Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi, just seen that there is more FUD that needs to be adressed: Am Dienstag, 18. September 2012, 23:15:57 schrieb Rob Nickerson: > * No variable parts in the key. This is essential as keys are used to > search for data in the OSM database. If a key comprises a variable part it > can no longer be

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

On Sep 19, 2012 5:09 AM, "Eckhart Wörner" wrote: > "single tag" is a slight understatement. Just to get the access for an hgv vehicle in Germany right, you have to consider: > access > access:conditional > access:vehicle > access:vehicle:conditional > access:motor_vehicle > access:motor_vehicle:co

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi David, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 08:26:07 schrieb David ``Smith'': > Wouldn't that be... > access > access:conditional > vehicle > vehicle:conditional > motor_vehicle > motor_vehicle:conditional > hgv > hgv:conditional > ...? Actually, no. To quote: "For access restrictions it is *allow

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

To echo Sir Humphrey*, my first reaction was "beautifully typed". My second reaction was as follows: What attempt has been made to get editor support for this "proposal"? Without it no-one, apart from the dwindling proportion voting on the wiki, will ever even have heard of it. Without edit

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, Eckhart Wörner wrote: > Am Dienstag, 18. September 2012, 23:15:57 schrieb Rob Nickerson: > > Variable parts in keys will also lead to an undesired > > proliferation of unique keys. > > This is the only argument that is not completely broken, and it has two > sides: the Extende

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi Ilpo, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 15:45:44 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen: > > > * Avoids the requirement for problematic characters in the key such as "<" > > > or ">" > > > > Which is a huge problem for data consumers that process XML using > > regular expressions, and nobody else. > > This i

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi Ilpo, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 15:45:44 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen: > > > Variable parts in keys will also lead to an undesired > > > proliferation of unique keys. > > > > This is the only argument that is not completely broken, and it has two > > sides: the Extended Conditions proposal h

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

On 19.09.2012 14:44, SomeoneElse wrote: > What attempt has been made to get editor support for this "proposal"? Tagging ideas are often documented (as a proposal or elsewhere) first, then actually used in the database, and only then added to editors. At this point, a JOSM/Potlatch patch would pr

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Eckhart, Ich habe gerade eine Spalte für das Extended Conditions Schema zur Beispieltabelle auf der Diskussionsseite des Conditional Restriction Schemas hinzugefügt. [1] (Warum hat das Extended Conditions Schema eigentlich keine Beispiele?) Würdest du mir helfen die Lücken zu füllen? Du scheins

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

I'm sorry. Here it is again in English: Eckhart, I've added a column for the Extended Conditions scheme to the examples table on the discussion page of the Conditional Restriction scheme. [1] (Why doesn't have the Extended Conditions scheme it's own examples?) Would you please help me fill in t

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi Ronnie, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 16:17:07 schrieb Ronnie Soak: > I've added a column for the Extended Conditions scheme to the examples > table on the discussion page of the Conditional Restriction > scheme. [1] > > (Why doesn't have the Extended Conditions scheme it's own examples?)

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi All, Despite some of the perceived benefits of this proposal being challenged (mainly in regards to their relevance), the overwhelming thing that was clear was that this proposal was well thought out. Ole looked carefully at the feedback that was given during previous proposals and worked to fi

[Tagging] Monasteries - RFC

I'd like to ask all of you for comments and for missing communities: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=monastery cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Conditional Restrictions vs. Extended Conditions

Hi everybody, it probably comes as no surprise that I am against the Conditional Restrictions proposal and in favor of the Extended Conditions proposal. My main reason is that I believe the Conditional Restrictions proposal is so complicated it will kill mapping of those conditions almost comple

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi Rob, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 18:08:30 schrieb Rob Nickerson: > Despite some of the perceived benefits of this proposal being challenged > (mainly in regards to their relevance), Except for one claimed benefit, I did not question the relevance of the claims, but their validity. Maybe

Re: [Tagging] access restrictions on ways

Update. First, If I were asked, is there a map showing access restrictions? ;-) I've seen many showing speed limits, this and that, but I didn't spot any global one. I have been called by a Council secretary and I finally received an e-mail reply too. They asked what is that osm.org map? (I

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

-- Eckhart wrote -- Hi Rob, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 18:08:30 schrieb Rob Nickerson: >* Despite some of the perceived benefits of this proposal being challenged*>* >(mainly in regards to their relevance),* Except for one claimed benefit, I did not question the relevance of the claims, bu

Re: [Tagging] Conditional Restrictions vs. Extended Conditions

>Hi everybody, > >it probably comes as no surprise that I am against the Conditional >Restrictions proposal and in favor of the Extended Conditions proposal. >My main reason is that I believe the Conditional Restrictions proposal is so >complicated it will kill mapping of those conditions almost

Re: [Tagging] access restrictions on ways

Am 19.09.2012 um 20:36 schrieb André Pirard : > BTW, I'm wondering about that "forward". If I understood you correct(!) this restriction should block traffic going in. If anyone manages to get into the town without passing that signpost (don't ask me how) he is allowed to leave town on that roa

Re: [Tagging] Announcement: Voting ongoing for proposed access tagging "Conditional restrictions"

Hi Rob, Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 20:10:45 schrieb Rob Nickerson: > Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012, 18:08:30 schrieb Rob Nickerson: > >* Despite some of the perceived benefits of this proposal being > >challenged*>* (mainly in regards to their relevance),* > Except for one claimed benefit

[Tagging] Animal_shelter, multiple semicolon separated values?

Hi everybody, what do you think about using multiple comma separated values in a key (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semi-colon_value_separator)? In particular about the new proposal "amenity=animal_shelter". Suppose we need