Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Cell Phone Reception

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 20:32:12 +0200 Marc_marc wrote: > Hello, > > Le 06.08.23 à 21:18, NickKatchur via Tagging a écrit : > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Cell_reception > > I'm a bit amused, or rather disappointed, to read comments like > "it's complicated to estimate the numbe

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - lifecycle prefix vandalised:

On Sun, 17 Sep 2023 14:59:27 +0100 Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > I thought that using photographic examples in the proposal would make > it fairly clear, but apparently not. > > If you come to a bench that is no longer there, "vandalised:" would > not apply. If the seats are damaged to an extend

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Deprecate crossing=zebra in favor of crossing:markings

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:58:37 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sent from a phone > > > On 28 Jun 2024, at 17:52, bauer3--- via Tagging > > wrote: > > > > I would like to introduce my proposal to deprecate crossing=zebra > > and replace the instances with the nowadays more popular > > alte

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 12:39:14 +0200 (CEST) Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > Jun 2, 2020, 03:52 by c933...@gmail.com: > > > > > > > 在 2020年6月2日週二 09:26，Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com> > 寫道： > > > >> On 30/5/20 12:48 am, Volker Schmidt wrote: > >> > My main point is that out there are thi

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 12:24:45 +0200 (CEST) Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > Jun 3, 2020, 07:03 by mark+...@carnildo.com: > > > On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 12:39:14 +0200 (CEST) > > Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > > > >> Jun 2, 2020, 03:52 by c933...@gmail.com: > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > 在

Re: [Tagging] Help explain the difference between path and track

On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 11:01:30 -0600 brad wrote: > I think if it's wide enough for a normal motor vehicle and is open > for that, even if only service & emergency, it should not be =path. > track or service In the United States, and probably in most other common-law countries, *everything* is open

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - shop=bubble_tea

On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 17:41:31 +0100 Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 17:28, Jarek Piórkowski > wrote: > > > > > I would suggest using an amenity tag rather than a shop tag since > > it's much more like a cafe or a fast food place than a store. > > > > I can see that it's more like f

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Ground)

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 19:36:10 +0200 mbranco2 wrote: > Maybe images was shot in a particular season, and the soil condition > is not always the same? > Well, if I check several imageries and in all of them I see a > "desertic land", I'm confident I can map that area with the tag we're > talking abo

Re: [Tagging] network tag on route relations

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 17:51:29 +0200 Peter Elderson wrote: > Aren't Interstate and US evident from the geographic extent as well? > The US has two national highway networks: * The Interstate Highway System, major high-speed roads connecting major cities. * The United States Numbered Highway Sy

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:29:17 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > And we would have to define what „bicycle“ means. > > Are these bicycles? > 1. > https://www.picclickimg.com/00/s/ODAwWDgwMA==/z/F-8AAOSwstJZXeV2/$_12.JPG > > 2. > http://img0.biker-boarder.de/detail_oxp1/g13_edge_raw.jpg > > 3.

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 22:49:47 +0200 bkil wrote: > Am I understanding correctly that this is what the wilderness rules > would like to achieve? > vehicle=no + scooter=prohibited + bicycle=prohibited + > moped=prohibited + unicycle=prohibited + hand_cart=prohibited + > wheeled_luggage=prohibited >

Re: [Tagging] narrow=yes, vs lanes=1, vs width

On Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:36:00 -0600 Rob Savoye wrote: > My entire county is contained within a national forest, and most of > the roads through residential areas are a single lane dirt road > maintained (sort-of) by the homeowners themselves. Often at the last > house the road becomes an unmainta

Re: [Tagging] Waterway equivalent of noexit=yes?

On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 19:37:40 +0100 Paul Allen wrote: > On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 18:36, Tod Fitch wrote: > > > Not yet mapped, but my prototype case can be seen in the Bing > > Imagery with an area that collect water around 33.99268,-116.22239 > > and flows generally to the east and north only to

Re: [Tagging] "width" on streets: Time for a recommendation

On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 10:09:17 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > on unpaved > roads, measure the extent of the maximum width that vehicles actually > use, on a medium to narrow part of the highway (i.e. do not add the > smallest width to a long stretch of highway if it only occurs for a > short pa

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Payment denominations

On Sun, 9 Oct 2022 17:08:46 -0700 stevea wrote: > At least in the USA, using currency (required to be accepted) isn't > like barter (doesn't have to be accepted): we even have a notation > on each and every "Federal Reserve Note" (the debt instruments used > in the USA as paper currency, often c

Re: [Tagging] plantation=yes?

