sent from a phone
> On 22 May 2023, at 20:06, Dave F via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> I've a leisure=picnic_table but has an extended table top made of metal to
> accommodate disposable barbecues.
>
> Can anybody recommend a sub-tag that's more descriptive than barbecue=yes?
for the avoidance of
sent from a phone
> On 27 May 2023, at 08:45, Alex wrote:
>
> As a group of mappers who regularly map playgrounds, we are proposing more
> values to the list of documented playground equipment to better map typical
> devices that had no documented value before.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetma
sent from a phone
> On 9 Jun 2023, at 12:04, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> I can't find it either. I remembered that JOSM presets have a lot more
> detail than the wiki. But I checked, and I don't see anything about
> "coaches" (which I think is the word in EU for what we Yanks would call
> "bus",
sent from a phone
> On 9 Jun 2023, at 12:56, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The difference between a coach and a bus?
>
> A 'coach' is intended for long distance transport - so more comfortable,
> provision for luggage and possibly an on board toilet.
yes, but this is a distincti
sent from a phone
> On 10 Jun 2023, at 00:13, Matija Nalis
> wrote:
>
> I think in such vandalized case it would be better tagged as
> disused:amenity=bbq or abandoned:amenity=bbq
there is also fireplace as tag
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@op
sent from a phone
> On 10 Jun 2023, at 17:58, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote:
>
> I don't know if
> wayside_cross is used for this in some instances, for example, which
> IMHO it shouldn't be
agreed. One tag I am aware of in this context is memorial=ghost_bike
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/t
sent from a phone
> On 14 Jun 2023, at 11:15, _ _ wrote:
>
> What separator do you use, and what advantage do they have over the others?
the semicolon is standard for most cases, for multilingual names dashes and
slashes are in use, for housenumbers periods are an alternative to semicolons
sent from a phone
> On 15 Jun 2023, at 09:41, Simon Poole wrote:
>
>
>> Am 14.06.2023 um 11:26 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
>> ...for housenumbers periods are an alternative to semicolons.
> You probably wanted to write "commas", periods are not in use
Am Sa., 17. Juni 2023 um 21:48 Uhr schrieb Minh Nguyen <
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>:
> You're quite fortunate that the meaning of an address is unambiguous in
> Italy. At least you can be sure that a pedestrian route will lead to the
> main entrance, even if other modes aren't as well-served.
sent from a phone
> On 21 Jun 2023, at 13:10, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I note the absence of 'fire' in the above definitions. Explosions can be had
> from compressed gas
doesn’t seem to cover electromagnetic weapons, or does it?
___
T
sent from a phone
> On 21 Jun 2023, at 15:52, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> It is absolutely the wrong thing to say that shop=firearms means "a shop
> that sells whatever the local law means by firearms". This is a
> general principle in OSM that we define something and then expect
> mappers to use
sent from a phone
> On 22 Jun 2023, at 00:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> Generally, yes, I'd however not invoke the law at this point - I'd say a
> shop=firearms is whatever locals would call a firearms shop, if that term is
> used locally.
agreed
>
> Generally speaking I object to an one
Am Do., 22. Juni 2023 um 12:36 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
>
> yes, but motorway is an exception because it is usually defined by signs
>> rather than characteristics (e.g. if the signs are missing but it looks and
>> feels like, we use motorroad=yes in some countries
Am Do., 22. Juni 2023 um 14:41 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
> Suppose in some other country, bakery is a term that means a shop that
> primarly sells sausages. We wouldn't say that this should be
> amenity=bakery.
this is why we have agreed to use English words. A "bakery" in English is a
place
sent from a phone
> On 23 Jun 2023, at 16:13, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> My point is that a tag defines a semantic concept and that we should strive
> to have it mean that concept everywhere. That is the point, so that data
> consumers can use it.
agreed. The problems for example arise bec
sent from a phone
> On 24 Jun 2023, at 00:29, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>
> But if we focus too pedantically on legal status at the expense of common
> sense, then we've reinvented designation=*, and mappers and data consumers
> have to find yet another key to express what could've been in highway
sent from a phone
> On 25 Jun 2023, at 18:11, Timeo Gut wrote:
>
> Other than the obvious yes/no we should also have a value to indicate that a
> place generally allows outside food but charges a fee for bringing particular
> items.
this is something typical also in Italy: people bring th
sent from a phone
> On 26 Jun 2023, at 20:50, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, the Sporting Goods Retailers subindustry in NAICS
> includes "gun shops".
what’s the category for multi role combat aircraft or heavy battletanks?
