On 27-9-2010 8:14, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Not always - a recruitment office is open to interested public, for example.
So are some military ranges, at certain hours/days.
And even military ranges aren't barren (and barren would also be an
indication of the type of land cover), as there will
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FIce_cream&action=historysubmit&diff=532984&oldid=531944
> This doesn't seem quite right.
Care to expand a bit?
Regards,
Simone
___
Tagging mailing list
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:26:27 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FIce_cream&action=historysubmit&diff=532984&oldid=531944
> This doesn't seem quite right.
27-18 + 1 abstain, seems an "approved" to me. Controversial, yes, but approved
On 27/09/2010 01:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 8:36 PM, SomeoneElse
wrote:
Not amenity=social_club? That seems to be in more widespread use...
Why would we use amenity when we have a more specific key (leisure)
that fits perfectly?
Your're free to tag things how you
On 27/09/2010 02:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 8:36 PM, SomeoneElse
wrote:
On 26/09/2010 23:35, vclaw wrote:
I have created a proposal for mapping social clubs, by tagging as
leisure=social_club.
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/social
Hello all:
I've created a proposal (or pre-proposal) in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:shop#shop.3Dwedding
to tag these kinds of bussiness.
I would like to get comments to it in order to have it approved (or denied) in
a near future
Thanks
Noel
er Envite
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:48 AM, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:26:27 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FIce_cream&action=historysubmit&diff=532984&oldid=531944
>> This doesn't seem quite right.
>
> 27-18 + 1 absta
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:10 AM, Lennard wrote:
> On 27-9-2010 8:14, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>
>> Not always - a recruitment office is open to interested public, for
>> example.
>
> So are some military ranges, at certain hours/days.
>
> And even military ranges aren't barren (and barren would als
On 27-9-2010 10:16, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Landuse should be covered by land cover (and buildings) where said
cover exists. For example a landuse=retail area may be over half
amenity=parking areas.
And yet we call forests/heath/grass/etc land *use* instead of land *cover*.
It feels like we'r
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 04:14:19 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:48 AM, David Paleino
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:26:27 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> >
> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FIce_cream&action=historysubmit&diff=53
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:49 AM, David Paleino wrote:
> How would you call then shop=ice_cream, sneaked in the wiki without any
> discussion or voting or anything else?
Another bad tag.
> On a related note: me and some other people on #osm-it were thinking about
> re-organizing the "food" taggin
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:26 AM, Lennard wrote:
> On 27-9-2010 10:16, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>
>> Landuse should be covered by land cover (and buildings) where said
>> cover exists. For example a landuse=retail area may be over half
>> amenity=parking areas.
>
> And yet we call forests/heath/gras
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 05:11:08 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:49 AM, David Paleino
> wrote:
> > On a related note: me and some other people on #osm-it were thinking about
> > re-organizing the "food" tagging (take "food" as an example in the
> > following). Something lik
2010/9/27 David Paleino :
> I'd say +1 to retail=food and food=cafe|restaurant|... though.
-1, I wouldn't tag restaurants, cafes and others as retail. I am not
opposing food=cafe / restaurant, etc., this would also be compatible
with the current amenity-tag, but I don't see a big benefit (we
alre
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:05 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/9/27 David Paleino :
>> I'd say +1 to retail=food and food=cafe|restaurant|... though.
>
> -1, I wouldn't tag restaurants, cafes and others as retail.
Why not? They're places where you buy things.
> In German I would use "Gastrono
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 06:15:50 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:05 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> > In German I would use "Gastronomie" as main tag for those, but I'm not
> > sure if "gastronomy" would be the exact translation in English for
> > this. My dictionary suggests "cat
(By the way, nobody seems to have brought up the existence of frozen
yogurt places and whether these fit into the new tag.)
Or "Smoothie" / "Fruit Smoothie" -only places.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoothie
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openst
On 9/27/10, David Paleino wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 04:14:19 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
[...]