On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:49:00 +0100 Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 01:10:33PM +, Dave F via Tagging wrote: > > Hi > > > > What does plantation=yes represent? > > Associated with woods, but nothing in the wiki. 2437  uses > > worldwide. Seems too vague to be OSM useful. > >

Re: [Tagging] bear box in campground ?

On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:44:41 -0600 Rob Savoye wrote: > Many western state campgrounds have metal bear proof food storage > boxes in each campsite, but not all of them. At certain times of the > year this can be important. :-) Around here the bears will destroy > your car if there is food left i

Re: [Tagging] Draft proposal for Key:aerodrome

Which is likely to cause confusion, because in the United States, an "international airport" is one that's got customs facilities. John F. Kennedy International (New York City's largest airport) and Eckhart International (a small grass strip near the Idaho-Canada border) are both considered inter

Re: [Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 18:29:04 +0200 Janko Mihelić wrote: > pet, 13. ruj 2019. u 17:31 Paul Allen napisao je: > > > On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 09:45, Janko Mihelić > > wrote: > > > > The correct way to group them is with a relation. If we don't have > > a suitable type of relation then propose one

Re: [Tagging] "not:brand" to mark a shop that isn't part of a chain?

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 10:52:01 -0400 Jmapb via Tagging wrote: > On 9/14/2019 10:53 AM, Tim Magee wrote: > > I would absolutely agree with this use case. Especially for cases > > such as the regularly mentioned Burger King. If somebody from out > > of town is either traveling through or armchair map

Re: [Tagging] Colby's "Instructions for the Interior Survey of Ireland" (Was: Strange tags)

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 12:42:38 + Philip Barnes wrote: > On Monday, 30 September 2019, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 12:41, Andrew Davidson > > wrote: > > > On 30/9/19 9:24 pm, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > > > > > I can't remember where I saw it, or even what I was looking for >

Re: [Tagging] New tag proposal: 'addr=milestone'

On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 09:01:06 +0200 Colin Smale wrote: > On 2019-10-01 08:18, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > > Hi Jorge, > > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 08:15:37PM -0600, Jorge Aguirre wrote: > > > >> Throughouthe entire Latin American region and some other parts of > >> the world, it is quite co

Re: [Tagging] Areas of bare soil (clay, silt, loam) such as badlands?

On Sun, 20 Oct 2019 09:19:10 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > How should areas of bare soil, such as badlands, be tagged? > > Currently there are documented tags for dry areas of bedrock, stones > and sand: > > natural=bare_rock, natural=shingle, natural=scree, and natural=sand > > For tidal a

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:17:55 +0100 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 12:47 Uhr schrieb Allroads > >: > > > Not only for bicycle dismount is used. These mofa moped motorcycle, > > need also wiki pages. > > IMHO we need neither bicycle=dismount, nor similar tags for mofas, >

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:26:14 + marc marc wrote: > Hello, > > Le 06.11.19 à 19:55, Mark Wagner a écrit : > > There are places like federal Wilderness Areas in the United States > > where possession of a bicycle is forbidden > > can you share the a picture of thi

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:13:49 -0500 Jmapb via Tagging wrote: > On 11/7/2019 2:09 PM, Mark Wagner wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:26:14 + > > marc marc wrote: > > > >> ere possession of a bicycle is forbidden > >> can you share the a picture of this tr

Re: [Tagging] What values of 'emergency=' should be on the main Map features page?

