Re: [Tagging] Center turning lanes: centre_turn_lane=yes method vs. lanes:both_ways method

e work to do. > > All we do is provide the data. Individual consumers can choose whether > they want to use it. > > > ------ > *From:* Paul Johnson > *Sent:* February 19, 2017 6:24 AM > *To:* Tag discussion, strategy and related tools > *Subje

Re: [Tagging] Mapping freeway stub ends?

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Albert Pundt wrote: > What is the best way to map freeway (and other road) stub ends such as > this ? It's currently mapped with all > of the closed off roadway being tagged with highway=service and access=no, > but I've also seen

Re: [Tagging] Mapping freeway stub ends?

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 25 Feb 2017, at 21:08, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > I tend to favor highway=construction, construction=* and possibly > abandoned=yes if it's partially built and co

Re: [Tagging] Invalid voting of proposed feature motorcycle_friendly=*

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03-Mar-17 09:51 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> >> sent from a phone >> >> On 2 Mar 2017, at 20:55, Tobias Knerr wrote: >>> >>> While it's ok to overlook minor "rule violations" sometimes, things like >>> not announcin

Re: [Tagging] Mapping time zones as geometries (relations)

On Mar 5, 2017 18:30, "Frederik Ramm" wrote: Hi, I would like to start a discussion about the mapping of time zones. What do you think? I'm generally opposed to mapping timezones in OpenStreetMap unless the tzdata maintainers are 100% on board. Since timezones are a royal pain to keep tr

Re: [Tagging] EuroVelo tagging

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > As EV routes are not managed as single entities, every route is split in > pieces managed on a country basis. I know the situation in Italy, as I am > involved in regional and national cycle routes here. EV routes are handled > by BicItalia

Re: [Tagging] Mapping time zones as geometries (relations)

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2017-03-06 17:21, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Mar 5, 2017 18:30, "Frederik Ramm" wrote: > > Hi, > >I would like to start a discussion about the mapping of time zones. > > > > What do you th

Re: [Tagging] how to map simple buildings

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 2:11 PM, "Christian Müller" wrote: > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 05. März 2017 um 20:22 Uhr > > Von: "Peter Barth" > > An: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > > Betreff: Re: [Tagging] how to map simple buildings > > > > > > you're probabl

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

Which node? On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Johan C wrote: > Hi, > > I'm in a discussion with a user who positions the motorway exit in a, > IMHO, uncommon way. Though it's not uncommon for OSM to have multipiple > solutions for the same problem I would like to have your opinion on this > one: h

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

:20 PM, Johan C wrote: > The motorway_junction node of the A4 towards A555, which was moved > westwards by 100 meters. > > 2017-03-07 0:02 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson : > >> Which node? >> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Johan C wrote: >> >>> Hi, >

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On Mar 7, 2017 03:47, "Volker Schmidt" wrote: This touches on a "conflict of interest" between two requirements: (1) OSM tagging practice is to map only physically separated ways as separate ways in OSM. (2) A routing algorithm needs to have information about legally separated ways, e.g. by a con

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

turn lanes on time, it does announce the > distance to the split as the distance to the exit-node. It does not > inform you about the need to be in the right lane based on a (long) > solid line of several hundred meters > As Paul Johnson wrote, the change:lanes tag is useful in such ca

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

Does anybody mind if I take a crack at the whole cloverleaf and upload a changeset? This kind of junction is pretty bog standard for Oklahoma and I'm familiar enough with EU markings to not get it completely worng. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openst

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 10:33 +1100, Warin wrote: > > At least some courier firms have offices where you can go to; > > send things - saves waiting for a courier to arrive at "some time" > > during the day. > > pick something up .. when you hav

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 09.03.2017 11:15, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Does anybody mind if I take a crack at the whole cloverleaf and upload a > > changeset? This kind of junction is pretty bog standard for Oklahoma > > and I'm familiar enou

