On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:49:54 +0200
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > No, that's exactly the same as 'oneway=no' on two-ways roads. When
> > the tag is not present, we assume that the road is two ways. That's
> > it. If it's wrong, then fix it by adding the oneway tag.
> > It is the same for waterway
2010/9/13 Pieren :
> No, that's exactly the same as 'oneway=no' on two-ways roads. When the tag
> is not present, we assume that the road is two ways. That's it. If it's
> wrong, then fix it by adding the oneway tag.
> It is the same for waterways and the direction of the way. If it's wrong,
> the
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange
> wrote:
>> Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
>> You must read a "manual" to know that.
>
> By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
> know about it, a
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 7:19 AM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Nathan Edgars II
> wrote:
>
> > > Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
> > > You must read a "manual" to know that.
> >
> > By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
> > kno
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
> > You must read a "manual" to know that.
>
> By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
> know about it, at least you aren't doing anything wrong by leaving it
> off.
T
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:46 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> One type of map that would benefit from showing the direction of waterway
> flow would be one intended for use with canoes, rowboats, or other
> muscle-powered small boats. Paddling in the same direction as a river's
> current is much
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Yes i understand, but own could you figure "flow=downstream" exist ?
> You must read a "manual" to know that.
By noting its presence on an already-mapped waterway. And if you don't
know about it, at least you aren't doing anything wro
ginal Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date :Sun Sep 12 15:37:45 America/Chicago 2010
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> > know the new tag they should r
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> > know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
> > direction is flow direction) is allready there.
> > If they do not read the actual wiki, why do they read the new o
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> I agree that the waterway flow would be more explicit for newbie, but to
> know the new tag they should read the wiki and the default rule (drawing
> direction is flow direction) is allready there.
> If they do not read the actual wiki
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> Actually highway=motorway implies oneway=yes:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway
And river implies boat=yes...
Those are special cases not the standard assumption for highway=* or
waterway=*
Idon't really understand where we are going in this
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:09 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> Tagging oneway=yes on a motorway is an example of tagging a special case.
> The general assumption on roads is that they are two-way unless tagged
> otherwise. Tagging the motorway as oneway=yes makes sure that routing
> calculations
-way (usually with a
safety barrier down the middle) when the other half of the motorway is closed
for road construction.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From :mailto:nerou...@gmail.com
Date :Sun Sep 12 13:53:47 America/Chicago 2010
On Sun, Sep 12, 2
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Cartinus wrote:
> And then you would only tag the special cases. We don't put oneway=no on every
> road either.
But, in my experience, we do put oneway=yes on every motorway.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetm
John F. Eldredge wrote:
> I am using my phone at the moment, not my PC, so I can't test this. What
> happens if the way, or section of a way, that you have selected has a
> portion mapped in one direction, and another portion mapped in the
> opposite direction (which could easily happen if diffe
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:38 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> I am using my phone at the moment, not my PC, so I can't test this. What
> happens if the way, or section of a way, that you have selected has a portion
> mapped in one direction, and another portion mapped in the opposite direction
>
been mapped by
different people)? Do you get an error message, or do JOSM and Potlatch go by
the majority direction?
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date :Sun Sep 12 12:39:02 America/Chicago 2010
John F. Eldredg
On Sunday 12 September 2010 19:39:01 Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> Richard Welty wrote:
> > On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> > > If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
> > > And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
> > >
Richard Welty wrote:
> On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> > If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
> > And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
> > what would be the reference ?
> >
> you'd want it to work with respect to
John F. Eldredge wrote:
> What properties of a way do you look at to determine whether it was mapped
> in the proper direction? Do you have to check whether the node IDs
> increase in the desired direction, or is there an easier way? Also, if
> it turns out that part or all of a way was mapped
is the best way of
correcting that direction, short of deleting the problem section and remapping
it?
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
>From :mailto:pdora...@mac.com
Date :Sun Sep 12 11:29:11 America/Chicago 2010
Sam Vekemans
wrote:
> For the
With the current standard, how do you add a source tag for the
direction? source:direction=I dropped dye into the canal and watched
it dissipate would conflict with a direction=* tag.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openst
On 9/12/10 12:29 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
If we really need a tag to indicate river flow, it can't be oneway.
And if we define a tag for flow, how would you define the direction,
what would be the reference ?
you'd want it to work with respect to the direction of the way, as
is done wit
Sam Vekemans
wrote:
> For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
> direction of the way was not taken into account. So the tag
> 'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.
oneway=yes has nothing to do with river flow, oneway indicate a legal
issue for transport (in river case
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
> about trees and waterways.
Even the opponent(s) of changing the wiki's tree definition didn't try
to argue that the wiki definition was better than the alternative. There
was disagreement over whether c
On Sunday 12 September 2010 01:24:51 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 7:10 PM, David Groom
wrote:
> > I think the difference can be summed up as:
> >
> > With the tagging of trees the definition in the wiki was unclear; "lone
> > or significant" can mean different things to diffe
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 1:18 AM, Sam Vekemans
wrote:
> Hi,
> For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
> direction of the way was not taken into account. So the tag
> 'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.
>
>
And if the information would have been present then you would ha
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> It may be natural once one knows that you're supposed to represent the
> direction. But I've come across many waterways that were mapped
> without regard for the direction. Three examples,
Yes of course, but it can be fixed easily fixed.
I assume also there are lot of
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 7:22 PM, David Groom wrote:
> Alternatively they may not have realised they were
> supposed to map the waterway so its direction was the same as the river
> flow.
Almost certainly this. There's not even anything on the main waterway
page; you have to go to one of the subpa
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 7:10 PM, David Groom wrote:
> I think the difference can be summed up as:
>
> With the tagging of trees the definition in the wiki was unclear; "lone or
> significant" can mean different things to different people.
>
> With the tagging of waterways the comment that "the way
- Original Message -
From: "Nathan Edgars II"
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] trees and waterways
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange
wrote:
..
Hi,
For the Canada canvec dataset, the map feature is available, and
direction of the way was not taken into account. So the tag
'oneway=yes' was not used as a preset.
However, for those who are interested in making the waterflow correct
(and render an arrow). In Canada we do have geobase Natio
- Original Message -
From: "Nathan Edgars II"
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2010 9:38 PM
Subject: [Tagging] trees and waterways
I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
about trees and waterways. Here's t
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:45:04 -0400
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange
> wrote:
> > ... Perhaps have you a proposition. But for my part, it seems
> > "natural" to use the natural flow of the way has the natural flow
> > of the river.
>
> It may be nat
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> ... Perhaps have you a proposition. But for my part, it seems "natural"
> to use the natural flow of the way has the natural flow of the river.
It may be natural once one knows that you're supposed to represent the
direction. But I've
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Cartinus wrote:
> In the second case there is only a problem according to one person. The other
> people are not ignoring the problem.They are just smarter.
Oh fuck off.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Saturday 11 September 2010 22:38:34 Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
> about trees and waterways. Here's the way things look to me:
> *The wiki says something should be tagged a certain way: ("lone or
> significant tree" for natural=tr
Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
please note that english is not my current language.
> I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
> about trees and waterways. Here's the way things look to me:
> *The wiki says something should be tagged a certain way: ("lone or
> significant tre
38 matches
Mail list logo
