Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] make water sources more usable by marking disused ones with lifecycle prefix, rather than extra tags like operational_status = out_of_order

I hate it when random mappers delete and then add water taps to the same place every year. They switch some (but not all) of them off for the winter to protect against freezing. They reason that as the suspense in operation is longer than 1 month, it's following best practice. I beg to differ. On

Re: [Tagging] When is I oppse vote invalled

Try to address whatever reasons were given on the linked discussion threads. Then create a new proposal by mentioning you have fixed all said things, linking to the earlier proposal and then put it up for another set of voting. It will converge over time, or lazy people will start giving better rea

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

will choose the variety I like best when I > get there. > And if you really want to know what they have, just go to their website which > is more likely to be up-to-date anyway. > On May 3 2024, at 12:36 pm, bkil wrote: > > https://wiki.osm.org/Key:organic or sourdough:organ

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

https://wiki.osm.org/Key:organic or sourdough:organic=yes On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 9:43 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > I agree for specific types of bread, but maybe we can have "classes" of > breads, if that makes sense. Personally, when going into a bakery I am > interested in the quality of

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

c types as long as it fits the 255 character limit (but honestly, if you are over 64, that's already a smell that you are using OSM for something that it isn't). On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 8:12 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2 May 2024 at 21:21, bkil wro

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Yes, that would be even better. sells:bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 12:39 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > what about > sells:bread=X;Y;Z (xyz being bread types) > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https:

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

It is equivalent to stating shop=bakery bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z Or the more conventional: bread=wholemeal_x;y;wholemeal_z On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 10:19 AM iriman--- via Tagging wrote: > > Hi > I've tagged a few bakeries for the bread they sell. > At first I used semicolon to separate val

Re: [Tagging] Please join the OSM accessibility initiative

Okay, I have now copy & pasted the content of the linked page to the bottom of this page and translated the five words that were not in English. I hope that you now consider it good enough to add yourself to the list of volunteers so we could start working. 🤞 🙏 ☯️ _

Re: [Tagging] Please join the OSM accessibility initiative

Thank you for noting. Former projects are linked from the bottom of the page. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Please join the OSM accessibility initiative

We are in desperate need for new tags and tools to improve accessibility for both contribution and use. Please refer to the following page for a detailed scope and feel free to add yourself as a volunteer if you could give us a hand in any of the outlined areas: https://wiki.osm.org/User:Bkil/OSM_

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception

Just a note about your "fact": your phone can roam to any available network when you are dialing the emergency number. You can even dial it without a SIM inserted in most countries. Hence why it displays the text "emergency calls only" in such cases. Circuits towards the emergency number are also m

Re: [Tagging] ladders

Think about emergency doors, emergency steps and emergency paths leading to them all along motorways. Sounds a bit exhaustive to create a new emergency value for each one. An access restriction sounds more reasonable. On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 2:33 PM Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > > Hello all, > > i

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Extended playground equipment

For coin operated machines, see also: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Damusement_arcade On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 3:40 PM Alex wrote: > > > "playground=ride / Is it supposed to include also coin operated ones that > > make noise/lights/movements?" > > There is already "attraction=

[Tagging] Tag which restaurant or cafe allows bringing your own food or drink?

Certain allergies or dietary restrictions preclude one from consuming a meal prepared by conventional amenities, or if the find the drink offering insufficient (for example you can rarely find milk or vegetable juice at most places). Or you would like to bring some snacks from home to a pub that on

Re: [Tagging] Best practices for creating a categorical key=value

Can you ring the doorbell and purchase or order something from that office? If yes, you could consider it to be a kind of shop. If it is only a reseller, consider: shop=trade + trade=building_supplies + sells=precast_concrete or even shop=doityourself. If it is manufacturing the said goods, consi

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Healthcare 1.1 - General comment

That's an interesting problem. Does the mediawiki API support CORS? If yes, we could easily create a very simple third party GUI form for it just for voting or adding a new comment on the talk page. On Sun, Nov 6, 2022 at 1:31 PM ael via Tagging wrote: > > A very general comment:- > > I very seld