___
Tag
sent from a phone
> On 2 Jul 2023, at 20:19, Asa Hundert wrote:
>
> I'd have to propose to deprecate the uses on areas
> that allows for such atrocities as "amenity=lounger; surface=grass".
I don’t think this would be suitable tagging for a Liegewiese (habe recently
seen such a sign in the
https://i.etsystatic.com/26861520/r/il/09aa34/3144992841/il_1140xN.3144992841_ps9i.jpg___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
sent from a phone
> On 3 Jul 2023, at 01:27, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Ah, but is that frame, material or surface? :-)
frankly I believe this level of detail would be overdoing it. Feel free to
develop any scheme you feel suits well. If I wanted to tag more detail,
priority would be „mat
forwarding by request.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Casper Kersten via OpenStreetMap Community Forum
>
> Date: 20 July 2023 at 13:41:38 CEST
>
> Reply-To: OpenStreetMap Community Forum
>
>
>
> Friendly_Ghost Casper Kersten
> July 20
> Hello friends,
>
> I wrote a short proposa
Am Mi., 6. Sept. 2023 um 19:46 Uhr schrieb Anne-Karoline Distel <
annekadis...@web.de>:
> I've decided to cancel the proposal I started on August 22 in favour of
> using the vending machine option in combination with fee=no instead.
I am thinking about using natural=bay with water=no for some n
sent from a phone
> On 11 Sep 2023, at 08:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> foot:oneway=yes / oneway:foot=yes?
as „oneway“ is defined for vehicles only, „oneway:foot“ doesn’t make a lot of
sense. The wiki suggests „foot:backward“ or „foot:forward“ as alternatives that
follow the generic wa
sent from a phone
> On 17 Sep 2023, at 14:12, Marc_marc wrote:
>
> If you're not there at the precise moment of the change of state,
> the only thing you can see is that the bench is no longer there
> or isn't in a working state anymore
maybe, but there might be other ways to learn how it wa
sent from a phone
> On 17 Sep 2023, at 20:25, Mark Wagner wrote:
>
> was it deliberately pulled over by a snowmobiler
> (thus, "vandalized:")
if you don’t know it you can remain on the save side and put “destroyed“
because this is what you see. It doesn’t mean there aren’t lots of other
si
Am Mi., 27. Sept. 2023 um 10:32 Uhr schrieb Mitchel van Duuren <
mitchelvanduu...@hotmail.com>:
> This proposal suggests the addition of a new tag to represent historic or
> decommissioned millstones found worldwide within the OpenStreetMap
> database: historic=millstone.
>
I think it is genera
Please comment on the proposal for highway=ladder
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Ladders
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
sent from a phone
> On 20 Oct 2023, at 10:23, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> maybe just removing this bad advise without proposal would be a good idea
+1
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.or
Voting is now open for highway=ladder
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Ladders
Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hi,
just a short headsup that voting is ended now, the proposal was
approved with 95% of votes:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Ladders
I have created a page for the approved feature:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dladder
Cheers,
Martin
__
sent from a phone
> On 20 Nov 2023, at 20:59, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> is there a way to tag shops that are not used for selling goods
> directly, but are just used for display for the actual shop or even to
> advertise something different? Here in Ireland, I think they are of
sent from a phone
> On 21 Nov 2023, at 12:47, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
> The wiki for Tesla says that Tesla showrooms are tagged shop=car
> A lot of shop=kitchen are really showrooms where you can order a
> kitchen which will be installed in you kitchen. The shop do not actually
> have kitch
sent from a phone
> On 21 Nov 2023, at 21:42, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
>
> With more stuff being sold online, we will probably see more showrooms,
> and I think we should have a way to tell users if they can buy anything
> at a shop, or it is just a showroom
yes, this is a good idea. The
Am Mi., 22. Nov. 2023 um 17:12 Uhr schrieb Anne- Karoline Distel
:
>
> My case was where you can't enter the premises, it's really just displaying
> goods or even (slightly different) displaying contact details for the
> business which has moved to the outskirts of town.