On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 22:18:10 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Should we remove some of the rare values of "emergency=" which have > got into Map Features? > ) =fire_hose "A high-pressure hose used to carry water or other fire > retardant (such as foam) to a fire to extinguish it." - 1115 uses > -

Re: [Tagging] Active volcanoes

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:04:21 +0100 Cascafico Giovanni wrote: > vHello ML! > this query [1] is supposed to display active volcanes. I made some > research using Sentinel-2 browser, but it happens that most volcanoes > doesn't have an infrared response [2]. > > Which is the criteria to tag volcano

Re: [Tagging] Active volcanoes

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 09:02:17 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/1/20 1:32 am, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 20:44, Kevin Kenny > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 2:38 PM Paul Allen > > wrote

Re: [Tagging] Active volcanoes

On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:47:39 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/1/20 6:24 pm, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > > I agree with you that this is the scale that volcanologists use, > > but people want to draw a distinction between something that > > erupted recently compared sometime

Re: [Tagging] road names and refs

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:23:59 -0600 Paul Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:15 PM Kevin Kenny > wrote: > > > Oh, and a further corner case: Are we agreed that something like > > "Old Route 7" has become a name? It's no longer a ref, because > > Route 7 is now elsewhere. It appears on st

Re: [Tagging] key damage and HOT

On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 08:12:17 + Paul Allen wrote: > Lifecycle prefixes prevent rendering of the feature. They are > equivalent to deleting the feature tag and adding a note to the > effect that the object is a disused . Except that the word > "disused" might not appear in the note and a syno

Re: [Tagging] Can highway=cycleway be limited to MTB?

On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 10:53:57 -0400 Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 5:12 AM Volker Schmidt > wrote: > > > > If a highway is mtb:scale=2 it is definitely not a cycleway. It is > > a highway=path with mtb:scale=2 If this were to encounter a > > "cycleway" with mtb:scale=2 , I would consi

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - traffic_signals=crossing_on_demand

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 18:42:42 +0200 lukas-...@web.de wrote: > The second goal my proposal wants to message is to deprecate tagging > "crossing=traffic_signals" together with "highway=traffic_signals" on > the same node. Especially if you're saying this is a full crossing > mapped. It breaks the hig

Re: [Tagging] With leisure=common deprecated, Senegal & Mali need a replacement

On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 12:08:22 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Do., 30. Apr. 2020 um 11:59 Uhr schrieb Warin > <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > > On 30/4/20 7:29 pm, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > > > Am Do., 30. Apr. 2020 um 11:18 Uhr schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier < > > j...@liotier.org>:

Re: [Tagging] highway=service, service=driveway vs highway=track

On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:45:48 -0400 Greg Troxel wrote: > Mike Thompson writes: > > > I have always been under the impression that the highway tag should > > be based off of function. Recently I have come across a number of > > cases where driveways and residential roads were tagged > > "highway

Re: [Tagging] RFC ele:regional

On Sun, 3 May 2020 14:16:09 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sent from a phone > > > On 3. May 2020, at 13:06, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > > > When I see an elevation value on the ground I do not see any > > reference to the reference system, so I cannot know, as a mapper, > > what reference s

Re: [Tagging] Tag:amenity=motorcycle_taxi not approved

On Tue, 12 May 2020 23:53:52 +0800 Phake Nick wrote: > Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi > and motorcycle taxi. Are there any differences that can't be explained by the fact that a motorcycle taxi uses a motorcycle to carry the passengers? For example, in the U

Re: [Tagging] Change of wiki page Key:access

On Wed, 27 May 2020 08:26:55 +0200 Colin Smale wrote: > On 2020-05-26 19:31, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > > > May 26, 2020, 19:19 by f...@zz.de: > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:46:11PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via > > Tagging wrote: May 26, 2020, 18:04 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com: >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boundary=aboriginal_lands

On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 15:21:28 -0600 Paul Johnson wrote: > Not to mention in practice, this is something of a misnomer for most > tribes in the US. WaPo has an op-ed > > about a

Re: [Tagging] Tourism=attraction: feature or secondary tag?

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 09:55:11 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > do you mean, 1) it is impossible to invent a tag for it which better > > describes its nature, or 2) that nobody has yet invented and > > documented such a tag? > > > > 1) is probably not possible > 2) would be good > I’m just not a

Re: [Tagging] Tourism=attraction: feature or secondary tag?