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Approved - migration to use belarusian as default language in Belarus for tagging

Why did I get a private message about this? On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:19 PM Paveł Tyślacki wrote: > > Hey > > Proposal to use belarusian as default language in Belarus for tagging were > approved by majority: (belarusian) > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Be:Belarus_language_issues/Migrati

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Move proposal voting from wiki to the new forum

What about bridging them together? On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 12:00 PM Yves via Tagging wrote: > > > > Le 24 septembre 2022 10:47:53 GMT+02:00, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > a écrit : > >3) https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/votes-on-discourse/508 > >strongly encourages voting without comment

Re: [Tagging] Tagging becoming more mature

Although, I understand that there could exist some special meanings of the word "park": https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/park The most widely understood meaning also documented in Wikipedia seems to be consistent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park And anyway, terms must be understood in their GB s

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Objects generating audible cues

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Objects_generating_audible_cues is open for voting now. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

urity measures aren't that interesting from an ear-mapping perspective) On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:32 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 01:10, bkil wrote: >> >> "hearing a dog" could be one of them. > > > But aren't

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

sual impairment at the moment (but this could change for the worse in the blink of an eye!), it is more desirable to hike, walk your puppy or push your baby stroller on calmer streets that have the least amount of barking. On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 4:42 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

urity. What do you think? On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 12:01 PM bkil wrote: > > I welcome your comments on the following proposal: > > Those with vision impairment should also have the right to explore and > map their surroundings in ways appropriate for them. We should have a > unified

Re: [Tagging] meaning of highway=crossing + bicycle=no

We always use it on nodes to mark a crossing where you must dismount. Not very common on ways around here. On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 11:22 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > I always understood > highway=crossing + bicycle=no > tagging to mean "you cannot use this

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

I welcome your comments on the following proposal: Those with vision impairment should also have the right to explore and map their surroundings in ways appropriate for them. We should have a unified way to specify the kind of noise that is generated by an object. The most useful ones are those wh

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

and not in the responsible proposer's user space?" - it's a wiki, > we are generally a libertarian group, there are no restrictions on creating a > page other than wanting to be relevant. I personally find it relevant. > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, 14:47 bkil, wrote: >>

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

g to map things that add the greatest value to the largest number of users. I think these should have their separate pages. On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:39 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 14:47, bkil wrote: >> >> >> Private swimming pools aren't that int

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

Could someone perhaps clarify why this page resides in the main namespace and not in the responsible proposer's user space? > Do not name individuals in OpenStreetMap tags, unless their name is on a > business sign posted towards the street, or part of the business name and > available in public

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

gle link in url=*, how would you know whether it is for the operator or for the camera stream? On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:47 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 20:40, bkil wrote: > >> "contact" can mean one-way contact, as in "on what channel does this POI &

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

"contact" can mean one-way contact, as in "on what channel does this POI broadcast information for us?" Note that except contact:email, most other links are also used oneway in 99% of the time. On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 9:34 PM Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 20:

Re: [Tagging] Link to stream of webcam

I also raised this question some years ago on the talk page but went with the flow and continued to tag webcams with contact:webcam=*. I think it makes more sense if you see a static gallery of a venue specified under contact:flickr=*, prerecorded videos under contact:youtube=* and you can also che

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

problem of not having a system to put > multiple images into one tag > > Cheers > Thibault > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil wrote: > > Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or > whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? > >

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

system to put > multiple images into one tag > > Cheers > Thibault > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020, 00:21 bkil wrote: > >> Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or >> whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? >> >> On Wed,

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

Have you considered uploading these to OpenStreetCam, Mapillary or whatever comes after OSM migrates away from that one? On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:37 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 26. Aug 2020, at 15:21, Jake Edmonds via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> wr

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

Didn't we have an OSM tool in the past that showed points with broken links? (Also I think the citations I've given earlier a few hours ago should clear up what should or should not be deleted - by policy they _should_ delete the lower quality image if a better quality image is also available) On

