Re: [Tagging] Christmas shop

It’s fine to make up new values in the “shop” key, so “shop=christmas” would work: already used 14 times. I think party shops are different. On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 3:51 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Just mapping a Christmas shop https://christmasshack.com.au/, which, as > the name suggests!,

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: > 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. > It suggests itself. > Added, with link back to this post Here that would be called "maxi

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. It suggests itself. Added, with link back to thi

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: > On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: > > On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: > 1.1 At the examples: for max empty weight, I propose the key maxemptyweight. > It sugges

[Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

Some cases of lit=yes are clear (direct lighting of street/footway by lamps) Some cases of lit=no are clear (no lighting whatsoever) But in cities there is also often strong or weak ambient light, for example: - carriageway is directly lit with so powerful light that spillover light makes footwa

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

What problem are you trying to fix here? Usually it is pretty obvious if a street has artificial lighting or not. Instead of creating artificial boundaries quantising shades of grey into black and white, why not make it more objective and record the light level in lux on the centre line of the road

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

What I couldsee work would be to have additional lit=* values like lit=weak or lit=spillover or lit=10lux From: Mateusz Konieczny Sent: Samstag, 6. Juli 2019 12:26 To: Tagging Subject: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold Some cases of lit=yes are clear (direct lighting of street/footway by lamps) So

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better because it is easier to understand what it means for non native speakers (simpler word). In the US, "empty" seems to be most commonly used, as it is als

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

Unladen is certainly the used, and understood, way of expressing such restrictions in the UK. https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained Phil (trigpoint) On Saturday, 6 July 2019, Tobias Zwick wrote: > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? > Even if "unladen" is

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 06/07/19 19:46, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 3 Jul 2019, 12:52 by o...@westnordost.de: 1.1 At the examples: for max empty

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On Saturday, 6 July 2019, Warin wrote: > On 06/07/19 19:46, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > On 2019-07-06 10:48, Warin wrote: > > > >> On 06/07/19 18:16, Colin Smale wrote: > >>> > >>> On 2019-07-06 05:03, Warin wrote: > >>> > >>> On 05/07/19 19:33, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >>> > >>> 3 J

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

On 06/07/19 20:47, Ferdinand Schicke wrote: What I couldsee work would be to have additional lit=* values like lit=weak or lit=spillover or lit=10lux I tired to use my mobile phone to gauge the amount of night light .. it did not work very well at all! lit=weak is too subjective. I too

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

6 Jul 2019, 12:35 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > What problem are you trying to fix here? Usually it is pretty obvious if a > street has artificial lighting or not. > > Unclear desired tagging for footways lit by spillover lighting. As I mentioned it is usually obvious but there are cases where

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:26, Philip Barnes wrote: > Unladen is certainly the used, and understood, way of expressing such > restrictions in the UK. > > https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-weights-explained > > Off topic, and not your fault, but that is an explanation that isn't entirely free from ambiguit

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 2019-07-06 12:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/24/made > Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better > because it is easier to understand what

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

>Unladen weight is used in European countries to apply only to goods >vehicles, either 3.5t or 7.5t, and is tagged as hgv=no/destination. Are you absolutely sure about this? I am pretty sure myself that hgv are defined differently: as goods vehicles with a "gross vehicle weight rating" (gvwr), a

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:42, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: It is not feasible to do for a typical mapper to record "light level in > lux". > Sadly, however, it is the only objective way of specifying the light level. And even then, it's easy to do it wrong if you don't account for the angle of incid

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

> I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise I think that your suggestions would make the definition actually less precise because they add a fair level of subjectiveness: "necessary to bring your own light" The least subjective definition is to map the physical presence of street

Re: [Tagging] Use bbq=yes/no or barbecue_grill=yes/no with campsites?

One caravan park I am familiar with has three types: basic picnic tables where you can provide your own mini grill, some fixed on a post grills, and a single large motorized rotating spit type grill. On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 2:43 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 16:27, Joseph

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 12:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > So "unladen" is the word used in UK legislation? Do you have a link? > Even if "unladen" is most commonly used in UK, I still find "empty" better > because it is easier to understand what it means for non native speakers >

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:00, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > I am pretty sure myself that hgv are defined differently: as goods vehicles > with a "gross vehicle weight rating" (gvwr), a.k.a. "gross vehicle mass" > (gvm) or plainly said maximum laden weight above 3.5t +1 no idea ho

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 12:35, Colin Smale wrote: > > Instead of creating artificial boundaries quantising shades of grey into > black and white, why not make it more objective and record the light level in > lux on the centre line of the road? Or would it be better to do that

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:07, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > The least subjective definition is to map the physical presence of street > lanterns on the way, not the light they emit. (This definition (though) would > mean that a footway close to a lit street would be mapped as unlit

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

I'd like to vote on the proposal for waterway=tidal_channel soon If you haven't read the page yet, please check and add any comments or bring up any problems that might have been missed. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel "Definition:A natural

Re: [Tagging] Use bbq=yes/no or barbecue_grill=yes/no with campsites?

