Re: [Tagging] RFC: emergency=dry_riser_inlet

sent from a phone > On 6. Apr 2017, at 07:42, Yves wrote: > > However they are water pipes for fire emergency , so I'd prefer > fire_water_inlet to keep it simple for casual mappers and have a chance for > the tag to be found in the wiki. I have added a lot of related terms so it should be

[Tagging] message=*

Hello, To launch discussion on the message tag which can be associated with advertising tag I created this page some time ago. In fac

Re: [Tagging] message=*

2017-04-06 10:18 GMT+02:00 Paul Desgranges : > Hello, > To launch discussion on the message tag > which can be associated > with advertising tag > > I created this page

Re: [Tagging] message=*

On 06-Apr-17 06:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2017-04-06 10:18 GMT+02:00 Paul Desgranges >: Hello, To launch discussion on the message tag which can be associated with advertising tag

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Power pole extension

I am extending the voting for one more week, until April 11. There are still 4 votes, and about 4 or more votes are needed. While there are many approves, a few or more is still needed. Link to voting for power pole extension: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_pole_extens

Re: [Tagging] message=*

2017-04-06 13:19 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > And the 'advertising' has a few problems too ... why 'size'? Why not just > use the existing height and with keys? indeed, the original proposal had no mention of "size": https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/advertisi

Re: [Tagging] message=*

2017-04-06 13:36 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > while the key:height page defines the height now as "height above ground" > while before it was defined as "height of the feature". How can it be that > such fundamental changes pass without discussion? I have restored the original, longstandin

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On 05.04.2017 23:42, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane this way routing engines will regard them as separate roads and stop trying to get

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On 2017-04-06 14:33, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 05.04.2017 23:42, Kevin Kenny wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >> Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane >> >> this way routing engines will

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

2017-04-06 0:29 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer : > Do _not_. Separate ways are used when the roads are physically separated, > not when a white line is painted. Lane mapping would get you reverted. > +1 if you map lanes as carriageways, as lot of stuff breaks, e.g. routing for emergency situations or ped

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bus bay

Dear all, I have made a proposal of bus bay: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/bus_bay#Tagging A bus bay must be a bay outside the main carriageway (not included in lane count) and not physically separated. It does not matter whether a bus stop is placed at the bus bay or n

Re: [Tagging] Tagging 'advance' turn restrictions

On Thursday 06 April 2017 00:29:49 Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 05.04.2017 23:19, Warin wrote: > > Where the solid lines start have a separate way for each lane > > Do _not_. Separate ways are used when the roads are physically separated, > not when a white line is painted. Lane mapping would get you r

Re: [Tagging] message=*

If "height" is "height of the feature" and not "height above ground", not a problem but how can we store this second height "height above ground" ? For example for an advertising device , the display surface of the advertising is supported by legs, then we need to distinguish the height of the

Re: [Tagging] message=*

2017-04-06 18:35 GMT+02:00 Paul Desgranges : > If "height" is "height of the feature" and not "height above ground", not > a problem but how can we store this second height "height above ground" ? > For example for an advertising device , the display surface of the > advertising is supported by le

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bus bay

2017-04-06 16:04 GMT+02:00 Michael Tsang : > Dear all, > > I have made a proposal of bus bay: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/bus_bay#Tagging > > A bus bay must be a bay outside the main carriageway (not included in lane > count) and not physically separated. It does not

Re: [Tagging] message=*

The idea of the "size " attribute was to provide the length*height*width of the advertising device itself (without the support), while the "height" attribute of the advertising device gave the total height ("height above ground") of the advertisin

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bus bay

On 06.04.2017 19:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: why do you define this as a node? bus_bay=right or left does not make sense on a node, and bus bays have a certain length anyway, I'd make it a way. It should not be a separate way if there is no physical separation. But I agree a node is not a g

[Tagging] "Neutral" language for objects in international areas

Which is the most appropiated/neutral language for international objects? (outside countries, in ocean, etc) For example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47301187 When I first created the Point Nemo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Oceanic_pole_of_inaccessibility obje

Re: [Tagging] "Neutral" language for objects in international areas

Use name:en for English, name:fr for French and so on. No "name" tag. Map renderer will pick up the right one. See the map of openstreetmap.de on how this can be done. Stephan On April 7, 2017 3:26:15 AM GMT+07:00, "Nelson A. de Oliveira" wrote: >Which is the most appropiated/neutral lang

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bus bay

On Thursday 06 April 2017 21:42:15 Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 06.04.2017 19:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > why do you define this as a node? bus_bay=right or left does not make > > sense on a node, and bus bays have a certain length anyway, I'd make it > > a way. > > It should not be a separate

Re: [Tagging] "Neutral" language for objects in international areas

I would suggest that in addition to the specific language tags (name:[]=) that the name= tag follow the multilingual convention https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names Esperanto / English / French / other On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote: > Use name:en for Eng