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

> [...] Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. [...] > File in use in another Wikimedia project [...] [OR] > File in use on Commons only: An otherwise non-educational file does not acquire educational purpose solely because it is in use on a gallery page or in a category on Common

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

> It's a solution, but still doesn't solve the problem of long urls clogging > up one tag. > Definitely if you have long urls because of unique hash/id's > (extreme example: IPFS urls: > https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR9wseHQiLbv4AnTXACo5rQ1CEcKj2fJq6vEnuZoi6Amd?filename=IMG_2

Re: [Tagging] Tagging multiple images on one object

As mentioned on the linked wiki page, you can escape a semicolon by doubling it: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator#Escaping_with_.27.3B.3B.27 On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:11 AM Thibault Molleman < thibaultmolle...@gmail.com> wrote: > While I use the semicolon for some ot

Re: [Tagging] source=RTK_GNSS

So let me just repeat to see whether I understand you correctly. You would like to see protection measures getting implemented in OpenStreetMap editors (like JOSM, iD and Vespucci)? Such protection would warn if any node or way is moved that has accuracy < 1? And/or it would warn if the accumulate

Re: [Tagging] Map maintenance with StreetComplete - Preferred tagging

OpenStreetMap is a shared database - you generally shouldn’t annotate POI with tags for your own use. Tags should correspond to ground truth - hence they need to pass the verifiability. If I resurvey the POI, will I conclude the same future todo_check_date=* that you have previously added? What if

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

ng an accident). On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 9:36 PM Jmapb wrote: > > On 7/22/2020 12:05 PM, bkil wrote: >> >> My guess is that the adoption of a dismounted_bicycle=* tag or similar >> would require significantly *less* work than re-examining all current >> bicyc

Re: [Tagging] Map maintenance with StreetComplete - Preferred tagging

This should be more applicable in case the person walked by the said object in person: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:survey:date Also, I'd like to stay neutral in this question as of now, but I think it would be possible to implement heuristic algorithms to reconstruct the history of a w

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

transponders may be IFF — note the capitalization — > although I wonder about that because I always think of IFF as more a > military thing. I'm not sure if civilian transponders are really meant > to *identify friend or foe*, or if they're more just "transponders".) >

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

ul Allen wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 at 15:01, bkil wrote: > >> >>> I'm trying (and failing) to imagine a road/path/whatever that you are >>> allowed to walk on *iff* you are pushing a bicycle (or moped or...). Do >>> you know of any examples? >>>

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

access=* to buildings. On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 3:53 PM Volker Schmidt wrote: > Careful with "access". > access=customers on an office building would imply you can drive into this > building with any means of transport, provided you are a customer. > > On Thu, 23 Jul 2

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

> > I.e., bicycle=dismount means that you can proceed after you dismount, > > however if a certain combination of other tags are also present > (foot=no), > > a data user would need to ignore this, making this more confusing than > > necessary (bicycle=no). > > I'm trying (and failing) to imagine a

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 3:39 PM Volker Schmidt wrote: > So it would have to be customer_service=yes|no at least. > That would also permit to check which offices have been evaluated by > mappers for the presence or less of customer_service. > > access=customers/private would also solve this withou

Re: [Tagging] amenity=customer_service RFC

Could you perhaps use existing tags instead of this? office=company + access=customers vs. office=company + access=private On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 2:44 PM Philip Barnes wrote: > On Thu, 2020-07-23 at 14:06 +0200, Simon Poole wrote: > > Wouldn't most, if not all, cases where this would be used al

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

le=only be sufficient? That mostly covers the legal definition around here. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:26 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 22. Jul 2020, at 22:51, bkil wrote: > > bicycle=no is usually used on busy motorways where dismou

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

Although I think we've given enough evidence and _some_ of your quotes make sense, let me add another consideration. This is where bicycle=dismount could be used (although it is the default on highway=footway): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Opastemerkki.jpg bicycle=no is usually used on

Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking

It would be advantageous to map them separately because one riding a motorcycle could make better use of OSM to navigate to and from the exact position of the applicable parking space. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 9:11 PM Matthew Woehlke wrote: > I've seen some parking lots that have spaces specifica

