10 March 2015 at 21:40, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
> Hi Bryce,
>
> How can I rename the wiki? Do I need to create a new one and copy/paste the
> contents?
Look on the line:
Read | Edit | View history | [Star, Watch] | Dropdown arrow
Click the Dropdown arrow and Move.
_
On 24 February 2015 at 08:55, David Bannon wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 06:15 +, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
>
>>
>> What to do with places where one cannot camp?
>
> But your examples mostly focus on what were once campsites and are now
not. So is
> it camp_site=closed (or disused or similar) ?
>
On 11 February 2015 at 17:45, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> A hotel room that has air conditioning may be both heated or cooled
>> depending on the desired temperature and the ambient temperature (and the
>> air conditioner). It
> Sorry, I was thinking of gas as a product (as in natural gas), not a
state of matter.
Confusing, so I proposed natural_gas for natural gas.
> I was thinking of substance=* as a category (water, fuel, oil, gas,
coolant, etc etc
I think we need (as often as possible) to tag separately nature and
John Willis wrote:
> Substance=gas
> Substance:detailed:multiphase_gas
> Substance:state=multi
That is not coherent. Do you mean that (substance=gas) is for mainly
gas or gas-only?
If it is gas only (substance=gas), it can be multiple gaseous
products. But it is not multiphase.
And then state=ga
On 29 January 2015 at 22:54, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30/01/2015 5:07 AM, Rainer Fügenstein wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd like to repeat once again that "substance" doesn't seem to be a nice
>>> key descriptor for values like ...
>> content ... too static
>> medium ... too spooky
>> product
Throwing out my ideas...
Disclaimer:
These are generic proposals for pipeline sub-tagging with example values
for illustration.
I do not want to derail this towards water/drinking_water and multi-values
(semicolon or namespaced). ;)
I propose 3 keys: use/purpose (as main subtag), state/phase and
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Yes, feature that does not exist anymore (or even never existed!) or
> is only proposed has no place in OSM.
+1. No place on rendered map and apps. +/-1. No place on DB.
> With possible caveat that features that are extremely likely to be added
> (recently destroyed bu
Richard Z. wrote:
> thank you all for the unexpected attention, the problematic text snippet
> was cut&paste from [[Comparison of life cycle concepts]] where it must
> have been lurking for some time.
[[Comparison of life cycle concepts]] is meant as an overview.
I approve very much your edit for
Eric SIBERT wrote:
> I started modifying the wiki following our recent discussion.
>
> For cuisine=*, I added:
> ...
> For shop=convenience, I added (in Tags used in combination):
> ...
+1
> And latter go on with culture=* for nonfood services?
+1
Hi Martin
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> The f
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> removed:
>> (features that do not exist anymore but may still be seen on other
>> sources)
>> [@Martin: leave a mention to the other sources]
>
> I see no harm in leaving them in OSM. Untill something is built there or the
> landuse/cover changes. Leave it th
> removed:
>
> (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are commonly seen
> on other sources)
>
> I propose to remove the part "or never existed but are commonly seen on
> other sources", because this has nothing to do with "removed". If people want
> to tag easter eggs or errors
>
And see also for repairs:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft%3Dwatchmaker
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hi
Plural form shop=watches is (a bit) more used and documented at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dwatches
But not mentioned in Map Features or Key:shop.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/li
> Also, I think that the subkey separator (':') should be different from
> the index separator (let's say '_' although that isn't fully
> standardised yet). Because I could concoct an example where "2" is a
> subkey rather than an index.
Visually for index I would go for "#" or "-" but I don't kno
While I am no skilled programmer I agree with the next points:
(any guru is welcome to disregard my following opinion if he wants to)
> Just because one can use a regular expression to grep out a certain meaning
> doesn't mean it's a good thing to do and will always work.
Regexps are AFAIK quit
>> Existing pages: value "e-cigarette" is referenced in the wiki.
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3De-cigarette
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop#Others
>
> The wiki page is very recent with only two contributors. I wouldn't be
> surprised if "e-cigarette" in the db w
>> My little +1 for key:subkey=*
>
> New people don't know how to add new keys. So they will have problems to add
> cuisine:antwerp = yes (in case such a thing would exist :-) ).
