Re: [Tagging] Emergency=levee_breach_materials

Do these have anything to identify them, like a ref? 3 words for a key seems like a mouthful to me, maybe emergency=levee_repair/materials. Ant 21.09.2018, в 0:59, John Willis написал(а): > I ran into an interesting thing when mapping my local rivers. > > All of the rivers in my area have le

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

On 20/09/18 22:53, Warin wrote: On 20/09/18 21:53, EthnicFood IsGreat wrote: From: Jonathon Rossi To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Subject: Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thanks everyone. Apologie

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations

On 21.09.2018 03:23, Mike H wrote: I've only mapped one station like this so far, but the area is actually rendered on the map. Yes police and firestation areas are rendered for a while this year in osm-carto, with the same colour as military but without the hatching. Thus I don't understand

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

Le ven. 21 sept. 2018 à 09:17, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Ok .. thinking on it, if the word 'sewer' is confusing for 'native' > English speakers (and dictionaries) it may be best avoided within OSM. > So what word/s to use? > I would think storm_water and waste_water or stormwater

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

How about ambulance stations? Should we tag the area with emergency=ambulance_station and the building with building=ambulance_station? dktue Am 21.09.2018 um 03:23 schrieb Mike H: I've only mapped one station like this so far, but the area is actually rendered on the map. https://www.openst

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

What about landuse=ambulance_station on the area? What would the landuse be otherwise? Asking for a friend... On 2018-09-21 10:47, dktue wrote: > How about ambulance stations? > > Should we tag the area with emergency=ambulance_station and the building with > building=ambulance_station? > >

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

It depends as some ambulance_station are located inside the hospital campus, some other are "external services" and are only a sort of "depot" like for taxi or buses. Personaly, I don't think landuse is a good tag for that. Why not an amenity tag like everything else ? (amenity=ambulance_station to

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

I’m not sure I understand why it would be a landuse instead of an amenity tag on the area, or the other way round? Are landuses supposed to be for larger areas? > 21 сент. 2018 г., в 9:58, Colin Smale написал(а): > > What about landuse=ambulance_station on the area? What would the landuse be

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

I personally think that     amenity=ambulance_station + building=ambulance_station would work well and fit in the schema we're using for     * schools     * hospitals     * fire stations but: it's not amenity=ambulance_station we're using at the moment. We're using emergency=ambulance_station

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

There is a parallel discussion going on about landuse=civil_administration which might include smaller areas for individual government offices. Just wondering if an ambulance station (or fire station or police station for that matter) might be analogous. I believe that landuse tagging should be m

Re: [Tagging] Emergency=levee_breach_materials

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 4:09 PM, Anton Klim wrote: > > Do these have anything to identify them, like a ref I cannot find an official name or ref - but I can see their purpose. The next time I am on a cycling survey, I will take a picture of any small plaques they usually put somewhere on a ma

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 6:17 PM, Anton Klim wrote: > > I’m not sure I understand why it would be a landuse instead of an amenity tag > on the area, or the other way round? Are landuses supposed to be for larger > areas? landuse areas can be as small as the land for housing plot, a factory buil

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 6:29 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > > There is a parallel discussion going on about landuse=civil_administration > which might include smaller areas for individual government offices In my original landuse=Civic proposal, I included all Civic buildings. Later, I split off th

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 7:47 PM, John Willis wrote: > > Landuse primarily for *services* for the public: libraries, community halls, > fire stations, police stations, etc. I messed up: civic_saftey for all manner of Saftey services. Ambulances, fire, police, ranger, lifeguard, and other public

Re: [Tagging] RFC - landcover clearing

I am not sure why landcover=clearing is described as better than other. If someone wants to leave gixme, the fixme key or OSM note is the best solution. 6. Aug 2018 02:11 by 61sundow...@gmail.com :   > and stop land covers becoming regarded as a legitimate us

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

sent from a phone > On 21. Sep 2018, at 11:17, Anton Klim wrote: > > Are landuses supposed to be for larger areas? landuse is a property of the land more than an actual feature. It doesn’t matter if you cut a landuse in 2 parts, it has the same meaning. cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

sent from a phone > On 21. Sep 2018, at 11:28, dktue wrote: > > but: it's not amenity=ambulance_station we're using at the moment. We're > using emergency=ambulance_station -- so: How do we solve this? I’m not sure what an ambulance station is, but not all of the features I have in mind (a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Free drinking water by private entities

sent from a phone > On 20. Sep 2018, at 03:30, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > I see that the suggestions about "free refills" are included here because > there was some confusion about the use of "free_refill=yes" in central > Europe. The English word "refill" implies that it is the second t

[Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - assembly_point:purpose

Link of the proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/assembly_point:purpose . Hi, I propose to add the tag key assembly_point:purpose to specify which emergency an emergency=assembly_point is designed for. Possible values would be fire, tzunami, earthquake, tornado, etc. Ki

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

On 9/20/18 9:54 PM, SelfishSeahorse wrote: On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 11:20, egil wrote: I tend to agree with Colins arguments below, because in Sweden gov. agencies are very mixed into the central spaces of cities but often not clustered together in large complexes or whole areas. Just because

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

Hi, This is the e-mail I started writing 3 weeks ago and that was commented before being sent ! On 2018-08-24 13:58, joost schouppe wrote: Hi, The cadastral plan is now open data for the entire country! Thanks a lot for the info Joost. But there is a *BIG WARNING*.* *PLEASE *DO NOT* use the