>> Almost every one of those approves is by someone living in Italy,
>> which suggests discussion on the Italian mailing list or other
>> discussion among a small group in an echo chamber.
There w
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:23 PM, David Paleino wrote:
Why changing an old and widely used "amenity=restaurant"+"cuisine" ? As it
was mentionned many times in the past, discussing new keys is easy when it's
about new features (e.g. craft). But changing old and well established tags
is generating
On 9/27/10, Pieren wrote:
> Why changing an old and widely used "amenity=restaurant"+"cuisine" ? [...]
> This can be accepted only if it's to clear ambiguities or add
> a real value but that's not the case here.
mostly because the current system does not scale, with food+drinks
places being an ar
recently there was introduced some weird stuff in bridge:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge
bridge=yes
bridge=aqueduct
bridge=viaduct
bridge=swing
bridge=abandoned
bridge=...
I'm fine with yes, but also aqueduct, viaduct, swing may be OK,
indicating all a speci
I already proceeded and removed "abandoned"
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:50 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> recently there was introduced some weird stuff in bridge:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge
>
>bridge=yes
>bridge=aqueduct
>bridge=viaduct
>bridge=swing
>bridge=abandoned
>bridge=...
>
> I'm fine wi
Hello all:
There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give Way
and the other has not. How to tag them?
My proposal is splitting the street in two highways with same name, same tags,
etc, each one being one-way and exactly the same nodes, with one of them
having an extra
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 3:48 AM, David Paleino wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:26:27 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features%2FIce_cream&action=historysubmit&diff=532984&oldid=531944
>>> This doesn't seem
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
>
> This is the same as railways: you can have railway=tram or
> railway=abandoned, so how do you tag an abandoned tramway?
I agree that this is the same problem. It isn't a good reason to keep
bridge=abandoned IMHO. You could workaround with railway=abandoned,
abando
2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> Hello all:
>
> There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give Way
> and the other has not. How to tag them?
If we consider the verse of the way, then probably a :forward vs.
:backward specification would work. For example, if a way runs
On 27/09/2010 10:19, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:26 AM, Lennard wrote:
On 27-9-2010 10:16, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Landuse should be covered by land cover (and buildings) where said
cover exists. For example a landuse=retail area may be over half
amenity=parking areas.
2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> Hello all:
>
> There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give Way
> and the other has not. How to tag them?
tag the signs at their position (i.e. in countries driving on the
right, put a node right of the way and tag it with traffic_si
On 27/09/2010 13:51, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I agree that this is the same problem. It isn't a good reason to keep
bridge=abandoned IMHO. You could workaround with railway=abandoned,
abandoned=tram, but for bridge the wiki states: bridge= and
"abandoned" is clearly not part of a typology vo
> Hello all:
>
> There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give
> Way
> and the other has not. How to tag them?
>
> My proposal is splitting the street in two highways with same name, same
> tags,
> etc, each one being one-way and exactly the same nodes, with one of them
>
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Noel David Torres Taño
wrote:
> Hello all:
>
> There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give Way
> and the other has not. How to tag them?
>
> My proposal is splitting the street in two highways with same name, same tags,
> etc, each one b
2010/9/27 Dave F. :
> On 27/09/2010 13:51, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> I agree that this is the same problem. It isn't a good reason to keep
>> bridge=abandoned IMHO. You could workaround with railway=abandoned,
>> abandoned=tram, but for bridge the wiki states: bridge= and
>> "abandoned" is
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> On 27/09/2010 10:19, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>> But what I'm mostly concerned with is having a limited number of
>> "top-level" landuse values. For example a large residential
>> neighborhood can be tagged landuse=residential, but there's no simil
I've used landuse in a slightly different way from what you say.
After discussion on the talk-it ML, we agreed that single shops in a
mainly residential block would be added as POIs, but not mapped as
landuse=retail. However, if the shop was a separate building, then the
landuse there would be ret
On Lunes 27 Septiembre 2010 14:01:58 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer escribió:
> 2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> > Hello all:
> >
> > There are some streets which, being two-way, one way has a Stop or Give
> > Way and the other has not. How to tag them?
