Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

2017-01-12 1:19 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout : > I honestly don't see the need for another top-level tag for this purpose. +1, IMHO we can use landuse for all kind of surface use, be it "land" or "water" or sulfuric acid, or whatever. In case of stacked "surfaces" (e.g. oysters in the water and som

Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

On 12-Jan-17 07:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2017-01-12 1:19 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout >: I honestly don't see the need for another top-level tag for this purpose. +1, IMHO we can use landuse for all kind of surface use, be it "land" or "water"

Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

On 12.01.2017 10:27, Warin wrote: On 12-Jan-17 07:55 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2017-01-12 1:19 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout: I honestly don't see the need for another top-level tag for this purpose. +1, IMHO we can use landuse for all kind of surface use, be it "land" or "water" or su

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

On 12.01.2017 02:19, Warin wrote: So I have added 3 tables to the wiki produce page; aquaculture, farm and forestry. I see no problem with defining these values. (hm, corn is AmE and should be maize for clarity and BrE). Question remains if there is a need to proactively add so many values to

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

I think Warin has put there values from taginfo, right? Yves Le 12 janvier 2017 12:10:40 GMT+01:00, Tom Pfeifer a écrit : >On 12.01.2017 02:19, Warin wrote: > >> So I have added 3 tables to the wiki produce page; aquaculture, farm >and >> forestry. > >I see no problem with defining these valu

Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

I have no problem with tagging mariculture operations with landuse=aquaculture although it is a bit odd sounding. I wonder if the key salt=yes will be sufficient (or even acceptable) to indicate when such aquaculture is occurring in the ocean? As for whether this is refining/redefining or redefini

Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?

2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : > I certainly use route relations, and since ref is only really used for the > renderer, I don’t know what I was thinking ref:forward and ref:backward > would be useful for… Tagging considerations are not "for the renderer", it's about how the world can be abstracted

Re: [Tagging] landuse=aquaculture with wateruse=aquaculture

2017-01-12 10:27 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > So .. anyone against redefining 'landuse' to include water? It is not a "redefinition", there are already some watery objects in it, for example landuse=reservoir/salt_pond and others might be under water, at least temporarily. E.g. fo

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

2017-01-11 22:40 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > And I disagree with all of them being leisure=garden. > The green patches between a road and a footway are not 'leisure' things .. > they are 'safety' things .. particularly beside busy roads. > I believe you are making this too "philos

Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?

The 2 or more relations for each variation is the way to go for Public Transport routes. Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward roles to describe both directions in one route relation. Polyglot 2017-01-12 15:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > 2017-01-12 6:40 GMT+01:00 : > >>

Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?

I was advocating forward/backward on bicycle routes, but with the appearance of so many roundabouts and one-way streets in agglomerations (at least here in Italy), I now tend to suggest the two-relations approach. Off course, the two approaches can coexist. On 12 January 2017 at 15:55, Jo wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

> Op 12 jan. 2017, om 15:17 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer > het volgende geschreven: > > 2017-01-11 22:40 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: >> Approach =the problem from 2 different ways of thinking - > >> What is the 'cover' ... landcover ? >> and then >> What is the 'use' ... landuse? >

Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?

I was considering to make a proposal for the next Google Summer of Code. Last summer I mentored the Public Transport Assistant plugin. I think it would be relatively easy to extend its functionality to foot and bicycle relations, so it becomes easier to validate and fix them. We'll see how it goes.

Re: [Tagging] ref:forward and ref:backward?

sent from a phone > On 12 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Jo wrote: > > Walking and bicycle routes use the forward and backward roles to describe > both directions in one route relation. It seemed to me that this thread was mainly about road routes where dual-carriageways are quite frequent, but also

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

sent from a phone > On 12 Jan 2017, at 16:47, Marc Zoutendijk wrote: > > I like that idea too, but why did that proposal process stop? Your original > proposal is from 2010!! And a renewed one from 2014? the proposal didn't stop, I just didn't bother to bring it to voting, as voting is mea

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

I'll agree that voting by using a tag is more important than a line on a wikipage Op 12 jan. 2017 20:33 schreef "Martin Koppenhoefer" : > > > sent from a phone > > > On 12 Jan 2017, at 16:47, Marc Zoutendijk > wrote: > > > > I like that idea too, but why did that proposal process stop? Your > or

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

Most of these values come from taginfo but in, I hope, a more organised form. The exceptions? Forestry - most of these are new additions - timber, oils and maple syrup. Cork was in taginfo and I had not thought of it, possibly it might be tagged an 'orchard'? Not checked. This is a 'new' area

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

The big problem with tagging which crops are grown in fields is that they are generally rotated, a field that grew wheat in 2016 will have something else in 2017. Crops are rotated to prevent disease, so it is tagging that will rapidly become stale. Best avoided IMHO. Just stick with farmland=ara

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

On 13-Jan-17 08:11 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: The big problem with tagging which crops are grown in fields is that they are generally rotated, a field that grew wheat in 2016 will have something else in 2017. Crops are rotated to prevent disease, so it is tagging that will rapidly become stale. U

Re: [Tagging] Added tables for values to key produce

Note! The usage rates are extremely low in taginfo for produce! However this is the time to organise them before they grow to a number that is hard to change. I have added some wikipedia links to the forestry table. Reformatted my response below so it fits a smaller screen, sorry about that.

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 12, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chris Hill wrote: > > The green spaces ( and concrete or whatever) around a road are part of the > infrastructure of a road. If someone is just mapping a road with a single way, including the sidewalk in the way's tags, I agree- But in ci

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

On 13-Jan-17 10:31 AM, John Willis wrote: Sent from my iPhone On Jan 12, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chris Hill wrote: The green spaces ( and concrete or whatever) around a road are part of the infrastructure of a road. If someone is just mapping a road with a single way, including the sidewalk in

Re: [Tagging] Wrong use of landuse=village_green - but what else to use?

Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 13, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is not the side walk administered by the same people who administer the road? A hedge is a hedge, regardless if it is planted by the road authorities, the walkway along the train station, or the walkwa