sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 07:57 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>
> herbal
there's also a tag shop=herbalist
cheers
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> Is there a reason for using the key "azimuth" instead of "direction"?
is there a good reason to use "direction" for the azimuth? The word suggests to
mean a combination of azimuth and altitude but the suggested values indicate to
mean azimuth.
cheers
Martin
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 00:58 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen :
>
> Many mappers don't want to input all those types using many keys because
> of increased effort that slows down useful mapping
it doesn't matter with presets as they can set several tags at the same time,
but I'd generall
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 00:55 schrieb Daniel Koć :
>
> landcover=trees has no Wiki page,
it does
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover
> it's quite established tag (I wouldn't say "popular" here, because it's just
> about 1% of forest/wood uses) and
What we have is a mess. Most data consumers will simplify it to meet their
needs.
About the only useful high-level distinction is between well-made paths,
typically in an urban environment, which clearly have been built with the
intention that they be used by someone, and poorly-made paths (mostly
Hi all,
Le 3 août 2015 06:11, "Tim Waters" a écrit :
>
> Is the idea to have a network map of an enclosed local loop? Is a loop
> a mappable thing in its own right and if so do you think that a local
> loop be represented as a relation perhaps?
The idea is to map some components of such local lo
landcover=trees has it's origins in this proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover
The proposal wanted to seperate the phsyical landscape (landcover) from the
cultural landscape (landuse). But the proposal never got the support it
needed to get established.
cheers He
On 02/08/2015 22:10, Tim Waters wrote:
Is a loop
a mappable thing
In the telecom context, "loop" is a synonym for "circuit", i.e. a pair
of wires, twisted together and is always a point-to-point connection
(linear (non-closed) way in OSM mapping).
__
christian.pietz...@googlemail.com wrote on 2015-08-03 09:20:
landcover=trees has it's origins in this proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landcover
The proposal wanted to seperate the phsyical landscape (landcover) from the
cultural landscape (landuse).
> But the pro
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 11:07 schrieb Richard Mann
> :
>
> So lets at least have a clear difference between a plain highway=footway and
> a plain highway=path
there is, a path is generic while a footway is for pedestrians
cheers
Martin
__
On 3 August 2015 at 10:34, Malcolm Herring
wrote:
> On 02/08/2015 22:10, Tim Waters wrote:
>>
>> Is a loop
>> a mappable thing
>
>
> In the telecom context, "loop" is a synonym for "circuit", i.e. a pair of
> wires, twisted together and is always a point-to-point connection (linear
> (non-closed)
> On Aug 3, 2015, at 6:07 PM, Richard Mann
> wrote:
>
> highway=path should be a rough path
> highway=footway should be a made-up path with limited room for non-foot
> traffic (eg bicycles), or an explicit ban
> highway=cycleway should be a made-up path with good room for bicycles (given
> ot
No, that isn't a difference. If path is generic then footway is a subset of
path.
It's this idea, that we need a vague generic basket for smaller highways
that has created all this confusion. It amounts to saying: put in a vague
tag and then add others to clarify. That isn't how people use tags in
On 3/08/2015 8:22 PM, Tim Waters wrote:
On 3 August 2015 at 10:34, Malcolm Herring
wrote:
On 02/08/2015 22:10, Tim Waters wrote:
Is a loop
a mappable thing
In the telecom context, "loop" is a synonym for "circuit",
e.g.
a pair of
wires, twisted together and is always a point-to-point c
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 12:30 schrieb johnw :
>
> From all the history, it looks like path was made to show some kind of mixed
> use way that footway was not good at - for mapping useful but unpaved and
> irregular pathways - trails, tracks, etc. A guy was pushing for this as
>
I created
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/*%3Ddepot intended
as alternative to landuse=depot that I consider as really bad tagging
scheme.
27 basic landuses is more than enough and introducing more is
not useful.
___
Tagging mailing
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 14:15 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny :
>
> I created
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/*%3Ddepot intended
> as alternative to landuse=depot that I consider as really bad tagging
> scheme.
I agree with you, but suggest to make that vehicle_d
-1.
Using that kind of definition would require to redefine the standard access
restrictions or would require to always use access-tags. Plus it
characterizations depends mostly on subjective impressions, as Martin already
stated. Also ways accessible by foot are nearly always accessible by bic
On 03/08/2015 11:30, johnw wrote:
From all the history, it looks like path was made to show some kind of
mixed use way that footway was not good at - for mapping useful but
unpaved and irregular pathways - trails, tracks, etc. A guy was
pushing for this as useful for horses, I think.
My
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:30:09 +0900
johnw wrote:
> I DO NOT WANT path & footway merged - we need to be able to show
> rough/informal paths.
The problem is that distinction of highway=path and highway=footway is
meaningless, like with natural=wood vs landuse=forest as it varies
from location to lo
sent from a phone
> Am 03.08.2015 um 17:41 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny :
>
> Changing definitions now is pointless - who is going to resurvey and
> verify over 9 million highway=path/footway ways to ensure that it will
> fit new definition?
+1
for informal paths there is the informal=yes attrib
I think the highway=trail proposal was right on the point.
highway=path was meant as equivalent to footway, cycleway etc and is most
often used that way. It's wording is unfortunate as the association with
path for many people is an unmade way. So it got mistakenly used for that
too, as there is
What is the point of quoting someone else without adding any additional
comment?
--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot
drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
On August 1, 2015 5:04:44 P
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 11:36:15 -0700 (MST)
NopMap wrote:
>
> I think the highway=trail proposal was right on the point.
>
> highway=path was meant as equivalent to footway, cycleway etc and is
> most often used that way. It's wording is unfortunate as the
> association with path for many people is
Did anyone else see this message as containing only headers, but no message
contents? That is how it rendered on my system.
--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot
drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luthe
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 02:35:28PM -0500, John Eldredge wrote:
> Did anyone else see this message as containing only headers, but no message
> contents? That is how it rendered on my system.
Same here. Presumably finger trouble?
ael
___
Tagging mailing
> On Aug 4, 2015, at 12:41 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> The problem is that distinction of highway=path and highway=footway is
> meaningless,
I have a ton of sidewalks to map and a ton of dirt trails in the mountains
informal cut-throughs in the grass to map. the distinction is very clea
I'm not sure what's the way to reply this, sorry about that...
- Martin Koppenhoefer: "there's also a tag shop=herbalist" but i think
is not the best tag for this, because the supplements can be or can't be
herbs and herbalist definition: Shop focused on selling herbs, often for
medica
On 4/08/2015 1:41 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:30:09 +0900
johnw wrote:
I DO NOT WANT path & footway merged - we need to be able to show
rough/informal paths.
The problem is that distinction of highway=path and highway=footway is
meaningless, like with natural=wood vs l
On 3/08/2015 5:25 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
Am 03.08.2015 um 07:57 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
herbal
there's also a tag shop=herbalist
Missed that one! :-)
Alberto .. I think you should
change the 'definition' in your proposal to match the change you
30 matches
Mail list logo