>
> tag the signs at their position (i.e. in count
I would guess that a "tourist strip" would refer to a group of businesses that
cater mainly to tourists, such as souvenir shops, rather than catering to local
residents. Since the two are sometimes intermingled, my preference would be to
use an area tag such as retail_area, and then map the ind
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Simone Saviolo
wrote:
> Also, in my mapping I've accounted for a possible future landuse=road.
> Therefore, any landuse area is smaller than or equal to a block. Also,
> as a consequence of this, parkings would be part of the landuse=road,
> and not to be included
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:37 AM, wrote:
> I would guess that a "tourist strip" would refer to a group of businesses
> that cater mainly to tourists, such as souvenir shops, rather than catering
> to local residents. Since the two are sometimes intermingled, my preference
> would be to use an
In data lunedì 27 settembre 2010 10:14:19, Nathan Edgars II ha scritto:
> And now we have a tag that replaces all ice cream places, thus
> providing less information than the former amenity=cafe/fast_food/etc.
> cuisine=ice_cream. How is this a good thing?
Ice cream (and related products such as g
One issue with tagging a commercial parking lot as landuse=road is that it is
generally legal to use a road as a through route, whereas you can be issued a
traffic ticket for simply cutting across a parking lot without stopping.
Admittedly, this isn't always enforced. In my experience, this te
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Luca Brivio wrote:
> In data lunedì 27 settembre 2010 10:14:19, Nathan Edgars II ha scritto:
>> And now we have a tag that replaces all ice cream places, thus
>> providing less information than the former amenity=cafe/fast_food/etc.
>> cuisine=ice_cream. How is thi
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Fast food is simply a style of serving: you go up to the counter and
> order. It has nothing to do with the cuisine.
>
The Italians probably don't like to think of ice-cream as fast food,
because that has connotations of high sugar/fat con
2010/9/27 :
> One issue with tagging a commercial parking lot as landuse=road is that it is
> generally legal to use a road as a through route, whereas you can be issued a
> traffic ticket for simply cutting across a parking lot without stopping.
> Admittedly, this isn't always enforced. In m
2010/9/25 Sean Horgan :
> For some reason, kerosin hasn't been able to post to the mailing list so I'm
> sending this out.
> We received great input over email and on the talk page for the social
> facility proposal so we decided to open it for voting:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_
So, in Italy, the owner of a private parking lot is not allowed to say that his
parking lot can't be used as a public street? It is common in the USA to see
signs at parking-lot entrances saying "no through traffic".
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] musings on landuse
>From
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Luca Brivio wrote:
>> In data lunedì 27 settembre 2010 10:14:19, Nathan Edgars II ha scritto:
>>> And now we have a tag that replaces all ice cream places, thus
>>> providing less information than the former amenity=cafe/fast_food/etc
In data lunedì 27 settembre 2010 16:00:04, Richard Mann ha scritto:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Nathan Edgars II
wrote:
> > Fast food is simply a style of serving: you go up to the counter and
> > order. It has nothing to do with the cuisine.
>
> The Italians probably don't like to think
Simone Saviolo:
> Fast food, in non-English-speaking countries, in associated with
> hamburgers, [...]
Yes, although it's a cultural interpretation (that I share, FWIW).
Actually saying kebab is fast-food is not that wrong, even if it
sounds strange to me and others.
But the main point of fast-fo
What about abandoned=yes ?
Noel
er Envite
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Why changing an old and widely used "amenity=restaurant"+"cuisine" ?
+1
Although I agree that the current amenity=restaurant, fast_food...etc.
is a bit awkward, it is nearly unthinkable that it should be changed because
of the number of people who are already using and rendering the data.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Alessandro Rubini
wrote:
> But the main point of fast-food is fast-meal, and actually people have
> lunch in a fast food. But you don't go to a coffee or gelateria to
> have lunch, that's the main reason why ice cream places don't qualify
> as fast-food.
