Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2020, at 00:35, Paul Allen wrote: > > one swallow doesn't make a summer but it makes a great BJ. you must be talking of ice cream? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_%26_Jerry%27s___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openst

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2020, at 00:44, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > > These guys in Texas will let you drive their tank around and shoot things, > for a price: > > https://www.oxhuntingranch.com/activities/hunting-shooting/machine-gun-shooting/ they actually mention “ mortars, art

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2020, at 05:43, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > The existing emergency=disaster_response will get a better definition to > cover each countries Emergency Rescue / Civil Defence service/s which kind of places should get the tag? Garages and places where equipment

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:traffic_calming=hillocky

Am So., 20. Dez. 2020 um 16:11 Uhr schrieb Niels Elgaard Larsen < elga...@agol.dk>: > Martin Koppenhoefer: > > I thought they would make people drive slower, while retaining a > possibility for > > bicycles to pass in between. > > That is what the proposal says.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:traffic_calming=hillocky

Am So., 20. Dez. 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt : > Martin, the former ones ( > http://www.valsassinanews.com/image/original/12663.jpg ) are "tables" ( > traffic_calming=table) in OSM-speak - see > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming. >

Re: [Tagging] Continuous shoulder rumble strips (CSRS)

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2020, at 22:50, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > I can understand why a cyclist would like to know about them, but I'm not > sure how we'd map them? A way drawn along the side of the road, like a fence, > or added to the roads properties eg cycleway=lane + cycleway:r

Re: [Tagging] sport=shooting_range vs sport=shooting + leisure=pitch

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2020, at 22:45, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Some examples; > > sportbowlsA place where you can play lawn bowls/lawn bowling. > > sportkitesurfingTo mark a spot for kitesurfing > > sportmultiA sports facility that

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

sent from a phone > On 21. Dec 2020, at 00:28, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > There has been concern raised on the talk page over the "If it's illegal, > please don't map" warning that I included in the proposal. is this referring to British law? Cheers Martin ___

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

sent from a phone > On 21. Dec 2020, at 00:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > I would hate for somebody to be potentially arrested on spying / espionage > charges for doing what we suggested :-( imagine you were mapping something, and it is legal in the place where you are, but illegal in B

Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature - RFC - Military Bases

Am Mo., 21. Dez. 2020 um 08:40 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > Mapping military bases in Israel, Russia, mapping anything in China/North > Korea > etc should be welcomed in OSM if someone is doing this and wants that. > Mateusz, this is a quite detailed

Re: [Tagging] Default access for service=driveway?

Am Di., 22. Dez. 2020 um 10:16 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm < frede...@remote.org>: > The private residential property has two driveways (highway=service, > service=driveway) entering it from different sides, thereby enabling > people to save a few metres by walking through, rather than around, the >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Emergency=Rescue Stations

sent from a phone > On 22. Dec 2020, at 09:42, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I think it's fine to use marine here, even though it may not strictly be at > sea and could be related to inland waters. So long as this is clearly stated > in the wiki documentation. It's not always possible to have OSM ta

Re: [Tagging] Definition of lake/pond as applied to stream/plunge pools

sent from a phone > On 22. Dec 2020, at 16:42, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > In current practice the areas of rivers (whether waterway=riverbank or > water=river) are not tagged with a name=* tag, that goes on the linear > waterway=river feature. there’s a 13,6% of all riverbank polygons

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr:interpolation on closed ways and nodes

Am Do., 24. Dez. 2020 um 00:22 Uhr schrieb Peter Elderson < pelder...@gmail.com>: > 10..20, meaning 10 up to and including 20 > I don't know if it is just you, but there are already some few examples for this in the db: 17 *wa**s:**ra**il**wa**y:**20**12**..**20**14*

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

We are having this discussion despite we already have the necessary tags to describe all relevant aspects, only because some map data consumers do not take them into account. And these tag are not only used, they are completely established (sac scale, trail visibility, hazard, etc.). There will alw

