Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr:interpolation on closed ways and nodes

Am Do., 24. Dez. 2020 um 00:22 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson < pelder...@gmail.com>: > 10..20, meaning 10 up to and including 20 > I don't know if it is just you, but there are already some few examples for this in the db: 17 *wa**s:**ra**il**wa**y:**20**12**..**20**14*

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 at 05:40, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I'm giving away all my favourite spots here but both of these the stream > is mapped a a way, and has the pool under the waterfall mapped as an area, > so you can determine pools under a waterfall based on the natural=water > area with one of t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr:interpolation on closed ways and nodes

Option 1 addr:range=* specifies the increment addr:range=even addr:housenumber=2..250 if .. is used, a hyphen combined with a range can be handled. addr:range=odd addr:housenumber=200-01..200-91 In these examples, a default of 2 would simplify things: .. infers a range, increment is default 2 a

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 9:00 AM Paul Allen All of which has drifted somewhat off topic, but until we have a > reasonable understanding of how different legislations handle > things we don't have a good model of how we ought to go > about mapping them (or even if we should map them). > I'm not sur

[Tagging] Quarry lakes

A commenter on the reservoir proposal[1] pointed out the existence of quarry lakes[2], which is a lake that is formed after a quarry has been dug after a mining operation. It was suggested that such bodies of water should be tagged separately from other lakes with a tag such as water=quarry. Shou

Re: [Tagging] Quarry lakes

On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 at 17:24, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > > Should quarry lakes be tagged under a separate value from water=lake? > If they should, then you have to consider that some of them may be ponds. If there is consensus that quarry lakes should be excluded from water=lake, > obviously

Re: [Tagging] Quarry lakes

I would like to keep water=lake as being a natural or semi-natural lake. Since most abandoned quarries are obviously artificial, it would be better to use a different tag. "Water-filled quarries can be very deep, often 50 ft (15 m) or more, and surprisingly cold, so swimming in quarry lakes is ge

Re: [Tagging] Fuzzy areas again: should we have them or not?

Long, prickly post ahead. On Dec 24, 2020, at 7:35 AM, Anders Torger wrote: > By not rendering valleys and peninsula and possibly other tags often used on > "non-verifiable geometry" it's a signal to mappers that those are not > considered important or desirable. We could say that we shouldn't

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 10:10 AM Paul Allen wrote: > Yes, we already have fee and access which can cope with these things. > What we didn't have was an understanding in the US that such tags > were even applicable or that anyone might wish to map fishing > features on rivers, especially pools tha