Hi.
I think, that's a good point.
As social_facility has a relatively widespread meaning across the
entities it is used for, I think, it's useless to filter the data for
amenity=social_facility, because nobody will use that not filtered or
sorted further.
It's similar simple to filter for soci
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Peter Budny wrote:
> Anthony writes:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
>>> On 10/21/2010 08:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> So if we have whole-multiple-counties=5 (eg
> N
2010/10/21 Sean Horgan :
> The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
> according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity), needs
> more than a single line definition.
Why? The shorter the definition, the better. The definitions should be
precise and con
* Richard Welty [2010-10-19 15:25 -0400]:
> tiger seems to have spots where there are streets that developers planned
> but never built. i see them from time to time.
The problem there is that proposed roads have been recorded as actual
roads. If people want to record proposed roads as highway=p
Anthony writes:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Peter Budny wrote:
>> Anthony writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 10/21/2010 08:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>
>> So if we have whole-mul
On 21/10/2010 22:29, Sean Horgan wrote:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single line definition.
I see nothing wrong with the vast majority of the usages of amenity.
The
It's now almost 3 years that I'm mapping and when I entered small
informal (not planned or built) footpaths I was using cryptic tag
combinations like highway=footway, informal=yes, width=0.3 (or
highway=path), surface=ground. While that is not impossible, it is
still somehow strange. Why shouldn't
There are two types of thing that use the amenity tag:
Small objects that are usually inside others, like water fountains and
post boxes
Larger objects that may take up entire lots, like schools and restaurants
Perhaps it would make sense to treat these differently?
__
Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> We could hijack the trail page (given that trail to native speakers
> implies what I want to express)
Not really; see the "rails to trails" movement.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openst
On 10/21/2010 06:18 PM, Ant The Limey wrote:
Couple of thoughts
B) i don't feel that any particular tag should necessarily have a
global level of consistency. As a geographer, i instinctively grasp
that location itself is context added to any fact - as one of the
five fundamental questions of re
On 22/10/2010 00:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I just created a relation for the Green Mountain Scenic Byway (which
is marked with signs like
http://www.floridascenichighways.com/program/wp-content/themes/fshp/images/sidePanther.jpg):
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1239925
Other than
On 22/10/2010 17:14, John Smith wrote:
Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
I agree.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
yes,
a sub-group to deal with trails can be created for trail=*, i'll also
look into that and see what has already been done by the other schemas
for this sub-grouping.
My aim is to have a full tagging schema report (SchemaTroll 2.01 -
White Paper) done by Nov 21st.
Cheers,
Sam
On 10/22/10, M∡
The wiki states the "name" is a suitable tag for atm. I disagree
because I don't know named atms. Do you? I am also proposing the use
of the network-tag (or maybe brand?) e.g. "cash_group" "Sparkasse",
"Volks- und Raiffeisenbank" (all german networks for atms). I this is
undisputed, I'd change the
2010/10/22 Nathan Edgars II :
> that should be added, perhaps scenic=yes or tourism=scenic_route?
I'd either create a route-tag or use tourism=scenic_route. scenic=yes
doesn't feel good IMHO.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetm
On 22 Oct 2010, at 9:11 , M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> Looking at a dictionary I found "trail" (for german "Trampelpfad"),
> and helas: there is already a tag-page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrail
>
> It isn't very clear though and from the picture I'd say that is hig
John Smith wrote:
> Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
highway=track is for ways that are wide enough for two-tracked vehicles.
highway=path is indeed what would currently be used for informal
footpaths. But it can also be used to describe intentionally built, well
maintained a
2010/10/22 John Smith :
> Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
No, in the case of path this is a common misconception, and in the
case of track: where did you get this idea from? tracks are kind of
roads (they are at least broad enough for 4-wheeled / normal cars),
they are usual
On 22/10/2010 17:14, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
We could hijack the trail page (given that trail to native speakers
implies what I want to express)
Not really; see the "rails to trails" movement.
Yes, "trail" is an even more ambiguo
2010/10/22 Craig Wallace :
> Yes, "trail" is an even more ambiguous word than "path". It can refer to
> just about anything that isn't a paved road. So it might be a forest track,
> or a hiking path, or a mountain bike trail etc. And it might be an official,
> signposted route or it might not.