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

sent from a phone > On 15 Sep 2022, at 17:34, Peter Elderson wrote: > > If you specifically want to know where the scramble sections are, the > sac_scale doesn't tell you, correct? it depends how fine grained you tag sac_scale, on a hiking route it only tells you the most difficult level

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

sent from a phone > On 15 Sep 2022, at 19:57, Peter Elderson wrote: > > To map a specific type of path, say, a scramble, none of the sac_scale values > specifically indicates that it is in fact there. > If you try rendering hand-and-foot climbs for hikers, comparable to how you > would ren

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

here is an example for a mountain situation where you should probably have the right shoes, and someone in sneakers of flip flops, or pushing (well, carrying at this point) a baby stroller would have a hard time, but it wouldn’t qualify for scramble or via ferrata: https://bergseensucht.files.w

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

sent from a phone > On 20 Sep 2022, at 10:56, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > This would encompass > - via ferratas > - demanding or dangerous hikes > - climbing routes > - anything else? > > To me, highway=scramble seems a good solution for this, but I'm not a native > English speaker, so t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - site_type=defensive_settlement

sent from a phone > On 20 Sep 2022, at 18:07, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > This proposed tag would be used for much less well known sites. How should > ordinary mappers determine if a ruin is an old fort or a fortified settlement > or a an ancient prison? either there will be a sign explai

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - settlement_type=crannog

sent from a phone > On 22 Sep 2022, at 18:06, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: > > Following that swiftly with a new proposal: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/crannog at first I thought that’s quite a specific value for such an apparently generic term like settlement t

Re: [Tagging] addr:town

Am Sa., 24. Sept. 2022 um 13:38 Uhr schrieb Andrew Hain < andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk>: > The key addr:town is currently documented as de facto [ > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q1070][ > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:town]. However > investigations in the UK have found i

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

sent from a phone > On 24 Sep 2022, at 20:22, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > "May be applicable to heavily degraded and crumbled roads which was paved in > past." according to what I imagine by this description it could be grade3 as well, “paved in the past” Cheers Martin __

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

sent from a phone > On 27 Sep 2022, at 14:52, Georg wrote: > > IMHO yes. I agree, although I wouldn’t see it necessary to characterize the feature Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/

Re: [Tagging] Is this continouos flow a water tap?

Am Mi., 28. Sept. 2022 um 09:18 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > > > Is > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beim_Kiosk_(Anlagage_Sihlh%C3%B6lzli).jpg > > man_made=water_tap > > or > > man_made=drinking_fountain > > ? > > > > depends if the water is drinkable, in these ca

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

Am Mi., 28. Sept. 2022 um 09:21 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > On 28/9/22 08:29, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > I would say that regardless of how it's operated - turn handle, push > button, lever, foot pedal, auto sensor etc - that if water comes out, it's > a tap! > > Must have the

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

Am Mi., 28. Sept. 2022 um 09:55 Uhr schrieb Peter Neale via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > If the user cannot control the flow, there is NOT a "tap" present. > around here, the typical drinking fountain is an iron cast column with permanent flow. There is a water tap inside the column b

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

Am Mi., 28. Sept. 2022 um 10:45 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > I would not use the tag man_made=water_tap for these. > > > Why not use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fountain > > > You will note the different tags - some relate to the 'style' of the > structure others relate

Re: [Tagging] Is it man_made=water_tap?

sent from a phone > On 29 Sep 2022, at 09:43, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> particularly to distinguish different drinking fountain types >> >> I think you mean "different drinking fountain apperance"? >> > > I think you mean "different drinking fountain apperance"? > no, I mea

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Bench: replace seats by capacity

sent from a phone > On 29 Sep 2022, at 14:10, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > Facing heavy objections and no support, I have come to the conclusion that my > proposal is not considered useful by the community. > > I thus decided to retract it. as you are interested in consistency, have yo

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 30 Sep 2022, at 17:48, grin via Tagging wrote: > > Either service should mean "one level below unclassified" and soften the > wording even more ("generally" to "in many cases", for example), or > unclassified shall drop requirement for motorcars and suggesting service

