sent from a phone
> On 5. Nov 2020, at 00:13, António Madeira via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> In Portugal and all Mediterranean countries, there are thousands of thresing
> floors. Most of them are not used anymore, of course, but they are still
> preserved and are private spaces used for many pur
sent from a phone
> On 5. Nov 2020, at 16:47, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> We use amenity=ice_cream and not amenity=ice_cream_parlor, because "ice
> cream" is the amenity being offered.
ice cream is more outlier than regular though. And amenity=ice_cream is not
just for ice cream parlo
Am Do., 5. Nov. 2020 um 13:59 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> This may be a losing battle but I'll point out (once again) that historic
> is not
> a synonym for old, disused or repurposed.
>
I agree, the word "historic" isn't always a synonymon for old , but the
things that we tag in "historic=*" are
Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 13:56 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 09:09, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>> We do not distinguish "truly historic" wayshrines from "ordinary"
>> wayshrines.
>>
>
> We currently do not make the dist
Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 21:04 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> ** Support for group naming is limited. It's here very common that several
> smaller islands are named as a group, smaller ponds are named as a group
> etc, without having individual names. Ther
Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 23:21 Uhr schrieb Anders Torger :
> I have not understood why there are these CPU limits, if it's "just" due
> to under-financed server infrastructure, or if it is a problem that can't
> be solved regardless of server infrastructure. As a layman one would think
> that some
Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 23:28 Uhr schrieb Anders Torger :
> I agree, but one renders (in some way at least), the other doesn't. Which
> one will the casual mapper choose? I'm a bit impatient and like to see
> results now.
>
> The cluster tag was drafted 2015, the group tag 2018. None of them rende
sent from a phone
> On 8. Nov 2020, at 07:46, Cascafico Giovanni wrote:
>
> retaining wall [1] is applicable to whatever area
retaining wall is only applicable to linear features, and while it could be
used here, it would make both, reading the map (looking for terraced fields)
and mapping,
sent from a phone
> On 8. Nov 2020, at 09:24, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> I really like an idea of separate database/layer for such fuzzy objects.
I have started a project to collect such fuzzy objects. Data is stored in a git
repo in Geojson representation. Pull requests we
sent from a phone
> On 8. Nov 2020, at 10:08, Yves wrote:
>
> * CC0 doesn't allow to derive data from OSM
it does. The whole point (for me) to start this was to provide data that can be
combined with OpenStreetMap. What would be your suggestion for a licence? I
would be willing to double l
sent from a phone
> On 8. Nov 2020, at 12:23, Allroads wrote:
>
> Toponym key
>
> Used at a import.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/3dShapes/Landuse_import
> Translation:
> Toponyms are used to still be able to apply a name = * to a large area, even
> if this has been divided into te
Am Mo., 9. Nov. 2020 um 09:37 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> In short: technically CC0 may be used, but it would be confusing as ODBL
> would still
> apply anyway.
>
> See https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility#CC0
>
> "CC0 lice
Am Mo., 9. Nov. 2020 um 13:15 Uhr schrieb Anders Torger :
> A question, is this database only intended for very large polygons, or
> also rather small?
>
at the moment, the polygons are all rather small, but the intention is to
get regions of all sizes, where they exist. As long as it is not so
sorry, of course I meant "rather large", in the first sentence
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>From what I understood to me it also seems desirable to distinguish a
"lake" from a "pond", although there may be edge cases and no clear cut
between both, for many cases it will be clear which one to choose. Maybe
most could be solved by depth and surface dimensions, but we are generally
missing
Am Mi., 11. Nov. 2020 um 14:22 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
> This doesn't seem like a good idea to me. The boundary between a lake and
>> a pond may be hard to measure sometimes, but that doesn't mean it is useful.
>>
>> In what way is this distinction useful?
>
fo
Am Mi., 11. Nov. 2020 um 15:52 Uhr schrieb Seth Deegan :
> If one was to establish a rendering difference, they should probably do so
> by computing the lake size in the (the area of the way), rather than its
> tagging.
