Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

o highway=scrambling? Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

ta" and "alpine hike with many safety measures" like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:safety_rope and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:rungs Greetings, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

ged as SAC T2 and T1 because they must not be a scramble, by their definition, and the relevant information is certainly existing in OSM DB. Only remaining bigger risk is that map and territory are not matching. Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing li

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

te Thu Sep 15 2022 00:03:48 GMT+0200 > If a sign says a path will make you scamble somewhere Despite hiking in many different regions and terrains and grades, I can't recall I ever saw such a sign besides fun/prank/ironic ones like "student crossing" https://images-na.ssl-images

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

lly only data consumers that are able and expected to show/consider scrambles, but many people do only car navigation, kayaking, cycling,... and will even be happy to get rid of "all the useless clutter" 😉 Best regards, Georg

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

ficult hike & MTB trail, a scramble, easy via ferrata and easy climb. I suggest we first decide whether we find the general concept of highway=scramble to be useful and want to introduce it at all. In case we answer this positively, then focus on working out the exact details like what's the exact sac scale threshold, etc. 👍 Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

scramble, i.e. they simply do not use the metal but the rock unless conditions are harsh. Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

Yes, it will still need years – but that's very likely the same with any approach to make highway=path less ambiguous. Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

of too much work but else wise welcomed. Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Motorcycle taxis, pedicabs

.56058#map=19/17.40145/78.56064 or Bengaluru https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=12.84703&lon=77.67096 so I cannot see & tell you how to tag. In case noone has a better answer: Maybe you find a way to contact Indian mappers? 🙂 Best regards, Georg __

Re: [Tagging] Is tracktype=grade1 surface=compacted a valid combination?

n "iffy" to drive upon (especially with > about 3% or 4% slope) Exactly this is one major reason why I consider most surface=compacted to not not qualify for tracktype=grade1. Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Are different definitions for same key/value OK? – was: Re: Is tracktype=grade1 surface=compacted a valid combination?

consequence, we'd need to re-check the tagging for thousands of paths but we have AFAIK no effective means to document which paths have been checked (e.g. MapRoulette does not help much here). Hence, I speak up for and strongly prefer to limit variances of definitions as much as possib

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=scramble

ghway=scramble. Thus, only scramble=grade1 remains by definition, so it cannot add any information and shall be removed from the proposal. Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

of taps. Amongst them: The term tap is widely used to describe the valve used to dispense draft beer from a keg, whether gravity feed or pressurized. If a pull-type tap is so widely called tap, a push-type does IMHO qualify too, as it is only inverted direction of movement. Regards, Georg

[Tagging] OSM Wiki

so {{something}}, but not the whole page including typical sections etc. Best regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Are rowboats covered by "boat=*" or "canoe=*"?

, surf..., jetski) - waterski - wind-/kitesurfing - waterscooter/jetski So the access restriction boat=* could only be used for 'sport' boats with motor or sail. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag pedestrian lanes?

Am 20.10.2019 um 11:24 schrieb Markus: On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 23:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: +1, or e.g. sidewalk:right=lane there are a few instances tagged like this: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/sidewalk%3Aright=lane 18 out of 30 are additionally tagged sidewalk=right. I think

Re: [Tagging] How to tag pedestrian lanes?

ipedia.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Switzerland_and_Liechtenstein at 6.19 Regards Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] key, name, long or a partial abbreviation?

Don't ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair designated parking space tagging?

=parking+wheelchair&title=Special:Search&profile=default&fulltext=1&searchToken=bquqcdlt1bi3tzdtjohslf972 Regards Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

least I want to find the right dealer for me (e.g. motorhome), so it would be necessary to distuingish them. Because there are mixed shops and all fall under caravaning, I suppose a subkey would be necessary - but yet I did not found a useful one or know a pos

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

other 'english' countries - may be even for the Brexiters. ;-) Language: You can use every word for every meaning - you just have to agree about what the meaning is. ;-) Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.op

Re: [Tagging] Link roads between different highways type

For link roads, the lowest. > > I could see an exception for motorway onramps, indicating "starting here you can't get off the motorway". > > I could agree with you - with the exception of motorway on- and off-ramps, which are always motorway_link up to the

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

Am 15.01.2019 um 14:43 schrieb Marc Gemis: On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:55 PM Georg Feddern wrote: tourism=caravan_site is the one where you (at least in Europe) only can stay with motorhomes (selfpropelled) - but not with caravans (towed). but the wiki states on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

ow - and I thought you had at least knowledge of it from the german forum. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] highway=service // public road?