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

OK, why not amenity=post_office, operator=*? On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 8:26 AM, muzirian wrote: > By courier I meant a place where you can sent and receive parcels and > mail, like post office. > > On Thursday, March 9, 2017, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 08-Mar-17 08:42 PM, muzirian

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 4:04 AM, muzirian wrote: > The fact that people are relying these services more than post offices to > send/recieve things (which is the most important purpose) made me think > that they have the significance to be called as amenity, but it is > debatable. What i wish is t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=courier

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Friday, 10 March 2017, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 4:04 AM, muzirian wrote: > > > > > The fact that people are relying these services more than post offices > to > > > send/recieve

Re: [Tagging] Request for Discussion - Drying_room or Drying_area

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 11 Mar 2017, at 02:19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Err this will be a separate key I think of it more as a property key .. > like internet_access >

Re: [Tagging] The direction=* tag

Since nodes lack direction, but relations do... seems like a stop sign relation would be ideal, with multiple ways for the "from" role and the node where it applies as the "to" role, with the actual stop sign locations as the "device" role, similar to how enforcement is tagged. On Mar 19, 2017 14:

[Tagging] Adding directionality to stop signs

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Since nodes lack direction, but relations do... seems like a stop sign > > relation would be ideal, with multiple ways for the "from" role and the > node >

Re: [Tagging] Starbucks or Starbucks Coffee

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I would tag them as internet cafes, you can't get serious coffee there. > ;-) > ...and that's how Martin was found murdered under the Alaska Way Viaduct. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@ope

Re: [Tagging] Adding directionality to stop signs

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > Given the effect of the stopping process on the overall travel time > (mainly for cars), we need a way that can be used by routing algorithms. > It's even worse with bicycles, since actual human effort has to happen to accelerate from a s

Re: [Tagging] Adding directionality to stop signs

Missed replying to this earlier... On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > I would consider having to create (and manage) relations for this tedious, > and error prone in case of editing. Turn restrictions are extremely common and managed using relations, so we know relations

Re: [Tagging] Adding directionality to stop signs

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 6:57 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote: > BTW the Stop sign is even more frequent in Italy than in the US, but it >> influences much less the travel time, because drivers simply don't stop >> most of the time, contrary to the practice in the US, or Germany, or the UK. >> > > Don't

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:46 PM, LeTopographeFou wrote: > In real life a traffic light is more often associated to another device > such as a camera, a pedestrian light... than stop signs which stands > generally on their own. So direction=* might be enought for stops and > give_ways most of the

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:direction=* vs. direction=*

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2017-03-23 10:30 GMT+01:00 Jean-Marc Liotier : > >> As the "complex intersections" section of the highway=traffic_signals >> page describes a gradation of model complexity >> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic

Re: [Tagging] Adding directionality to stop signs

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:45 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: > >> >> Turn restrictions are extremely common and managed using relations, so we >> know relations don't have to be hard. It's possible for t

Re: [Tagging] Landuse for vacant lots

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > "brownfield" seems quite misleading as description for a plot formerly > occupied by a house, it would be appropriate for former industrial or > commercial areas with suspected pollution (in case of former industrial and > some kind o

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > Obviously, if we are using the node for other purposes, we may need to > disambiguate with stop:direction=* or give_way:direction=*, just as we do > with other ambiguously-named tags. > > I'm having a hard time picturing any case where this

Re: [Tagging] Pennsylvania colored Interstate detour routes

Check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Ddetour On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Albert Pundt wrote: > Is there an established way of mapping detour routes such as > Pennsylvania's colored Interstate detours, as seen in this picture >

Re: [Tagging] Traffic sign relevant direction: relation type:enforcement vs. direction=* vs. traffic_signals:direction=*

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On 03/30/2017 07:43 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Kevin Kenny > <mailto:kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> Obviously, if we are using th

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

Looks like bike-shedding the previous proposal without addressing the root problem. On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:48 AM, muzirian wrote: > The proposal for amenity=courier was rejected, so going on with another > suggestion office=courier. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Office%3Dcourier >