Re: > basic picnic tables where you can provide your own mini grill It looks like we can propose "bring_own_bbq=yes" for that situation Re: > some fixed on a post grills Do you think this should be "bbq=yes" or "barbecue_grill=yes"? -Joseph On 7/6/19, Nita S. wrote: > One caravan park I am fa

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

Floating restaurants, hotels and event halls are pretty common in Budapest. Some fancy ones even offer budget daily lunch menus. https://www.a38.hu/en If we interpreted the intention, semantics and usage patters of building=* in OSM, we could use something like building=boat, building=caravan or

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

Hi Joseph, Thank you for having relevantly chosen a different word from canal. One question, which doesn't necessarily imply error on the current version of the proposal How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in the tagging? Should we use intermittent=yes and dire

[Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

Hi Unsure if these validation warnings on uploading a changeset in JOSM are new or I've never noticed them before: >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, use highway=path"     This is incorrect. A cycleway tag can be used on a shared path, one which can

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

In many parts of Hungary, vegetation can overshadow street lights, especially if they are placed high enough. They may make efforts to protect roads against this, but they rarely consider footways. Hence I know a lot of streets where road illumination is fair, but the sidewalk right beside it (mayb

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:59, Dave F via Tagging > wrote: > > Anybody know when & why these were introduced? IIRR, it was like 10-20 years ago. You should be able to find more information on the path page in the wiki. Cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

On 06/07/2019 13:59, Dave F via Tagging wrote: Hi Unsure if these validation warnings on uploading a changeset in JOSM are new or I've never noticed them before: >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, use highway=path"     This is incorrect. A cycleway

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

To summarize, In January, Javbw mentioned amenity=cram_school for these "juku" cram schools, e.g. brand Komon In February, office=tutoring was suggested by Jmapb, perhaps with tutoring=test_prep for those focused on test preparation only In March, Warin added the suggestion of education=tutorin

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

Ok, it seems that "unladen" is somewhat favoured here on the list because it is more precise, more common and conforms with the wording in the (UK) legislation. I'll change the one mention in the wiki of "maxemptyweight" to "maxunladenweight". Cheers Tobias On 06/07/2019 14:17, Martin Koppenho

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

> ... we could use something like building=boat, > building=caravan or building=vehicle, but it is unfortunate that none > of these can be understood to be buildings in any sense of the word. building=static_caravan is common for mobile homes and caravans (aka trailers) which are semi-permanently

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

> How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in > the tagging? > Should we use intermittent=yes and direction=both, or are they implied by > waterway=tidal_channel? > ...only recommend the use of intermittent=yes on > channels which are fully empty at low tide time. Th

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

6 Jul 2019, 14:07 by o...@westnordost.de: >> I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise >> > > I think that your suggestions would make the definition actually less precise > because they add a fair level of subjectiveness: "necessary to bring your own > light" > > The least subje

Re: [Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

Just two additional aspects from my own experience on bicycle, to make things even more complicated: 1) cycle and foot path illumintion dramatically depends on the presence of leaves on the trees that are planted along the road. (don't get me wrong: I like trees) 2) another effect which is very a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

Le sam. 6 juil. 2019 à 16:39, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > > I don't know if the tag "direction=both" is used commonly with > waterways. There's no wiki page to describe this tag, and the page > Key:direction doesn't mention direction=both, though it's used 20,000 > times. More common is to add t

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 16:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > building=static_caravan is common for mobile homes and caravans (aka > trailers) which are semi-permanently located in one place. Tagged on > ways 132, 566 times: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dsta

Re: [Tagging] shared planter where you can harvest for free

I like your suggestion, Jason. Also, indeed I meant the operator of this specific thing is a person, not "let's change the definition of operator=*" :) Op vr 5 jul. 2019 21:28 schreef Jmapb via Tagging : > On 7/5/2019 3:08 PM, Paul Allen wrote: > > I read joost's comment as "The operator of this

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

14 169 building=houseboat 6 lip 2019, 16:31 od joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: >> ... we could use something like building=boat, >> building=caravan or building=vehicle, but it is unfortunate that none >> of these can be understood to be buildings in any sense of the word. >> > > building=static_cara

Re: [Tagging] New sections added to "Good Practice" page?

Le 06.07.19 à 14:52, bkil a écrit : > We would need something like: housed_in=vehicle location=vehicle ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

On 06/07/2019 14:08, Andy Townsend wrote: Where any editor gives incorrect suggestions I'd suggest raising a ticket with the editor concerned about it.  I've done that a couple of times in the past with JOSM and the issues have been resolved almost immediately. Obviously it helps to provide a

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

On 2019-07-06 06:17, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: In May, yumean1119 suggested tagging Japanese "cram schools" as either office=educational_institution + education = cram_school or amenity=prep_school And then iD and the name_suggestion_index started using amenity=prep_school I added some test prep

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

Le 06.07.19 à 14:59, Dave F via Tagging a écrit : > > use highway=path" > This is incorrect <...> on a shared path Funny to say that a shared PATH mapped with highway=PATH is incorrect. we already have this discussion several times on talk-fr, it's often the same scenario: - a cyclist considers t

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 2019-07-06 04:49, Colin Smale wrote: It is an intrinsic danger of international projects that words mean different things to different people. Hence the importance of keeping things objective, and recording facts, rather than judgements. It's about what things ARE, not what they are CALLED.