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 17:54:44 +0100 Rory McCann wrote: > On 06/12/2018 08:38, Mark Wagner wrote: > > Yellowstone National Park has attracted a fair few bare > > "tourism=attraction" objects. How would you tag the following: > > > > * Boiling River and Fir

Re: [Tagging] How to tag access restriction on interstate highway crossovers?

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 18:06:26 -0500 Xavier wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:38:26PM +0100, Volker Schmidt wrote: > >On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, 22:31 Xavier >> By "interstate highway crossovers" I mean small bits of road that > >> connect the two carriage ways of a US interstate highway and are > >>

Re: [Tagging] Trailhead tagging

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 20:57:04 +0100 Peter Elderson wrote: > Copying from an earlier response: Designated starting point for > multiple routes into a nature area. There is a designed marking pole > or stele, information boards, seats or benches, free parking space > nearby. This one is in a small v

Re: [Tagging] landuse=landfill : for regular/irregular ones

On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 18:41:19 + Sérgio V. wrote: > Many times in Brazil we found irregular landuse=landfill for urban > waste disposals. Many times they are simple trash grounds uncontroled. > Guess only 10% of them in Brazil are regularized. > > There are 2 fundamental classes according to it

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 07:54:00 +1000 Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Possibly something like caravan:type=caravan / motorhome / Winnebago / > camper trailer etc, but then you get to the problem of what is > difference between a camper van, motorhome & Winnebago? In the (US) industry, the terminology fo

Re: [Tagging] Creating shop=caravan

On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 11:59:35 + Paul Allen wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jan 2019 at 22:08, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > > Wow, so much for me naively thinking that caravan was a universal > > word! Should know better by now :-) > > > > Yeah, where are the camels? It's not a proper caravan with

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

My copy of the Oxford English Dictionary has about a page of definitions for "ditch" and "drain", and not a hint that either of them needs to be lined. -- Mark On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 01:28:10 +0100 Sergio Manzi wrote: > I know, that's why I asked for a good one... > > On 2019-02-02 01:23, Joseph

Re: [Tagging] Micronations

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 10:54:16 +1000 Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Does OSM recognise, & allow the mapping of, micronations as defined > areas? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micronation > > Was looking for something completely different :-) & just found this > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/653287

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 15:28:00 +0300 Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > > > пн, 4 февр. 2019 г. в 02:55, Martin Koppenhoefer > > > >: > > there is established tagging for buried man made waterways > > (tunnel=culvert and man_made=pipeline) > > tunnel=culvert is supposed to be used with waterway=*

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:55:50 +0200 Tomas Straupis wrote: > Two things to add: > 1. At least in Lithuania cartographic (topographic) "tree row" is > defined as "a row of trees groing alongside a road or railway". That > is random trees somewhere in a field do not become a "tree row" even > if

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

In the United States, the rules aren't quite as permissive (for example, authorities are allowed to forbid foot traffic), but in practice, I'm not aware of a single case where a residential street actually prohibits foot traffic. (I'm aware of one near me that's *tagged* as such, but I think it's

Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

Tracks are often "access=private" for everyone, so there's no reason to call out foot access in particular. -- Mark On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:27:44 + Dave F via Tagging wrote: > Why do you exclude tracks? > Legal access to them are often denied as they're on private land > (example: farms)

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 11:30:07 -0300 Fernando Trebien wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:52 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > > The real problem is that if unclassified is more important than > > residential, what to do with roads that do not merit unclassified > > but do not have primarily residential lan

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 17:58:51 -0300 Fernando Trebien wrote: > I queried place=hamlet in Washington State using Overpass Turbo and > compared it with the current classification in OSM. Indeed, many such > places lie next to major highways, as is the pattern in other > countries (small communities t

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:52:19 -0300 Fernando Trebien wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 3:46 AM Mark Wagner > wrote: > > When you did your query for hamlets, I'm afraid you ran headlong > > into a quirk of American political geography. Historically, the > > postal se

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 09:23:52 +0100 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sent from a phone > > > On 27. Feb 2019, at 08:56, Mark Wagner > > wrote: > > > > The best way I've found to identify "real" hamlets is the presence > > of a cemetery. >