> S
On 23 October 2010 02:25, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> The wiki states the "name" is a suitable tag for atm. I disagree
> because I don't know named atms. Do you? I am also proposing the use
> of the network-tag (or maybe brand?) e.g. "cash_group" "Sparkasse",
> "Volks- und Raiffeisenbank" (all g
On 23 October 2010 02:34, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> OK, thank you for this comment. So I'd propose highway=informal or
> highway=informal_path
If you are so determined to make a new type, at least do it as a sub-type...
highway=path
path=informal
_
> highway=path is indeed what would currently be used for informal
> footpaths. But it can also be used to describe intentionally built, well
> maintained and paved ways.
Intentionally built way, too narrow for 4-wheel vehicles, is
"highway=footway". Unintentional, informal way is "highway=path".
2010/10/22 Apollinaris Schoell :
> please no new highway, path/footway is already a very controversial tag.
Yes, and it could become a little clearer when there is different tags
for a 3 m wide and paved "path" and a 0.3 m wide and unpaved and
unmaintained "path". We have x road classes and just
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> On 22/10/2010 00:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>
>> I just created a relation for the Green Mountain Scenic Byway (which
>> is marked with signs like
>>
>> http://www.floridascenichighways.com/program/wp-content/themes/fshp/images/sidePanther.jpg):
2010/10/22 John Smith :
> On 23 October 2010 02:34, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> OK, thank you for this comment. So I'd propose highway=informal or
>> highway=informal_path
>
> If you are so determined to make a new type, at least do it as a sub-type...
>
> highway=path
> path=informal
Why? We
A short definition is great but I think the wiki page could use a little
more explanation *after* the definition, e.g. some examples, references to
supporting sources like wikipedia. I also think that it is worth
mentioning and linking to pertinent mail archive threads on the use of the
tag as it
Locally, these are just added as tourist routes... Most are just
numbered, some use icons...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Custom_Highway_Shields#Australia
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/t
On 10/22/2010 11:43 AM, SURLY_ru wrote:
highway=path is indeed what would currently be used for informal
footpaths. But it can also be used to describe intentionally built, well
maintained and paved ways.
Intentionally built way, too narrow for 4-wheel vehicles, is
"highway=footway".
Incorrec
On 22/10/2010 17:42, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Dave F. wrote:
On 22/10/2010 00:49, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I just created a relation for the Green Mountain Scenic Byway (which
is marked with signs like
http://www.floridascenichighways.com/program/wp-content/the
On 23 October 2010 02:44, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I don't see a benefit from subtagging here, it is a new class IMHO.
I don't see a benefit in tagging these differently than highway=path,
and so far you have failed to show how they differ, as others have
pointed out, the path tag is for any
On 10/22/2010 11:28 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
highway=track is for ways that are wide enough for two-tracked vehicles.
highway=path is indeed what would currently be used for informal
footpaths. But it can also be used to d
On 10/22/10 12:31 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
They have to be not planned, not maintained, ground
surface: they are simply there because people (or animal) use them.
There might be some intersection with small paths in some cases, but
usually I'd also say that paths are broader.
this will le
please no new highway, path/footway is already a very controversial tag.
Yes, and it could become a little clearer when there is different tags
for a 3 m wide and paved "path" and a 0.3 m wide and unpaved and
unmaintained "path". We have x road classes and just one for ways that
are not roads (
In the USA, ATMs will usually be labeled with the name of the bank chain
operating them, and then will have smaller decals on the front showing which
networks of banks that bank belongs to (for example, banking chain A and
banking chain B both are part of the Cirrus network). You can use any AT
2010/10/22 SURLY_ru :
>> highway=path is indeed what would currently be used for informal
>> footpaths. But it can also be used to describe intentionally built, well
>> maintained and paved ways.
>
> Intentionally built way, too narrow for 4-wheel vehicles, is
> "highway=footway". Unintentional, in
2010/10/22 Richard Welty :
> On 10/22/10 12:31 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> They have to be not planned, not maintained, ground
>> surface: they are simply there because people (or animal) use them.