Re: [Tagging] OSM Wiki

sent from a phone > On 1 Oct 2022, at 02:38, stevea wrote: > > There's water_tap, there's fountain (water fountains, same as drinking > fountains / bubblers, not the same as big fountains in the park or Las > Vegas), there's bubblers, are we (largely?) on the same page about these?! > Good

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 1 Oct 2022, at 12:22, Greg Troxel wrote > > So I don't know about the OP's country's laws, but I would suggest > looking at legal definitions of roads, and tending to unclassified for > legal roads and service for things that are not legally roads, if that > makes sens

Re: [Tagging] service vs. unclassified, conflicting definitions

sent from a phone > On 1 Oct 2022, at 13:16, Timeo Gut wrote: > > On tbe other hand if it's frequently used by pedestrians and cyclists then > service doesn't seem right either. it is not uncommon in rural areas around here that hiking or cycling routes have some parts on highway=service,

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

sent from a phone > On 2 Oct 2022, at 19:40, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > - primary feature [1] > - main key [2] > - primary key [3] > - feature tag [4] > > 1) Are these synonyms (except for the key/tag distinction)? yes > > 2) Is *one* of these terms "official" OSM speek with a clea

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

sent from a phone > On 3 Oct 2022, at 07:55, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > > - primary feature [1] > - main key [2] > - primary key [3] > - feature tag [4] > > 1) Are these synonyms (except for the key/tag distinction)? > > > yes > what about cases where multiple features are

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Citadels

Am Mo., 3. Okt. 2022 um 22:30 Uhr schrieb Casper Kersten < casperkerst...@gmail.com>: > I just created a proposal page to tag citadels: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Citadel > The proposed tag is castle_type=citadel. > > All feedback is welcome. Feel free to share it here

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

Am Mo., 3. Okt. 2022 um 10:17 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > what about cases where multiple features are tagged on one object? > > For example stream + road tagged on one line? > > > 2 primary features, identified by feature tags, represented by one > OpenStreetMap element. Main k

Re: [Tagging] Terminology primary feature, main tag, etc..

Am Mo., 3. Okt. 2022 um 12:40 Uhr schrieb martianfreeloader < martianfreeloa...@posteo.net>: > 2) There is no such thing as a "primary feature". hm, this seems strange, OSMF has the term in their collective database guideline, it could be seen as important to understand whether the license appl

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

Am Mo., 3. Okt. 2022 um 10:07 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > I don't think this is a drinking fountain, another mapper does.. what is > your opinion? > > > https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg/375px-Water_flowing_from_dri

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

Am Di., 4. Okt. 2022 um 10:00 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > To me the word 'drinking fountain' means a water source I can drink from > directly. without the use of a cup, glass, hands etc .. This may be > cultural? > > > you can drink directly from the fountain in the picture. It's

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

Am Di., 4. Okt. 2022 um 11:08 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > I wouldn't call this a "drinking fountain," since I understand that term > to mean the water flows upwards > > COULD drink from it, if I were to cup my hands and bring them to my > lips, even as th

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 4 Oct 2022, at 14:46, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Also, ones in Rome that I have seen mostly had downward flow. the typical, mostly deployed types in Rome (nasone and roman_wolf) are both providing a method to change to upward flow (there’s a hole on t

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 4 Oct 2022, at 14:46, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > See for example image shown at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:fountain%3Ddrinking this one is an exception, it’s inside a school (access=private) Ciao Martin _

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 4 Oct 2022, at 14:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > I would prefer even more using a different key for both: maybe > flow=gentle_upward_jet > flow=downward > would be better? if it cannot be deducted from the type (or you want to be redundant), a specifi

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

Am Di., 4. Okt. 2022 um 17:14 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > *Bubbler with tap * > >- amenity=fountain >- fountain=bubbler >- drinking_water=yes >- man_made=water_tap > > they are not usually mapped as "amenity=fountain", typical tagging is: a

