2010/10/25 Dmitry Granovsky :
> Does anyone have any ideas? (If I missed a previous discussion on the
> same topic, could you please point that to me.)
there is this page in the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts
I remember a discussion about such multipl
2010/10/25 Tobias Knerr :
> You already get very different tagging advice depending on whether you
> ask on, say, tagging, talk-de, the forum, or the wiki. So I question
> whether it's wise to create another mostly isolated group of people who
> will start to breed their own, incompatible interpret
name:- is not bad. However, we have to somehow combine it with
name:LANG tags: name:en:1945-1954 or name:1945-1954:en.
Have you ever seen it implemented?
2010/10/25 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer :
> 2010/10/25 Dmitry Granovsky :
>
>> Does anyone have any ideas? (If I missed a previous discussion on
For example, what would you tag this?
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Vercelli,+Piedmont,+Italy&ll=45.314604,8.414012&spn=0.001633,0.004128&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=45.314594,8.413845&panoid=VAMbvxwaZiigA_JUOfHBkw&cbp=12,348.5,,0,31.53
I guess you could call it a path, a high-grade path at
2010/10/25 Simone Saviolo :
> For example, what would you tag this?
>
> http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Vercelli,+Piedmont,+Italy&ll=45.314604,8.414012&spn=0.001633,0.004128&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=45.314594,8.413845&panoid=VAMbvxwaZiigA_JUOfHBkw&cbp=12,348.5,,0,31.53
>
> I guess you could
2010/10/25 Dmitry Granovsky :
> name:- is not bad. However, we have to somehow combine it with
> name:LANG tags: name:en:1945-1954 or name:1945-1954:en.
>
> Have you ever seen it implemented?
One could use name:old:-, or name:old:N to give a
chronological order when dates are not k
On Sábado 23 Octubre 2010 09:34:50 Vincent Pottier escribió:
> On 23/10/2010 02:00, 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 ne
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/surface:winter_road
--
Totus tuus, Glebius.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 10/22/2010 08:08 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Peter Budny wrote:
It looks like Richmond, Indiana and Wayne Township are an example.
Richmond is not part of any county. "Like all Virginia municipalities
incorporated as cities, it is an independent city and not part
On 10/23/2010 08:31 AM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
On 10/22/2010 09:49 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
No. Width is not a sufficient criterion to determine whether it’s a
track. There is a rails-to-trails conversions around here that don’t
have anything physically preventing cars from driving down it
A tr
On 10/23/2010 08:45 AM, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
On 10/22/2010 09:50 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
That’s not what the wiki says. It says “If a path is wide enough for
four-wheel-vehicles […] it is often better tagged as a highway=track.”
That doesn’t mean that that is the only criterion.
Then what d
On 10/25/2010 10:29 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote:
> the street you have to jump down the curb (some 15 cm curb). This is
> really not a path, IMHO
It is definitely a path, IMHO.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.
For that matter, roads originally intended for motor vehicle use are sometimes
later changed to being restricted to bicycle and/or foot use, particularly in
public parks. These park roads will often have a gate blocking vehicular
entry, with official personnel able to open the gate when necessa
On 10/23/2010 04:00 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
Relations are to relate things to each other. Therefore the role is the
interesting part of the relation concept.
A group of things, where none of them has a specific role is not a
relation, it's a collection or category.
That would apply to the ro
On 10/24/2010 04:30 AM, M[measured angle :-p]rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I inform you that I am using informal=yes for ways that are not
constructed and not maintained or signposted but are only there for
the fact that someone uses them.
That sounds to me like a good way to handle it. It would p
On 25.10.2010 22:29, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 10/24/2010 04:30 AM, M[measured angle :-p]rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I inform you that I am using informal=yes for ways that are not
constructed and not maintained or signposted but are only there for
the fact that someone uses them.
That sounds to me l
On 10/25/2010 04:36 PM, Felix Hartmann wrote:
Most people underestimate that for many informal looking trails, there
are actually people caring to keep them in shape. Be it paid
trailbuilders, hunters, forestry staff or simply residents that want to
have a trail for unknown reason. There is nothi
17 matches
Mail list logo