yes, your thread was so
sent from a phone
> On 22 Nov 2023, at 18:33, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> I would consider it more as device than showroom
can you provide a dictionary definition for “device” that could refer to a
room? Because the ones I looked at wouldn’t fit.
Cheers Martin
sent from a phone
> On 27 Mar 2024, at 20:36, Dave F via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> what determines the cut off point for a name being too "slangy"?
the “what” is harder to generalize, but the “who” is pretty clear: the local
mapper decides this
___
Ta
sent from a phone
> On 15 Apr 2024, at 07:37, yo paseopor wrote:
>
> It is not a big problem...except they are using the same key.
it is not a problem, as long as the values describe a traffic sign. It means
parsing doesn’t become even slightly more laborious, as a datauser you have to
parse
Am Mo., 15. Apr. 2024 um 12:33 Uhr schrieb Greg Troxel :
>
> It seems really obvious that normalized osm words and CC:codepoint are
> different things and belong in different keys.
>
they are both ways to refer to a traffic sign, you do not have to know they
are "CC:codepoint" values, you can ju
Am Mi., 24. Apr. 2024 um 16:33 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien <
fernando.treb...@gmail.com>:
> As Antarctica is international space,[1] I understand that, in
> principle, the highway classification scheme of no particular country
> applies there.
Generally, highway classification is not done base
to be more concrete, I think for an important link like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pole_Traverse
highway=primary would be appropriate.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
sent from a phone
> On 25 Apr 2024, at 09:51, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> By established conventions of functional road tagging in OSM these would
> almost all be service roads (no through-traffic to other destinations than
> the ones the route ends at).
this is also the case with some mo
sent from a phone
> On 26 Apr 2024, at 09:30, Daniel Evans wrote:
>
> Differentiating with different `product=` values doesn't seem sensible - both
> types of works "produce steel", and getting into specific types of steel
> doesn't help. The two `landuse=industrial + industrial=x` tags do a
sent from a phone
> On 26 Apr 2024, at 13:11, Daniel Evans wrote:
>
> It sounds like your feeling is that the tagging of industrial sites should be
> closer to power=plant and the associated plant:x tags.
I say it already is like this. The meaning of landuse=industrial is land used
for in
sent from a phone
> On 26 Apr 2024, at 14:34, Daniel Evans wrote:
>
> Thanks. I have been partly lost between some competing (but perhaps poorly
> supported) proposals which suggested more focus on making the `industrial=`
> tag more detailed. I'll give some thought to what a sequence of `wo
apart from the usefulness in routing (as there aren’t alternatives it doesn’t
matter for routing if a road on antarctica is unclassified or primary, and
usual time estimates would generally not be useful in this particular context
and also likely more depend on the vehicle than the “road”), the
sent from a phone
> On 27 Apr 2024, at 10:55, Daniel Evans wrote:
>
> works:industry= is an option which is much clearer about exactly what the tag
> means. Does that sound good to you?
it is fine, maybe also just “industry”? There are a few hundred of them but not
so much with works: http
sent from a phone
> On 28 Apr 2024, at 19:58, Daniel Evans wrote:
> I've seen "industry=" proposed/discussed before, with the big problem that
> it's very close to the existing "industrial" tag, and it would likely be too
> confusing if they had different meanings (one for land use, one for
Am So., 28. Apr. 2024 um 16:40 Uhr schrieb Andy Townsend :
> Assuming we're talking about something that's signed as a "Public
> Bridleway" in England and Wales*, then at the most basic level there are
> two tags to consider:
>
>- highway=steps
>- designation=public_bridleway
>
> The first
Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 09:47 Uhr schrieb Jo :
> I was wondering about that myself. They seem to be 'long' steps. So a
> horse wouldn't have too much trouble with them.