>
the lake size is determined also by its depth
Cheers
Martin
_
Am Mi., 11. Nov. 2020 um 16:16 Uhr schrieb Ilya Zverev :
> My point is that anywhere except UK, “ride-sharing” is the term for Uber,
> Lyft, Bolt, and such. While researching, I’ve found road signs and articles
> using “Ride Share” or “ride-sharing” in the US, Australia, and Russia.
>
I am not c
Am Do., 12. Nov. 2020 um 02:33 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> Ok, it looks like enough people feel that a very small artificial water
> body, like a decorative pond in a residential garden, shouldn't be tagged
> as water=reservoir or water=basin, so we need a replace
sent from a phone
> On 12. Nov 2020, at 21:10, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> You need to explain this on the new proposal page. Note that on
> Tag:shop=funeral_directors it says "an event (sometimes with the deceased's
> body present) to honor the deceased for mourners are held here in conj
sent from a phone
> On 14. Nov 2020, at 04:05, Kevin Kenny wrote:
>
> Around here, beavers are a significant sculpting force on the landscape.
>
> (And `man_made=dam` is the best tagging that we have for their water control
> structures, which are also often adjusted seasonally)
frankly,
sent from a phone
> On 14. Nov 2020, at 08:05, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
[canal areas]
> There was never a standard way to tag this before
I thought it was waterway=riverbank?
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
ht
sent from a phone
> On 17. Nov 2020, at 06:23, stevea wrote:
>
> to the degree they can be displayed in a narrow column on a web page
yes, this is basically broken since the redesign (maybe 2012?), the history
view used to provide a clearer overview on the full width, and this is
something
Am Di., 17. Nov. 2020 um 20:04 Uhr schrieb stevea :
> I never said to NOT use source=* tags, they are correctly used on an
> individual datum if / as it might diverge from a greater set of data that
> otherwise has another source. In short, if ALL of the data are from a
> single source, use a cha
Am Mi., 18. Nov. 2020 um 13:19 Uhr schrieb ael via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:09:40AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> We have tags like source:name and source:outline for more specific
> tagging.
>
yes, every tag could get a source
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 09:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> I would describe https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg as road
> with
> - one lane driveable by full-size vehicles
> - one parking lane
>
really? And if vehicles would be parking on both
Am Fr., 20. Nov. 2020 um 11:28 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
> This seems unlikely, with 0 lanes it would mean that cars inside are
> blocked
> and unable to leave.
>
that's not the meaning of "lanes", lanes=0 would mean that there are no
traffic lanes. (this is what
sent from a phone
> On 20. Nov 2020, at 23:01, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> surface=rock
> surface=bare_rock
these seem both explicit and ok, although bare rock is a bit redundant
and rock alone has 5 times the usage:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/surface=rock
I wo
sent from a phone
> On 20. Nov 2020, at 23:22, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> Both for exposed natural rock and steps/footways made of rock pieces?
rock „pieces“ would be tagged as „stone“ I guess?
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailing
sent from a phone
> On 22. Nov 2020, at 02:32, François Lacombe wrote:
>
> It's true proposed tagging deprecates the current pump=* definition according
> to rationale and wishes to use the pump word in a more appropriate way.
this would deprecate around 20k pump values describing a pump ty
sent from a phone
> On 22. Nov 2020, at 18:47, Seth Deegan wrote:
>
> I agree with Dave F.
>
> It's a duplicate.
I also agree with Dave F., it is not a suitable surface value, nor is it a
duplicate of “surface= wood”
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging m
sent from a phone
> On 24. Nov 2020, at 18:30, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>
> Following the discussion on how to tag COVID-19 vaccination centres
> previously on this list,
> I have created a proposal for the vaccination key:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/vaccination
th
sent from a phone
> On 25. Nov 2020, at 02:28, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> It's built right beside a Creek, on a flood-plain (yeah, thanks Council!), so
> it's done like that so that the apartments are up away from the water the
> next time the Creek floods!
