On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 02:36:06PM -0800, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> The proposed new tag, vaccination= available>, seems like a reasonable idea.
>
> However, it might be necessary to discuss a main feature tag to use in the
> case when these are not administered by a clinic or doctor's office or
>
I would use "survey using high quality dualband GPS (accuracy with X m)"
to make it clearly understandable.
Most people would be unaware of meaning of "GPS dualband"
(I ma quite interested in this topic and I am unsure what is the accuracy
difference, especially as there massive differences in
acc
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:45:13PM +0100, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote:
> The intention is to make future mappers consider the device precision when
> doing corrections.
My experience is that many mappers, especially armchair mappers, ignore
source tags. I often find that my fairly accurate gps mapping
sent from a phone
> On 30. Nov 2020, at 10:46, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> Yes please - I can see planning coming up for vaccinations centers here
> in Germany and these are not planned in hospitals but in vacant commercial
> buildings which have loads of parking spaces. So using some
> healthc
On 30/11/20 8:45 am, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote:
Hi,
I bought a tracking device that supports GPS dualband (also called
dual frequency) for high precision mapping, and I'm wondering if I can
put this information in the "source" tag.
The intention is to make future mappers consider the device pre
On 19/11/20 6:59 am, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
With the first Covid-19 vaccines getting approved, many municipalities
are planning facilities for administering mass vaccination. In Berlin,
the two former airports Tegel and Tempelhof are planned,
along with some sports facilities.
This raises the ques
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:11 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I would use "survey using high quality dualband GPS (accuracy with X m)"
> to make it clearly understandable.
>
This sounds like a good idea.
___
Tagging
sent from a phone
> On 30. Nov 2020, at 12:56, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would assume the location of these mass vaccination centers would be widely
> publicized and the locations identified. Do they need further identification
> within OSM?
the same holds true for post off
I run into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcoast_guard
and despite that I have basically zero experience with such objects
I am pretty sure that this description (and an old proposal) has a
problematic definition
It was "A building housing the Coast Guard administrative offices"
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 12:27 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If the intention is to indicate the error/accuracy/uncertainty then
> tag/state that. The better GPS devices give indications of this
> error/accuracy/uncertainty.
>
The big advantage of the dualband is not (only) the increase
Nov 30, 2020, 14:33 by amadva...@gmail.com:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 12:27 PM Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> imagery may well be better than survey by consumer GPS
>>
> I agree. Where an image is available I always use it as reference. But most
> of the trails of my local a
I recently wrote a series of diary entries about my experience with the
accuracy of one-device GPS precision. I concluded with a comparison of
three devices I had personal experience with including a new Garmin GPSMAP
66sr which I posted here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bobwz/diary/394711
Hello everyone,
With the Belgian community, we have been in contact with Natuurpunt, our main
national nature conservation organization. They are slowing using more and more
OSM and recently came to us with the following remark.
"Some mappers have added paths that are not actually real paths f
You could add a `note=*` to every element. You should probably contact the
mappers of that region and explain to them not to add them.
I agree that in this case, mapping animal tracks is *especially *necessary.
If someone isn't going to map it now, they're going to do so in the future
(as you've s
>
> I recently wrote a series of diary entries about my experience with the
> accuracy of one-device GPS precision. I concluded with a comparison of
> three devices I had personal experience with including a new Garmin GPSMAP
> 66sr which I posted here:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bobwz/di
Creating a new tag for this is not a bad idea.
Yves
Le 30 novembre 2020 21:27:33 GMT+01:00, Seth Deegan a
écrit :
>You could add a `note=*` to every element. You should probably contact the
>mappers of that region and explain to them not to add them.
>
>I agree that in this case, mapping animal
Adding a `note=*` would not really help much here. The issue is that the
paths show up on the maps viewed by people. If we want to to give
platforms the ability to not render animal paths, they should be easy to
filter out. You can't do that with a generic note. I'm not sure if
something alread
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 06:54, Yves via Tagging
wrote:
> Creating a new tag for this is not a bad idea.
