2011/7/23 Tobias Knerr :
> http://wiki.osm.org/Proposed_features/Conditions_for_restriction_relations
I like this proposal and I think it could be extended for weather/road
conditions as well (fog, wet surface, etc.)
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing
2011/7/25 OSM user :
> Hello!
> Please, look at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr:territory .
> I suppose to use this tag for addresses, which doesn't contain name of
> some street (for example, there are no street in some villages, there
> are addresses ", ").
What abou
there is currently some wikifiddling going on for implicit maxspeeds.
on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source:maxspeed
someone adds an "alternative" tagging method like this:
* {{Tag|maxspeed||IT:urban}} and {{Tag|source:maxspeed||implicit}}
* {{Tag|maxspeed||DE:rural}} and {{Tag|sourc
I wonder if this definition which was formerly part of the description
for highway=unclassified is still valid:
"Unclassified roads typically form the lowest form of the
interconnecting grid network."
It was removed here "(Tidying up the struck bits)":
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?ti
2011/7/27 Simone Saviolo :
> IMHO, it's a sentence that is both unclear and wrong. "Interconnecting grid
> network" has no significance: if it wasn't interconnecting it wouldn't be a
> network, and a grid network is just a specific case of a network but the
> unclassified applies to any kind of net
2011/7/27 Simone Saviolo :
> 2011/7/27 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> Maybe I'm being picky. What I mean is: we have a worldwide graph of roads,
> or a "network" if we want to call it that. A grid network, to me, sounds
> like an orthogonal grid, like the one you'd fin
2011/7/27 Richard Mann :
> When I had a go at re-writing it, I tried to give some clarity on the
> boundaries with adjacent values (residential, tertiary, track) -
Yes, but on the other hand deleting the cited part changed the
definition and made it more difficult to differentiate between
unclass
2011/7/28 Simone Saviolo :
> 2011/7/27 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> Then I can't honestly grasp what this "interconnecting" network is.
> Or rather, I think I understand what you mean, but you're not defining it -
> you're describing it with a vague term.
2011/7/28 Colin Smale :
> It sounds like there are three types of street name:
> 1) Official, as decided by the Powers That Be
> 2) Signed, as displayed on the signs
> 3) Colloquial, as people habitually use
>
> So which one do we put in "name=*", and what do we do with the others?
1) should gene
2011/7/28 Josh Doe :
> There's been some recent discussion on the talk page, so please review at
> least the four sections starting here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/kerb#Height
>
> Open issues as I see it include:
> 1) Replacing "lowered" with "ramp" or "dropped"
>
2011/7/28 Josh Doe :
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:15 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>>
>> 1) lowered is not the same as "ramp" or "dropped".
>> See here:
>> http://www.kohl-ratingen.de/images/kohl-markierung/z.299.jpg
>
> I'm not
2011/7/29 Steve Bennett :
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:58 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> I wonder if this definition which was formerly part of the description
>> for highway=unclassified is still valid:
>
> I love it when people are brave enough to question the semant
2011/7/29 Sander Deryckere :
> Well, I just don't know any gates with names, exept city gates like the
> Menin gate in Ypres, but they can't be closed and I should not tag it as
> barrier=gate but rather as a building.
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=historic%3Dcity_gate#tags 200x
htt
2011/7/30 Dave F. :
> HMS Belfast should help:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.506278&lon=-0.081219&zoom=18
>
> Take a scoot South-East for a totally over the top mapped/tagged building.
> "It was the fault of the government"
IMHO
building=ship
tourism=museum
(culture=museum)?
Cheer
2011/7/30 Sander Deryckere :
> @Martin: historic=city_gate seems a good tag for city gates indeed, but the
> menin gate already has historic=monument, so I'll have to think about it.
you could think about removing historic=monument, it doesn't seem
appropriate for a gate IMHO. See the wiki:
"An
2011/7/30 Pieren :
> A ship, even static, is not a building. That's tagging for the renderer.
it depends which definition of "building" you are applying. Floating
buildings might be legally considered buildings in some places.
there is already 27 building=ship
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/sea
http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/5585874
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2011/7/31 Pieren :
> You can reuse the existing entrance tags. According to the Richard Fairhurst
> duck test, if it looks like a ship, is floating like a ship, it's a ship...