AFAIK we do not have a specif
sent from a phone
> On 25. Nov 2020, at 14:15, Phake Nick wrote:
>
> I don't thibk it is appropriate to add one-off temporary facilities into OSM.
everything is temporary, e.g. buildings, trees, even mountains, although the
latter on a geological time scale. Not to speak of businesses. Things
Am Do., 26. Nov. 2020 um 08:25 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
>
>- It is not explicitly mentioned, but it would be a good idea to have
>explicit mention
>- is it OK to tag hazard that
>-
>- - exists
>- - is unsigned
>- - governme
Am Do., 26. Nov. 2020 um 17:48 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
> This is good feedback, and I would potentially toss another into the mix:
> hazard=erosion which has about 300 tags. Do we think these four tags
> (rock_slide, falling_rocks, landslide, erosion) represent
Am Do., 26. Nov. 2020 um 18:35 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson <
pelder...@gmail.com>:
> Well, mass testing did not stop the virus anywhere, it just costs a lot,
> drives people to despair and boosts the numbers.
>
this is off topic here, but apparently the Chinese have succeeded in
stopping the pand
sent from a phone
> On 30. Nov 2020, at 10:46, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
> Yes please - I can see planning coming up for vaccinations centers here
> in Germany and these are not planned in hospitals but in vacant commercial
> buildings which have loads of parking spaces. So using some
> healthc
sent from a phone
> On 30. Nov 2020, at 12:56, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would assume the location of these mass vaccination centers would be widely
> publicized and the locations identified. Do they need further identification
> within OSM?
the same holds true for post off
Am Mo., 30. Nov. 2020 um 14:36 Uhr schrieb Andrea Mazzoleni <
amadva...@gmail.com>:
> But most of the trails of my local area are under the woods (low mountain)
> and the GPS is the only source of information.
>
you can use any tag like "source" or "note" to try to convey to the
following mapper
Am Di., 1. Dez. 2020 um 00:39 Uhr schrieb Lukas Richert :
> I wouldn't tag this as foot=no or access=no. There are many trails in my
> area that are clearly animal tracks and seldom used by people - but it is
> allowed for people to walk on these and they are sometimes significant
> shortcuts so a
sent from a phone
> On 1. Dec 2020, at 04:31, Minh Nguyen via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> Regardless, informal=yes seems especially appropriate for these animal-made
> paths.
*if* the path could be useful for humans (i.e. you can walk there),
highway=path and informal=yes may be suitable, otherw
sent from a phone
> On 1. Dec 2020, at 05:03, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> humans=no?
looks like an access tag, so it is not suitable unless this is the legal
situation.
Generally we might not be able to have a solution with a single tag, because of
the differing legal situation. In some cou
sent from a phone
> On 1. Dec 2020, at 11:18, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The 'Auto' setting may not be 'optimal' for what you want, but as a
> compromise between data bloat and resolution/accuracy it maybe better than a
> fixed time as judged by the developer/manufacture.
I‘ve
Am Mi., 2. Dez. 2020 um 10:45 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> In the UK it looks like the heath service (NHS) will contact eligible
> individuals and probably arrange a time and place for their vaccinations.
>
> As such all that is needed is the location be in OSM and be mapped with t
sent from a phone
> On 2. Dec 2020, at 05:30, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Only in places where local mappers have mapped most things that the details
> are mapped better are 'accuracies' of some discussion.
yes, generally I agree that any of the gps settings from the more detail
sent from a phone
> On 2. Dec 2020, at 05:43, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wombat pads are wide enough to follow but the animal is lo to the ground and
> can go through what to a human is inpenatrable scrub - some is simply to
> thiic and interwwoven and some has sharp needle leve
Am Di., 1. Dez. 2020 um 18:08 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
> +1, it's unreasonable for mappers to be mind readers about the intent of
> land managers. Either the public is allowed to walk on these paths, or
> they are not. There isn't really a middle ground here.
>
Am Mi., 2. Dez. 2020 um 13:42 Uhr schrieb Daniel Capilla <
dcapil...@gmail.com>:
> I have documented the use of "historic=cemetery" [1] and some new types
> of tombs, such as "tomb=table" [2], "tomb=pillar" [3], or
> "tomb=cenotaph" (empty tomb) [4].
>
>
Hello Daniel,
thank you for discussing t
sent from a phone
> On 3. Dec 2020, at 16:53, 德泉 談 via Tagging wrote:
>
> I think the description in OSM wiki looks fine. Not supported by osm-carto
> and other tools needs to be reported by somebody, worth doing that.
