Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

sent from a phone > On 26. Aug 2019, at 01:11, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > To me dune is a land form. +1, for me these should go under natural and not in landcover Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org htt

Re: [Tagging] Bicycle kitchens, community centres that offer bicycle repairs etc

Martin wrote:> IMHO no. We do not need tags of an is_in fashion for this, > we can model this universally by making use of implicit > spatial relationships (i.e. put the bike kitchen inside the community > centre or pub, or the other way round, according to our > interpretation of the situation)

Re: [Tagging] Bicycle kitchens, community centres that offer bicycle repairs etc

23 Aug 2019, 09:07 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > Could you/someone explain how you can search for objects that form such > spatial relationships? > Overpass API is good for start. Wiki has page with examples for Overpass API/Overpass turbo, including "X within N meters from Y, limited to Z area

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

26 Aug 2019, 05:51 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: > This also brings up the question: is it appropriate to edit pages like > this to mention the more common tags at the top, e.g. natural=dune, > natural=sand? > Yes. Especially in cases of tags that are - duplicates of far more used tags - witho

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On 26/08/19 20:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 26 Aug 2019, 05:51 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: This also brings up the question: is it appropriate to edit pages like this to mention the more common tags at the top, e.g. natural=dune, natural=sand? Yes. Especially in cases of tags th

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

26 Aug 2019, 12:31 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: > On 26/08/19 20:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> >> 26 Aug 2019, 05:51 by >> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com >> >> : >> >>> This also brings up the question: is it appropriate to edit pages >>> like >>>

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On 26/08/19 20:36, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 26 Aug 2019, 12:31 by 61sundow...@gmail.com: On 26/08/19 20:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 26 Aug 2019, 05:51 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com : This also brings up the question: is it appropriate

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 04:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: There seems to be confusion about what the key "landcover" means, > because recently there have also been pages created for > landcover=water and landcover=hedge as well. > I'm in no way justifying any of the landcover=* tags that user has in

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 05:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Traditionally OSMwikis had a section 'See also' where other tags were placed. > > Placing more and more information at the top of the page confuses people. > > The page should first describe the tag and how to use it. This is g

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 01:37, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > amenity=charging _space? Says what it is. > First problem is that goes against the design of amenity=parking_space. Somebody will then decide to have amenity=disabled_parking_space rather than use the appropriate subtag with ame

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

Le 26.08.19 à 12:57, Warin a écrit : > Is there a requirement to go in to all of these wiki pages and explain > why the demotion of one over the other simply due to frequency of use > without consideration of other factors? I ask myself "what would we do if the other tag didn't exist ?" would we

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

I agree, Paul. The most important things on a wiki page are 1) The description of the tag: what sort of feature or property does it represent and 2) How does one distinguish it from overlapping tags? Both of these should be in the first paragraph / section. For example, see highway=raceway: (https

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 13:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I agree, Paul. > The most important things on a wiki page are 1) The description of the > tag: what sort of feature or property does it represent and 2) How > does one distinguish it from overlapping tags? Both of these should be > in the fi

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

Yes, I agree that for something like landcover=hedge an even stronger warning is needed. Some context for why Warin and I are talking about this: The second section of the key page Key:produce has long mentioned the differences between produce=* and product=*. I added to that section, mentioning

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

sent from a phone > On 26. Aug 2019, at 00:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > A bit messy, but how about > amenity=parking_space + access=vehicle_charging_only > car_charging=yes/no > truck_charging=yes/no > hgv_charging=yes/no Is it really „parking“? Maybe we should introduce an amenity=cha

Re: [Tagging] Multiple tags for one purpose

Valor Naram wrote: > some long time ago I wondered why we have two tags for one > purpose sometimes? For example: A mapper can use either the > tag `contact:phone`or `phone` to add a phone number to the > database. I think this makes the database dirty and for > developers - like me - it's anno

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

sent from a phone > On 26. Aug 2019, at 13:54, Paul Allen wrote: > > Third problem is that although the ones my local supermarket recently > installed have > signs (which,so far, are being completely ignored) saying they are only for > charging, > in other places (particularly as charging st

Re: [Tagging] phone vs contact:phone WAS Re: Multiple tags for one purpose

sent from a phone > On 25. Aug 2019, at 18:06, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > there are at least two possibilities: > > > phone= > phone:emergency= > phone:staff= > > and: > > phone= > emergency:phone= > staff:phone= > > Neither of which requires "contact:" exactly, I was about to reply the sa

