sent from a phone
> On 13. Jun 2019, at 04:59, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There are a few uses of lanes=0... I would think these are errors. Even if
> unmarked a road would have at least one lane otherwise it is not really a
> road.
according to the current definition requirin
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 02:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Usually they won't be used for residential purposes .. unless they have
> been demolished.
>
Around here a LOT of farms have converted at least one outbuilding to a
holiday cottage.
Most are still working farms. In some cases
On 13/06/19 17:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 13. Jun 2019, at 04:59, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
There are a few uses of lanes=0... I would think these are errors. Even if
unmarked a road would have at least one lane otherwise it is not really a road.
accordi
>
> Personally I would prefer a more inclusive definition which requires for
> lanes to be recognizable, which could be either through lane markings or
> through traffic observation (if the vehicles drive in two lanes it is a
> 2-lane road also in absence of road markings).
>
> Cheers, Martin
>
> Here, legally, if there are no lane makings then it is considered to have one
> lane in either direction.
I am kind of a fan of lanes=0, denoting that there are no marked lanes. Here is
why:
a. if a road with no lane marking is tagged as lanes=2, this situation cannot
be distinguished from a
At some point diapers need to be changed...
Polyglot
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 6:44 PM Valor Naram wrote:
> Oh thanks. Corrected it
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:changing_table and I also
> notified all downstream users that this feature replaces Key:diaper
>
> On Wed, 2019-06-12 at 1
On 13/06/19 18:41, Tobias Zwick wrote:
Here, legally, if there are no lane makings then it is considered to have one
lane in either direction.
I am kind of a fan of lanes=0, denoting that there are no marked lanes. Here is
why:
a. if a road with no lane marking is tagged as lanes=2, this situ
I noticed after checking these photos that i should add those tunnels to
OSM.
https://www.dnoticias.pt/madeira/obra-brutal-pronta-antes-das-eleicoes-XL4872088
https://funchalnoticias.net/2019/06/07/veja-como-esta-a-ficar-o-falso-tunel-da-pestana-junior-arquiteto-paulo-david-colaborou-na-solucao-e
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 08:09:26PM +1000, Warin wrote:
> On 13/06/19 18:41, Tobias Zwick wrote:
>
> I think a tag to say "lane:marking=no" could be better for that situation???
>
> lanes=* says the number of lanes, it does not say if they are marked or
> unmarked as demonstrated above.
+1
It h
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 5:10 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Now, my argumentation is in favour of making a distinction between
> unmarked and marked but not explicitly for lanes=0. I wouldn't mind or even
> slightly favor a tag like nolanes=yes or similar - this would be even more
>
> I think a tag to say "lane:marking=no" could be better for that situation???
1. or lanes:marked=no? (mark_ed_ instead of mark_ing_)
Would be (more) consistent with the naming of opening_hours:signed,
collection_times:signed, (1k-2k usages each)
2. or nolanes=yes?
Would be consistent with non
A carriageway can have lanes or not.
A lane is a part of a carriageway with visual markings.
In Dutch law we have.
rijbaan = roadway = fahrbahn
and with visual marking, we have
rijstrook = lane = fahrstreifen
If there are no visual markings, there are no rijstroken / fahrstreifen /
lanes.
A tw
lanes, at least around here, can be nebulous and variable. Most
hardtop/asphalt roads are 2-lanes (1 in each direction). Graded
limerock roads are unmarked in any way, and usually capable of two
vehicle squeezing past one another, except on a day like today. There
is so much accumulated water that
Le 11.06.19 à 01:19, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit :
> There is currently 267 key & tags on OSM wiki with mismatching STATUS
> field, as seen in http://tinyurl.com/y62j5m5e
I have fixed some of them in the key page
but items doesn't have a auto-update :)
so it's hard to follow the status with the query.
Le 11.06.19 à 22:06, Violaine_Do a écrit :
> boundary=refugee see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Refugee_Camp_Boundaries
I agree with a boundary= because
boundary=administrative is wrong when it'sn't a administrative boundary
but it's the same issue with admin_level, u
On Thu, 2019-06-13 at 12:46 +0100, ael via Tagging wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 08:09:26PM +1000, Warin wrote:
> > On 13/06/19 18:41, Tobias Zwick wrote:
> >
> > I think a tag to say "lane:marking=no" could be better for that
> > situation???
> >
> > lanes=* says the number of lanes, it does
Le 11.06.19 à 09:31, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
>> On 11. Jun 2019, at 01:41, Paul Allen wrote:
>>
>> I'd be inclined to leave "in use" as a German synonym for "de facto" unless
>> people who have German as a first language say that "de facto" would be
>> acceptable.
> maybe there are nuances
AFAIK, these are functionally similar to avalanche protection tunnels. Most of
the "open" sided tunnels I see in Japan are dual purpose - if it's steep enough
for an avalanche, it's steep enough for rocks falling on cars to be an issue.
I would use the avalanche protection tag, as it properly d
> On Jun 13, 2019, at 4:22 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Conversion of farm buildings to residential buildings is not only possible,
> it's frequent in
> some parts of the world.
Very true, but even a house or cottage inside a working farmyard would still be
on a landuse mapped as a farmyard. Th
Just had a look & the wiki does actually say " Their purpose is to protect
the highway or railway from avalanches and landslides" so that will be fine.
Thanks
Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/list
20 matches
Mail list logo