>>
>> There might be some intersection with small paths in some cases, but
>> usually I'd al
John Smith writes:
> On 23 October 2010 02:25, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> The wiki states the "name" is a suitable tag for atm. I disagree
>> because I don't know named atms. Do you? I am also proposing the use
>> of the network-tag (or maybe brand?) e.g. "cash_group" "Sparkasse",
>> "Volks-
Changing the email subject doesn't make this any more valid, most
responses so far have highway=path as being sufficient and so far you
have failed to show why it's not.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/li
2010/10/22 Mike N. :
> I would still say that the current highway=path handles this very well.
> I've never felt constrained by this tag with the common attributes. You
> can provide direction to renderers by adding surface=, width=, sac_scale,
> mtb:scale . If current renderers do not interpr
On Viernes 22 Octubre 2010 17:58:04 Peter Budny escribió:
> John Smith writes:
> > On 23 October 2010 02:25, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> >> The wiki states the "name" is a suitable tag for atm. I disagree
> >> because I don't know named atms. Do you? I am also proposing the use
> >> of the netw
2010/10/22 Nathan Edgars II :
> There are two types of thing that use the amenity tag:
> Small objects that are usually inside others, like water fountains and
> post boxes
> Larger objects that may take up entire lots, like schools and restaurants
>
> Perhaps it would make sense to treat these dif
2010/10/22 Sean Horgan :
> A short definition is great but I think the wiki page could use a little
> more explanation *after* the definition, e.g. some examples, references to
> supporting sources like wikipedia.
while it is convenient to link to wikipedia I don't like the idea very
much that t
On 10/22/10 1:18 PM, Noel David Torres Taño wrote:
I've asked about this too. I can understand that name=* refers to a specific
name of the particular ATM, like "Lenox Square Mall ATM" as you said. But
where to write "Banca March" (bank) and where to write "Servired" (network)?
Which one is oper
On 10/22/2010 12:09 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Well, beside this little detail, that some paths are formal (they are
intended, sign posted, maintained, have maybe names, etc.) and others
are informal, usually shortcuts, usually not very long, shall not be
maintained, etc.
OK, but take this
2010/10/22 Noel David Torres Taño :
> On Viernes 22 Octubre 2010 17:58:04 Peter Budny escribió:
>> > What is wrong with the operator=* or brand=* tags?
>>
>> +1 to both
>>
>> name=* to me would equate to the name that appears on my bank statement,
>> like "Student Center Post Office ATM" or "Lenox
2010/10/22 Richard Welty :
> for ATMs, brand and operator are likely to be the same, as what
> the user really wants to know is if it's his bank, or one that will hit
> him up with extra charges. so i'd say use the street name of the
> financial institution.
Don't know in your country, in Germany
2010/10/22 Alex Mauer :
> On 10/22/2010 12:09 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> Well, beside this little detail, that some paths are formal (they are
>> intended, sign posted, maintained, have maybe names, etc.) and others
>> are informal, usually shortcuts, usually not very long, shall not be
>
On Viernes 22 Octubre 2010 18:29:58 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer escribió:
> 2010/10/22 Noel David Torres Taño :
> > On Viernes 22 Octubre 2010 17:58:04 Peter Budny escribió:
> >> > What is wrong with the operator=* or brand=* tags?
> >>
> >> +1 to both
> >>
> >> name=* to me would equate to the name that
On 10/22/10 1:45 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/10/22 Richard Welty:
for ATMs, brand and operator are likely to be the same, as what
the user really wants to know is if it's his bank, or one that will hit
him up with extra charges. so i'd say use the street name of the
financial institution
In the USA, an A(M is usually a member of multiple networks, sometimes ten or
more, and will usually have decals on the front of the machine identifying
which networks it is a member of. You can use the machine if your bank is a
member of any of those networks, but may have to pay a surcharge i
On 10/22/2010 06:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> It's now almost 3 years that I'm mapping and when I entered small
> informal (not planned or built) footpaths I was using cryptic tag
> combinations like highway=footway, informal=yes, width=0.3 (or
> highway=path), surface=ground. While that is
On 10/22/2010 06:31 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/10/22 John Smith :
>> Isn't this what highway=path or highway=track is for?
