Hi,
I want to mention that user ulamm is not just doing vandalism on the
osm-db, but also on the wiki.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Aaccess&diff=1076542&oldid=1076413
He is changing the information for Germany, where this is not true so
far as I know.
Now he is claiming
Hi,
May be you could link to cycleway:mandatory, too. Which would give a
reference to the analog usage if there is cycleway=* used on the road.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway
But I do not know whether there is a proposition page for
cycleway:mandatory. So maybe this tag should
Hi,
I am wondering if the building-tag should be used for moveable objects.
I guess that this is not in the sense of the meaning of building (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building#Residential and check for
houseboats).
For example according to taginfo houseboats are mapped as
building=houseb
Am 22.12.2014 um 02:20 schrieb Ulrich Lamm:
> I've written a proposal for the tags cycleway=obligatory and
> cycleway=optional.
I am still against this tag as I mentioned several times.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.o
Hi,
Am 25.12.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> cycleway=opposite is useful for marking that cyclists may drive in both
> direction, \
Then cycleway=no/none would do the same.
But I guess this is not the best idea for the same reason.
> but there is no marked contraflow lane (for street
Hi,
there is a sentence on
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway
which says
"It is also possible to use {{Tag|sidewalk|right}}/*=left [on
highway=cycleway] to indicate which side of the segregated path
pedestrians should walk on (where right/left is relative to the way's
di
Hi,
late, but better than never: Thank you for your replies!
I tried to sum up some of your ideas at the discussion page of Buildings
and added a new section "Mentionable usage" to the page.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buildings
Cheers
Tobias
___
Hi,
I have a very, very special case here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/318383959
There is a road with four lanes, but not all of them seem to be
motorroad. There is a sign which suggests that. I do not like to have a
separate way there, so I used the following tagging.
motorroad:lanes=yes
nwald :
>>
>> 2015-01-20 3:36 GMT+01:00 715371 :
>>
>>> motorroad:lanes=yes|yes|yes|no
>>>
>>>
>> Seems absolutely fine to me. One alternative (for better compatibility)
>> would be motorroad=yes + motorroad:lanes=yes|yes|yes|no
>>
&g
Am 21.01.2015 um 19:41 schrieb Martin Vonwald:
> Is there any motorroad signpost before that part of the road?
No. The only existing sign on that link is that one on the picture.
There is no second on the right hand side, too.
If you mean the other direction: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/20
Am 21.01.2015 um 00:03 schrieb Mariusz:
> Judging from Google Street photos (from 2008) all four lanes are motorrad.
> The sign 331.2 - end of motorrad - can be seen at about this location:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1968608980
> This would imply the way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31
Hi,
what about running facilities?
This is a track which is dedicated to runners:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4039958
Those elements where it seems to use the normal path are in fact
seperated by a lowered kerb - not really mentionable.
I do not really like to use leisure=track ther
Hi all,
I have a situation where a cycleway=track is not a oneway, while the
highway itself is a oneway=yes. So I added oneway:bicycle=no to the way
because it is true from at least one point of view.
The same problem applies to cycleway=opposite_track.
BTW: Neither graphhopper nor mapquest supp
Am 25.02.2015 um 22:20 schrieb Hubert:
> The implied problem in your question is how to interpret a (main) tag on an
> osm_way. Does it only apply to the carriageway/driving lanes or to the whole
> street which also includes cycleways, sidewalks, etc ? Just consider the
> width=* or lanes=* tags
Am 26.02.2015 um 01:54 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> I'd say you have met the limits of cycleway=track. You can solve this by
> creating a proper osm object for what is a distinct way in the real world as
> well.
Well, this is almost the same as cycleway=opposite_track, but that tag
is obviousl
Am 26.02.2015 um 12:06 schrieb Paul Johnson:
> What's the location we're working with?
Here a location for cycleway=opposite_track:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4769712#map=18/53.07986/8.80454
There is no kerb between the carriageway and the cycleway. Just some
bollards.
And here a location
Hi,
Am 26.02.2015 um 10:56 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> Yes, cycleway=track and cycleway=opposite_track are rather special type of
> FIXME than a proper tagging of a cycleway.
Maybe in some situations, but at the moment it is IMO for many
situations the best solution. But that's a different topic
Hi,
I just wondered how to tag a dock which is tidal, since the wiki does
not propose anything for that case. In fact the wiki proposes dock=tidal
for a dock, which has a tidal independent water level i.e. the water
level is managed.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Ddock
But ma
I would like to make the decision based on the usage of a dock.
Such dock=tidal would never be used to pump the dock dry, but to keep a
fixed water level, I think.
Then the usage of dock=drydock would be associated to the purpose of dry
docks.
At Bremerhaven the structures which are described by
19 matches
Mail list logo
