Re: [Tagging] courtyards

On 7/02/2015 6:03 PM, Alex Rollin wrote: imho a courtyard is related to leisure. why for: because a courtyard matters to people with leisure time and it is a luxury of sorts. why against: perhaps a courtyard is a sequestered area/way as it is often tagger highway designated footpath as an ar

Re: [Tagging] Tram tracks running in a road

Hi Luca, Am 2015-02-06 um 17:29 schrieb Luca Sigfrido Percich: > first time I write to the list (after lurking for a while), so I introduce > myself. I am from Milano - Italy, I work for the municipality's agency for > environment and mobility, and we'we been working for the last months to > integ

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

Amenity is the best fit for this tag. I disagree. (Usually that just means "I didn't find anything better") As this tag is always going to be used within another entity I think we should rather look towards something like indoor tagging or other subtags. In addition using amenity for receptio

Re: [Tagging] Tram tracks running in a road

2015-02-07 0:31 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić : > 2015-02-06 17:29 GMT+01:00 Luca Sigfrido Percich : > >> >> We could also user a lanes modifier: >> lanes=3 >> lanes:backward=2 >> tram:lanes:backward=yes|no >> tram:forward=yes >> >> > I think this is the best way to tag this. There's a great map paint s

Re: [Tagging] route=running

Hi, what about running facilities? This is a track which is dedicated to runners: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4039958 Those elements where it seems to use the normal path are in fact seperated by a lowered kerb - not really mentionable. I do not really like to use leisure=track ther

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

>> Amenity is the best fit for this tag. > > > I disagree. (Usually that just means "I didn't find anything better") +1 "Amenity" is very vague in general (), and a lot of things can be marked as such. So I'd prefer to use it only when it's an obvious choice or there is nothing better. What about

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

On February 7, 2015 10:41:17 AM CST, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: > >> Amenity is the best fit for this tag. > > > > > > I disagree. (Usually that just means "I didn't find anything > better") > > +1 > "Amenity" is very vague in general (), and a lot of things can be > marked as such. So I'd prefer t

[Tagging] Spatial triggers/conditions changing/affecting tags elsewhere

Hi, We've have *:conditional=* which is useful to describe complex tagging cases, however, it is not able to cover one particular case with spatially distinct trigger. Lets look to this issue through two examples: A) There's Vantaanjoki river that goes under a motorway. Alongside the river

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

On 7/02/2015 9:15 PM, Andreas Goss wrote: Amenity is the best fit for this tag. I disagree. (Usually that just means "I didn't find anything better") As this tag is always going to be used within another entity Always is such a large word. What about a hut that is used only for reception? S

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

On Sat, 2015-02-07 at 17:41 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: ... > "Amenity" is very vague in general (), and a lot of things can be > marked as such. So I'd prefer to use it only when it's an obvious > choice or there is nothing better. Well, while I agree that "Amenity" is pretty general, but amen

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

On 8/02/2015 3:41 AM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: Amenity is the best fit for this tag. I disagree. (Usually that just means "I didn't find anything better") +1 "Amenity" is very vague in general (), and a lot of things can be marked as such. So I'd prefer to use it only when it's an obvious choic

Re: [Tagging] Wiki on amenity=waste_disposal Rewrite?

On 5/02/2015 12:04 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: You mean a one step? Like highway= x ? To do that I'd think a new supper key waste= at the top level! And maybe that is what it nee

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reception Desk

Maybe there is a need for something like… a tag for office=* which may cover the different public or employee facing building types where the common facilities you would find in each category would be taggable, so you can tag a point or a building as certain types of facilities. office=human_r

Re: [Tagging] Wiki on amenity=waste_disposal Rewrite?

Actually, I was not referring to a new top level tag of waste=* but to amenity=dump_point. I quoted from the previous post but that was very misleading. I wanted to avoid the proliferation of waste types that must be associated with a new tag of waste=* By more carefully defining only one tag, (d

Re: [Tagging] Wiki on amenity=waste_disposal Rewrite?

On 8/02/2015 1:18 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: Actually, I was not referring to a new top level tag of waste=* but to amenity=dump_point. I quoted from the previous post but that was very misleading. I wanted to avoid the proliferation of waste types that must be associated with a new tag of was