Dunkin'
2010/9/27 :
> So, in Italy, the owner of a private parking lot is not allowed to say that
> his parking lot can't be used as a public street? It is common in the USA to
> see signs at parking-lot entrances saying "no through traffic".
I wouldn't say he's not allowed. AFAIK (and Google seems to
On 27-9-2010 16:25, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
What about abandoned=yes ?
And expect every data consumer to have to parse that in addition to
whatever bridge=* value you leave on the data. What's not there anymore
is just that: not there anymore. It doesn't deserve a bridge=* tag.
That's
On 27/09/2010 01:36, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 26/09/2010 23:35, vclaw wrote:
I have created a proposal for mapping social clubs, by tagging as
leisure=social_club.
See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/social_club
Not amenity=social_club? That seems to be in more widespread
Well, you presumably would have an intermediate step in which the railway is no
longer being used for train traffic, but the rails and crossties (also known as
sleepers) have not yet been taken up, so it isn't suitable yet for use as a
cycleway.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Taggin
2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> Hello all:
>
> I've created a proposal (or pre-proposal) in
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:shop#shop.3Dwedding
> to tag these kinds of bussiness.
>
> I would like to get comments to it in order to have it approved (or denied) in
> a near future
2010/9/27 Elena of Valhalla :
> There was indeed some discussion on the italian mailing list, where
> they felt the need to distinguish between italian style "gelateria"
> and other kinds of ice cream sellers
and not only...
> this would give a space for regional variants such as
> food+drink=b
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:19:58 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/9/27 Elena of Valhalla
> :
> > of course, we still have the problem with the tag name, since
> > "food+drink" doesn't look quite right
>
> if is probably not "good English", but I think it's quite appealing:
> it is easily unde
Hi all,
Cool 10 downloads from my last update :)
I have now added in the Osmarender map features that are listed in the
'osmarender_standard' file, its neet to see what map features that
this rendering uses. .. and i see that some features were added in
that arn't on the wiki :) lol. But what's
On Lunes 27 Septiembre 2010 16:09:45 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer escribió:
> 2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> > Hello all:
> >
> > I've created a proposal (or pre-proposal) in
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:shop#shop.3Dwedding
> > to tag these kinds of bussiness.
> >
> > I would like
On 27/09/2010 15:39, Lennard wrote:
On 27-9-2010 16:25, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
What about abandoned=yes ?
And expect every data consumer to have to parse that in addition to
whatever bridge=* value you leave on the data. What's not there
anymore is just that: not there anymore. It do
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 05:19:58PM +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/9/27 Elena of Valhalla :
> > this would give a space for regional variants such as
> > food+drink=biergarten|gelateria|whatever_else, preventing the creation
> > of additional amenities whose usage makes little sense out of
2010/9/27 Lennard :
> On 27-9-2010 16:25, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
>>
>> What about abandoned=yes ?
>
> And expect every data consumer to have to parse that in addition to whatever
> bridge=* value you leave on the data. What's not there anymore is just that:
> not there anymore. It doesn't de
On 27/09/2010 17:10, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/9/27 Lennard:
On 27-9-2010 16:25, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
What about abandoned=yes ?
And expect every data consumer to have to parse that in addition to whatever
bridge=* value you leave on the data. What's not there anymore is just t
On 27-9-2010 16:57, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
Well, you presumably would have an intermediate step in which the railway is no
longer being used for train traffic, but the rails and crossties (also known as
sleepers) have not yet been taken up, so it isn't suitable yet for use as a
cycleway.
On 27-9-2010 17:48, Dave F. wrote:
Many railways in the UK, following Doctor Beeching's cuts, were
abandoned, but much infrastructure, such as bridges, remain, & are unused.