> not a building magically floating on the water ;-)
It's physics, not magic.
http://sicarius.typepad.com/althouse/floati
2011/7/31 Pieren :
> The OP is about USS Slater in Albany NY
> Wikipedia says : "The destroyer closes to the public from December to March
> and moves from the Snow Dock to the port's Rensselaer side" ([1]).
> A ship moving 2 times a year and tagged as a building
OK, I wouldn't necessarily ta
2011/8/1 Steve Bennett :
> should be usefully shown on a map. I don't know if we have a strict
> definition of "building" but I would go with something like "a
> man-made structure with walls that is by default inaccessible to the
> average pedestrian".
generally walls are not a requirement for b
2011/8/4 Steve Bennett :
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Dave F. wrote:
>> Sports_centre appears to be used for multiple sports.
>
> Weird, I've always tagged them leisure=sports_centre. I never realised
> it's supposed to be for multiple sports. That seems like an
> unnecessary restriction?
+
2011/8/16 Tobias Knerr :
> Arthur Lutz wrote:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Billboard
>
> You should probably talk to the creator of
> http://wiki.osm.org/Proposed_features/advertising
>
> It proposes advertising=billboard (as well advertising=column etc.).
> Both tags wou
2011/8/18 Pieren :
> So, you blame my examples but you agree with my suggestion to remove
> the tags translations in the wiki.
I think that Tobias said this well above:
"species:de/en/... might be useful temporarily when someone doesn't know
the Latin name (although that's not hard - you can loo
2011/8/18 Pieren :
> I also found a related key formal documentation about "taxon":
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:taxon
> which deprecates "species" and replaces "genus" by "taxon:genus".
> Again more inconsistencies in our documentation...
+1, it would be nice if alternatives would be
2011/8/18 Steve Bennett :
> several cranes sharing the same set of rails, and I think it would be
> legitimate to describe the rails and the crane (in some indicative
> central position) separately.
+1, IMHO there is a key missing for the rails because railway=rail is
not the tag we should use fo
> point the writer to the voting process.
I agree that it would be nice to stick closer to the proposal
procedure when defining new tags in the wiki.
Recently there is lots of pages popping up which try to establish
alternative tagging schemes to already in use schemes (I guess that
sometimes th
2011/8/17 Colin Smale :
> On 17/08/2011 12:19, Sander Deryckere wrote:
>> It has a bad discription, it's a tag for a temporary feature (at least
>> how I interpret it) and it didn't go via the voting process.
>>
>> So I would just delete it and point the writer to the voting process.
>>
> Since wh
2011/8/23 Colin Smale :
> My point is that all these tags
> which are *now* established and widely in use, probably got that way without
> discussion and documentation *in advance* but were simply taken into use by
> the early contributors and documented afterwards.
+1, I also guess that in the e
2010/4/8 John Smith :
> From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beach
>
>> "Beach areas should always meet with a natural=coastline way. Do not use
>> this tag for patches of sand/gravel which are not by a coastline. Note that
>> the natural=coastline should ideally be positioned at the average h
2010/4/9 Richard Welty :
> many towns in upstate NY have town beaches on local lakes.
In Berlin we have beaches (Oststrand [1+2] ) at the river and even in
the zoo ;-) [3]
cheers,
Martin
btw.: what about tagging (and rendering) surface=sand ? IMHO the
beaches-hack is not to be kept eternally...
2010/4/10 Ben Laenen :
> Now, about paved on the outside and unpaved in the middle: given the fact that
> paved roads shouldn't be tagged as tracks anyway, ...
why not? Of course they are: grade1-tracks have to be paved (or
similar surface like very compounded hardcore).
cheers,
Martin
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
an John
Details anzeigen 17:04 (Vor 0 Minuten)
2010/4/10 John Smith :
- Zitierten Text anzeigen -
> On 11 April 2010 00:18, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> btw.: what about tagging (and rendering) surface=sand ? IMHO the
>> beaches-hack is
2010/4/11 John Smith :
> On 11 April 2010 20:40, Roy Wallace wrote:
>> Surely these should be tagged golf_course=bunker, or something.