>
Not a bad idea at all, even if just to stop them being marked as paths, but
what would you tag them as?
Footpaths etc are currently tagged as highway=xxx, which really isn't
appropriate for a
Note that there is already an animal=* tag for describing things related to
animals, so that probably shouldn't be overridden. Perhaps a combination
of foot=no and animal=yes satisfies what we're describing?
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 4:16 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 21:45, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Note that there is already an animal=* tag for describing things related
> to animals, so that probably shouldn't be overridden. Perhaps a
> combination of foot=no and animal=yes satisfies what we're describing?
>
Or not:highway=path
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 23:29, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> I run into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcoast_guard
> and despite that I have basically zero experience with such objects
> I am pretty sure that this description (and an old prop
Am Mo., 30. Nov. 2020 um 14:36 Uhr schrieb Andrea Mazzoleni <
amadva...@gmail.com>:
> But most of the trails of my local area are under the woods (low mountain)
> and the GPS is the only source of information.
>
you can use any tag like "source" or "note" to try to convey to the
following mapper
I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are many trails in my
area that are clearly animal tracks and seldom used by people - but it
is allowed for people to walk on these and they are sometimes
significant shortcuts so allowing routing over them in some cases would
be good. However,
On 1/12/20 7:46 am, Andrea Mazzoleni wrote:
I recently wrote a series of diary entries about my experience
with the accuracy of one-device GPS precision. I concluded with a
comparison of three devices I had personal experience with
including a new Garmin GPSMAP 66sr which I poste
Am Di., 1. Dez. 2020 um 00:39 Uhr schrieb Lukas Richert :
> I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are many trails in my
> area that are clearly animal tracks and seldom used by people - but it is
> allowed for people to walk on these and they are sometimes significant
> shortcuts so a
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 09:23, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 23:29, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> I run into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcoast_guard
>> and despite that I have basically zero experience with such o
On 1/12/20 10:36 am, Lukas Richert wrote:
I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are many trails in
my area that are clearly animal tracks and seldom used by people - but
it is allowed for people to walk on these and they are sometimes
significant shortcuts so allowing routing ove
I believe access=no would apply for this specific situation, in the sense that
the organization mentioned doesn't want people walking on the trails. I'm
guessing it's either protected land or private property these trails are on.
Since the organization mentioned they didn't want to put up "no ac
On 1/12/20 12:24 am, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 30. Nov 2020, at 12:56, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
I would assume the location of these mass vaccination centers would be widely
publicized and the locations identified. Do they need further identification
within
On 1/12/20 11:06 am, Casper Van Battum wrote:
I believe access=no would apply for this specific situation, in the
sense that the organization mentioned doesn't want people walking on
the trails. I'm guessing it's either protected land or private
property these trails are on. Since the organizat
Maybe animal_path=yes|cow|deer|...
Where the values cover the various animals that create paths visible on imagery.
--
Sent from my phone, please forgive my brevity.
> On Monday, Nov 30, 2020 at 1:15 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick (mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com)> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 06:
Vào lúc 16:32 2020-11-30, Warin đã viết:
I would not encourage the use of the tag 'animal' as it is a real mess!
See taginfo for the variety of values that have no coordination. Example
animal=wellness ... for which animals and then the problem of tagging
that... terrible.
animal=wellness is
humans=no?
Vr gr Peter Elderson
Op ma 30 nov. 2020 om 20:44 schreef s8evq :
> Hello everyone,
>
> With the Belgian community, we have been in contact with Natuurpunt, our
> main national nature conservation organization. They are slowing using more
> and more OSM and recently came to us with th
> Think your confusing two terms; resolution, accuracy
>
I understand that you mean, but check this detail: https://ibb.co/7ycFW5J
At least my impression is that the 1Sec is also more accurate. It's
obviously only a single test, and the recording happened at a different
time, so indeed it could be
34 matches
Mail list logo