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

> > My guess is that the adoption of a dismounted_bicycle=* tag or similar > would require significantly *less* work than re-examining all current > bicycle=no ways. > > Yes, I think that would be workable. > Nonetheless, I completely agree with you, =no should mean =no! But I > fear we're in the

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

> > Yes, my guess is that early mappers felt no need for bicycle=dismount > because it was simply presumed that foot=yes + bicycle=no meant the same > thing -- the assumption of a very bicycle-friendly culture! > > The obvious problem with bicycle=closed is that it's rarely used so > routing softwa

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

When it was split in 2008, it had the following proposed values: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:bicycle&oldid=119888 - bicycle=yes - bicycle=no - bicycle=d

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

> I wonder if carrying a bicycle (possibly folded) would also be prohibited > on these unpaved ways? > > As was mentioned in the last thread, the rules for most federal wilderness > areas in the USA strictly prohibit possession of any bicycle on the > property, whether the wheels ever touch the gro

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

> > On the other hand, the terms of services of transport companies usually >> have written provisions for carrying on folded bicycles irrespective of >> size limits (for example, they even allow folded mountain bikes). >> > they might not even allow big boxes, according to the current situation >

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

I have come across another type of hard-no for bicycles in the form of > chicane-type cycle barriers too narrow to push a bicycle (or a wheelchair) > through. > > On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 11:48, bkil wrote: > >> I have yet to see a park where they limit the size of luggage I can c

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

when I didn't have a lock at hand and they didn't mind. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:43 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > Am Mi., 22. Juli 2020 um 11:34 Uhr schrieb bkil : > >> I think the core idea behind such a restriction is that people only want >> to go to

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

I have yet to see a park where they limit the size of luggage I can carry with me (within rational limits). I think local law always defines what a bicycle is exactly. I don't think that they have the right to search your box to check whether it contains legally defined bicycles - that could only

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

I think the core idea behind such a restriction is that people only want to go to that park for walking around (no cross-traffic), and pushing the bike for half an hour doesn't make much sense and allowing people to push bikes around would risk them hopping on the bike when nobody is looking. What

Re: [Tagging] source=RTK_GNSS

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=accuracy Yes, definitely. We used accuracy=* for this in the past, although I see it is now a bit overloaded. accuracy:meters=* and location:accuracy=* both seem to be widely used. All of them should be interpreted as meters by default (i.e., location:acc

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Should this be tagged amenity=fast_food? Its name contains the word "restaurant" and these are proper cooked meals similar to what one makes at home, but they cook large batches, so people can just sit in and have a bowl of pagpag with no delay: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-42990661/how

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 1:18 AM Paul Allen wrote: > I can't let Britain down in the bizarre food vendors contest. A butcher near > me sells various types of raw meat (obviously). There are also racks > outside on the pavement: a rack of fruit and a rack of vegetables. I was > informed a few years

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Funny that you mention. I've just read the Hungarian interpretation of a legal advisor regarding what counts as seating. They were differentiating between the sit down amenity kind and the takeaway-only shop kind of cukrászda from a tax perspective. According to them, in order for a _service_ to b

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Again, I still don't have enough information about your "takeaway" places, but if you are not satisfied with takeaway=only + capacity=0, could it be also solved via subtagging? I can see someone started experimented with amenity=restaurant + restaurant=diner And: amenity=fast_food + fast_food=van

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

>> > Shop=pastry? >> > >> >> Unfortunately we can't use that tag, as the menu of a cukrászda far >> exceeds the definition of what the word "pastry" implies. They usually >> offer many items from the following categories: >> * cakes >> * cookies >> * custards >> * doughnuts >> * frozen desserts >>

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

> The only possible downside I see is that it requires more carto code if you > want different icons. But that would be necessary however we did this. > Possibly. But if part of the world already uses amenity=café for places that do not primarily focus on coffee, this icon revision based on subty