+1, I would also think the wiki is fine, after all, a way seems the most
sent from a phone
> On 4. Dec 2020, at 17:42, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> I am thinking this case (crossing golfers) is more of a highway=crossing
> rather than a hazard?
I think it is a warning that a golf ball might eventually hit your
vehicle, and if you’re prepared you won’t be startle
sent from a phone
> On 4. Dec 2020, at 21:43, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> Does that satisfy your concern?
yes, very reasonable, maybe could add that unsigned hazards can not only be
found in the developing world, but the probability of encountering them will
raise the farther you move
sent from a phone
> On 5. Dec 2020, at 17:05, ael via Tagging wrote:
>
> Also at much larger airports. Brize Norton
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Brize_Norton), for example.
you guys are finding real world examples for every weird situation that nobody
expected to even exist. Traffic
Am Sa., 5. Dez. 2020 um 21:37 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :
> Traffic lights triggered by avalanches! Is that close enough, Martin?
>
>
> https://elearning.unipd.it/scuolaamv/pluginfile.php/19629/mod_resource/content/1/04_02%20difesa%20dalla%20valanghe.pdf
>
I knew you would deliver :)
interesti
sent from a phone
> On 5. Dec 2020, at 22:34, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
>
> Volker Schmidt:
>> Hi,
>
>> In the case of signed hazards, I see two alternative ways of tagging the
>> signing:
>> * (only for nodes and ways highway segments) by adding source:xxx=sign like
>> we do
>>with
sent from a phone
> On 6. Dec 2020, at 03:23, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Please visit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Marine_rescue & have a look.
>
> All comments welcome either here or on the Talk page.
it makes it look a either military or rescue decision, but many coast guards
w
Am So., 6. Dez. 2020 um 18:34 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
> The hazard proposal [1] currently proposes hazard=cyclists as a way to tag
> a signed area in which motorists should watch for or share the road with
> cyclists. Note that this is explicitly different from a
Am So., 6. Dez. 2020 um 17:01 Uhr schrieb Brian M. Sperlongano <
zelonew...@gmail.com>:
> This is probably a US-centric viewpoint, but I note that there is a
> general lack of tagging under the military= key to indicate the military
> branch associated with a military base.
>
yes, a documented w
sent from a phone
> On 7. Dec 2020, at 00:17, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> The largest existing use of hazard=cyclists is in Germany. There is no
> Google StreetView in Germany
of course there is
> , but from the small number examples [1] I looked at, it seems like this tag
> is bein
sent from a phone
> On 7. Dec 2020, at 22:56, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> And if none of that persuades you, the historic=* tag is treated specially
> by the Historic Places map and is given special emphasis. It would
> get very cluttered if these stones were classed as historic.
I am not saying
sent from a phone
> On 7. Dec 2020, at 23:16, Volker Schmidt wrote:
>
> Yes, that tag is a good idea.
> But, it is not a barrier on the way, but a single object off the way.
I agree. For the node on the way, barrier=entrance might eventually be suitable
together with width where the passage
sent from a phone
> On 8. Dec 2020, at 08:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> But the current proposal only provides a way to tag the military service
> branch of a military=base feature (which is usually also landuse=military).
>
> It might be better if there were a way to tag the branch for an
sent from a phone
> On 9. Dec 2020, at 01:06, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>
> How about amenity=art_school, with another tag to indicate the specific
> disciplines of art being taught?
which kind of arts would this include, performing arts? An institution where
you can become a film director? Wou
Thank you for taking the time to draft this! Looks generally ok and is
needed.
A small detail: maybe we would want to have a more explicit qualifier for
the distinction between structures conceived for permant and temporary use,
which could be added even if there is no official / precise end date,
Am Mi., 9. Dez. 2020 um 12:31 Uhr schrieb Niels Elgaard Larsen <
elga...@agol.dk>:
> I do not not consider them real schools.
>
> I have taken inspiration from, Paint Your Style in Berlin:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4235447795
>
> Which is tagged with a leisure=ceramic_painting tag.
>
>
I agree that I would probably not use highway=service in this case, I
imagine the way is important for pedestrians as well? This being said, the
current tagging with access=yes, motor_vehicle=no and bus=private seems ok
(routing will work as expected, if service roads are taken into account),
regar
sent from a phone
> On 10. Dec 2020, at 22:55, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> military_service=army
do we really need military_service=army given that these services will differ
according to the country? We can tag operator =United States Army or “United
States Marine Corps” and keep lists
sent from a phone
> On 12. Dec 2020, at 00:12, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Going out there a bit, but I could also see cases where somebody can see
> fighter jets taking off & landing, so it's obviously an Air Force base
or a Navy base, or Marines. Look for a runway if you are interested
sent from a phone
> On 12. Dec 2020, at 06:59, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> All names are opaque to computers, so we use standardized tags which can be
> translated one time, instead of needing to translate an operator=* tag for
> every language and every country to make it usable.
sent from a phone
> On 12. Dec 2020, at 12:26, Anders Torger wrote:
>
> In the wetland case as described, there is no parent relation at all. The
> only thing that ties them together is implicitly by sharing borders and
> having the same name tag. It seems to me that an "official" way to edi
of course all of these could be tagged as place=locality nodes, but this is a
compromise to drop a name, which does not allow to even guess about the extent,
shape or orientation.
My idea is to collectively curate a parallel dataset which can be used in
addition. Just draw the thing roughly (t
sent from a phone
> On 12. Dec 2020, at 23:43, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> So what? How are we going to improve if we're not willing to correct choices
> that are objectively bad in retrospect? Especially when fixing the problem
> makes lane tagging more consistent for all lane types and easie
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2020, at 03:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> In regard to operators - "USMC" or "United States Marine Corps", & the same
> for all the other names ie abbreviated or spelt if full ?
fully spelt out
Cheers Martin
_
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2020, at 12:30, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> Tagging all parts with a truly unique Id in a special key could do the trick,
> but who issues/manages the unique ids?
wikidata?
wikidata:part=Q123?
Cheers Martin
___
Tag
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2020, at 18:49, Tomas Straupis wrote:
>
> Introducing duplicate and unused schema (especially as the only
> option) is not a good IT decision, basic analysis should have shown
> that. But in case of id it was technology leading functionality and
> thus leading u
sent from a phone
> On 14. Dec 2020, at 07:22, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
> wrote:
>
> There are cases where there is group of multiple holiday cottages,
>
> each rentable independently. I know about cases with just 2 and big groups,
> 25 in one place.
leisure=resort?
Cheers Martin __
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2020, at 21:37, stevea wrote:
>
> This is problematic to my thinking. In California (my state), at an
> UNCONTROLLED intersection (no traffic_signal, stop sign, other traffic
> control device...), for example where the sidewalk "would continue to another
> si
sent from a phone
> On 14. Dec 2020, at 09:46, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> Yes, that's for one. But there is nothing for a group, Operator on each
> ties them together loosely, but it would be nice to have a relation or
> a boundary for them that could be rendered as a name for the grouping,
> wou
sent from a phone
> On 15. Dec 2020, at 06:11, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> If I look at a map eg
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Forest#/media/File:Relief_Map_of_Germany,_Black_Forest.png,
> it tells me that the Balck Forest is a more or less oval-shaped area in
> Southern Germany.
sent from a phone
> On 14. Dec 2020, at 23:11, François Lacombe wrote:
> Furthermore, :type suffixes make things complex and don't bring any
> additional information as anything is a type or category of something
yes, the keys should rather say which kind of type they are referring to. For
Am Di., 15. Dez. 2020 um 08:51 Uhr schrieb Anders Torger :
> The simple answer is that this naming concept is fundamentally broken, and
> that we need to have some other concept, such as fuzzy areas.
>
I agree that there isn't really a concept for naming larger (natural)
areas. In OSM you can ma
Am Di., 15. Dez. 2020 um 15:59 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> Re: “ a couple of islets with a collective name”
>
> We have a tag for that: place=archipelago for a group of islands.
>
> There isn’t a common tag for a group of lakes with one name, probably
> because th
Am Di., 15. Dez. 2020 um 10:42 Uhr schrieb Anders Torger :
> We should probably not have all these possible generalized areas in our
> db. Just as we probably shouldn't have a bedrock map in the db either, at
> least not until it can manage layers.