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 02:05:46 +0100 Sergio Manzi wrote: > On 2019-03-02 01:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > > >> On 1. Mar 2019, at 13:45, Mateusz Konieczny > >> wrote: > >> > >> I would tag max weight, I would not tag emergency=no. > > > > +1, it will not exclude a

Re: [Tagging] tagging laboratories

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 14:03:37 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 04/03/19 21:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > Am Mo., 4. März 2019 um 09:37 Uhr schrieb Warin > > <61sundow...@gmail.com >: > > > > > > > > These can be commercialfirms, part of the g

Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along

On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:38:09 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24/03/19 21:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > > >> Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > >> > >> Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also > >> barrier=wal

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Runway Holding Positions

On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 13:27:23 -0400 Steven Estes wrote: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/runway_holding_position > > Proposing the addition of runway holding position markings (commonly > called hold lines). Runway holding position markings are painted > markings on an airp

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Grain Storage Centre

On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 16:38:56 + Philip Barnes wrote: > On Friday, 5 April 2019, Richard Welty wrote: > > On 4/5/19 11:19 AM, Cédric Mélac wrote: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Grain_Storage_Centre > > > Defintion: A large site with many silos and barns which > > >

Re: [Tagging] Subtag for place=locality?

On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:25:14 +0200 Christoph Hormann wrote: > place=locality is currently used as a generic tag for anything with a > name for which no established more precise tag exists. > > This kind of contradicts the idea of OSM which would normally suggest > to invent a new tag then for t

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:44:33 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > sent from a phone > > > On 17. Apr 2019, at 06:55, Joseph Eisenberg > > wrote: > > > > I searched taginfo for "tableland", "table_land", "table-land", > > "plateau" and "mesa". > > > > There are 94 natural=plateau and 3 natural=m

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:19:52 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I have reviewed all the features tagged as place=locality in 2 places > in the USA and 2 in Europe, and found that 3 out of 4, place=locality > is usually used for features that could be tagged with a more specific > tag. >... > Out o

Re: [Tagging] Marking temporary traffic organisation change

On Wed, 8 May 2019 17:35:09 + marc marc wrote: > Le 08.05.19 à 17:00, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > > sometimes change is applied for months > > > How one may mark that such change is temporary? > > > > It would be useful for at least two reasons: > > - it would easier to catch roads for

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair = hiking

On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:57:25 -0700 Nick Bolten wrote: > > IMO wheelchair=yes means accessible for most basic wheelchairs. > > Yes, but it's something that is frequently difficult to estimate. After learning that the trail from the Old Faithful viewing area to Castle Geyser isn't considered w

Re: [Tagging] Idea for a new tag: amenity=power_supply

On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 01:23:35 +0100 Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 23:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 04:53, Paul Allen wrote: > > > >> Having power_supply=yes indicates that the socket type is unknown, > >> > > > > But wouldn't that default as t

Re: [Tagging] track smoothness/quality

On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 19:10:24 -0600 brad wrote: > Unfortunately, the wiki for highway, in the section for track says: " > To describe the quality of a track, see tracktype > =*. " > But, as described in the wiki,  tracktype is not very relevant t

Re: [Tagging] maxstay=0

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 13:33:46 +0200 joost schouppe wrote: > Hi, > > The most common value for maxstay=* is 0. There is no guidance on the > wiki on how to interpret this. However, the below is used to explain > that you cannot use the parking on Sunday and public holidays. > > maxstay:conditiona

Re: [Tagging] Subkeys like payment:*=yes/no? | Re: Country code value prefix? | Re: Feature Proposal - Voting - Tag:insurance:health

Won't work in the US, as values have a size limit of 255 bytes, and there are more *insurance plans* than that in the US. You might be able to pack everything in by treating the value as a bitfield. -- Mark On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 16:52:22 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I’m normally not in favor

Re: [Tagging] Road hierarchy

On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 09:35:41 +0300 Tomas Straupis wrote: > Hello > > Road hierarchy is needed for a number of things: > * deciding which classes of roads to display on different scales in > a map > * performing road network validation > * other tasks (f.e. typification of buildings - orie