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

I have introduced the bubbler tag because internet search suggested it was a suitable term, and it works well in the sense that you can imagine what it is about just by looking at the tag "fountain=bubbler". In general, I suggest you take out your phone and make a picture of the drinking fountains

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 5 Oct 2022, at 13:48, ael via Tagging wrote: > > As a native British English speaker I had never heard of a "bubbler". > As others have said, I would have called that a drinking_fountian. > I really don't understand why some people object to that term, but then > I have

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 5 Oct 2022, at 15:26, Jass Kurn wrote: > > The tag amenity=fountain was created to map the entity/object known in > English as fountains, and is documented in the OSM wiki with several pictures > of fountains. eg > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fountain_at_M

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 5 Oct 2022, at 15:26, Jass Kurn wrote: > > When it should be, as a suggestion, drinking_water:type=bubbler, or > drinking_water:type=bottle_refill. these tags are misleading, you are not describing drinking water, hence it is not a suitable approach IMHO. amenity=d

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 6 Oct 2022, at 11:41, ael via Tagging wrote: > > Definitely not a fountain. > > These all in British English. these all fountains in German and Italian, basically any sculpture with water around it or emerging from it is a fountain, particularly if the water is in m

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 6 Oct 2022, at 14:00, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > I feel that man_made=water_tap is quite useless in this regard and might very > well be substituted for a tap=yes secondary value. these are 2 completely different things, one is a feature and one is a proper

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 6 Oct 2022, at 14:00, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > For example a public tap where you can wash clothes, which I guess you could > tag as amenity=fountain, drinking_water=no but that does not differentiate it > from a decorative fountain. > http://www.sigecweb.

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 7 Oct 2022, at 01:09, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > For example, man_made=water_tap cannot coexist with > man_made=drinking_fountain thus, in the wiki it currently advises to tag a > water fountain that has a tap as man_made=water_tap drinking_fountain=yes. ev

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

I would be interested to learn how you would call them, if "fountain" is not the correct term. Also I would like to add another example and ask whether that's a fountain for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevi_Fountain (don't let the name irritate you, just by looking at the thing). Cheers,

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

who cares for "in use" or "approved", the question is only whether there are alternative tags available, in which case you either have to decide or put both. The voting isn't binding, at most it could be relevant if there is an alternative value for the same key. So while this could be seen as a c

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

so basically you call a "fountain" what we call in German a "Fontaine", or "Springbrunnen", and what could be more specifically called a "waterspout fountain" in English, i.e. a structure where water is blasted into the air, and have no word for all the sculptural fountains that don't jet water in

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

Am Fr., 7. Okt. 2022 um 13:46 Uhr schrieb ael : > Maybe. I guess that if I was starting from scratch, I might have a > general tag of water_feature and find choose suitable values to describe > these things. then I am happy we do not start from scratch :) There are so many different kind of wa

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 06:43, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I note that settlements are already on the values for the key historic, e.g > farm, manor, monastery, castle ... all places where people lived. none of these are necessarily settlements on their own though

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 07:55, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Example Tom Bass Wall Fountain, Sydney, Australia 1963. Nicknamed "The > Urinal" for obvious reasons! according to a british mapper, this is not a fountain but a water feature 🤷‍♂️ __

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 12:43, Enno Hermann wrote: > > One thing I keep wondering about on this topic is how to tag very simple > fountains that are widespread in Switzerland along hiking paths > (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Adlisberg_-_Gockhausen_IMG_4215.jpg) > o

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 12:43, Enno Hermann wrote: > > It does not make sense to me to use different tags for the same kind of > feature, so I generally use amenity=fountain for these with appropriate > subtags. it’s not the same kind of feature if the water is drinkable in o

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

sent from a phone > On 8 Oct 2022, at 14:23, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > It feels strange to me that the same exact structure might belong to three > different primary tags according to whether the water provided is potable or > not or if animals can use it or not. this is the res