Re: [Tagging] mandatory restriction with via way as members

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Michael Tsang wrote: > Dear all, > > > > I have created a restriction (mandatory route) where if vehicles coming > from way must go through a section of a trunk route before leaving it. > Assume that an only_straight_on relation has been created with from A-C, >

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:00 AM, muzirian wrote: > I have been trying to address all the suggestions mentioned on the other > problem, if you feel I missed something.Please feel to talk about it.It > will help greatly if you can explain it in bit more detail or mention it on > the talk page. > H

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Marc Gemis wrote: > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > How is it not a post office that just happens to have an operator other > than > > the state? > > So if I ask you "where is the nearest post office?"

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Marc Gemis wrote: > I doubt people will go to DHL/UPS/... to send their Christmas cards. Not to sound contrarian, but why not? When I was homeless, my "permanent address" was a rental box at a UPS Store by where I went to high school. FedEx Office is the only c

Re: [Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - (office=courier)"

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My impression is that worldwide the branding of 'Post Office' implies a > government run service with international links to other 'Post Offices'. > A 'posted' item would be through the 'Post Office' no mater the sending or

Re: [Tagging] Tagging change_lanes

On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Tijmen Stam wrote: > Hello, > > I'm hijacking this thread to ask about the change_lanes tag. > There seem to be three ways of mapping the change_lanes in circulation, > that can't all be correct. > > 1) I've always been using the JOSM Lanes and Road Attributes map

Re: [Tagging] Time is now: tag ALL traffic signs in OSM

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Mark Wagner wrote: > Warning signs are something that data consumers could certainly make > use of, but we need some way of explicitly coding which direction of > which road they apply to. > This sounds like a problem that can be handled with relations. Sign is

Re: [Tagging] Time is now: tag ALL traffic signs in OSM

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 21.05.2017 22:23, yo paseopor wrote: > > As you can see in http://imgur.com/gallery/SgE90 with Kendzi3D JOSM > > plugin you can locate the traffic signs belonging to a way. > > Of course it's always possible to guess a place next to the r

Re: [Tagging] Unsigned portions of signed routes

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Still generally, you can add ref tags for routes, IMHO regardless of them > being signed or not, as long as you can verifiably demonstrate that the > route exists even on those unsigned parts (e.g. official documents that are > publicl

Re: [Tagging] Access restriction for gas-powered vehicles

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Michal Fabík wrote: > Hi, > I'm sure this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find anything on > the topic in the Wiki. How do you tag access restriction for > LPG/CNG-powered cars, as is sometimes the case in underground garages. > I'm thinking of something

Re: [Tagging] Access restriction for gas-powered vehicles

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > Hazmat normally refers to hazardous materials being carried as freight, > not the fuel for the vehicle itself. Campers carrying LPG or CNG are typically (near-universally) doing so for "hotel" reasons (cooking, heating), and not propulsion.

Re: [Tagging] admin_level with office=government

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: > Does it really make sense to have admin_level with office=government > I don't think so. I noticed someone's also been adding administrative boundary relations to university campuses, which seems equally bizarre to me. __

Re: [Tagging] Meaning of cycleway=no

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Wiktor Niesiobedzki wrote: > > Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value? Should it's use > be discouraged by validators / presets? (at least combinations as > highway=cycleway + cycleway=no) > highway=cycleway + cycleway=no is definitely a nonstarter.

Re: [Tagging] Names containing abbreviations that are the official name

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: > Saint Paul - but that certainly is an exception. > > I was using a garmin gps device to navigate about 4 years ago. As I > entered Mount Vernon, WA the voice called it Mountain Vernon. > > Albert Pundt suggestion to use offical_name or name_

Re: [Tagging] oneway:bicycle

If it's physically seperate, sure. Otherwise just oneway:bicycle=no On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 8:20 AM, José G Moya Y. wrote: > In Madrid, in Puerta del Sol, there is a two-way bicycle way that shares > space with a one-way car street. I haven't checked how it is mapped, but I > guess a parallel l

Re: [Tagging] Nicknames

I suspect a nickname tag would be too subjective. Manhattan, KS has the same nickname. But I don't think too many locals, either in NYC or Manhattan, KS regularly call it that outside of fond hyperbole or tourism pitch. Plus, there's a lot of places that have just way, way too many nicknames. I'

Re: [Tagging] winter tyres

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Michal Fabík wrote: > On 31.10.2017 18:37, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> >> >> sent from a phone >> >> On 31. Oct 2017, at 16:31, Michal Fabík wrote: >>> >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map >>> _your_local_legislation.2C_if_not_boun

Re: [Tagging] winter tyres

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:03 AM, Michal Fabík wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > possibly something like 'motor_vehicle:conditional=winter_equipment @ > > winter' > > Technically, this looks fine, but is it really necessary to specify > that winter

Re: [Tagging] winter tyres

On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > In many European countries we have two types of restrictions: > (a) Certain roads or road networks require you to carry winter equipment > for specific periods (details vary widely) or under certain weather > conditions (more or less vaguely

Re: [Tagging] passage only on low tide

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Colin Smale wrote: > I guess this must be a bridge, with a physical limitation? Or is there a > "legal restriction" with a sign saying "no access except within 1.5 hours > of low water?" What is actually the real-world scenario behind this? > http://www.openstreet

Re: [Tagging] passage only on low tide

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:29 AM, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 04/11/2017 07:04, Max wrote: > >> How to tag a way that is only passable for 3 hours during low tide? >> > > If it helps anyone, an example of the sort of object with this restriction > is http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/177021004 . I wo

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours for public transport routes?

I agree. The opening hours for Sunset Transit Center in Portland are 45 minutes before the first departure to 90 minutes after the last arrival, IIRC. Effectively, this averages out to 21 hours per day on most days, but this isn't clear to non locals, and now that I'm not local to TriMet, I have

Re: [Tagging] opening_hours for public transport routes?

t of being more remote yet closer to the Elmonica depot. On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > I agree. The opening hours for Sunset Transit Center in Portland are 45 > minutes before the first departure to 90 minutes after the last arrival, > IIRC. Effectively, this

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

Most data consumers seem to treat barrier=* as access=no by default; it's a good idea with barriers to explicitly tag for access on barriers. On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 5:24 PM, marc marc wrote: > Le 25. 11. 17 à 00:05, Selfish Seahorse a écrit : > >

Re: [Tagging] Road barrier

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Selfish Seahorse wrote: > On 28 November 2017 at 11:26, Georg Feddern wrote: > > Yes, unfortunately the european common-in-use traffic sign "VEHICLES > > PROHIBITED EXCEPT MOTORBIKE/SIDECAR" or "Prohibited for any > double-tracked > > motor vehicles" has no equiv

Re: [Tagging] amenity=atm + man_made=surveillance

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:22 PM, nwastra wrote: > > On 7 Dec 2017, at 10:07 am, Nelson A. de Oliveira > wrote: > > >> But I didn't find any discussion on this here. Do you agree that it is > >> adequate to combine amenity=atm with man_made=surveillance on the same > >> element? > > I also think t

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:lanes? (specific signal types for certain lanes)

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 5:04 PM, yo paseopor wrote: > I will not discuss here if continuous_green would be a realistic value > with full possibilities in a future. But according to taginfo [1] there are > only 6 nodes around the world. > Also I am asking myself: if continuous_green is continuous

Re: [Tagging] traffic_signals:lanes? (specific signal types for certain lanes)

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > > As for your continuous green light, you might have always observed that it > is on, maybe because you have never been there at a time when it might be > off In the US, where a light is continuous green, I've only ever seen it implemented

Re: [Tagging] emergency bays - which side?