Am 23.05.2018 um 22:33 schrieb Greg Troxel: Florian Lohoff writes: I now see increasing usage of service roads as a category below unclassified. People tagging "smaller roads" in the countryside as a service roads. I think this is basically wrong tagging. I find this a little disturbing and

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Am 17.09.2018 um 16:17 schrieb Florian Lohoff: is it intentional that StreetComplete tags the maxspeed source/type in maxspeed:type instead of the much more used source:maxspeed? If you search the german forum you will find that it is indeed intentional: StreetComplete wird maxspeed:type taggen

Re: [Tagging] issues with the list of deprecated features

Am 15.10.2018 um 16:38 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am Mo., 15. Okt. 2018 um 14:21 Uhr schrieb Tom Pfeifer mailto:t.pfei...@computer.org>>: On 15.10.2018 10:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 3. amenity=creche and amenity=nursery > For both tags amenity=kindergarten is suggested as

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

ical need for a bicycle:dismount=no where bicycles are even not allowed dismounted. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

, that on these driveways (or serviceways?) you leave the legal cycleway/footway (with the regarding legal rights above the otherwise crossing traffic) and have to obey the crossing traffic for your own risk - even as walker, but also as cyclist. Georg ___

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

ike a suitcase or parcel/packet ... none I suppose, but I never was in such situation yet. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

o now without the sign. Where shall he ride then? Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

of the citation sounds better than the proposed "use_cycleway" - at least for me. But its just the "name", not the intention, which is the same for both. If there is a need for the additional tag of "country-specific" or if it may be as country-specific-implicit as

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

Am 14.11.2013 10:47, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 14/nov/2013 um 10:40 schrieb Georg Feddern : @Martin: Your reply is only valid for the first line of the citation. An approach which combines 2 tags in a way that the meaning is only true for the combination of both, but not for the

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - bicycle=use_cycleway

;, there is something else. I won't call it "use_cycleway", but name it what it is: A 'restriction'. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] preproposal : internet webcam

can not decide which view angle, zoom or purpose it has. Only: There is someone watching - but what and why? Best regards Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] preproposal : internet webcam

d use a new but generic tag (camera?) in my opinion. Yes, this may result in parallel tagging - but we should not run in the next cul-de-sac with one's eyes open. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openst

Re: [Tagging] How to tag max width at chicane-type bicycle barriers

ill have another "normal-length" - and therefor another "maximum width that's presumed to pass" ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] noexit

t;. (false positives) A note would have to be clear and machine-readable for this case. It might be useful for renderers as on a map it might look as a connection (because of oversize of rendered ways). But this could be determined by preprocessing al

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

othing. A cyclist who dismount is legally a pedestrian. A pedestrian is legally allowed to use a one-way-road in the opposite direction. Any bicycle router can use a foot=yes (even implied) just as well as a cyclist=dismount - for routing and/or for advisin

Re: [Tagging] one-directinal bicycle dismount on oneway road ?

means "no cycling" a long time already. For "no cycles" there should be a new tag. There was a discussion some time ago. But watch out for talking about "what is legally allowed" as it varies widely by country! Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging lifeguard watch towers

g and geocoding), I kind of feel that this may be a health "amenity" similar to amenity=doctors/clinic/hospital. I won't see them as a health_facility and would put them under emergency=lifeguard. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency_%28

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

d times, it is still "open end" but with different meaning. The current syntax "+" does not diffentiate between "until curfew" and "beyond curfew". But this seems to be a desirable differentiation. Why not extend the syntax with such quite clear definitio

Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging

e is not wide spreaded? At least the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_hydrant uses the term 'post- or pillar-type fire hydrant' - but I do not know who wrote that. At least there is a desire to distinguish between 'pillar' (or synonym) vice 'underground' vic

Re: [Tagging] wiki definition for man_made=works

man_made=works for the whole area of a work/factory complex of one operator (as one object). landuse=industrial otherwise may be the whole industrial area with several works (it is a use, not an object). It does not collide with man_made=works and can exist parallel. Georg

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

- wherever you are. Or the tax free amount of travel goods. :) A more real world example, where hours vary, would be open sunrise to sunset, which is often used for rural car parks. Yes - that's why opening_hours already support this. ;-) Georg

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - opening hours open until

, but I can remember, it was still in usage for pubs in my lifetime. I thought England (or maybe Great Britain) is still using this for pubs. At least, as this seems to be a problem, that causes the Prime Minister to intervene! ;-) http://news.sky.com/story/1205719/world-cup-pub-opening-ban-ov

Re: [Tagging] origin of some fire_hydrant tagging

in my opinion. Regarding standpipe: I would understand 'standpipe' as the device you need to connect to underground hydrants. So I would not use standpipe for hydrant:source but 'riser' instead, may be distuingish between dry_riser or wet_riser. Georg ___

Re: [Tagging] surface=ground/dirt/earth

made" / constructed work - which inside OSM seems to be the (defined) value "compacted". So I would get rid of dirt, but keep 'earth' beside 'ground' as a useful value (smooth walking on hiking trails) . Georg ___ Taggin

Re: [Tagging] simple_brunnel : one node bridge like xing highway over waterway

connection in reality. Missing or loosing the "bridge" tag I would always assume a ford there ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

ppropriate role. The information at the node itself will be only an information about importance in the end - not to say as renderer hint. And for this case a "value is less or equal" will be sufficient. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Taggi

Re: [Tagging] editing polygons in JOSM

, then proceed as described above. As far as I know there is no automatic way to do one of these. I would recommend the plug-in "utilsplugin2". This will give you new tools, e.g.: - Add nodes at intersections - Split object This will automate some, but not all of the neccesary ste

Re: [Tagging] Rendering change: buildings within highway areas

rect. Did you consider buildings that are - at least partly - raised on pillars/columns with a pedestrian area underneath? Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposed change to Tag:access=designated page

arked_ for a particular use". Nevertheless e. g. all highway=residential are _designated_ by law - without any signs at all... - which leads to _my_ understanding of designated ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org htt

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

n applications - and not between mappers! A second tag would not change the mind of a consumer about the meaning ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Date of survey

even without tag - regularly. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

Am 14.04.2015 um 07:28 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny: On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 00:08:31 +0200 Volker Schmidt wrote: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Separated_cycle_and_foot_path.jpg I would add also surface (and maybe smoothness) as this one seems to be quite bad. 3) How would y

Re: [Tagging] To tag "opening_hours=by appointment"

Am 30.06.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Robin Schneider: On 30.06.2015 14:04, Marc Gemis wrote:> in the local language (e.g 123 "nach␣Vereinbarung" -- German for by appointment) IMHO this means that there is nothing to forma

Re: [Tagging] waterway=derelict_canal

Am 27.08.2015 um 18:49 schrieb Philip Barnes: A disused pub, providing it still looks like a pub, is still a useful navigational feature. Pubs have always been the normal way of giving directions. http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/PrKK4Y3JBpdF3jg6fnLM1g/photo Turn right by The White Horse, carry o

Re: [Tagging] Pubs with accommodation

/node/75844692 ) are pubs that do accommodation, but not really hotels, so I'd use accommodation=yes for those. Why not the already established tourism=guest_house for this B&B offer? Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing li

Re: [Tagging] new access value

tination" would prohibt residents from driving through - but they are actually allowed to do so. Yes - but that's the very rare edge case Simon wrote about. Try to think about a router that would be able to handle this case - and its preconditions. Georg __