If there's a usable bridge, it's bridge=yes. If there's no usable
bridge, it's ruins=bridge or not even that.
is leg
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:05 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> 2010/9/27 David Paleino :
>>> I'd say +1 to retail=food and food=cafe|restaurant|... though.
>>
>> -1, I wouldn't tag restaurants, cafes and others as retail.
> Why not? They're places where you buy thi
2010/9/27 Richard Mann :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>> Fast food is simply a style of serving: you go up to the counter and
>> order. It has nothing to do with the cuisine.
>>
> The Italians probably don't like to think of ice-cream as fast food,
> because that has
On 27/09/2010 17:37, Lennard wrote:
And when I cycle such a thing and want to map it, it's:
highway=cycleway
And I'm done. How am I to know there used to be rails infrastructure
there, years (and years) ago?
If you know - tag it; if not - don't. It's not vital, but could be useful.
But I
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Alessandro Rubini
> wrote:
>> But the main point of fast-food is fast-meal, and actually people have
>> lunch in a fast food. But you don't go to a coffee or gelateria to
>> have lunch, that's the main reason why ice cream places do
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:08:56 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> [..]
> a restaurant produces the food (prepares it from raw or semi-worked
> material).
Then it's clearly craft=restaurant! :-D
"[..] A place producing or processing customized goods. [..] craft=* for small
production on demand an
2010/9/27 Nathan Edgars II :
> It seems to me that landuse is a mess.
+1
> landuse=agricultural would include values like farm and vineyard
does this include farmyards, or would they be residential or
industrial? What if they also sell to end customers?
> landuse=institutional would include
2010/9/27 Dave F. :
>> http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/6058662
> That's clearly not a bridge & I wouldn't even bother tagging it.
well, it once was a bridge. I wouldn't tag it as bridge either.
> Where as clearly this is even though no traffic passes over it:
> http://www.publow-with-p
2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> I expressely said in the proposal at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:shop that it is not for clothings,
yes, I understood this, but it was not what I expected. And many other
people might not read the definition prior to using a tag if they have
Shop=wedding is ambiguous. Going by the tag name alone it could be a shop
selling wedding supplies (decorative materials used for weddings), a shop
selling wedding gowns, or even a bakery specializing in wedding cakes, or any
combination of the above.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re:
2010/9/27 David Paleino :
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:08:56 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> a restaurant produces the food (prepares it from raw or semi-worked
>> material).
> Then it's clearly craft=restaurant! :-D
that's not the worst interpretation IMHO. It is much more craft then retail.
c
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Yet there are still two uses of landuse: how people use a parcel of
> land (or larger area) vs. how a portion of that area is covered.
One problem, the solution to which doesn't really lend itself to
collaborative editing, is what level t
2010/9/27 kerosin :
> Hey Martin,
>
> I would tag this as with amenity=community_centre! Our aim with that
> "social_facility"-proposal is to capture facilities for people with
> disadvantages or people in needs. The amenity you're describing is more
> general and responsive to everyone.
yes, I a
On 09/27/2010 12:17 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> On 27/09/2010 17:37, Lennard wrote:
>> And when I cycle such a thing and want to map it, it's:
>>
>> highway=cycleway
>>
>> And I'm done. How am I to know there used to be rails infrastructure
>> there, years (and years) ago?
>
> If you know - tag it; if no
I happened to stumble over
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcommunity_centre
The definition restricts usage with this sentence "The Community
Centre is owned and provided by the local government."
The linked wikipedia article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_centre doesn't fo
Your proposed changes make sense to me.
---Original Email---
Subject :[Tagging] community centres
>From :mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com
Date :Mon Sep 27 16:02:20 America/Chicago 2010
I happened to stumble over
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcommunity_centre
The definit
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:39:53 +0200
Lennard wrote:
> That's one thing I've never really understood with railway=abandoned
> either. Sure, many of them have been converted into might fine
> cycleways, but that's just what they are now: cycleways.
