Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Pieren
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Andrew Errington wrote: > I am using OSMAND for navigation, so it's important to have clear maps. Now > that I have downloaded the latest data for this area (which includes my > updates) I am much happier with the map I see. Without any additional tags like "tun

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Andrew Errington
Mea culpa, except that the layer=* tag is a hint for the renderer. Should I add layer=-1 to all the rivers and streams again? If not, why not? Best wishes, Andrew PS I didn't want to mention the lake that was tagged layer=-2, but I fixed that too. Having visited it I can confirm it is indeed

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Richard Z.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:42:34AM +0200, Pieren wrote: > On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Andrew Errington > wrote: > > > I am using OSMAND for navigation, so it's important to have clear maps. Now > > that I have downloaded the latest data for this area (which includes my > > updates) I am mu

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Richard Z.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 07:06:16PM +0900, Andrew Errington wrote: > Should I add layer=-1 to all the rivers and streams again? no, see other email. Richard ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/ta

Re: [Tagging] Offices of Bike Sharing services

2014-04-21 Thread nounours77
Dear Volker, > Office=bike_sharing > also does not sem correct. In the current tagging, this sounds rather straight-forward to me!! But there should be a better, generique way for this. We discussed part of this on boat_sharing / boat_renting, or car_riding ... maybe you join in? https://wiki.

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-04-21 20:48 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. : > > Without any additional tags like "tunnel=*" or "covered=*", a > > "layer=-1" river shouldn't be rendered differently than a "layer=1" or > > even in the absence of any "layer" tag. This is a bug in OsmAnd. You > > except for the the very frequent case wh

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-04-21 Thread Chris Hill
On 21/04/14 21:20, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-04-21 20:48 GMT+02:00 Richard Z. >: > Without any additional tags like "tunnel=*" or "covered=*", a > "layer=-1" river shouldn't be rendered differently than a "layer=1" or > even in the absence of a

Re: [Tagging] Offices of Bike Sharing services

2014-04-21 Thread Ryan Kaldari
'office=bike_sharing' makes the most sense to me. 'sharing:office=bike' is unintuitive and confusing, IMO. Ryan Kaldari On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:52 AM, nounours77 wrote: > Dear Volker, > > Office=bike_sharing > also does not sem correct. > > > In the current tagging, this sounds rather straig