Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Martin et al., It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the "question" we will never agree about the "answer" except by coincidence, and that would be the worst situation of all. What are the use ca

Re: [Tagging] "Pet Relief Areas"

> Am 27.05.2015 um 01:16 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > And more parking: > > trolley_parking (near supermarkets) > pram_parking > Umbrella > coat an ashtray would be cigarette parking? cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.o

Re: [Tagging] "Pet Relief Areas"

The thread has diversified greatly... (as is normal... the thread subject (pet relief Areas) refers to an area .. where 'pets' leave excrement. There is also following discussion on 'hitching racks' (hitching rails or posts) = a bar or post where animal leads can be secured, pet off lead exer

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:07 schrieb Colin Smale : > > What are the use cases for an "address"? Is it as a routing target? A "label" > or "annotation" for a building? or a "property" in a looser sense? Is it for > the benefit of the postman? Or what? it is a property of some other object it re

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:07, Colin Smale wrote: What are the use cases for an "address"? Is it as a routing target? A "label" or "annotation" for a building? or a "property" in a looser sense? Is it for the benefit of the postman? Or what? As Christian Quest explained on talk-fr just minutes ago, an a

Re: [Tagging] Airport power and USB stations

> Am 27.05.2015 um 00:42 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > So, you favour tagging for the renderer ? > > If it's a charging station it should be tagged as such and indicate what it > will charge. yes, but there is no established tag for a generic charging station, there is one for vehicle ch

Re: [Tagging] Future of categories

W dniu 26.05.2015 22:35, Tobias Knerr napisał(a): On 26.05.2015 20:06, Janko Mihelić wrote: I think we need a separate instalation of wikibase on our wiki. I don't understand what you mean exactly: just a service without Wikimedia data to use our own, or with a copy of Wikimedia objects (one

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > Absent any information, tagging the plot is better than nothing. A building > is better - and even better is the main entrance or an even finer scheme to > separate entrance and postbox. if you add an address that belongs to a plot t

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > Also, the address must be unique why? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Pet Relief Areas"

The supermarket chain in my region (Joyful Honda) has carts for pets, and also a pet boarding area (a kennel to check your poodle into while you shop). this is a single large store. So we’re talking about pet “sitting” as opposed to pet boarding (like a pet hotel). This is beyond the tie-off

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

W dniu 27.05.2015 9:38, Jean-Marc Liotier napisał(a): Also, the address must be unique - it must not be present on more than one object, even if more than one POI exists at that address. So there are exceptions to this rule: I know at least one example where the same address is given for two

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : Absent any information, tagging the plot is better than nothing. A building is better - and even better is the main entrance or an even finer scheme to separate entrance and postbox. By using an

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:57, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 27.05.2015 9:38, Jean-Marc Liotier napisał(a): Also, the address must be unique - it must not be present on more than one object, even if more than one POI exists at that address. So there are exceptions to this rule: I know at least one example whe

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

A block of flats will also have many addresses. Each individual apartment will have its own. If there is a garage down the street which is part of the "property" of the flat, you could say that the garage is also part of the address. Things can get very messy... Depending on the definition you

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : >> Also, the address must be unique > why? Otherwise they make bad routing targets /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org htt

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-27 10:38 GMT+02:00 Markus Lindholm : > On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > >> Also, the address must be unique > > why? > > Otherwise they make bad routing targets Maybe for ideal routing, an address is someti

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. The entrance is here: http://binged.it/1Rn0nOY but the centroid is about here: ht

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Markus Lindholm wrote: > Otherwise they make bad routing targets Complete addresses may indeed be unique, but the "housenumber" part can be and is in may countries the same for, for example all apartments in an apartment building. In other countries each apartmen

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-27 11:03 GMT+02:00 Ross : > But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then > displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as > it's centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. Yes, but more intelligent software could see

Re: [Tagging] Airport power and USB stations

On 26/05/2015 6:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 25.05.2015 um 17:18 schrieb Dave Swarthout : amenity=charging_station fee=no access=public socket:USB=yes socket:typeb=yes motor_vehicle=no There are currently only 7 socket:typeb=* in the world including the 6 I just added and a similar

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 7:33 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-05-27 11:03 GMT+02:00 Ross >: But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's centroid is not even

[Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?

I'm just curious, but what does everybody think about the 'covered=yes' tag when used on highways? I know you aren't suppose to use it when the highway goes under a bridge, but I've been noticing more people adding the tag in that case, even though the Wiki page on that tag says you shouldn't.

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Don't know if this can happen in the Australian model, but there may be multiple "visitor entrances" which are true alternatives (i.e. not one main plus one side entrance). I would hope the routing would pick the most appropriate entrance, given an ultimate destination in the middle somewhere an

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 11:59 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > Using that logic the address should be on a node at the main visitor entry > ... only visitors will need that level of detail .. regulars will make their > own way once in close proximity. no, because there are other useca

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 10:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-05-27 10:38 GMT+02:00 Markus Lindholm : >> >> On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : >> >> Also, the address must be unique >> > why? >> >> Otherwise they make bad

Re: [Tagging] Future of categories

sri, 27. svi 2015. 09:45 Daniel Koć je napisao: W dniu 26.05.2015 22:35, Tobias Knerr napisał(a): I don't understand what you mean exactly: just a service without Wikimedia data to use our own, or with a copy of Wikimedia objects (one-time or synchronized somehow maybe)? Wikibase was made as

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 01:00, Ross wrote: > Your still missing the point. > > Depending on the country, state, area the address does not necessarily > refer to the building. > > In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that > is defined by the cadastral plan. > > So those

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 08:07, Colin Smale wrote: > Martin et al., > > It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of > reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the "question" > we will never agree about the "answer" except by coincidence, and that > woul

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 08:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > > > Also, the address must be unique > > > why? > > Otherwise high risk of computer crashing Mike. @millomweb - For

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it seems > correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense really. Mike, you keep on insisting that addresses should always be put on an area and never on a

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 28 May 2015 at 00:39, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > > > > In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it > seems correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense > really. > > Mike, you keep on insis

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

> On May 16, 2015, at 10:29 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > Thanks for the post, John. > Thanks for reading ^^ > I think the problem is the tagging method. Why does there have to be two > parts to it ? beyond necessary database syntax (key=value), This is a flat vs hierarchical question. Do we

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a different town, and sometimes even a different country. What would you call the geographic address for NP16 7JU? The postal address is Chepstow. It's not