You can abandon a railway and still have a someth
On Lunes 27 Septiembre 2010 19:13:32 j...@jfeldredge.com escribió:
> Shop=wedding is ambiguous. Going by the tag name alone it could be a shop
> selling wedding supplies (decorative materials used for weddings), a shop
> selling wedding gowns, or even a bakery specializing in wedding cakes, or
> a
agreed. there should be no restriction on who owns/provides the service.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 14:04, wrote:
> Your proposed changes make sense to me.
>
> ---Original Email---
> Subject :[Tagging] community centres
> From :mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com
> Date :Mon Sep 27 16:02:20 Am
I am making a simple proposal of "roundabout=priority_to_right" to
indicate a specific non-standard priority arrangement on some
roundabouts occurring in some parts of mainland Europe.
Please see:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Roundabout_Priority
Comments and suggestion
On 9/27/10 1:08 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
because not everyone to whom you give money to get something can be
considered a retailer. Wikipedia states:"In commerce, a "retailer"
buys goods or products in large quantities from manufacturers or
importers, either directly or through a wholesale
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:36:18 +0200, Colin Smale wrote:
> I am making a simple proposal of "roundabout=priority_to_right" to
> indicate a specific non-standard priority arrangement on some
> roundabouts occurring in some parts of mainland Europe.
Shouldn't this be better done with a proper rig
Thanks for the comments Martin, response below:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 13:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/9/27 kerosin :
> > Hey Martin,
> >
> > I would tag this as with amenity=community_centre! Our aim with that
> > "social_facility"-proposal is to capture facilities for people with
> >
On 9/27/10 5:01 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
You might well have the remains of an old railway, such as an
embankment, that was still present and useful as a landmark, but had not
been turned into a cycleway.
one reason to keep the abandoned railways in place is that in fact
they are still freq
I prefer wedding_services over wedding_office, as my first thought with
office was one of those Vegas drive-thrus. Either one will still cause some
confusion though.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:05, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/9/27 Noel David Torres Taño :
> > I expressely said in the propos
2010/9/27 Colin Smale :
> I am making a simple proposal of "roundabout=priority_to_right" to indicate
> a specific non-standard priority arrangement on some roundabouts occurring
> in some parts of mainland Europe.
>
> Please see:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Roundabout_P
YMCA is probably a good example of a private "community centre".
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 27/09/2010 22:01, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On 09/27/2010 12:17 PM, Dave F. wrote:
On 27/09/2010 17:37, Lennard wrote:
And when I cycle such a thing and want to map it, it's:
highway=cycleway
And I'm done. How am I to know there used to be rails infrastructure
there, years (and years) ago
2010/9/28 Sean Horgan :
> I took a stab at a definition and updated the wiki; let me know what you
> think
"A social facility is any place that focuses on improving the lives of others."
that's very generic, while it is true it might still not be very
helpful for a mapper who looks for a certain t
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> But only add what is actually visibly there now. Not what was there fifty
> years ago.
What was there 50 years ago is useful, and removing it would be
vandalism. You can argue about whether Mapnik should show it, but
don't remove it.
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 02:10:20 +0200
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> really? You would tag a place where heroine-addicts go to consume
> their drugs "healthcare"?
>
> > social_facility:for=drug_addicted
Caffeine addicts have amenity=cafe
___
Tagging mai
2010/9/28 Nathan Edgars II :
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Dave F. wrote:
>> But only add what is actually visibly there now. Not what was there fifty
>> years ago.
>
> What was there 50 years ago is useful, and removing it would be
> vandalism. You can argue about whether Mapnik should show
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:23 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/9/28 Nathan Edgars II :
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Dave F. wrote:
>>> But only add what is actually visibly there now. Not what was there fifty
>>> years ago.
>>
>> What was there 50 years ago is useful, and removing it w
On 28/09/2010 01:11, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Dave F. wrote:
But only add what is actually visibly there now. Not what was there fifty
years ago.
What was there 50 years ago is useful,
I agree
and removing it would be
vandalism.
I disagree. How can it b
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
