On 2017-03-07 07:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> On 03/07/2017 02:06 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
>> There are reasonable use cases for wanting to take a timezone name and
>> get back a multipolygon
>
> Question is, does (the core database of) OSM have to fulfil these use cases!
>
>> or to
This touches on a "conflict of interest" between two requirements:
(1) OSM tagging practice is to map only physically separated ways as
separate ways in OSM.
(2) A routing algorithm needs to have information about legally separated
ways, e.g. by a continuous white line.
In the specific case the ex
Hi David,
it's not (anymore) about "treated a bit unfairly",
but to avoid futher issues like that.
The automatic reply has to be misunderstood (what Martin was referring
to Mon, 6 Mar 2017 17:37:52 +0100)
and will lead to "process problems" like the current (as long as the
promised check by the "
2017-03-07 10:58 GMT+01:00 Thilo Haug :
> "own data, as an overlay" doesn't make sense to me in this case,
> as it's data the community should collect, not the transformation of
> existing data collections
> ("motorcycle friendly" web pages, as they are often randomly listing
> hotels).
> This is
Hi,
* Colin Smale [170307 09:04]:
> [..]
> It is possible to have enclaves/exclaves for a territory which differs
> from the surrounding territory. Taking the US as an example, if we put a
> timezone tag on a State, there may need to be an overriding tag on a
> County or even possibly at a City l
On 6 March 2017 at 00:30, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> you could easily build time zone
> geometries by either (a) keeping an external database that says "Time
> Zone X consists of the following administrative units" and then
> collecting the units from OSM
That database is Wikidata. make sure that th
Hi all,
this discussion has started because of me, so I would like to add few
comments:).
Should OSM contains timezone data? I think so. Some said, we should use other
sources and overlay them over OSM, but there is no direct mapping except
description in human languages, not too usable for compu
Hi all,
thanks to Martin for the clarification.
In the discussion of the (former voted) wiki entry :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:motorcycle_friendly
I referred to the definition of the German automobile club :
8X---
The German automobile club has the following criteria :
Hello all,
there's a totally different, interesting approach from Dieterdreist :
Assessment of tag
Here's an example: drying_room=yes, motorcycle_parking=yes,
motorcycle_repair_tools=yes, motorcycle_tour_tips=yes. I.E. these are 4
tags rather than one, and the drying room for instance isn't somet
Volker Schmidt wrote:
As EV routes are not managed as single entities, every route is split in
pieces managed on a country basis. I know the situation in Italy, as I am
involved in regional and national cycle routes here. EV routes are handled
by BicItalia which is part of FIAB, the "Italian Fede
I think this idea is a winner. We have geometry for the tricky cases but this
can just fall through to the administrative geometry in places such as Arizona
outside the reservations.
--
Andrew
From: Wolfgang Zenker
Sent: 07 March 2017 10:38:01
To: Tag discussio
2017-03-07 12:42 GMT+01:00 Jaroslav Kameník :
> Personally I would compromise - leave timezone relations
> where really needed (river/meridian/territorial waters/...) and change them
> to tagged A.B. otherwise.
>
>
+1
Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailin
Extra credit if we can come up with a 'universal' solution :-)
Polyglot
2017-03-07 10:44 GMT+01:00 Volker Schmidt :
> This touches on a "conflict of interest" between two requirements:
> (1) OSM tagging practice is to map only physically separated ways as
> separate ways in OSM.
> (2) A routing
2017-03-07 13:30 GMT+01:00 Thilo Haug :
> there's a totally different, interesting approach from Dieterdreist :
Thank you for the laurel, but I have to reject them, prefering the tagging
of individual aspects (many tags with clearly defined scope) rather than
aggregated conclusions (few tags t
Hi Martin,
do I need to search for "quintessence of osm" or "tagging of individual
aspects" to RTFM ? ;-)
Also in this case (such as with the email stuff)
I think it would be good to link to those "basics" in the relevant
documentation (RFC template ?)
to enable the new users to find it.
RTFM do
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> On 03/07/2017 02:06 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> > There are reasonable use cases for wanting to take a timezone name and
> > get back a multipolygon
>
> Question is, does (the core database of) OSM have to fulfil these use
> cases!
>
It at leas
On 07/03/17 20:58, Thilo Haug wrote:
...
I'm not really sure about which issue you talk in the 2nd part of your
message "not actual rules",
do you refer to my entry in the proposal about a "code of conduct" ?
...
Thilo, what I was suggesting is that you need to receive the list
mes
Well, the WIKI more or less has a sort of consensus. Yes, we do have the
divided highways ('baulicher trennung'). But there is also the consensus
that it's important to make sure the requirements for navigational devices
like OSMAND should also be met. So, if the physical point is used by a
mapper
On 07-Mar-17 10:56 PM, Thilo Haug wrote:
Hi all,
thanks to Martin for the clarification.
In the discussion of the (former voted) wiki entry :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:motorcycle_friendly
I referred to the definition of the German automobile club :
8X---
The German
On 08.03.2017 00:01, Johan C wrote:
make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should also be
met
I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem with the node being at the
physical separation, in particular if the turn:lanes are tagged
correctly. OsmAnd will give advance adv
Hi Tom,
have you ever used a PND in a car on a motorway?
Kind regards, Johan
2017-03-08 0:47 GMT+01:00 Tom Pfeifer :
> On 08.03.2017 00:01, Johan C wrote:
>
>> make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should
>> also be met
>>
>
> I don't think OsmAnd would have a problem
21 matches
Mail list logo