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:40 PM Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 20:13, Gábor Fekete wrote: >> >> >> It's about the main function. In an imagined daily routine (similarly to >> Bkil), coffeehouse (and cukrászda) is the place of some social life aft

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

> But then how do we handle food places in food courts? > > They would all count as =fast_food, as everything is already cooked / > prepared, & they are takeaway only from the actual shopfront, but there is > seating & tables 5m's away, so are they takeaway or sit-down? > These kind of places ar

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

> I'd be happy with that. Except we don't have seating=yes. We can > differentiate > with takeaway=yes|no|only. However, apart from the chip shop and a Greggs, > all > the fast food joints near me that I can recollect are takeaway=only. So I > don't > get a hint from the icon as to whether I

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráre?, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Yes, pretty much sounds like a cukrászda to me. ;-) Especially if they prepare their own desserts and if they take custom orders (why shouldn't they if they already have a pastry cook?). Do they have waited tables? Do they serve alcohol? It would be great if you could share a link to their websit

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:11 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > it is you who knows the cukrászda best. You must decide (together with your > fellow local mappers who also know the feature), whether it is a subtype of > one of the established tags, or whether it is so different that it must get a

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

t often only keep fancy bakery products, not staple ones. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 4:09 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > On 28. Jun 2020, at 15:58, bkil wrote: > > We are leaning towards being dissatisfied with tagging as either > shop=p

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Yes, "we" refers to the Hungarian mapping community who we discussed this topic with a few times in the past, although we're still waiting for others from the neighboring area to also chime in. We'd be more than happy if we could have input from as many cultures as possible. In Hungary, coffeehou

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=bubble_tea

Actually we have a very similar problem with tagging a "Tejivó" in Hungary (literally a "place to drink milk"). It's conceptually very similar to a café (coffeehouse...), but the coffee offering isn't that pronounced (other than using their own milk). Rather, they serve a huge variety of dairy base

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

> That's what cuisine=* is for. That's what Google is for. That's what Yellow > Pages is for. That's what TripAdvisor is for. Yes, I've been wondering why we keep adding streets and POI to OSM, I thought that's what Google Maps is for. Now seriously, OSM has a great advantage of not favoring

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Okay, so at least now I better see where the misunderstanding stems from. Let's get some facts straight. It may be true that almost all words in OSM are interpreted within British English, but amenity=café is an exception (we've decided to leave out the accent for the benefit of the international c

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Thank you for your additions regarding Italy and Germany, I've copied your insights into the document. So to summarize, we started to debate this around 2011 before you introduced shop=pastry and then had some more discussions in 2016, 2018 and this year too. We've also experienced the shop=confec

[Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

Hello, I'd like to ask your help in improving the definition of the venue mostly serving self-made artisanal desserts that I describe at the end of this message. Before we discuss possible tagging solutions (we will probably need a new tag), we would like to have some input from mappers in other

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

best practices): * use abstraction * honor public interest * allow maintainability * don't clash with others * don't disappoint users * discuss with the community On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 10:40 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 30/12/19 21:31, bkil wrote: > >

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

ld map them with the same tags after we invent the missing keys. On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 9:56 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some have no fee as such but linked to you opening your home wifi for use > by others (telstra Australia do such a thing). > I prefer access=private. &

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

un, Dec 29, 2019 at 10:36 PM marc marc wrote: > Le 29.12.19 à 21:50, bkil a écrit : > > fee=no @ register with an Italian phone number > > it seems to indicate that it's fee=yes if you don't register, > which doesn't seem to fit with what you're saying. > I p

Re: [Tagging] Business names in capital letters

I find it amusing that some of the other big map providers have chosen a different "canonical" capitalization of the same trademarks. So they either are not canonical after all, or we misunderstood the meaning of the name=* key all along. I think when deciding such issues, we would need to share an

Re: [Tagging] Public WLAN boxes

I probably wouldn't add the antenna tags either, unless it is visible and useful for navigational purposes. If possible, please add the network name as well, something like this: operator=Comune di Cividale del Friuli internet_access=wlan internet_access:ssid=FVGWiFi This is a bit sketchy questio

[Tagging] szekler_gate vs. szekely_gate?