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

Am Sa., 8. Okt. 2022 um 16:04 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky : > > That’s why we decided some years ago to record additional detail about > the structure in the fountain tag. > I wish to add more sense to how these structures are described. The > current tagging scheme has a lot of problems with overlappi

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

Am Sa., 8. Okt. 2022 um 19:26 Uhr schrieb michael spreng (datendelphin) < m...@osm.datendelphin.net>: > - It seems we have more specific terms in German for fountains. >Springbrunnen, Laufbrunnen, Brunnen... it confuses that in English, >everything is mapped to the same term (I'm not a nat

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 08:50, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'll be voting no. me too, it is trying to deprecate a handful of tags I am using for fountain classification. Why do people have to “deprecate” other people’s tags when they introduce new ones with differ

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 08:43, stevea wrote: > > Tags must capture these differences, and more. and ideally they should do it in a way to reduce confusion Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://li

Re: [Tagging] RFC - A broad look at fountains

/lawbook/rwstatutes_20170113.pdf#page=30 > [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MUTCD-CA_PS-013.svg > [3] https://forms.iapmo.org/email_marketing/codespotlight/2017/Aug3.htm > > -- > m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us > > > > > ______

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

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:01, m.brandt...@posteo.de wrote: > > voting has started for the proposal Payment denominations. question: is it legal in the EU not to accept certain types of Euronotes? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@op

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > As the next part of drinking water linguistic journey I documented at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tap#Examples > (bottom example) that bubblers are mostly water taps, despite

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 22:56, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Let me know if this edit was right or wrong (I am quite confused here, > and this is why I want to document this to make situation less confusing). IMHO saying it _is_ a water tap is confusing, I’d say i

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Or lets take > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fontanella_Bolsena.jpg > illustrating fountain=drinking and seemingly without upward flow: > is it a drinking fountain? IMHO yes, it is near a beac

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > If yes - why > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg > would not be a water fountain? looking again at this, it really is a poor construction and will not wo

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:40, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > As an American, I would not consider "fontanella bolsena" > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fontanella_Bolsena.jpg) to be a > drinking fountain, it appears to be a public drinking water "tap" (though in > Ame

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 00:15, stevea wrote: > > If this water is potable, it's amenity=drinking_water. yes, it is potable, and if you look closely you’ll notice that the tube has an upper hole, so when you tap the flow it will create a vertical spout in the curve, so someh

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

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:26, Marc_marc wrote: > > but it's certainly not forbidden to pay for 500€ with a 500€ note, > even though some shops refuse to let you do so I heard it was forbidden in this case not to accept the 500 bill as it is legal tender __

Re: [Tagging] Is this a drinking fountain?

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 01:31, stevea wrote: > > I suppose somebody figured "well, the drainage is good" (or even improved, > as here with a grate to a wastewater system, apparently) yes, these are always connected via a grate with the sewers > and "well, it doesn't make

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > Which one? > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Water_flowing_from_drinking_water_tap.jpg > ? yes, this one is not very clear, although the sticker they added makes it clear it is fine for drinki

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 9 Oct 2022, at 23:21, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > I started this thread to confirm/reject listing > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Bubbler.jpg as > man_made=water_tap > fountain=bubbler > drinking_water=yes > amenity=drinking_water replace man

[Tagging] relevance of water taps as opposed to fountains

I see the wiki yesterday has received some more question marks regarding distinction of water taps and drinking fountains, claiming that the drinking fountain tag has fewer usage as the water tap and “many fountains also qualify for the water tap tag”. IMHO this is the result of loosing focus.