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of State Parks in the US

On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:49:40 -0700 Clifford Snow wrote: > I’m probably getting out into the weeds here, but I think it’s worth > mentioning that there are also *state park properties*… > > *State Park Properties:* Lands owned by the agency that are being > held for future development (and lack an

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours:sign=no - RFC

On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:23:43 +1000 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Most websites have some copyright thing .. that makes some nervous. > I usually only tag things that interest me, and stuff I like to > support. In the United States, at least, opening hours are uncopyrightable. You can on

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Feature Proposal - Voting - Dog poop area (dog_toilet)

On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 14:50:33 +0200 joost schouppe wrote: > I've removed the reference to "pets", however in the real world dog > toilets are the actual thing and any pet willing to use it is > allowed. So I' don't really see the problem. > > The four options could be moved somewhere else; I just

Re: [Tagging] iD presets

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 14:52:32 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > if iD provided a mechanism to choose from different sets of presets > (or maybe compose different subsets of presets to a set), the default > set could be the one that most of all active mappers in the previous > month have used. Th

Re: [Tagging] Let's get (quite) rid of units and their multiples in OSM values

On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 22:33:10 +0200 François Lacombe wrote: > Well okay > Given problem is how can we query maxspeed like : > [Maxspeed>25] ? > Which situation do we want to optimize for? The rare case, or the common case? It's common to want to document legal restrictions such as "speed limi

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a way with several conditional access restrictions

On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 21:48:36 +0200 SelfishSeahorse wrote: > Note that the wiki states that wheelchair=* should be used instead of > disabled=*. However, I think this is wrong: wheelchair=* gives > information whether something is suitable for wheelchair users, while > disabled=* gives information

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

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 20:36:06 +0200 Tobias Zwick wrote: > From your anecdote, it seems, an implicit speed limit tagging scheme > is even more important in the US than for example in the UK In my part of the US, a meaningful implicit speed limit tagging scheme is impossible, due to the three sets

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

nwood Road might be 50 mph, but the road was designed around farm trucks going no more than 20 mph, and has the tight curves, short sight lines, and poor surface quality you'd expect for that speed. -- Mark > On 19/09/2018 07:15, Mark Wagner wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 20:36:06 +020

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

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 08:09:12 +0200 Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:24:00AM -0700, Mark Wagner wrote: > > My point is that no such guarantee exists for roads without speed > > limit signs. Yes, the numeric limit for something like Glenwood > > Road mig

Re: [Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 20:19:58 +0200 SelfishSeahorse wrote: > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 at 19:34, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > > I think it's better to stick to either a common or a technical > > > definition. > > > > > > it doesn’t have to be the British definition of terms, has it? > >

Re: [Tagging] My "weirdly unnatural aversion to relations"

On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 17:01:33 +0100 Paul Allen wrote: > Even if a multipolygon can have many disconnected outers, it seems > I'd have to make each university > building an outer. And then there are no inners. So even if it can > be done that way, it seems like > an abuse of the concept, which I t

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

No. Sometimes, all I know about a store is what it says on the sign out front. If the store calls itself "Empire Foods", it's a good bet it sells food. -- Mark On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 13:04:39 +0900 Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Highway=road and building=yes are used when adding features based on >

Re: [Tagging] Greengrocer vs grocery vs shop=food?

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 19:53:41 +0900 John Willis wrote: > > On Oct 11, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Mark Wagner > > wrote: > > > > Empire Foods", > > The name doesn't help much either. > > A convenience store? > > Food production? (Not a shop)

Re: [Tagging] Another multipolygon question

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018 09:49:57 -0500 Kevin Kenny wrote: > Not only legitimate, but recommended! > > If you haven't stumbled on it yet, another useful procedure is to map > areas of landuse use or landcover by drawing each border only once, > and having each area be a multipolygon with the shared

Re: [Tagging] Upcoming removal of power=station and power=sub_station in the standard style

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:27:01 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 23/10/18 05:04, Yves wrote: > > Daniel, Mateusz and others: if nobody care to review those sub > > stations, this means they need care. > > That's more a concern than an old tag in the DB. > > You want them re tagged, th