>
> I was hoping for something a little more generic since you can also
> have beach volley ball areas that are no where near beaches, there is
> also sand in dese
2010/4/12 John Smith :
> On 12 April 2010 09:09, Steve Doerr wrote:
>> Sand is not a necessary element of a beach in any case. In fact, the
>> original meaning of 'beach' was: 'The loose water-worn pebbles of the
>> sea-shore; shingle.'
>
> All this means is that sand is assumed, since natural=bea
2010/4/12 John Smith :
> I updated the ticket I submitted the other day for surface=sand to be
> rendered the same as natural=beach
>
> http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2873
I updated the wiki-description for surface (included other areas than highways).
cheers,
Martin
__
2010/4/12 Anthony :
> No. There are probably more OSMers that know basic English than OSMers that
> know basic German. And we all know where the hyphen key is.
Don't know if that's true, but if I see how many complaints there are
about the ÖPNV-Karte, which ist just one word, probably introducin
2010/4/20 Erik Johansson :
> Wouldn't it be great if railway=subway_entrance was rendering
+1
currently I'm mapping them with barrier=wall (U-form) and
highway=steps in the middle (and on the end subway_entrance) but it
would be nice to have them show up.
> , and if
> we had a generic scheme to
2010/4/26 John F. Eldredge :
> A subway entrance is a descending staircase, usually in the middle of a
> sidewalk. Coming from one direction, you encounter the steps. Coming from
> the other three directions, you encounter some sort of wall or fence to keep
> you from falling into the stairwel
2010/4/26 Jukka Rahkonen :
> Area=yes is unnecessary.
+1
> And then the buildings have
> properties like architect, height, number of floors etc.
ideally yes. To find out which tags you can really find associated,
simply use tagwatch or analyse the planet ;-)
cheers,
Martin
__
2010/4/30 Jonathan Bennett :
> On 30/04/2010 09:57, Claudius Henrichs wrote:
>> I'm trying to get some input on how to tag a shop selling fish and
>> seafood from some english speaking users.
>
> For the sake of sanity I'd use
>
>> shop=fishmonger
>
> This describes what the shop sells in general
2010/4/30 Richard Mann :
> poissonerie, surely?
Poissonnerie
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poissonnerie
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
what about a simple shop=fish ?
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2010/5/2 Zeke Farwell :
> Thanks for all the ideas. Definitely seems like natural=coastline;cliff is
> a bad idea and may screw up coastline rendering.
on the other hand use of separators on coastlines could push
integration of multiple feature values into the main tools (or maybe
by preprocessi
2010/5/3 John Smith :
> Why does it need to be a unifying criteria?
>
> Provide the tags, people will come up with their own criteria based on
> their own cultural background, while they will be similar, there will
> be subtle differences.
+1
cheers,
Martin
_
2010/5/3 Seventy 7 :
> The existing walls have been tagged historic=citywalls which render as a
> thick grey line in Mapnik and don't render at all in Osmarender. This is an
> undocumented tag as far as I can tell.
thanks for this, I was mapping city-walls in Rome and the thin grey
line for the
2010/5/3 Seventy 7 :
> The existing walls have been tagged historic=citywalls which render as a
> thick grey line in Mapnik and don't render at all in Osmarender. This is an
> undocumented tag as far as I can tell.
>
> The documented (and therefore correct?) tag is barrier=city_wall, which
> ren
2010/5/5 Jonas Minnberg :
> I am currently working on cleaning up stuff in Stockholm, and I was
> wondering if it was OK do to things like:
>
> * Remove cycleways parallel to other ways and add a cycleway=track to that
> way instead.
no, you should rather do the opposite: remove the preliminary t
2010/5/5 John Smith :
> On 5 May 2010 23:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> I suggest to change leisure=park to landuse=grass if it is not a park.
>
> This was covered in another thread, landcover isn't the same thing as
> landuse, the only landuse=grass I can think of i
2010/5/5 Jonas Minnberg :
>> If they aren't parks, then what are they?
>
> They are trees or sometimes small areas of grass next to buildings. For
> instance;
use landuse=grass, that's IMHO not wrong regarding landuse-use ;-) in general.
cheers,
Martin
__
2010/5/5 Jonas Minnberg :
> Shouldn't you expect - you know - *grass* in areas with landuse=grass ? :9
>
> Seriously though, from the image of the actual street you can see that it is
> a sidewalk. The only people who see the green surface are the ones flying
> over it.