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 09:12, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > I like this, but I'd remove amenity=drinking_water rather than > drinking_water=yes, because you _should_ add the tag amenity=fountain. this would be completely inconsistent with the usage of the amenity=foun

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 15:34, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do we tag > > the waste receptacle > > or > > the tap > > or > > the drinking fountain > > ?? Which is the feature primarily there for? To me that is the drinking > fountain. I'd leave out the tap and

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

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 12:07, Michael Brandtner wrote: > > The proposal includes advice to only use this tag in shops that don't accept > all denominations in Italy, one and two cent coins have been abolished, they are not accepted any more in shops, and while prices are s

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 09:53 Uhr schrieb Davidoskky via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > I do not believe > anymore that man_made=water_tap should be deprecated but rather > redefined to only describe the tap of a fountain and not the whole > fountain. > this is not a redefinition, it i

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

Am Di., 11. Okt. 2022 um 10:24 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > > Is it possible that drinking fountain in a given style has multiple models? > absolutely yes. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@op

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

Am Mo., 10. Okt. 2022 um 17:33 Uhr schrieb Illia Marchenko < illiamarchenk...@gmail.com>: > Unification of tags allows more simple usage source data, e.g leisure = > pitch allows rendering of all pitches, but lots of tags as > leisure=tennis_court, leisure = baseball_playground, leisure = > footba

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 11:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > Nobody is tagging the specific model type, such as distinguishing nasone from > the 1960s and nasone from the 1990s. > > Should we introduce another key for the style and then tag the specific model > of the

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 12:06, Davidoskky wrote: > > Some are indistinguishable from drinking fountains, some have drinking water > and can be used to wash clothes as well. all drinking fountains can be used to wash clothes, although it may not be legal in some instances, e

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 12:06, Davidoskky wrote: > > I do agree, and that is also my objective; but I do like the idea of having a > very generic value you can fall back to when no other value applies. I don’t like the idea, because it will only slow down development of sign

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > This is problematic, since if you only tag amenity=fountain it will fall back > to a decorative fountain since amenity=fountain appears to be defined in that > way. those fountains that supply drinking wate

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > If I have a fountain that is not decorative, doesn't have a tap and doesn't > provide drinking water, this fountain cannot be tagged. why are you sure it is a fountain? And what has it to do with it having a

Re: [Tagging] RFC - More sensible values for fountain=*

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 13:30, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > How would you tag this fountain I photographed the other day? > > The water is not potable, the stream of water cannot be interrupted and > definitely is not a decorative fountain. > > https://commons.wikimed

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote: > > No value. There is no reason to call neighboring w1101484649 "Commercial > Zone". Why is a car wash and a vet commercial, and the gas station is retail? this seems completely in line with what I would expect for “landuse”

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 21:45, Evan Carroll wrote: > > If there is no name, what is the value? it is a property that helps understanding how an area is structured. If there is a name you should use “place” Cheers Martin ___ Tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 15:37, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > Do you have a suggestion how to fix this? it is not broken, unless your proposal gets approved ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstre

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 17:32, martianfreeloader > wrote: > > Nobody commented during RFC and then everybody voted against; which is not > nice. I was one of them. particularly because the no vote didn’t offer any meaningful contribution, the only reason given was a formali

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

sent from a phone > On 12 Oct 2022, at 04:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > I would love to be able to move the vast majority of military= to > historic=military, as they are no longer military installations. > > Yes, they certainly were, but they aren't any more. are all military tags abo

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

sent from a phone > On 12 Oct 2022, at 07:11, Evan Carroll wrote: > > Let's say you're in an industrial zone: do you tag as such > (landuse=industrial) if half of the buildings have been converted to lofts? I would see landuse=residential on the parcels where people live and landuse=indus

Re: [Tagging] Apparently bubblers emitting jet of water on buton press are water taps

sent from a phone > On 10 Oct 2022, at 19:58, Davidoskky via Tagging > wrote: > > tap=* and water_tap=* are currently being used to tag the presence of a water > tap in a building. > > tap=* is used in Dominican Republic and the values used are "yes", "no" or > the number of water taps in

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water outlet

sent from a phone > On 11 Oct 2022, at 11:39, Illia Marchenko wrote: > > Of course. Hierarchical tagging. leisure = pitch & sport = *. or leisure=swimming_pool, track, golf_course, fitness_centre, sports_centre, climbing, mtb routes, landuse=recreation_ground, piste=* etc The situation

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >