Richard,
This is indeed a great cycleway=track. By the way it is nice that the
feature http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left has
been approved.
Your example can be taggen by:
highway=*
cycleway=track
In fact it is cycleway:both=track, but with no :right or :left we me
Am 08.01.2011 13:40, schrieb Robert Elsenaar:
Richard,
This is indeed a great cycleway=track. By the way it is nice that the
feature
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left has
been approved.
Your example can be taggen by:
highway=*
cycleway=track
In fact it is cyclew
Peter wrote:
If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear.
Yes you are right. But implicite we have accepted several default in our
tags.
E.g. we tag highway=residential and more precice would be
highway:type=residential
And we tag surface=asphalt and more precise would be
highway:su
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Peter Wendorff wrote:
> Please keep in mind, that with this in mind, cycleway:both=track is more
> precise as cycleway=track could be due to another interpretation of the
> local mapper.
>
>
It's not more precise. Interpretation of tags is documented on the wiki an
Robert Elsenaar schrieb:
Peter wrote:
If you tag it as cycleway:both=track, it's more clear.
Yes you are right. But implicite we have accepted several default in
our tags.
That's right.
But the problem is, that already hundreds or thousands of cycleway=track
tagged yet - but in reality they
Drawing seperated ways is a workaround for a “Not yet solvable” problem. By
drawing a second way, what’s not there, is implicitely wrong. There is NO
SECOND WAY so try not to draw it then.
And yes I admit, I do use often the “second way solution” to solve complex
situations or situations were I
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Drawing seperated ways is a workaround for a “Not yet solvable” problem. By
> drawing a second way, what’s not there, is implicitely wrong. There is NO
> SECOND WAY so try not to draw it then.
Huh? If there's separation between the cycleway
I do think this is not a real probolem because our Map is never ready, next
mapper will correct these previous tags.
I'm more worried about hte mappers that think that in *every* cycleway=track
situation a seperated way is the best option to map it.
Re-mapping that is a greater problem.
-Robert
Please define seperation?
-Robert-
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
From: Nathan Edgars II
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:54 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Robert Elsenaar
wrote:
Drawing s
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht- From: Nathan Edgars II
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:54 PM
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Differences in cycleways
>
> Huh? If there's separation between the
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Please define seperation?
>
>
You are completely wrong. If there is no seperation, then tag it as a cycle
lane, not track. This thread is about cycle track.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
Nathan,
I do not understand you at all.
We agree about cycleway=lane: No seperation but defenitely a special place
for bicycles.
You stated in your last replay, and correct me if a I'm wrong.
highway cycleway should be mapped if there is any kind of seperation, even
when it is only a seperatly
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Nathan,
> I do not understand you at all.
> We agree about cycleway=lane: No seperation but defenitely a special place
> for bicycles.
> You stated in your last replay, and correct me if a I'm wrong.
> highway cycleway should be mapped if th
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the difference between these two tags? Only
place=town appears to be documented. Both have ~~4000 usages on ways.
Steve
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On 9 January 2011 10:39, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Hi all,
> Can anyone tell me the difference between these two tags? Only place=town
> appears to be documented. Both have ~~4000 usages on ways.
The place marker should be part of the boundary as well, because the
centre of the boundary and the cen
On 9 January 2011 10:48, John Smith wrote:
> On 9 January 2011 10:39, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Can anyone tell me the difference between these two tags? Only place=town
>> appears to be documented. Both have ~~4000 usages on ways.
>
> The place marker should be part of the boundary as
On 9/01/2011 11:48 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 9 January 2011 10:48, John Smith wrote:
On 9 January 2011 10:39, Steve Bennett wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the difference between these two tags? Only place=town
appears to be documented. Both have ~~4000 usages on ways.
The place marker sh
On 9 January 2011 11:05, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Sorry, I don't follow. There should be a place=town node that is part of the
> boundary=town way? How could the centre of the town be on its boundary?
Sorry I thought you meant node, there is generally a need for a node
to mark the centre of a place
> From: Steve Bennett
>
> On 5/01/2011 3:18 PM, John Smith wrote:
> > Perhaps a more generic approach would work, eg waterway=flow_control
> > flow_control=weir|sluice_gate|flood_gate|spillway_gate|
> Yeah something like that would be reasonable. What I'd like to see a lot
> more of is plann
I'm starting to be convinced that there is a cultural disconnect with
the word craft. To me (and I suspect most English speakers) there has
to almost be an arts aspect for something to be a craft. Whereas I'm
starting to get the impression the German use is closer to what I
think of as trade or pr
On 9 January 2011 13:36, Paul Norman wrote:
> I've been looking into this. How does this sound?
> waterway=dam and waterway=weir remain unchanged.
I'm still in favour of shifting these into flow control...
> The question is, what else would go there? Flood gates don't belong there -
> that's the
On 9 January 2011 13:37, Stephen Hope wrote:
> I'm starting to be convinced that there is a cultural disconnect with
> the word craft. To me (and I suspect most English speakers) there has
> to almost be an arts aspect for something to be a craft. Whereas I'm
> starting to get the impression the
On 9 January 2011 07:43, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
> Nathan,
> I do not understand you at all.
> We agree about cycleway=lane: No seperation but defenitely a special place
> for bicycles.
> You stated in your last replay, and correct me if a I'm wrong.
> highway cycleway should be mapped if there is
Agreed. In American usage, craft implies a decorative object, frequently
created by the person who will be using it, and always in a small-scale rather
than mass-production manner. Examples would be hand-thrown pottery, wood
carvings, and handmade jewelry. A craft store sells tools and suppli
So, no standalone cycleway will ever be mapped with the cycleway=track tag, and
no cycleway that is actually shown on a map will have the tag either? The tag
is never to actually be used on a cycleway, only on a motor-vehicle road to
indicate that a cycleway exists somewhere nearby, but isn't d
25 matches
Mail list logo