Re: [Tagging] Wastewater Plants

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 08:20:03 -0700 Clifford Snow wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 6:05 AM Paul Allen wrote: > > > > > It has the disadvantage that it doesn't make sense. At least not > > to me, as a native speaker of > > British English (which is the normal language for defining OSM > > tags)

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 14:17:49 +0900 John Willis wrote: > Javbw > > On Jun 13, 2016, at 8:22 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: > > >> Highway=trail > > > > I don't think we need to change path to trail. It's basically the > > same thing. > > Path=trail > Path:trail=main > > Something, *anything* t

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 07:59:18 -0400 Greg Troxel wrote: > Martin Koppenhoefer writes: > > > sent from a phone > > > >> Il giorno 13 giu 2016, alle ore 01:22, Greg Troxel > >> ha scritto: > >> > >> I agree there should be some tag to show that a trail/path is the > >> main one. > > > > do we

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - learner driver

On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 00:00:13 +0800 Michael Tsang wrote: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/learner_driver > > The proposed feature learner driver is to tag the legal access of a > highway by a vehicle driven by a learner driver. It is similar to > Key:access#Transport mode re

Re: [Tagging] reviving an abandoned proposal

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 15:55:58 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2016-07-23 15:21 GMT+02:00 ael : > > > OTOH, some of the deep historic cuttings illustrated earlier don't > > seem to me to fit the description hollow_way, which was perhaps the > > point. > > > > > yes, there are different kind

Re: [Tagging] tagging floodplain

In the United States, this is usually defined as the "X years floodplain", indicating how frequently it's expected to flood. For example, the 100-year floodplain is the area around a river is the area that's expected to flood an average of once every hundred years. -- Mark On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 1

Re: [Tagging] Busways

On Sat, 5 Nov 2016 16:42:47 +0100 Tijmen Stam wrote: > On 03-11-16 11:55, Yves wrote: > > @Tijmen, IMHO there is very little chance to convince people to > > change the way we tag highways because of buses using them or not. > > Yves > > This saddens me, because I don't propose to "change the

Re: [Tagging] railway=rail vs. railway=subway

On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 07:45:04 -0800 (PST) Michael Tsang wrote: > > I don't follow this. light rail is about the cars being lighter and > > perhaps the rails being built to a lower weight limit, and it isn't > > about grade crossings. Around me there is real rail with fll-sized > > enginers and i

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a private/membership club

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 13:22:48 -0500 Andrew Wiseman wrote: > Hey all, > > Myself and a few other folks in the US have been looking into a way > to tag private or membership clubs -- things like the Elks Club, > Fraternal Order of Eagles, Veterans of Foreign Wars club (which are > sometimes open to

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=grass - boots on change to wiki

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:28:37 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Following on from the discussion on "Wrong use of > landuse=village_green > - but what else to use?" and subsequently bring up the wiki on > landuse=grass I have made a major change to landuse=grass to what I > th

Re: [Tagging] highway=services & "Road Stations" - subtag requested.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:58:39 + Andy Townsend wrote: > On 25/01/2017 12:28, tomoya muramoto wrote: > > I think "Michi-no-eki" is not a kind of highway=services, > > because usually it does not have a car specific service, like a gas > > station or a car maintainance. > > > > A typical Michi-n

Re: [Tagging] self-service laudry machines a camp and caravan sites

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:28:17 +0900 John Willis wrote: > Javbw > > Side note: > > I imagine laundromats could have a whole > > Laundromat:foobar=n scheme. > > Laundromat:10kg_dryer=8 > Laundromat:20kg_dryer=2 > Laundromat:10kg_sidewasher=3 > Laundromat:20kg_sidewasher=1 > Laundromat:shoe_w

Re: [Tagging] lanes=3 + lanes:forward/backward=1 for "semi-divided" roads?

On Sat, 11 Feb 2017 23:39:00 -0500 Albert Pundt wrote: > Consider High Street in downtown Carlisle, PA. It is one lane each > way, with a wide space as wide as a travel lane in the middle, but > not used for anything such as a center turning lane. Tagging this > with just lanes=2 seems wrong sinc

  1   2   >