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - assembly_point:purpose

Problem: most assembly points are multi-purpose around here. At least fire and earthquake. And they are not marked with a purpose. On Fri, 21 Sep 2018, 17:15 Daniele Santini, wrote: > Link of the proposal: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/assembly_point:purpose > . > > Hi

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 21:26, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > The landuse also is perhaps better in that it's a more appropriate tag > for 'government' facilities such as a highway maintenance garage IMHO landuse is never a good tag for a feature (or facility). We can have landuse

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

sent from a phone > On 20. Sep 2018, at 04:57, John Willis wrote: > > I wholeheartedly believe the decision to use commercial for Civic buildings > was wrong, and came from an adversity to making enough new landuse values at > the start. I want to correct that. I support this. IMHO it ste

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

sent from a phone > On 20. Sep 2018, at 08:25, Andy Townsend wrote: > > In your part of the world, perhaps. Elsewhere, this isn't guaranteed to be > the case. Certainly here in the UK many formerly "civic" services have been > privatised and are run for out-and-out commercial gain; you

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

sent from a phone > On 21. Sep 2018, at 03:59, John Willis wrote: > > Similar with religious schools. My buddhist school is operated by a > “business” representing the temple. > > the school is a school, operator=[temple business]. the important tags here are “religion” and “denominatio

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

sent from a phone > On 21. Sep 2018, at 21:32, André Pirard wrote: > > The whole cadastral map is offset by that 7m. > ... > > Picture 3: So, I dragged his parcel right onto the wall. > And now it's correctly located, aligned with the fencing all around. how did you know which source was of

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - assembly_point:purpose

> On Sep 22, 2018, at 5:17 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > Problem: most assembly points are multi-purpose around here. At least fire > and earthquake. And they are not marked with a purpose. Very true - I think most people assume an assembly point is "safe", as the location is chosen becaus

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

> On Sep 22, 2018, at 6:07 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > the important tags here are “religion” and “denomination”, Yep, those are useful, but it doesn't state that they are "operated" by a specific group (the specific temple down the street) - just what is the religion/denomination

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - assembly_point:purpose

On 22/09/18 07:42, John Willis wrote: On Sep 22, 2018, at 5:17 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: Problem: most assembly points are multi-purpose around here. At least fire and earthquake. And they are not marked with a purpose. Very true - I think most people assume an assembly point is "safe", as

Re: [Tagging] Area of Firestations / Area of Ambulancestations

On 21/09/18 23:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 21. Sep 2018, at 11:28, dktue wrote: but: it's not amenity=ambulance_station we're using at the moment. We're using emergency=ambulance_station -- so: How do we solve this? I’m not sure what an ambulance station is, but no

Re: [Tagging] RFC - landcover clearing

On 21/09/18 23:16, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: I am not sure why landcover=clearing is described as better than other. If someone wants to leave gixme, the fixme key or OSM note is the best solution. Best solution for what? This started because a group wanted to map clearings from imagery. Why

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 21:16, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > This is a good argument against tagging an explicit maxspeed=X when > there is actually no speed limit sign around (X is what the OSM mapper > by his knowledge about the law thinks should be the default limit here). every

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

André, i don't really see your point with the argument you made about cadastre data. i don't know of anybody looking to use this data to add building into OSM. It is outdated data regarding buildings and roads in a lot of different place in Belgium. And as, the people at cadastre are not the source

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 22:09, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > This is France though. The abutters-key would only need to be used in > the United States in order to infer the default speed limits as only > there, a difference is made between residence districts and business > districts

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

On 2018-09-21 23:22, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 21. Sep 2018, at 21:32, André Pirard > wrote: The whole cadastral map is offset by that 7m. ... *Picture 3:* So, I dragged his parcel right onto the wall. And now it's correctly located, al

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

sent from a phone > On 19. Sep 2018, at 22:12, Jérôme Seigneuret > wrote: > > highway:legal_type=urban or highway:legal_type:FR=agglomération I agree with the idea but would use a different tag, something like highway:zone=urban (or whatever you need to distinguish). “legal_type” can mea

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 6:05 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 19. Sep 2018, at 21:16, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > > > This is a good argument against tagging an explicit maxspeed=X when > > there is actually no speed limit sign around (X is what the OSM mapper > > by hi

Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream

Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 10:13:41 +0200 From: François Lacombe To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Subject: Re: [Tagging] Stormwater outlet into stream Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Le ven. 21 sept. 2018 à 09:17, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

sent from a phone > On 22. Sep 2018, at 01:18, André Pirard wrote: > > In Beijing, it was Google Maps that moved. > Satellites (several if I recall) were showing OSM in the right place. here is some information about the coordinate processing and geodata in general in China: https://en.m.wi

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] cadastral plan now open data

On 2018-09-22 01:08, Lionel Giard wrote: André, i don't really see your point with the argument you made about cadastre data. i don't know of anybody looking to use this data to add building into OSM. It is outdated data regarding buildings and roads in a lot of different place in Belgium. And

Re: [Tagging] landuse for government offices ?

sent from a phone > On 22. Sep 2018, at 00:18, John Willis wrote: > > Yep, those are useful, but it doesn't state that they are "operated" by a > specific group (the specific temple down the street) - just what is the > religion/denomination is practiced there. if these are added to a scho