Re: [Tagging] start_date variants

Hi Stephan! Yes, a relation can be made up of a relation: no problem with that, AFAIK. In your particular case, anyway, I'm afraid there is something wrong: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1937535 (name=MuseumsQuartier) is tagged as "building=yes" and also with "building:architecture=bar

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

> That was actually what I had originally proposed. My role format was > stop:+00:32, though, which is only slightly different. People in this list > noted that it would corrupt existing relation roles, so I redesigned the > proposal to have no effect on existing data. The way I think it I cannot

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

вс, 17 февр. 2019 г. в 00:11, André Pirard : > It's easy to make a script to total up all the segments of a waterway or > any way. > It will work but only if the entire river from its spring to mouth is drawn precisely enough, all relation roles are labeled properly and nobody breaks the labeling

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

On 2019-02-17 12:55, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > It will work but only if the entire river from its spring to mouth is drawn > precisely enough, all relation roles are labeled properly and nobody breaks > the labeling by intent or mistake some day. That's as old as data processing: "/garbage i

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

вс, 17 февр. 2019 г. в 15:18, Sergio Manzi : > > That's as old as data processing: "*garbage in, garbage out*". Let's > fix the data. Fixing data is a good thing but from utilization in production point of view the choice between unstable and stable data is not questioned. Competeness of data is

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

I think I know understand what usage you want to do of that "waterway length" datum (/or at  least that's what I'm reading in your last message/): use it as a "control" for checking if the waterway's segments add up to the "official" (/whatever that can mean.../) waterway length.  Or at least in

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - new tag departures=*

Voting is open for the tag departures, which states the list of departure times in a public transport route. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Public_transport_schedules/Departures Thanks, Leif Rasmussen ___ Tagging mailing list Tagg

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

On 2/16/2019 7:27 PM, Jmapb wrote: On 1/30/2019 7:21 PM, John Willis via Tagging wrote: Looking over the page for schools and  all the abandoned proposals, I assume there is some in-use tag for after-school study and test preparation type private “schools” [...] Does anyone have any experien

Re: [Tagging] start_date variants

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, 08:09 Stephan Bösch-Plepelits Do you think a relation with a multipolygon relation as member would work? > Or would it be better to duplicate the multipolygon relation? > A multipolygon can only consist of ways (with the roles outer and inner), so you need to duplicate the re

Re: [Tagging] start_date variants

On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 23:55 Sergio Manzi Then I guess the correct solution would be to not "stick" the amenity to > the building but to a new relation whose only member will be the building > itself. > + 1 > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetma

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

sent from a phone > On 15. Feb 2019, at 13:20, Tobias Wrede wrote: > > By German law you are required to use footpaths if they exists on the road. > In these examples there are no footpaths on the roads so you should be able > to use the carriageways. this is oversimplified, you are indeed

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 10:48, Jmapb wrote: > I've been tagging them as office=tutoring... can't remember whose suggestion > that was, but it seems adequate. (Only 35 hits on taginfo though.) Could > combine with tutoring=test_prep if that's the main focus. Hi John and J, In Toronto I've seen a

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

Sharps is the term used in the UK too. Phil (trigpoint) On 16 February 2019 22:37:00 GMT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 16/02/19 19:54, Markus wrote: >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 00:59 Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: >> >> >> Would =drugs also apply to sharps

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

> > it is wrongly named (distance instead of length) Has already been corrected (at least in the english wiki) > it can assume multiple different values according to different sources "length:source" can resolve this if needed. > it is unverifiable "on the ground" it is IMNSHO useless (*just p

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Education_Reform_Alternative ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

On 2/17/2019 12:30 PM, Erkin Alp Güney wrote: See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Education_Reform_Alternative Link doesn't work for me. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listin

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

This is correct: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

Hi,Wiki suggests amenity=recycling + recycling:drugs=yes/nohttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3DrecyclingIf we choose to put it under 'waste' (instead of recycling) then I suggest to copy the recycling namespace schema and use waste:drugs= yes/no (or something similar) instead of cre

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 19:07, Topographe Fou wrote: > > Wiki suggests amenity=recycling + recycling:drugs=yes/no > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Drecycling Thanks for the hint. It might be that drugs that haven't reached their expiration date are sorted out and recycled, but

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 19:05, Markus wrote: > > It might be that drugs that haven't reached their expiration date are > sorted out and recycled, but i don't think that expired drugs get > recycled as they likely get ineffective or even dangerous. > In the UK returned drugs cannot be recycled eve

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Why do you exclude tracks? Legal access to them are often denied as they're on private land (example: farms) Why ford? Why oneway? Cheers DaveF On 15/02/2019 11:50, Tobias Wrede wrote: As far as I am concerned roads that are most likely to merit a foot=no are - all highway road types excep

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Tracks are often "access=private" for everyone, so there's no reason to call out foot access in particular. -- Mark On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:27:44 + Dave F via Tagging wrote: > Why do you exclude tracks? > Legal access to them are often denied as they're on private land > (example: farms)

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Places where you are "not allowed to walk*" vary hugely from one country to another - in some places the presumption is yes unless denied, in others no unless allowed, in still others still not really defined. I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes sense; there'll be l

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

On 15/02/2019 12:20, Tobias Wrede wrote: Unfortunately, the legal situation is not always as clear as we wish to. There are a lot of grey zones and we need to apply common sense when tagging the access rules. You're undoubtedly correct. However, foot=yes/no has always represented, as stated

