On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 19:15, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dec 22, 2020, 00:42 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 23:24, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> Dec 20, 2020, 23:29 by graemefi...@gma
Hi,
A property owner in Germany has complained that several routing engines
- crucially also the one used by the local transport authority - route
pedestrians trough their private residential property as a "shortcut"
for accessing a bus stop.
The private residential property has two driveways (hi
Thanks Kevin, point taken ;-)
To summarize. This is the way I interpret this situation:
OSM is a geodatabase, with a design that makes some geodata suitable for
it, others less so. The overall design is not likely to change to accept
more types of geodata, instead we would rely on extra data s
Am Di., 22. Dez. 2020 um 10:16 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm <
frede...@remote.org>:
> The private residential property has two driveways (highway=service,
> service=driveway) entering it from different sides, thereby enabling
> people to save a few metres by walking through, rather than around, the
>
On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 22:34, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> > On 22. Dec 2020, at 06:49, Andrew Harvey
> wrote:
> > water=stream_pool
>
> isn’t this an oxymoron?
>
How so? It's a body of water so therefore water=*. It's usually a pool of
water along a stream, so the name stream_pool. Usually her
sent from a phone
> On 22. Dec 2020, at 09:42, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> I think it's fine to use marine here, even though it may not strictly be at
> sea and could be related to inland waters. So long as this is clearly stated
> in the wiki documentation. It's not always possible to have OSM ta
På Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:14:39 +0100
Frederik Ramm skrev:
>Hi,
>
>1. Should a routing engine automatically assume that something tagged a
>"driveway" is not suitable for through traffic?
We must have millions of intersections between driveways and cycle paths
and sidewalks along roads. Certainly
>
> 1. Should a routing engine automatically assume that something tagged a
> "driveway" is not suitable for through traffic?
For motor vehicles through traffic seems inappropriate by default, but for
pedestrians I would think it is generally ok. Bicycles are somewhere
between.
The case Frederik
Brian,
In current practice the areas of rivers (whether waterway=riverbank or
water=river) are not tagged with a name=* tag, that goes on the linear
waterway=river feature. The same is true for canals.
This makes sense because the name belongs to the linear watercourse, and
adding it to the area
sent from a phone
> On 22. Dec 2020, at 16:42, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> In current practice the areas of rivers (whether waterway=riverbank or
> water=river) are not tagged with a name=* tag, that goes on the linear
> waterway=river feature.
there’s a 13,6% of all riverbank polygons
On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 01:49, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> I suggest that, when we get around to looking at pools, we consider
> the possibility of adding other angling considerations
>
Carrying on from those, there are other named river features such as Bend &
Reach, which we currently have no way of
On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 00:50, Brian M. Sperlongano
wrote:
> Great discussion, here and in the 2017 thread. Participation in the
> tagging list is certainly educational.
>
> water=stream_pool suffers from a few problems, and its use seems far from
> a settled question. (None of this is meant as
12 matches
Mail list logo