>
there is this property which might be applying:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:flat_steps
Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 16:06 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien <
fernando.treb...@gmail.com>:
> > why you think that place=hamlet are automatically entitled to
> > highway=tertiary?
>
> The wiki emphasizes the highway classification should consider the
> relative importance of roads within regional c
Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> (second note also may benefit from fix as the most important in
> Vatican is not highway=trunk - though again, maybe it can be avoided
> via "Vatican has no road network system").
>
the Vatic
sent from a phone
> On 30 Apr 2024, at 08:51, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
>> In fact, some bicycle trails are signed where
>> cycling is illegal
>
> So does that then make it legal?
no, in Germany it also happens from time to time that we discover signposted
bicycle routes where cycling i
Am Di., 30. Apr. 2024 um 10:54 Uhr schrieb Szem :
> There was a similar conversation in the Hungarian community as well. I
> would like to ask what you think about such (and similar) official bicycle
> route signs:
>
> https://www.google.hu/maps/@47.4675022,18.8055463,3a,35.3y,85.25h,81.51t/data=!
Am Di., 30. Apr. 2024 um 01:47 Uhr schrieb Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana <
jptolosanz...@outlook.cl>:
> It has no sense to inflating classifications of every island in the word
> for being the most important road in respective island.
>
> If a neighbor garage is more quieter than the mine is not a jus
what about
sells:bread=X;Y;Z (xyz being bread types)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
I agree for specific types of bread, but maybe we can have "classes" of
breads, if that makes sense. Personally, when going into a bakery I am
interested in the quality of the bread more than the exact type. Typically
I would ask "do you have bread made of natural sourdough" and the answers
will va
Am Fr., 3. Mai 2024 um 14:09 Uhr schrieb Zoon van Michiel <
spaanse@gmail.com>:
> What is the benefit of putting the breads a bakery sells into OSM?
> Otherwise, bread is just bread. I will choose the variety I like best when
> I get there.
That even bakers might not advertise which sort
sent from a phone
> On 3 May 2024, at 15:39, Daniel Evans wrote:
>
> This proposal has now been updated on feedback, both here and on the talk page
thank you for working on this, the current improvements are promising, I think
you could work a little bit on the page structure, now there are
forwarding this from the forum:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/voting-feature-proposal-shop-tortilla/113059
Voting will start tomorrow for shop=tortilla at the proposal page. I am not
familiar with mailing lists, so, please, cross post this announcement on the
tagging mailing list on my
sent from a phone
> On 11 May 2024, at 23:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> If you do, I will appreciate it if you comment in this thread that you did
> crosspost my call for votes on the proposal.
I sent it to the tagging ml
___
there is also
restriction=no_entry
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
sent from a phone
> On 20 May 2024, at 21:57, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>
> I tried that, but could not get the from, via and to nodes to work out.
create a node at the actual start of the crossing street (some meters away from
the crossing of the center ways) and split it there, that’s your vi
Am Di., 21. Mai 2024 um 15:01 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> In such case I would typically place such tags on
> a short section (meter or two) of way near end where
> such restriction is applied.
>
the restriction is not applied to a section, it is app
sent from a phone
> On 1 Jun 2024, at 19:55, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> yes, but tagging very short stretch of road (say 3m where it is not connected
> to anything)
> conveys the same info without using relations
it is tagging for the router, you add a oneway restriction
sent from a phone
> On 23 Jun 2024, at 12:35, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> So I think you should absolutely have the oneway section, even if you
> also add another tag. Unless of course there is evidence that the large
> majority of routers would do the right thing.
there is no oneway section be
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 alternative of
> crossing:markings=zebra and crossing=uncontrolled.