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

6 lip 2019, 14:59 od tagging@openstreetmap.org: > >"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, > >use highway=path" > >     This is incorrect. A cycleway tag can be used on a shared path, one which > can have a designation for other >     transport modes, such a

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

>"Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with > foot=designated, use highway=path" > I interpreted this as invition to use the "neutral" tagging scheme based on highway=path + foot=designated + bicycle=designated + segregted0yes|no which is the tagging scheme that JOSM implicitly pr

[Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

I have been working on a scheme to improve the cross-language quality of Map Features. [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Map_Features#Reimagining_Map_Features] Of course the page may deserve a bigger or deeper rethink. -- Andrew Talk:Map Features - OpenStreetMap Wiki

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

Le 06.07.19 à 15:17, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > provide after-school additional instruction why it isn't still a school with another min_age/max_age or any additional tag ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

6 lip 2019, 22:31 od vosc...@gmail.com: > In IT it is legally essentially a footway on which cyclists are tolerated, > but the pedestrians have always priority to the extend that if there are too > many pedestrians the cyclists have to dismount, and always have to ride at > moderate velocities.

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

sent from a phone > On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is > how such objects are tagged in Poland. at least in Germany there is a difference between bicycle=yes on a footway (it means they must not ride faster than walking speed

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

6 lip 2019, 23:52 od dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> >> It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is >> how such objects are tagged in Poland. >> > > > at least in Germany there is a difference between bicycle=yes on a foo

Re: [Tagging] JOSM's "suspicious" path data warnings

7 lip 2019, 00:07 od matkoni...@tutanota.com: > 6 lip 2019, 23:52 od dieterdre...@gmail.com: > >> >> >> sent from a phone >> >>> On 6. Jul 2019, at 23:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >>> >>> It sounds like bicycle=yes, at least that is >>> how such objects are tagged in Poland. >>> >> >> >> at le

Re: [Tagging] Test prep centres and cram schools as amenity=prep_school?

On 2019-07-06 14:20, marc marc wrote: Le 06.07.19 à 15:17, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : provide after-school additional instruction why it isn't still a school with another min_age/max_age or any additional tag ? For much the same reason that an acupuncturist's office isn't tagged amenity=doc

Re: [Tagging] Maxweight wiki page changes

On 06/07/19 22:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 6. Jul 2019, at 14:00, Tobias Zwick wrote: I am pretty sure myself that hgv are defined differently: as goods vehicles with a "gross vehicle weight rating" (gvwr), a.k.a. "gross vehicle mass" (gvm) or plainly said maximum l

[Tagging] lit=yes/no threshold

> lit=weak is too subjective. > disclaimer: I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise as > part of my grant > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/368849 There is a lot of open access academic literature on your topic, covering objective measures and both subje

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

On 07/07/19 00:38, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: How are handled the concepts of intermittence and direction of the flow in the tagging? Should we use intermittent=yes and direction=both, or are they implied by waterway=tidal_channel? ...only recommend the use of intermittent=yes on channels which are

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

Here's one, https://www.dropbox.com/s/agj4njek1r35vnz/2018-10-03-13.06.54r.jpg?dl=0 Maybe gets some maintenance every 10 or 20 years or so.  It is probably never soft, so it doesn't fit any tracktype definition. It is still used for a couple of  mines (worked by 1 or 2 people), but mostly recre

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

What wiki are you looking at?   At https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype,  grade5 says "Soft. Almost always an unimproved track lacking hard materials, same as surrounding soil. " What if the surrounding soil is hard materials??? Clearly written by someone that has not seen rocky s

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

I would think that an unimproved track across naturally solid rock or naturally well-compacted gravel would not be tracktype=grade5 - while it might be bumpy, it’s probably passable by any vehicke with sufficient clearance and tire size, even when wet, unlike a track of unimproved clay, silt or loa

Re: [Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

From the talk page: >I propose to tackle the varying quality of this page in different languages by >changing Map >Features to a single multilingual page that outputs its text in the user’s >preferred interface >language. >The tag tables can be generated from Taginfo/Taglists. For the best resu

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

That is true if the terrain is agreeable.  Often it is steep and a very loose rocky surface so 4wd is necessary.  Even if it isn't very steep, since it is not maintained very often, if at all, erosion creates hazards in the road also requiring 4wd or at least a very high clearance vehicle. *"

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

7 lip 2019, 01:57 od bradha...@fastmail.com: > What wiki are you looking at?   At > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype,  grade5 says > "Soft. > Almost always an unimproved track lacking hard materials, same as surrounding > soil. " > > What if the surrounding soil is hard mater