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

I should have been clearer. I was indicating a case where foot=no would be appropriate, but I should have stated there are also cases where 'yes' or 'designated' are required. I'm still unsure why Tobias W. thinks tracks shouldn't be queried at all yet residential roads should. Don't misunders

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 20:03, Markus wrote: > > Thanks for the hint. > > It might be that drugs that haven't reached their expiration date are > sorted out and recycled I would doubt this. Maybe somewhere, in Europe it is very unlikely, also because the expiry date is for

Re: [Tagging] Tagging "test preperation" / cram school / Juku (eg: Komon)

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 03:51, Erkin Alp Güney wrote: > This is correct: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative Any further progress with your proposal Erkin? There's at least one comment supporting the idea, & I would also like to see it introduc

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

>> Pedestrians can take the level footpaths/sidewalks instead taking the >> underpass: >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6187386#map=18/50.94224/6.95277. >> There is no signage forbidding foot traffic. >> (https://www.google.de/maps/@50.978,6.9530483,3a,60y,190.35h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 05:18, Paul Allen wrote: > > In the UK returned drugs cannot be recycled even if they have not > expired. There are safety > issues to do with tampering. > Same thing applies in Australia, even if the original seals haven't yet been broken. Thanks Graeme ___

Re: [Tagging] Medicine Disposal

On 2019-02-17 20:17, Paul Allen wrote: > In the UK returned drugs cannot be recycled even if they have not expired. > There are safety > issues to do with tampering. And the fact that you don't know how/where they have been stored.___ Tagging mailing

[Tagging] Sharps / syringe disposal

Carrying on from where it was raised under Medicine Disposal On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 18:56, Markus wrote: > On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 00:59 Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > >> >> Would =drugs also apply to sharps bins for needle disposal? >> >> I would think they should have their own tag? (or is there o

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Am 17.02.2019 um 21:57 schrieb Dave F via Tagging: I should have been clearer. I was indicating a case where foot=no would be appropriate, but I should have stated there are also cases where 'yes' or 'designated' are required. I'm still unsure why Tobias W. thinks tracks shouldn't be queried at

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 22:39, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > No, that tag is correct. It is not allowed to walk in the tunnel, > because the tunnel is still part of the street Tunisstraße, which has a > sidewalk. See StVO §25 (1) > https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/__25.ht

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Am 17.02.2019 um 20:44 schrieb Andy Townsend: I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes sense; there'll be lots of countries where it'd be silly. I don't think the app "encourages" anything. In this quest the app merely speculates that the sidewalk=none could maybe warra

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Am 15.02.2019 um 17:09 schrieb Hubert87: why not use foot=use_sidepath and/or sidewalk=no? In combination with hw=primary/secondary, routers should be able to work out that that route is a bad one. Well, not all foot=no roads do have a sidepath. And anyway this discussion is on whether the

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Am 17.02.2019 um 17:45 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: this is oversimplified, you are indeed legally required to walk on the road even in the presence of sidewalks: if carrying big loads. Sure there are exceptions to every rule. We usually don't map that. When there is no signage, foot=no is inc

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:35, Tobias Wrede wrote: > > We also need to apply common sense when mapping. yes. Although common sense is not a criterion for legal access. This is either allowed or forbidden, and unless it is forbidden, access is by default allowed on roads.

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:49, Tobias Wrede wrote: > > Exactly, but how should the router know that? highway=* tunnel=yes sidewalk=no and a significant length Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

sent from a phone On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:49, Tobias Wrede wrote: >> this is oversimplified, you are indeed legally required to walk on the road >> even in the presence of sidewalks: if carrying big loads. > > Sure there are exceptions to every rule. We usually don't map that. I did not mea

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object. Sidewalk has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate legality. On 17/02/2019 22:29, Tobias Wrede wrote: Am 17.02.2019 um 20:44 schrieb Andy Townsend: I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

I'm afraid countries differ with respect to legal imlications of sidewalk. This discussion, I've seen it 5 times now ande it never ends with consensus. It never ends at all. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op ma 18 feb. 2019 om 00:49 schreef Dave F via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > As already st

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

True. Primarily because there's a false conflation of meanings, such as yours. That there are laws in certain countries around the world is irrelevant. *Within* OSM that tag has no legality implied. A different tag would be required to map what you suggest. Cheers DaveF. On 18/02/2019 00:30,

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 18:07, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > highway=* > tunnel=yes > sidewalk=no > and a significant length +1 on this. I would expect a pedestrian router to apply a scoring penalty to highways with sidewalk=no or sidewalk=separate, and with the help of this scoring choose the foot

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

On 2019-02-17 12:55, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: вс, 17 февр. 2019 г. в 00:11, André Pirard >: It's easy to make a script to total up all the segments of a waterway or any way. It will work but only if the entire river from its spring to mouth is drawn p

Re: [Tagging] Waterway length

On 2019-02-16 23:00, Markus wrote: On Sat, 16 Feb 2019, 20:06 Eugene Podshivalov wrote: What is the best way to correct this, so that all other langauge pages got the correction as well? I'm not aware of any other way than correcting it on each page. I've j

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

>> We also need to apply common sense when mapping. > > >yes. Although common sense is not a criterion for legal access. This is >either allowed or forbidden, and unless it is forbidden, access is by >default allowed on roads. I fear common sense in fact somehow IS a legal criterion. Lawyers a