it is almos
sent from a phone
> On 28 Jun 2024, at 21:15, Mark Wagner wrote:
>
> at the current pace, the specific combination of
> "crossing=uncontrolled, crossing:markings=zebra" is probably going to
> have double the usage of "crossing=zebra" by the end of the year.
that’s possible, just currently bo
forwarding on behalf of Jason, Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jason Olshefsky via OpenStreetMap Community Forum
>
> Date: 16 July 2024 at 04:26:10 CEST
> To: dieterdre...@gmail.com
> Subject: [General talk/Tagging general discussion] [Voting] (Post-comment
> changes) Add ability to specify or
crossposting on behalf of tordans:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-feature-proposal-deprecate-cycleway-shared/116579
Hello! I am looking into deprecating cycleway=shared (notshared_lane). Please
find the proposal at Proposal:Deprecate cycleway=shared - OpenStreetMap Wiki
I sugges
sent from a phone
Begin forwarded message:
> From: dknelson9876 via OpenStreetMap Community Forum
>
> Date: 14 August 2024 at 04:44:16 CEST
> To:
> Subject: [General talk/Tagging general discussion] Proposal to replace
> `denomination=mormon` with `denomination=latter-day_saint`
> Reply-To:
Am Mo., 9. Sept. 2024 um 10:55 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> It has nothing to do with the vehicle specification.
>
> The sign is there to stop the destruction of the way through overloading
> the structure, thus an unload hgv may meet the required weight limit and
> use the way, bu
sent from a phone
> On 4. Jun 2020, at 02:29, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> The Map Features page is already quite long and unwieldy, so it is reasonable
> to limit how many more tags are added.
yes, it is already so long, it really doesn’t matter so much whether you add
another item or not,
sent from a phone
> On 4. Jun 2020, at 02:41, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> All features with 50+ uses? It would probably not load within minute in a
> typical browser.
you’re right, make it 500
>
> In its current state it is still barely usable.
+1
Cheers Martin
_
sent from a phone
> On 6. Jun 2020, at 03:58, Jack Armstrong wrote:
>
>
> The wiki permits the mapping of reality, on-the-ground, as it is in the world
> today. OSM should reflect what exists today, not decades ago. If there is
> something that remains of a previous railroad, then it can be
sent from a phone
> On 5. Jun 2020, at 10:14, European Water Project
> wrote:
>
> They also expressed interest in having more Mapillary images linked to OSM
> objects.
from the OpenStreetMap point of view it seems preferable to have the images we
link to available openly. If mapillary doe
sent from a phone
> On 4. Jun 2020, at 16:56, Cornelis via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> Maybe this one even serves as example for an old railway that in fact
> should be mapped to explain these clearly visible features that
> otherwise would lack an explanation?
this is about a different topic: pro
sent from a phone
> On 6. Jun 2020, at 00:04, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> I do object strongly to the invitation to remove the razed/dismantled-railway
> tag in the case of railway tracks have been replaced by roads with the same
> geometry.
+1
Cheers Martin
___
sent from a phone
> On 7. Jun 2020, at 23:54, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> Do you also object when the geometry of the railway and the road is a
> straight line?
yes
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.op
sent from a phone
> On 7. Jun 2020, at 03:32, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> How hard you look for them? I would hope that does not extend to ground
> penetrating radar that is used to find old buildings that used to exist
>
ultimately things under the surface would be included, th
sent from a phone
On 6. Jun 2020, at 11:22, Lanxana . wrote:
But how to indicate that it’s underwater partially or totally and its
access is occasionally possible, when the water drops?
an area with natural=water around it?
I find these tags, but none convinces me:...
Location=underwater [
Am Mo., 8. Juni 2020 um 10:48 Uhr schrieb European Water Project <
europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com>:
> Dear Martin,
>
> For-profit companies have different levels of openness, I think it would
> be a mistake to put them all in the same bucket.