I must admit I didn't look
2010/5/5 John Smith :
> the amenity=fast_food is the primary function of the POI, it has a
> secondary functions of cafe=yes, restaurant=yes and
> drive_through=yes...
yes, but what do you do if all those functions are primary? Sometimes
this is the case.
Gruß Martin
___
2010/5/5 Jonas Minnberg :
> I will not join together joining areas since there doesn't seem to
> be consensus on that.
I think there is consensus that the nodes should be connected (and
I'll even go so far to say it is wrong if they are not connected). The
open question is whether this should inv
2010/5/5 Jonas Minnberg :
> Well since we need space for all those thousands of sidewalks that people
> want to add maybe we better leave space around all roads anyway :)
IMHO the sidewalk (and the street) are not part of the adjacent
landuses anyway. I thought you were asking for landuses one to
2010/5/5 ivom :
> Just wondering when the use of : of . is most appropriate with regard to
> namespace tags in mind. Some examples like this tree:height=20m or
> shop.restaurant.parking=yes is what I mean.
>
> Is the : de-facto the namespace divider of choice or does the . come into
> view for some
2010/5/6 John Smith :
> On 6 May 2010 19:27, Richard Mann
> wrote:
>> In the UK, they'd almost certainly be tagged as supermarkets, since
>> our stores tend to have one product area dominant (eg groceries).
>> Department stores are large shops with lots of different departments
>> selling lots of
2010/5/6 Tyler Gunn :
> Here's the same area in OSM; I've added a lot of detail to this shopping
> district including parking lots, buildings, and started to put in POIs. I
> think this is a HUGE improvement over what Google Maps shows:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.82372&lon=-97.20104&zo
2010/5/6 John F. Eldredge :
> From my experience (in the USA), most WalMarts and KMarts only allocate a
> small percentage of their floor space to groceries. The so-called "super
> WalMarts" have a full range of groceries; even so, the grocery section takes
> up only 20 percent or so of the sto
2010/5/6 Jonas Minnberg :
> landuse=lawn (For smaller areas of kept grass that are
> either inaccessible or not meant to - you know - picnic on or similar).
> landuse=yard (For private backyards etc, usually inaccessible, even if they
> may look park-like on the satellite).
For the first there is
2010/5/6 Richard Welty :
> most of these stores devote no more than 5 or 10% of their floorspace to
> food, and are otherwise inexpensive department stores, and i'm certainly
> having trouble seeing how 10% of their stock overrides the other 90% when
> it comes to tagging.
I see. The type of disc
2010/5/6 Tyler Gunn :
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2010 12:37:10 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
>> +1, nice.
>> cheers,
>> Martin
>
> It definitely shows how incredibly pedestrian-unfriendly these big
> suburban box store "malls" are. There are buildings in a sea of pa
2010/5/6 Jonas Minnberg :
> Also, you can't always tell if you actually can walk there, it may be one of
> those in-between-building areas that are completely inaccessible.
access=no
although "completely inaccessible" is always relative: do you have to
climb a fence? Dig a tunnel? Use a boat? Use
2010/5/6 Cartinus :
> On Thursday 06 May 2010 15:06:36 Jonas Minnberg wrote:
>> > for the latter
>> > highway=pedestrian, area=yes. For accessibility use the access-tags,
>> > e.g. in your examples access=no and access=private.
>>
>> This would really confuse I think.
>
> This is not confusing, it
2010/5/6 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
> To the proposed solutions in this thread:
> * highway=pedestrian, area=yes - It doesn't really make sense to me to
> tag private fenced and _green_ areas by highway tag.
sure, for green areas it isn't, for paved ones it IMO is.
> * surface=grass, surface=la
2010/5/7 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
>>> * surface=grass, surface=lawn, surface=whatever - I don't like this
>>> because what I really want to map is not that my neighbour has a lawn
>>> behind his house, but the fact that there is a private "green" property
>>
>>
>> add access=private?
>
> You mis
I set up a page (Draft) for additional barrier-values. If you want to
contribute I will be glad.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/New_barrier_types
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.opens
2010/5/12 John Smith :
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/New_barrier_types
>
> Why not just start using these values?