Re: [Tagging] phone vs contact:phone WAS Re: Multiple tags for one purpose

On 2019-08-26 15:53, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sent from a phone > > On 25. Aug 2019, at 18:06, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > there are at least two possibilities: > phone= > phone:emergency= > phone:staff= > > and: > phone= > emergency:phone= > staff:phone= > > Neither of which requires "contac

Re: [Tagging] phone vs contact:phone

sent from a phone > On 25. Aug 2019, at 21:48, marc marc wrote: > > we need to switch all contact to key with contact: prefix > (pro : a datauser is able to group them without havng to keep > a hardcoded list of all key (phone, fax, email, web, social network ) > and update to list everytime

Re: [Tagging] Bicycle kitchens, community centres that offer bicycle repairs etc

sent from a phone > On 23. Aug 2019, at 09:07, Morten Lange wrote: > > Could you/someone explain how you can search for objects that form such > spatial relationships? I’m not sure how to do it with publicly available services, but if I’m not misguided, overpass api allows you to do it. T

[Tagging] Relations/proposed/circuit

i would like to get a discussion of this proposal started again: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Circuit it fills a need i have and i've been using it in both OSM and OHM. i have made a couple of new comments on the Talk page. right this instant i'm looking at mapping stree

Re: [Tagging] phone vs contact:phone

I've yet to see an argument for collecting all under the 'contact:*' tag that bears scrutiny . The "group them without having to keep a hardcoded list" falls down as they have to be split into separate variables to make sense of them. DaveF On 25/08/2019 20:48, marc marc wrote: Le 25.08.19

[Tagging] Agility park for dogs

Hi there, I'm going to map a small dog park where there are obstacles for agility training, and I'm not sure if I should use sport=dog_training[1] or not. It seems like it's just an old proposal and there was quite some discussion about it. It also looks like it's not much used, less than 500 ti

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Document personal tags in Proposed_features/ space, User: space, or Tag:/Key: space?

Am Mo., 26. Aug. 2019 um 00:19 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > While some have suggested that uses of the landuse=* key like > landuse=grass, landuse=village_green and landuse=recreation_area lead > to misuse of the landuse=* key, the landcover=* key appears to be eve

Re: [Tagging] Document personal tags in Proposed_features/ space, User: space, or Tag:/Key: space?

Am Mo., 26. Aug. 2019 um 06:09 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > All approved and de facto landforms in Map Features are under > natural=*, eg natural=ridge, natural=valley, natural=cliff, > natural=valley, natural=peak, natural=mountain_range... - it's one of > the mai

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 08:53, Paul Allen wrote: > On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> >> A bit messy, but how about >> amenity=parking_space + access=vehicle_charging_only >> > > Big problem right there: you're expanding on the access tag. Some on this > list will > t

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 23:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > On 26. Aug 2019, at 13:54, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > Third problem is that although the ones my local supermarket recently > installed have > > signs (which,so far, are being completely ignored) saying they are only > for charging, >

Re: [Tagging] Agility park for dogs

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 01:53, MARLIN LUKE wrote: > I'm going to map a small dog park where there are obstacles for agility > training, and I'm not sure if I should use sport=dog_training[1] or not. > Would leisure=dog_park https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Ddog_park not cover it?

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On 26/08/19 23:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Yes, I agree that for something like landcover=hedge an even stronger warning is needed. Some context for why Warin and I are talking about this: The second section of the key page Key:produce has long mentioned the differences between produce=* and pr

Re: [Tagging] landcover dune or land form dune

On 26/08/19 21:27, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 04:52, Joseph Eisenberg mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: There seems to be confusion about what the key "landcover" means, because recently there have also been pages created for landcover=water and landcover=hedg

Re: [Tagging] Add amenity=childcare to Map Features?

Anyone else have any opinion, in favor or against adding amenity=childcare to the wiki page Map Features, and to Template:Map_Features:amenity? If there are any concerns, I can make a proposal to discuss it fully, but if no one objects after 2 weeks, then I will add it. (Unless anyone objects to t

Re: [Tagging] Add amenity=childcare to Map Features?

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 13:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Anyone else have any opinion, in favor or against adding > amenity=childcare to the wiki page Map Features, and to > Template:Map_Features:amenity? > Can't see any problems, thanks, Joseph. Thanks Graeme __

Re: [Tagging] Agility park for dogs

26 Aug 2019, 23:55 by graemefi...@gmail.com: > > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 01:53, MARLIN LUKE <> luke.mar...@viacesi.fr > > > wrote: > >> I'm going to map a small dog park where there are obstacles for agility >> training, and I'm not sure if I should use sport=do