Re: [Tagging] scope of emergency=dry_riser_inlet

2022-12-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am So., 11. Dez. 2022 um 04:25 Uhr schrieb Kyle Hensel < k.y@outlook.co.nz>: > I think we need a new tag then. In New Zealand dry risers are not allowed > for new buildings, since charged systems are safer... > > > > François’s suggestion of emergency=riser_inlet + a sub tag seems like a > goo

Re: [Tagging] Relations of type=site + tourism=camp_site

2022-12-12 Thread Warin
On 10/11/22 22:36, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 10 Nov 2022, at 12:31, Yves via Tagging wrote: Site relations are often used to models thing that aren't spatially joined, like windfarms, universities... I can easily imagine it's reasonable to use them for campings in so

Re: [Tagging] Relations of type=site + tourism=camp_site

2022-12-12 Thread Warin
On 11/11/22 23:25, Casper Kersten wrote: Site relations are usually completely redundant if you just tag an operator=* tag. A tourism=camp_site closed way or multipolygon is, of course, a camp site, and a shop or parking area on or belonging to that camp site should get an operator=* tag with

[Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Following a JOSM discussion I wanted to ask here, if someone else is using building=entrance to tag entrance buildings. It is a term that seems well introduced and understandable, so there is not much hindering people from using it, just that there was the bad practice to use the same tag on nodes

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sorry, missed the link https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/22570 any comments on the tag? Someone else using it for buildings? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] scope of emergency=dry_riser_inlet

2022-12-12 Thread Kyle Hensel
The only problem I see with many top-level tags is editors would need to make 4 very similar presets, which is pretty confusing and forces mappers to pick one option, even if they don't understand the difference... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@ope

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Jmapb
On 12/12/2022 2:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Following a JOSM discussion I wanted to ask here, if someone else is using building=entrance to tag entrance buildings. It is a term that seems well introduced and understandable, so there is not much hindering people from using it, just that t

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Kevin Kenny
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 3:51 PM Jmapb wrote: > On 12/12/2022 2:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > Following a JOSM discussion I wanted to ask here, if someone else is > > using building=entrance to tag entrance buildings. > > > > It is a term that seems well introduced and understandable, so t

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Marc_marc
Le 12.12.22 à 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : Following a JOSM discussion I wanted to ask here, if someone else is using building=entrance to tag entrance buildings. it doesn't look like to be a building but a indoor=* (root ? entrance ?) and sometime a building:part (for 3D tag) i disl

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 12 Dec 2022, at 22:13, Marc_marc wrote: > > i dislike the idea to have tag with several meaning depending > if it's on a node or a closed way One could say the distinction is in the meaning, not in the object type, there is a tag that was used in the past on nodes

Re: [Tagging] building=entrance

2022-12-12 Thread Andrew Hain
I also support that mass retagging of building=entrance nodes attached to buildings. -- Andrew From: Martin Koppenhoefer Sent: 13 December 2022 00:26 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] building=entrance sent from a phone >