I'm already using them
> The whole proposal seems pretty inconsequential, it's not like you are
> trying to make a well sued highway tagging scheme redundan
2010/5/12 Craig Wallace :
> On 12/05/2010 14:41, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/New_barrier_types
>
> I don't think barrier=swing_gate is really needed. Its still a type of
> gate, so it should just be tagged barri
2010/5/14 Steve Bennett :
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:05 AM, John Smith
> wrote:
>> The whole proposal seems pretty inconsequential, it's not like you are
>> trying to make a well sued highway tagging scheme redundant.
> Do we agree there is a basic goal of getting everyone to tag the same
> way
2010/5/14 John Smith :
> You missed the important point I made, which was the bit about these
> types of tags being incosequential in the entire scheme of things,
> documenting them is more important than any vote when it won't have
> any great effect on anything else.
I (obviously) don't agree
2010/5/14 Jonas Minnberg :
> What about bordering buildings - ie buldings sharing walls but having
> different addresses/uses ? Is it better to draw the as a single area or as
> separate but with shared nodes?
IMHO the more you can separate them, the better. Usually I would
expect (in a "final" s
2010/5/14 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
> And the added bonus of abusing leisure=garden tag... Let me one more
> time explain what I think is wrong on this tag, so here is an example:
> Step two: Which one of these lines better describes the area?
> A) Place where flowers and other plants are grown
2010/5/14 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
> That's the part of copied text from wikipedia, that really significantly
> changed the meaning of leisure=garden page on OSM wiki. Take a look at
> the history, only few weeks ago the content said something completely
> different (although it was marked as a
2010/5/14 Jonas Minnberg :
> Oh and I forgot:
> * landuse=grass overlapping landuse=wood, grass set as layer=-1
is this inside a building or are there platforms or what is the
purpose of this layer-tag?
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@
2010/5/14 Jonas Minnberg :
> OK, some real world examples;
> * Two overlapping wood-areas, one named, the other not.
Generally it's a good idea to tidy up your area, given you know the
area, so in this case: either you know the extent of the named area in
real life, or you shouldn't touch it.
>
2010/5/14 John Smith :
> On 15 May 2010 05:27, Jonas Minnberg wrote:
>> Oh and I forgot:
>> * landuse=grass overlapping landuse=wood, grass set as layer=-1
>
> Are you mixing up landuse and land cover by any chance?
you're insisting on this one? Yes, you are right: in traditional
geoscience land
2010/5/14 John Smith :
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_garden
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_garden
>
> I don't really see what the big deal is, leisure=garden can mean a lot
> of different things to a lot of different people, so it needs to be
> sub-tagged,
+1
and one possible w
2010/5/14 Liz :
> On Sat, 15 May 2010, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> what if someone decides not to cut his grass? It would IMHO still be a
>> garden.
>>
> My grass is rarely cut (climatic reasons) and we have left the main grassed
> area to become /meadow/.
> It
2010/5/15 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
>> but before neither ;-)
>
> I disagree, it was pretty simple to ask myself if the area is "Place
> where flowers and other plants are grown in a decorative and structured
> manner or for scientific purposes." - Botanical garden - yes, Japanese
> garden belong
2010/5/14 John Smith :
> On 15 May 2010 05:50, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Thanks for opening a new thread.
> I filed a bug for surface=grass, we also possibly need one for
> natural=beach, surface=sand|gravel etc...
+1
>> encourage people to change tagging. This is all bec
2010/5/15 John Smith :
> On 15 May 2010 11:30, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> yes, we should. Most of them are already present in "nature".
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
the thing is: the amount of different values makes it already hard to
actually use
2010/5/15 Jonas Minnberg :
> Is it OK to use information you find on map-signs next to streets or
> suburban areas?
> Usually they show the houses and street names in a certain area (residential
> or commercial most often).
> None I have found have ever had any sort of copyright text on them.
If
2010/5/16 Pieren :
> +1
> I submitted a ticket to revert this change :
> http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2970
> Mapnik cannot display all tags and all information in OSM. Showing all
> private things will result of an unreadable map.