>
> While all their data and images are not open, Mapil
Am Mo., 8. Juni 2020 um 11:20 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> On 6. Jun 2020, at 00:04, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> I do object strongly to the invitation to remove the
> razed/dismantled-railway tag in the case of railway tracks have been
> replaced by roa
Am Mo., 8. Juni 2020 um 12:28 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
>
> Jun 8, 2020, 11:39 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
> Am Mo., 8. Juni 2020 um 11:20 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
>
> On 6. Jun 2020, at 00:04, Volker Schmidt wrote:
sent from a phone
> On 9. Jun 2020, at 03:40, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Similar for Roamn and Saxon sites, if there is something present today, map
> it... nothing there then nothing on OSM, put it in OHM
Warin, can you give an example for something historic that is not there
sent from a phone
> On 8. Jun 2020, at 18:14, Alan Mackie wrote:
>
> Last I heard it was "mostly harmless".
the less dangerous an area is, the more the remaining dangers will be
emphasized. Let’s tag normalized dangerousness ;-)
Cheers Martin
__
sent from a phone
> On 8. Jun 2020, at 11:53, European Water Project
> wrote:
>
> Which is why we seek to store user contributed images on Wikimedia Commons
> (if they will accept them) rather than on our server.
+1, I completely agree, of all available options wikimedia commons seems a g
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 01:07, Mike Thompson wrote:
>
> I asked this same question about a trail in a nearby park (Natural Area) a
> couple of weeks ago on this list and received a largely different answer from
> the one I am receiving today. Perhaps it is just that differe
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 02:31, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> In terms of function, 'track' and 'service' (with or without
> 'driveway') are practically interchangeable - at least in terms of
> what they provide to the road network. They're both distinguished by
> the fact that they do
Am Mi., 10. Juni 2020 um 14:09 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny <
kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>:
> As far as I know, all routers need the node if they're going to, for
> instance, present a warning to an approaching motorist or cyclist that
> the crossing is impending. But some attributes of the crossing (most
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 20:28, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> 1. Tagging both the crossing and a node on the highway.
> https://mycloud.snowandsnow.us/index.php/s/YEFoYcTgR2gtW3j
> 2. With no crossing ways, just a node on the highway to mark the type of
> crossing https://mycloud.s
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 18:19, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> Before changing the wiki, I'd like a clearer understanding of your proposed
> change.
this sentence was only introduced recently, it is not backed by history,
current usage or the people in this thread here. Just remov
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 18:56, Mike Thompson wrote:
>
> Also, the land manager (e.g. parks and recreation department) has access to
> almost all of their properties via motor vehicle.
>
> Does this only apply to unpaved ways?
General motorized traffic is typically exclude
sent from a phone
> On 10. Jun 2020, at 23:28, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> I would suggest that the one feature per element page needs to include a
> couple of exceptions to the rule.
the rule is mostly pointless, because it depends what you define as a feature.
In the crossing example there
sent from a phone
> On 14. Jun 2020, at 20:02, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
>> What do you mean by 'just unused?'
>
>
> Waiting to be demolished
or repaired, turned on, reused etc.
just unused means not currently used/operating, but might again in the future,
or not.
For example a disused
I just noticed that a year ago someone well meaning has significantly
changed the site relation definition, by introducing the requirement for
the site to be "man_made":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Relation%3Asite&type=revision&diff=1850677&oldid=1850254
According to the comm
sent from a phone
> On 19. Jun 2020, at 11:20, European Water Project
> wrote:
> For how long ?
for as long as Facebook wants. There is also the practical aspect: even if the
license is permissive, it doesn’t imply you can actually get the data for
downloading.
Facebook has changed condit
sent from a phone
> On 19. Jun 2020, at 20:32, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> A qanat is a specialized kind of underground aqueduct which is the
> traditional way of supplying water in hot and arid climates within limited
> distance of a mountain range.
while the description reads quite ne
What about historic=aqueduct
should it be applied as well, in case of historic qanats?
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Am Fr., 19. Juni 2020 um 23:15 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> As mentioned on the proposal page, there are 4 criteria, which all qanat
> features share:
>
>
>- The immediate source of water is groundwater (aquifer or well), not
>a spring, stream or river
>
>
1 - 100 of 6536 matches
Mail list logo
