*Ones that won't annoy those who lurk silently until voting time ?*
Well said!
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:24 AM Dave Swarthout
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 2:07 PM, David Bannon
> wrote:
>
>> I agree with Jan in that a small set of (universally acceptable) values
>> would make the proposal m
Map it one way or the other (I'd say either was acceptable), but don't
switch repeatedly between the two.
There are many tram systems which only really separate from the road at
stops, with much less separation between stops than your clear white line.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Fernando Tre
On 01/03/2015, fly wrote:
> I just say, that out of the 25,000 objects tagged with route=foot over
> 21,000 have been tagged either network=lwn or network=rwn and would be
> better tagged route=hiking as that is the route type for hiking routes.
>
> In general, I do not like route=foot but I susta
In Belgium and The Netherlands we have tagged all the regional walking
networks as foot. With this system of walking networks it is possible to
plan walks as short as 2-3 km and and long as a few hundred kilometers. For
me the short walks are no hikes, but that might be the wrong interpretation.
W
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 13:06 +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
> In Belgium and The Netherlands we have tagged all the regional walking
> networks as foot. With this system of walking networks it is possible
> to plan walks as short as 2-3 km and and long as a few hundred
> kilometers. For me the short walks
On 01.03.2015 23:26, Warin wrote:
> I have edited the wiki to better reflect the situation. I have also
> changed the order ...
Thank you! :)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Speaking from an American point of view, I tend to think of "hiking" as a
wilderness, or at least rural, activity. In an urban setting, I would
likely refer to "walking".
--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot
drive o
Dump stations are one of a number of compelling "poi mapping" efforts that
exist outside of OSM.
Sanidumps is so much stronger than OSM for this feature, I suspect it will
maintain it's lead.
OSM is similarly overshadowed in AED mapping.
On the other hand OSM seems to be the leader for drinking wa
For developing world demographers, data on home toilets is important. This
data periodically gets recorded in Open Street Map.
Unfortunately this brings up a number of conflicts, among them the use of a
map by a member of the public wishing to use a toilet. Nothing
distinguishes a toilet one can
Hi,
the wiki page about amenity=toilet clearly states - in English and
German version, that it is used to identify a toilet *open to the public*.
As far as I can see, this seems to be the case since at least 2010
(although I didn't check any single one for intermediate differences).
The French s
2015-03-02 19:05 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt :
> I'm opening a discussion about at least mechanically re-tagging
> operator:type=private
> into "access=no" or "access=private", so that rendering software can
> choose to omit these locations depending on the map purpose.
>
according to the wiki, the
"access=no or access=private do not seem to make much sense"
Toilet may be open only to to a limited public - in military base, only for
employees or out of order.
2015-03-02 19:37 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> 2015-03-02 19:05 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt :
>
>> I'm opening a discussion about a
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:15 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
>
> Speaking from an American point of view, I tend to think of "hiking" as a
> wilderness, or at least rural, activity. In an urban setting, I would likely
> refer to "walking".
>
+1
Hiking is a form of leisure for people - to go hiking
There are two issues here:
* Use of OSM to store demographic surveys, particularly using tags that
imply the feature is public.
* The wider issue of mapping within a restricted place. Similar issues
occur for amenities inside places (ATM's, AED's, Bike tool stations,
toilets, drinking water). F
On 3/03/2015 8:38 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
There are two issues here:
* Use of OSM to store demographic surveys, particularly using tags
that imply the feature is public.
* The wider issue of mapping within a restricted place. Similar
issues occur for amenities inside places (ATM's, AED's,
The current wiki vote guidelines read:
*A rule of thumb for "enough support" is 8 unanimous approval votes or 15
total votes with a majority approval, but other factors may also be
considered (such as whether a feature is already in use).*
Consider instead this wording:
*There is no firm defi
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 17:07 -0800, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> The current wiki vote guidelines read:
>
Bryce, I see what you want to achieve but not sure if I agree on the
details.
> Consider instead this wording:
> There is no firm definition of 'enough' votes.
Too subjective ! (Finally, I
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2) new key ... private=* ?
> thus change these from amenity=toilet to private=toilet ... also provides for
> other 'private' things being entered ..eg swimming pools ..
>
+1
There are all kinds of b
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 17:07 -0800, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> ..
> 8 or more unanimous approval votes.
> 16 or more votes, with a supermajority (75%) positive
> or abstaining.
Interesting to consider the current state of reception_desk proposal,
some
On 3/03/2015 12:31 PM, David Bannon wrote:
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 17:07 -0800, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
The current wiki vote guidelines read:
Bryce, I see what you want to achieve but not sure if I agree on the
details.
Consider instead this wording:
There is no firm definition of 'enou
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:44 PM, John Willis wrote:
> > On Mar 3, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2) new key ... private=* ?
> +1
> If OSM wants to be used in emergency uses or be flexible for odd data
> sets, mapping private toilets (or propane ovens, house-top solar pa
On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 10:44 +0900, John Willis wrote:
> There are all kinds of buildings we map that are completely private (houses,
> for example), yet are visible from publicly accessible places.
>
OK, so perhaps we need to tag only those private toilets that are
completely visible from public
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:46 AM, David Bannon
wrote:
> Its interesting to note that most 'no' were concerned it is a tourism
> only tag despite that issue being discussed (and resolved ??) on this
> list.
>
For me this shows that the current process for tag definition might miss a
few important s
"Excluding private toilet seems a sane step for a general purpose map."
Completely private toilets (especially home toilets) may not be mapped
with amenity=toilet, what solves rendering problems.
Public toilets with restricted access should be mapped with appropriate
access tag.
2015-03-03 2:58
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:10 PM, David Bannon
wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 10:44 +0900, John Willis wrote:
> > There are all kinds of buildings we map that are completely private
> (houses, for example), yet are visible from publicly accessible places.
> >
> OK, so perhaps we need to tag only th
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
> For me this shows that the current process for tag definition might miss a
> few important steps.
>
+1
The process works well then the proposal itself is refined and improved
through the process. The vote then becomes almost irrelevant.
In
26 matches
Mail list logo