> it's much easier to come up with cuisine=Antwerp, especially when there is
> an input field "cuisine".
New people can
Existing pages: value "e-cigarette" is referenced in the wiki.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3De-cigarette
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop#Others
On 22 January 2015 at 15:43, Dave F. wrote:
> Ah, As normal cigarettes are sold in multiples I didn't think of searching
>
> Hi all - does anyone know what the geographic distribution of
> associatedStreet is like? taginfo doesn't render a map (it seems it
> doesn't do that for relations).
This shows a map, I don't know if this is what you are looking for:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/type=associatedStreet#ma
read, I guess it does not really matter.
But the starting process looked biased towards the German community.
Mit freundlichen Grüssen
althio
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> I even find the second example more difficult to visualize. It's just
worse
> than the first in every respect.
>From a mapper's point of view
My little +1 for key:subkey=*
In free text like this thread, several key:subkey=* may look more heavy and
complicated than key=values;separated;by;semico
Hi Jo/Polyglot and list,
On 22 January 2015 at 12:01, Jo wrote:
> Which too schemes? I think you'd need to be more specific.
1. key=values;separated;by;semicolon
2. several key:subkey=*
> route_ref:De_Lijn=1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8;9;284;285;310;315;316;317;333;334;335;337;351;352;358;370;371;372;373;374
First point:
It is good that several people invent, propose and use various schemes.
Second point:
At some point, unification of schemes with similar intent would be great.
As usage grows, having the same kind of data treated differently is a pain
for everyone, mappers, developers, maintainers and
> Please vote here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:associatedStreet
Is this a formal voting?
Is there a date for start and end vote?
It looks strange, hidden on a Talk:page without the usual template or
RFC or call for votes on the international mailing lists.
Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is the basic philosophy of OSM tagging at the top level?
> ...
> Is there an FAQ on this? Or has this never been documented
I do not have a FAQ on philosophy, only this and that...
A few entries about 'how to create/propose/use' tags:
http://wiki.openst
> like:
> amenity=hairdresser
> name=Scalp
> culture=punk
> ?
Exactly, I provided other examples in my previous message such as
culture=country, culture=grunge, culture=shinto.
Using several keys ethnicity=* + nationality=* + subculture=* all together
would be unambiguous but I think culture=* do
John Willis wrote:
> I think there should be ethnic=*, Nationality=* , or culture=*tag that
can be used [...]
I find culture=* the best so far.
I find it specialised enough (compared to _type=*, origin=*, category=*,
group=* ...)
I find it accurate enough.
I find it generic enough (compared to m
On 19 January 2015 at 13:42, Eric SIBERT wrote:
> One may also not that road are also subject to intermittent (un)usability.
> Some unpaved one are closed during rainy season. Some part of road have
> concrete parts that are flood_prone during cyclone.
>
> How can we (or not) extend it to roads?
My main suggestion would be to re-use the same scheme as
Key:opening_hours to define the time when the waterway is likely to
flow.
I would also discard rare/frequent as too subjective. Instead:
approximate duration are not perfect but should improve mutual
understanding.
For instance as in:
waterw
"Kotya Karapetyan"
> 2) Suggested tags functionality should be implemented.
I have seen that in the Android editor Vespucci.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
It seems that Pieren and I agree on most points.
@François
Maybe drinkable water is a very special case... but here service/use
is much more important than object/feature. The ability to find this
water on a map or from any data consumer is useful. It can even be
essential to many people from hike
I didn't follow every bits of the discussion, so sorry for
interrupting. Sorry also if my proposals are out of scope or already
reviewed. Maybe a fresh view can help.
@Marc amenity=drinking_water // amenity=non_drinking_water
It feels like a good start and compromise.
Either can be associated with
On Jan 14, 2015 5:53 PM, "Marc Gemis" wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I appreciate you concerns. They should have been raised in the
commenting period of the proposal rather than the voting period that is
coming to a close.
>
>
> -1. Why wo
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
