Re: [Tagging] lost and found

This type of facility is usually called 'Lost Property' or a lost property office. amenity=lost_property would work here, or lost_property=yes could be added where it is a secondary function of something else such as an information desk. Phil (trigpoint ) On Tue Apr 28 00:01:07 2015 GMT+0100,

Re: [Tagging] Tag:natural=tree and taxon names

On 28 April 2015 at 07:16, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Andy Mabbett > wrote: >> >> What can species= and genus= do, that taxon= cannot? > > > If all you know is the species, you can feel comfortable tagging the > species. That doesn't answer my question. If al an edi

[Tagging] proposal - camp_site= Voting is now open.

OK folks, everyone has had every chance to tell us what is wrong with this proposal, its now open for voting. We have talked and talked ! Lets vote now please ! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Camp_Site David ___ Tagging maili

Re: [Tagging] Tag:natural=tree and taxon names

> Am 28.04.2015 um 11:29 schrieb Andy Mabbett : > > Again; why do we need species=* and genus=* on that basis? you're right that we don't need them, the less specific key taxon covers all kind of taxons, still people seem to prefer species and genus (together 600K uses) before taxon (139K

[Tagging] Damage Assessment Tags - Would like feedback on a schema

Greetings everyone, I am looking to help further develop a set of tags to reflect disaster event damage to mapped objects in OSM. OSM has already used damage tags in the past several times for example after Typhoon Haiyan: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Damaged_buildings_crisis_mapping And a

Re: [Tagging] Tag:natural=tree and taxon names

I had a look at the page for natural=tree and there is no example using taxon. For me that resulted in the use of species when known. Until yesterday I didn't even know how taxon could be used and it is confusing that it can look the same as genus or species. OTOH I do understand that using 3 keys

Re: [Tagging] lost and found

2015-04-28 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_and_found=yes seems good to me, > It seems like a duplicate information to me. The second key doesn't give any additional information and is therefore not useful. 2015-04-28 10:57 GMT+02:00 : > This type of facility is usually

Re: [Tagging] lost and found

To clarify the tag name: According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_and_found it should be: amenity=lost_property OR lost_property=yes (British English) Volker On 28 April 2015 at 16:46, Florian LAINEZ wrote: > > 2015-04-28 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > >> so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_an

Re: [Tagging] lost and found

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Florian LAINEZ wrote: > > > 2015-04-28 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > >> so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_and_found=yes seems good to me, >> > > It seems like a duplicate information to me. The second key doesn't give > any additional information and is therefore not us

Re: [Tagging] lost and found

On Tue Apr 28 15:46:18 2015 GMT+0100, Florian LAINEZ wrote: > 2015-04-28 1:01 GMT+02:00 johnw : > > > so amenity=lost_and_found + lost_and_found=yes seems good to me, > > > > It seems like a duplicate information to me. The second key doesn't give > any additional information and is therefore not

Re: [Tagging] Colour coding of wiki description boxes

On 04/27/2015 01:26 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, I'm finding myself in a little edit war with user Xxzme on the wiki (is there a club?) over my objection to the use of the colour red for tag description boxes that describe tags with the any of the following statuses: Can we also reject a r

Re: [Tagging] Colour coding of wiki description boxes

+1 that there's a problem here of the wiki pretending to be more than it it is. Xxzme's "bold" edits often exacerbate that. -- When it comes to "deprecated" and "obsolete" tags I basically feel that if you can't get enough worldwide consent to re-tag, the tags are not really obsolete or deprecat

Re: [Tagging] Colour coding of wiki description boxes

On 29/04/2015 4:30 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: +1 that there's a problem here of the wiki pretending to be more than it it is. Xxzme's "bold" edits often exacerbate that. -- When it comes to "deprecated" and "obsolete" tags I basically feel that if you can't get enough worldwide consent to re-t

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-GB] Wiki deprecation of an in-use feature

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Back on topic? > The 'problem' looks to have come from incorrect wiki definition. So that > is where to start, correctly define it, contact those who have been > contributing to the wiki and check th

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-GB] Wiki deprecation of an in-use feature

On 29/04/2015 2:34 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: Back on topic? The 'problem' looks to have come from incorrect wiki definition. So that is where to start, corre