Just a quick question to some native speakers, which one would you understand as more correct? artwork_type = szekler_gate tourism = artwork vs. artwork_type = szekely_gate tourism = artwork For describing the following very common objects in central Europe: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/C

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

In many parts of Hungary, vegetation can overshadow street lights, especially if they are placed high enough. They may make efforts to protect roads against this, but they rarely consider footways. Hence I know a lot of streets where road illumination is fair, but the sidewalk right beside it (mayb

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

/boat/cart/tent/building/... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure#Load-bearing On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 1:26 AM Fernando Trebien wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 5:33 PM bkil wrote: > > Be my guest: > > intermittent=yes > > ephemeral=yes > > building=no &g

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

Be my guest: intermittent=yes ephemeral=yes building=no permanent=no movable=yes stationary=no caravan=yes mount=trailer support=wheels foundation=no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_restaurant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houseboat On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:30 PM Fernando Trebien wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] Which global OSM mailing list for the "community index"?

1. Although, just copying the archive may not seem to add too much value, I do see the potential improvement to the forum search index. However, it would be real useful if this transfer could be automated and turned into a kind of near-realtime sync. Then all you needed to implement is reverse sync

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 117, Issue 90, topic 1 & 4: Ban of Ulamm by Woodpeck

If you could give us a link where we can continue this discussion without being off topic, I'd gladly chime in with my viewpoint. We had dozens of mail threads on our local list in this topic in the past with some good pointers as well. On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:01 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >

Re: [Tagging] Which global OSM mailing list for the "community index"?

use cases). Partitioning could still be done using labels/categories within the platform. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 10:52 PM marc marc wrote: > > Le 22.06.19 à 10:31, bkil a écrit : > > I wonder why nobody has created a gateway > > to merge all discussions > > nabble.com/ do

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

My answer reflected on Paul's suggestion of introducing yet another term (fare=*) to more closely match common vocabulary. I wouldn't recommend merging tolls, sorry if you read it like that. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:10 AM Colin Smale wrote: > On 2019-06-22 10:38, bkil wrote: &

Re: [Tagging] About the diaper key

👍 On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:48 AM Satoshi IIDA wrote: > > As my small contribution, switched to changing_table in a baby care > proposal page~ > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/babycare > > > > 2019年6月17日(月) 5:44 Rory : > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:14:59 +0200, Va

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

If we step back a bit from our dictionaries, fee=* as a concept is isomorphic to toll=* (and fare) in this context. As all of them could be understood by native speakers and fee=* covers a more general category, it is clearly the better choice. If we consider our data users, non-native speakers and

Re: [Tagging] Which global OSM mailing list for the "community index"?

We should probably list the OSM Forum as well then. OSM Help also uses your OSM credentials. OSM IRC channels do not need credentials - a random alias is sufficient. The OSMF link seems to be more about donations than giving a hand. I'd funnel using these two categories: Primary: * OSM Help * OS

Re: [Tagging] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

This is what you are looking for, it has been used 160 times: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddevice_charging_station Although, I'd probably just unify this with amenity=charging_station and always specify the socket type and voltage. You should only navigate to a charging statio

Re: [Tagging] A modest proposal to increase the usefulness of the tagging list

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:05 AM John Willis via Tagging wrote: > On Jun 4, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Or you will use. > Thanks for handling man_made bridge. I use it a lot. > > The only comment to this idea of “make tags for you to use” is that if you > invent a tagging metho

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

at 8:39 PM ET Commands wrote: > > > Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 10:01:13 +0200 > > From: bkil > > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in > > > [...] > &

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear in formulating the questions, I'll try to rephrase my inquiries again below. On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 8:09 PM ET Commands wrote: > > Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 20:34:52 +0200 > > From: bkil > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging b

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

The kind of derivative information that you suggest does not add much to the map, hence I don't support your proposal. On the other hand, if you simply added the area of the parking lot you see next to the building (kind of a factual information), others could draw the same conclusion as you did.

  1   2   >