On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:10 AM, John Smith wrote:
>
> I don't see an overly compelling reason to change the existing tag,
Me either. In my previous post I was actually trying to point out the
problems with the landuse tag, rather than advocate it.
I think natural=beach is fine to describe an ar
On 11 April 2010 20:40, Roy Wallace wrote:
> Surely these should be tagged golf_course=bunker, or something.
I was hoping for something a little more generic since you can also
have beach volley ball areas that are no where near beaches, there is
also sand in deserts, and sand dunes that aren't d
2010/4/11 John Smith :
> On 11 April 2010 20:40, Roy Wallace wrote:
>> Surely these should be tagged golf_course=bunker, or something.
>
> I was hoping for something a little more generic since you can also
> have beach volley ball areas that are no where near beaches, there is
> also sand in dese
For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at fast
food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru (and sometimes
also oneway=yes since it seems that the implicit vs. explicit tags debate is
not yet done). Does anybody think that this is a good idea that can be
On 12 April 2010 01:36, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at fast
> food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru (and sometimes
> also oneway=yes since it seems that the implicit vs. explicit tags debate is
No idea if t
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:46 AM, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 April 2010 01:36, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> > For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at
> fast
> > food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru (and
> sometimes
> > also oneway=yes since it
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Anthony wrote:
>
> I have indeed tagged a couple of these, using "highway=service,
> service=drive-through, access=private, oneway=yes".
>
>
highway=service + oneway=yes + access=destination
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing l
On 12 April 2010 01:56, Anthony wrote:
> In my experience the oneway is usually explicit, as there are arrows on the
> ground.
junction=roundabout implies oneway=yes, which is why you don't need to
add a oneway tag as well.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tag
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:13 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 April 2010 01:56, Anthony wrote:
> > In my experience the oneway is usually explicit, as there are arrows on
> the
> > ground.
>
> junction=roundabout implies oneway=yes, which is why you don't need to
> add a oneway tag as well.
>
Ah,
On 12 April 2010 02:33, Anthony wrote:
> Now, if we really want to start a flame war, maybe I should ask whether or
> not to include "bicycle=no" :).
While your comment is tongue in cheek, most drive throughs have
height/width restrictions and usually don't allow towed vehicles to be
taken throug
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:18 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 11 April 2010 20:40, Roy Wallace wrote:
>> Surely these should be tagged golf_course=bunker, or something.
>
> I was hoping for something a little more generic
Suggestions? As is, you can't use surface because that's only for
"roads/footpa
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
>
> For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at fast
> food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru
I've done similar, though I've used "service=drivethru". Adding
oneway=yes can't hurt.
Would b
On 12 April 2010 07:50, Roy Wallace wrote:
> Suggestions? As is, you can't use surface because that's only for
> "roads/footpaths" (although strangely it's also used for
Why does the surface tag have to be limited to roads/footpaths?
> leisure=pitch's - seems the wiki needs updating). And landus
From: "John Smith"
> I was hoping for something a little more generic since you can also
> have beach volley ball areas that are no where near beaches, there is
> also sand in deserts, and sand dunes that aren't desert but aren't
> part of a beach either.
Sand is not a necessary element of a bea
On 12 April 2010 09:09, Steve Doerr wrote:
> Sand is not a necessary element of a beach in any case. In fact, the
> original meaning of 'beach' was: 'The loose water-worn pebbles of the
> sea-shore; shingle.'
All this means is that sand is assumed, since natural=beach renders as
a yellow colour.
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Pieren wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Anthony wrote:
>
>>
>> I have indeed tagged a couple of these, using "highway=service,
>> service=drive-through, access=private, oneway=yes".
>>
>>
> highway=service + oneway=yes + access=destination
>
> Pieren
>
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar
> wrote:
> >
> > For a while now, I've been drawing and tagging drive through lanes at
> fast
> > food restaurants with highway=service and service=drive_thru
>
> I've done similar, though
On 12 April 2010 13:49, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> Since a couple of people mentioned that service=drive-through is a good
> value, then I'd go for this value too for consistency.
If you want to be consistent, use underscores not hyphens, eg
service=drive_through
__
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:04 AM, John Smith wrote:
>
> On 12 April 2010 07:50, Roy Wallace wrote:
>> Suggestions? As is, you can't use surface because that's only for
>> "roads/footpaths" (although strangely it's also used for
>
> Why does the surface tag have to be limited to roads/footpaths?
I
It sounds to me like we're getting back to the old argument about the
difference between land-use and land-cover. Unfortunately, tags for
both have been lumped together into landuse=*, (as well as some
natural, man-made etc) which is why the debate reoccurs so often.
Sand is a cover, not a use. S
On 12 April 2010 14:20, Roy Wallace wrote:
> Good point. I assume you disagree with the use of landuse=grass, then?
> (which is listed at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse)
It seems inconsistent with other landuses such as residential,
industrial, commercial etc.
> Well, the wiki page f
On 12 April 2010 15:05, Stephen Hope wrote:
> My personal opinion is that we should separate out the cover tags from
> landuse into some other tag (doesn't have to be landcover). Not
> because this is required, or it for easier searching, though they may
> be side benefits. Simply because having
22 matches
Mail list logo