>
> But we could simply pick one criteria, docume
sent from a phone
> On 16. Dec 2020, at 00:32, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> I want to be clear that in such a proposal, any instances of disrespectful or
> insulting commentary directed towards any group or individual will not be
> tolerated and will be immediately brought to the attentio
sent from a phone
> On 16. Dec 2020, at 04:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Individual as 1 cabin per site, or, as Mateusz raised, multiple cabins on one
> site?
even multiple cabins in one building
https://huettenpalast.de/
#nothreadwithoutanedgecase
;-)
Cheers Martin
sent from a phone
> On 16. Dec 2020, at 14:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> https://huettenpalast.de/
meant to post this
https://hostelgeeks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/hafentraum-indoorcampinghostel-best-hostels-in-germany.jpg
Chee
sent from a phone
> On 16. Dec 2020, at 17:52, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> You still have to distinguish marine water (outside of the natural=coastline)
> from inland waters, and distinguishing rivers from lakes is very important
> for proper rendering of many maps.
and it seems landuse
sent from a phone
> On 18. Dec 2020, at 03:40, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> A base is the (almost invariably) enclosed area where a military
> establishment is located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_base. It
> will include a variety of buildings, facilities etc in the area, & may b
Your edit makes sense, at least as a first step, but we should reflect how
to explain why addr:floor is described as an alternative to level:ref, and
not as a "possible tagging mistake". Are there subtle differences? If not,
I would prefer to choose one and discourage the other. 10.000 uses are not
Am Fr., 18. Dez. 2020 um 14:07 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <
matkoni...@tutanota.com>:
> 1) both are in use and while level:ref has more uses most of them come
> from mass edits[1]
>
> 2) this edits were intended to document current tagging practice, not to
> create a proposal
>
> 3) addr:floor
Am Fr., 18. Dez. 2020 um 12:32 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> I'm not entirely happy with natural=water being applied to either sewage
> treatment or slurry. Neither are natural and neither store water.
>
neither am I, not for the question of how "natural" they are (ship has
sailed) but because I w
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 02:02, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> As with most things OSM, this tag would really only apply to permanent /
> long-term sites. "Temporary" locations "in the field" wouldn't be mapped or
> tagged this way (plus, of course, the challenges of locating
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 22:53, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>
> traffic_calming=multi_bump ?
or
traffic_calming=mini_bumps ?
when they come up with something smaller that could still be micro_bumps ;-)
Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailin
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 21:35, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> Or is it always preferable to use sport=shooting + leisure=pitch?
>
> That's an improvement. Not ideal, because it's practised at a
> range, not on a pitch. Just because we have other sports that
> have been shoe-horned i
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 23:27, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> I understand that the purpose of them is simply to make noise when a car
> drives over them, as they don't slow you down in any appreciable way like a
> speed bump/hump.
I thought they would make people drive sl
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 23:29, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
> Perhaps simply leisure=range, as this would be generic to any type of
> facility where one might fire projectiles or ordnance.
is firing ordnance a leisure activity somewhere? Or a sport? leisure=range
makes me
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 23:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> (& I can already hear Paul saying just because it's old doesn't necessarily
> make it historic! :-))
yes, but so far I didn’t read from anybody else that they would share this
particular concern, one swallow does
sent from a phone
> On 19. Dec 2020, at 23:59, Jeremy Harris wrote:
>
> I think rifle-shooting was a component of a triathlon in a recent
> Winter Olympic, too.
if rifles are „ordnance“ my perplexity dissolves, I did not know the word
ordnance and looking it up referred me to artillery. I
sent from a phone
> On 20. Dec 2020, at 00:02, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Another comment suggested =recreation_ground for the whole area (car parks,
> buildings etc) with shooting=range for the actual area that bullets are
> flying over.
I have seen some shooting=range but the tag does
sent from a phone
> On 20. Dec 2020, at 00:35, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> one swallow does not make a summer. ;-)
>
> I don't see many sharing your viewpoint, either. :p
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/historic#values
Cheers Martin ___
Taggin
501 - 600 of 6546 matches
Mail list logo