Re: [Tagging] manège - area for horse training

moves? Power? Is a carrière - sport_practice when there is just training but - sport when there is a competion? Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tunnel=culvert

l. The normal road traffic has not to obey these sign - but any street work or use (crawling ;) ) at the waterside. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] traffic_sign:forward=*

the way in the relevant direction - with all possibilities, but even all obstacles also ... I do not support this "node on way" strategy - I use only the node beside way as tagging for the sign itself - and "always on the right side" ;-) - at

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a fence made with metal bars?

in 'electric'. Under 'bars' I would understand some simple 'bars from metal between the poles - like the horizontal poles in the wooden 'pole' example. Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

traffic_calming=* should be identified as a traffic_calming we won't need highway=traffic_calming anymore ... Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] improve tagging of traffic_calming

ses I added the tag highway=crossing (and kept the traffic_calming=* tag) highway=crossing obsolete in this cases? Regards, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] boundary relations and the subarea property

Am 27.11.2015 um 15:46 schrieb André Pirard: Have you noticed that some borderlines are *hexaplicated* (that they appear in 6 different relations) and that *that* is unhealthy redundancy that is made unnecessary by subareas? And that, unlike wanting to destroy an enemy, the programs I spoke of

Re: [Tagging] service = parking_access for main ways on a parking lot

At all - what's the matter with the already said "highway=service" only if you can not distinguish the service or if it is a "bigger" service road? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging natural or historic regions

Am 28.03.2016 um 08:28 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 27.03.2016 um 21:59 schrieb Colin Smale : If we can't mark polygons as fuzzy, then we can only allow 'accurate' polygons well, as was proposed above, we could introduce a way to store fuzzy areas without using polygons, or by using more th

Re: [Tagging] Masts vs Towers yet again

Am 18.04.2016 um 04:39 schrieb John Eldredge: The 808-foot antenna for radio station WSM fits both the tower and mast descriptions we are using. > You are right about the descriptions in the wiki. The

Re: [Tagging] nursing homes and group homes

. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of larger surfaces for rendering and routing

Am 14.08.2016 um 23:24 schrieb Stefan de Konink: On zondag 14 augustus 2016 22:43:04 CEST, Marc Gemis wrote: IMHO, the value of the highway tag should define its use, not the surface from which it is made. So highway=pedestrian (or service or ...), surface=grass; area=yes makes more sense to me

Re: [Tagging] Freeway exit tagging

I consider the visual lane assistance as it is named - as an assistance useful where there are several options. If there is no assistance anybody who get the advice "take the exit" (*) should obviously use the rightmost lane. So even _no_ turn lane tagging would be an option for me in this (quit

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

Am 26.08.2016 um 14:18 schrieb Kieron Thwaites: I can, however, see the rationale behind tagging "none;slight_right", as well as tagging nothing at all, and as such, I think that this is an issue that we need to find consensus on. That said, I believe Paul is quite correct with his statement tha

Re: [Tagging] Busways

Am 02.11.2016 um 22:57 schrieb Tijmen Stam: On 02-11-16 20:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: careful with access=no, I suggest to use vehicle=no in this case, because you risk of excluding pedestrians (and other means of transport you didn't think about) as well (happened around here in the rea

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

Am 27.03.2017 um 17:29 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: 2017-03-27 16:34 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis >: In the case you have added e.g. a stop sign on the way. A second mapper comes in, splits the way on the stop sign, reverts the direction of one of the spit part

Re: [Tagging] Anti-slip surfaces

e as they suggest a certain amount of looseness. it may be not 'the best' tag - but is it not very similar to 'asphalt'? Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bus relation - circular route - report says not closed

he information is in the order of the relation and the platforms. Thoughts? Done. ;-) Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: On 27. Nov 2017, at 13:51, Selfish Seahorse > wrote: Sorry for asking again, but does anyone know if motorcar=no implies that there is no access for all multi-track motor vehicles or only for motorcars? In c

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Am 28.11.2017 um 11:54 schrieb Selfish Seahorse: On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for any double-tracked motor vehicles" has no e