It depends on the way the information is displayed. Of cou
2010/5/16 Jonas Minnberg :
> Also, is it OK that natural overlaps landuse? It kind of has to be, since
> it's used a lot to place brushes or tree-areas inside larger landuses.
IMHO yes, as natural is mainly about landcover (what you physically
encounter on the spot) while landuse is about usage.
2010/5/16 Andre Engels :
> That doesn't matter for OSM. All things are copyrighted, you said it
> yourself. Whether it's "fact" or "knowledge" doesn't matter.
no, you can't put copyright on facts.
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openst
2010/5/17 Steve Bennett :
it doesn't seem to work for e.g. amenity=drinking_water
(you list just Osmarender, but it is also displayed in Mapnik, the
cyclemap and JOSM and probably others as well).
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstr
2010/5/16 Zeke Farwell :
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 10:29 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>>
>> IMHO yes, as natural is mainly about landcover (what you physically
>> encounter on the spot) while landuse is about usage.
>
> If you want do some extremely detailed m
2010/5/17 Pieren :
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Jonas Minnberg wrote:
>>
>> I'm kind of considering if this is right or not - if a road is the divider
>> between two landuses, is it still best to unglue it from the landuse(s) and
>> move it into one or the other?
>>
>
> It's best to unglue b
2010/5/17 Andre Engels :
> Even if the collection is copyrighted, that does not make its elements
> copyrighted. What is copyrighted in the case of such a collection, is
> the (result of) the selection process that decides which facts are and
> are not included.
My first comment was not heading to
2010/5/18 Ulf Lamping :
> Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in
> use for years.
+1
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2010/5/18 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
> Hi,
> I had finally some time to write down some proposal of sub-tagging for
> leisure=garden as discussed earlier.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Garden_specification
>
> Since I'm no big gardener any comments and suggestions are mo
There is maybe also some potential conflict with allotment gardens?
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2010/5/19 Greg Troxel :
> I would call the first access=destination and the second access=permissive.
yes, by thinking it over I also see some space for a restriction
between permissive and private and destination is more "elegant" cause
it uses an already introduced value for access.
cheers,
Ma
2010/5/19 Roy Wallace :
> IMHO, those sites are used for surveying. Or at least they're close
> enough to not warrant introducing a new obscure tag.
+1
or at least a more specific tag than "man_made=gps_receiver". If you
want a dedicated tag use sth. like plate_tectonic_monitoring
cheers,
Martin
2010/5/18 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
> M∡rtin Koppenhoefer napsal(a):
>> Thanks for putting this up. I would actually try to reduce some of it
>> to the necessary:
>> "The most common form of garden, located in proximity to a residence,
>> usually privat
2010/5/19 John Smith :
> On 19 May 2010 12:56, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> or at least a more specific tag than "man_made=gps_receiver". If you
>> want a dedicated tag use sth. like plate_tectonic_monitoring
>
> I wasn't feeling inspired today, which is wh
2010/5/19 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" :
? No, it is useful for castles and other representational gardens as
well. Why would you restrict it to residencial areas? I mean, at least
that would be quite a change from the current definition.
>
> landuse=recreation_ground OR landuse=residen
2010/5/19 John Smith :
> how about using man_made=gps_monitoring_station instead then?
yes, I'd say that's much better, even though I would probably stick a
note that this is about plate tectonics monitoring.
> While that is a nice idea, it doesn't pan out that way in reality for
> various reas
2010/5/19 Anthony :
> One problem I have with the concept of "access=destination", even beyond the
> fact that it says "right of access", is that parking lots quite often aren't
> connected to the places they serve. Something like access=customer is
> therefore *more general*. The parking lot mig
2010/5/20 Tyler Gunn :
> Lol, now just think if we micro-mapped each tree in the parking lot you
> could get your GPS to determine the spot that is likely to be in shade for
> a large part of the day, keeping your car nice and cool! :) Ok, too far
> perhaps.
height and diameter are still missing
2010/5/19 John Smith :
>> yes, I guess it helps more to speak German ;-). In German highway=ford
>> translates to "Furt" and this is the definition in OSM. Mostly you can
>> guess the meaning of tags by typing them into an
>> English-German-dictionary and look up the various meanings in German.
>
>
101 - 200 of 969 matches
Mail list logo