>
>
> No, in the case of path this is a common misconception, and in the
> case of track: where did you get this idea from?
This is not a misconception. The wiki
On 10/22/2010 06:42 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Yes, and it could become a little clearer when there is different tags
> for a 3 m wide and paved "path" and a 0.3 m wide and unpaved and
> unmaintained "path".
If it is 3 m wide it is a track. If it's paved it's grade1, if it's
worse its a low
On 22/10/2010 17:27, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I'd either create a route-tag or use tourism=scenic_route.
Tourism is another tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
Primary tags shouldbe used to describe what it is, not whom it *might*
be used by.
For example: art galleries & museums are
On 10/22/2010 06:43 PM, SURLY_ru wrote:
> Intentionally built way, too narrow for 4-wheel vehicles, is
> "highway=footway".
The wiki and the actual usage say nothing about wether it was
intentionally built. Footway on the other hand is for designated
pedestrian ways, i.e. in many countries a blu
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> On 22/10/2010 17:27, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> I'd either create a route-tag or use tourism=scenic_route.
>
> Tourism is another tag that shouldn't be used as a primary.
>
> Primary tags shouldbe used to describe what it is, not whom it *mig
On 10/22/2010 02:18 PM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
On 10/22/2010 06:42 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Yes, and it could become a little clearer when there is different tags
for a 3 m wide and paved "path" and a 0.3 m wide and unpaved and
unmaintained "path".
If it is 3 m wide it is a track. If it
On 10/22/2010 02:13 PM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
On 10/22/2010 06:11 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Looking at a dictionary I found "trail" (for german "Trampelpfad"),
and helas: there is already a tag-page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrail
It isn't very clear though and fro
Am 22.10.2010 18:28, David Murn:
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 07:55 +0200, Peter Körner wrote:
Am 21.10.2010 23:29, schrieb Sean Horgan:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single li
2010/10/22 Alex Mauer :
> On 10/22/2010 02:18 PM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
>>
>> On 10/22/2010 06:42 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, and it could become a little clearer when there is different tags
>>> for a 3 m wide and paved "path" and a 0.3 m wide and unpaved and
>>> unmaintained "path
In most cities in the US, and even some smaller towns, there's an
organization called the Chamber of Commerce. With varying participation
from municipal government, it's a portal for new businesses to come to for
help and information, networking with other business owners, representing
business
Hi Alan,
I believe that the value of the amenity key should in some way describe what
it provides, e.g. cafe, fuel.
Is the Chamber of Commerce a private organization? What amenity would you
say it provides?
Maybe you could propose amenity=lobby or amenity=advocacy and then use
name=chamber_of_c
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Peter Budny wrote:
> Anthony writes:
>> What would be an example of a township that would be at admin_level=7?
>>
>> I'm not saying you're wrong. I just couldn't come up with an example.
>> The townships that I've seen which overlap with cities/towns aren't
>>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Alex Mauer wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 07:12 PM, Anthony wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
>>> The point of admin_level is *not* primarily to record which governments
>>> are
>>> above another. It’s to indicate which governments across dif
Peter Budny was talking about Richmond, Indiana, not Richmond, Virginia.
According to the Wikipedia article on Richmond, Indiana, "Richmond is a city
largely within Wayne Township, Wayne County, in east central Indiana, which
borders Ohio."
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [Tagging] [
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:17 PM, wrote:
> Peter Budny was talking about Richmond, Indiana, not Richmond, Virginia.
Wow, that was dumb of me. I knew he was talking about Indiana! Thanks...
> ---Original Email---
> Subject :Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] how to tag US townships?
> From :mailt
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Peter Budny wrote:
>> Anthony writes:
>>> What would be an example of a township that would be at admin_level=7?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying you're wrong. I just couldn't come up with an example.
>>> The townships t
On 23/10/2010 01:00, Alan Mintz wrote:
In most cities in the US, and even some smaller towns, there's an
organization called the Chamber of Commerce. With varying participation
from municipal government, it's a portal for new businesses to come to for
help and information, networking with other b
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Since when is Indiana the same as Virginia?
Isn't that the whole point of admin_levels?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
71 matches
Mail list logo