Re: [Tagging] route/forward/backward members in all types of routes

Am 10.01.2018 um 12:32 schrieb Ilya Zverev: Selfish Seahorse wrote: The course of the route is determined by the order of the stops in the route relation. Therefore forward/backward roles would be redundant. But stops are not mandatory in public transport routes, unlike highways/railways! I am

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

rough a wooden door opposite to a steal one' to claim separate main tags. A height limitation isn't tagged elsewhere as a separate main tag. So I am not convinced 'sufficiently'. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Best way of tagging split between electronic toll and cash lanes?

andle unknown access values? I hope/think as 'no'). Nevertheless - as long as a router cannot discriminate _all_ of the necessary informations, he can only warn about the toll point itself - and the user have to discriminate visually. Georg ___

Re: [Tagging] lanes tag dispute

anes lanes:through=2 lane:turning_left=2 So I second Anthony. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] second_hand shops

d look for a furniture or clothes shop which sells second hand - I would look for a 'second hand shop' if I am looking for IT, electronics, games or other small stuff. At least here in Germany. BTW: A 'shop=car' mostly sells second hand also ... or only. Georg __

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

wn. What should be the problem? You wait until there is no car coming or all cars stop and then you cross. Yes - I see, you have _seen_ the point already. ;-) cheers, Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

router will have to use the 'road'. A router that does consider sidewalks, will _prefer_ sidewalks and use roads otherwise. A router that does not consider sidewalks will use the roads anyway. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@ope

Re: [Tagging] Turn Restriction usage

range anyway - a split and combine would not be 'rectangle'. (U-turns at dual-carriage ways with two 90° turns because of a via-way have to be considered separately. If not allowed - even only by law - a turn restriction may be helpful there.) Greetings Georg __

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

Am 12.04.2012 15:15, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 12. April 2012 08:44 schrieb Georg Feddern: A router that does not consider sidewalks will use the roads anyway. No, a router that doesn't consider sidewalks would with the currently suggested tagging use the sidewalk and think it

Re: [Tagging] highway=services/rest_area

Am 20.04.2012 10:46, schrieb Nathan Edgars II: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservices says that it (usually) has fuel and food, but it links to Wikipedia:rest area. Should the Wikipedia link be removed (and added to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Drest_area)

Re: [Tagging] Block names (vs street names) in Brasilia

hing like that - you need a special place= block value. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Block names (vs street names) in Brasilia

Am 25.04.2012 12:29, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: -1, place=locality shouldn't be used here, because according to the wiki it is not to be used for settlements or parts of them Objection granted! I abandon this question, Your Honour! ;-) ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

ambiguous here. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] "contact:phone" or "phone" to combine with "amenity=telephone"

e 'phone'. well, I too appreciate the namespaces if they avoid ambiguity - but is there really any ambiguity with phone, fax, email, website, webcam? contact: is a mere categorisation than distinction - and so it is just stuffing for me. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

x27;s one major difference between 1.5 and>=2.5, ie., whether the traffic in one direction almost always interferes with the opposite direction of the traffic, in the latter case it shouldn't happen So you mean 1.5 is the same as 1 regarding the "almost always interfere"? ;-)

Re: [Tagging] Dispute prevention: meaning of lanes tag

Then you may know, if your small vehicle can pass every oncomming lorry. But lanes=1.5 has no benefit or information here - not even for a cyclist, if you mean a 1.5 passenger car width - and the lorry is coming ... Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@op

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

For highway=pedestrian, at platforms and many other things we allow to add area=yes to a feature to turn a circular way (ring) to a circular area (filled area, polygon). If - and that's in fact more or less the result of the discussions we had in the last days - the difference between mini rou

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

this method - but would allow the mini-roundabout-tag on areas for compatibility reasons - may the latter rest upon 'already mapped' or 'stubborn resistance'. ;-) Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lis

Re: [Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

es" and implied oneway restriction. I think I understand your point here - but the simple node still has a oneway restriction too. Georg ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

  1   2   >