[Tagging] Patisserie?

2010-10-28 Thread Valent Turkovic
I'm using Mapzen POI collector and current version of Mapzen POI collector uses abandoned feature patisserie: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abandoned_features AFAIK it should be tagged like this: amenity=cafe cuisine=cake Right? -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt blog: htt

Re: [Tagging] Patisserie?

2010-10-28 Thread M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
2010/10/28 Valent Turkovic : > I'm using Mapzen POI collector and current version of Mapzen POI > collector uses abandoned feature patisserie: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abandoned_features > > AFAIK it should be tagged like this: > amenity=cafe > cuisine=cake I'd say this depends on the

Re: [Tagging] Patisserie?

2010-10-28 Thread Pieren
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Valent Turkovic wrote: > I'm using Mapzen POI collector and current version of Mapzen POI > collector uses abandoned feature patisserie: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abandoned_features > > AFAIK it should be tagged like this: > amenity=cafe > cuisine=cake >

Re: [Tagging] Patisserie?

2010-10-28 Thread Valent Turkovic
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:56 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/10/28 Valent Turkovic : >> I'm using Mapzen POI collector and current version of Mapzen POI >> collector uses abandoned feature patisserie: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abandoned_features >> >> AFAIK it should be tagged l

[Tagging] Super-relations or not (was: Relation member_roles from Osmosis import)

2010-10-28 Thread Peter Budny
(sorry for the crossposting, but this really applies globally, as well as for recent discussions on the talk-us list) Ian Dees writes: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Peter Budny wrote: > > Jochen Topf writes: > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:39:38AM +0200, Frank Broniewski wrot

Re: [Tagging] Super-relations or not (was: Relation member_roles from Osmosis import)

2010-10-28 Thread Apollinaris Schoell
On 28 Oct 2010, at 7:51 , Peter Budny wrote: > > To me, this says we really ought to be using super-relations for route > relations, rather than a single relation with roles tagged, for 2 > reasons: > yes, absolutely, the relation with role is very limited, one more reason is the checking tool

[Tagging] levees

2010-10-28 Thread Nathan Edgars II
Is there a standard way to tag a levee? It seems that highway=track embankment=yes would work for the vast majority of cases, but there may be some that service vehicles can't drive on. Also, levees (at least in swampland) often have an associated adjacent canal without its own name. This is somet

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] stop signs

2010-10-28 Thread Paul Johnson
On 10/27/2010 11:47 AM, Peter Wendorff wrote: > Another point is: if forward/backward is used, a mapper can see with > common knowledge, that tagging a stop sign at the intersection node is > no good idea. Compass could in theory be tagged at the intersecting > node, too. It's possible and with re

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] stop signs

2010-10-28 Thread Paul Johnson
On 10/27/2010 08:26 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/10/27 : >> I have never seen a stop sign at a railroad crossing. Buses are required by >> law to stop before a railroad crossing, and open the bus door so that the >> driver can better hear if a train is approaching. Some other commerci

Re: [Tagging] Difference between footway and pedestrian

2010-10-28 Thread Paul Johnson
On 10/26/2010 04:19 PM, Noel David Torres Taño wrote: > Hello all: > > There are two values highway=footway and highway=pedestrian and I do not know > which are the differences between them. The wiki does not contain a decisive > difference mark. Look in Portland, Oregon around the Rose Garden

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] stop signs

2010-10-28 Thread Paul Johnson
On 10/27/2010 10:24 AM, Anthony wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:27 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> 2010/10/27 Anthony : >> >>> One proposal for mapping stop signs is that the stop sign always faces >>> opposite the nearest intersection. >> >> so let's discuss about this. I don't think it i