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > On 31 December 2017 at 19:47, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > How do I indicate the side of the road the EB is serving in the case of a >> bidirectional road. >> > > Wouldn't an emergency bay always be on the side of the road away from > o

Re: [Tagging] emergency bays - which side?

c 31, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> >> On 31 December 2017 at 19:47, Volker Schmidt wrote: >> >> How do I indicate the side of the road the EB is serving in the case of a >&g

Re: [Tagging] cycleway:both=no in StreetComplete

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:23 AM, Matej Lieskovský wrote: > Someone in the Netherlands might want to assume cycleway=both as the > default. (The cycleway tag is just an example here.) > Maybe for older roads; newer roads would be cycleway=no with parallel cycleways on either side, for which oneway

Re: [Tagging] route role on cycle routes

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Jo wrote: > I fail to understand what information the route role is supposed to add. > Identify "on/off ramp" connections on cycleways and multi-use paths that have a "bicycle superhighway" configuration. > I never needed a link role in bicycle or hiking route

Re: [Tagging] route role on cycle routes

On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 6:51 AM, Fernando Trebien < fernando.treb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Jo wrote: > >> > >> I fail to understand what information the route role is supp

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

On Jan 16, 2018 05:36, "Stefan Nagy" wrote: Am 16.01.2018 12:10 schrieb marc marc: > we probably need to work on "default values". > but no one seems motivated to work on the proposal. > Is 'default values' a better word for what I called 'implicit values' before or are you talking about someth

Re: [Tagging] Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 3:45 PM, OSMDoudou < 19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > > This is a two-fold question in fact. > > > > (A) > > > > Osmose raises error "Way access mismatch relation route=bicycle" [1] on a > segment of the R50 highway [2] [3]. > > > > I'm gu

Re: [Tagging] access=avoid

On 06/13/2011 06:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/83524747/history > No comment. Nice troll. Go back under your bridge. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@open

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 10:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Folk, I rediscovered an old proposal which is extending the set of > barrier values. > > Please comment now on this, before we can eventually vote to get this > to a more definite status: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 02:50 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > >> On 06/30/2011 10:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >>> Folk, I rediscovered an old proposal which is extending the set of >>> barrier values. >>> >>> Please comment n

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 06/30/2011 05:35 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > How about lane dividers? This is an example below, though where I'm > thinking of them they actually divide a couple of lanes for about a km > or so - no lane changing allowed at that point. > > http://www.ingalcivil.com.au/reboundable_lane_divider.ht

Re: [Tagging] Prevoting: New_barrier_types

On 07/06/2011 03:35 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/7/7 Pieren : >> And this case, Cour Delepine entrance, Paris: >> http://maps.google.ch/maps?q=paris,+Cour+Delepine&hl=fr&ll=48.853267,2.376236&spn=0.001272,0.001982&sll=48.853393,2.376266&sspn=0.002527,0.003964&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=48.85327

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 02:53 PM, Jason Cunningham wrote: > Wasn't sure what a "splash pad" was and it looks like it's a North > American term for the British "water play area"? We used to call them "wading pools," but then we ended up with a generation of idiot parents who think swimming pools and children

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 09:05 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 7/19/2011 9:54 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On 07/19/2011 02:53 PM, Jason Cunningham wrote: >>> Wasn't sure what a "splash pad" was and it looks like it's a North >>> American term for the Britis

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - playground:splash_pad

On 07/19/2011 07:36 PM, Matt wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. > > There is no wikipedia entry for "water play area". I'm not sure what > language convention you are referring to. Can you please explain why the > British term should have precedence? Loosely speaking, it seems we have a bit more o

Re: [Tagging] Best way of tagging split between electronic toll and cash lanes?

On 07/20/2011 11:58 PM, Georg Feddern wrote: > Nathan Edgars II schrieb: >> Many toll plazas now have high-speed electronic toll lanes. Tagging >> seems haphazard. As I see it, the choices are: >> *What gets tagged as motorway vs. motorway_link? >> *What gets the name, ref, and relation membership?

Re: [Tagging] RFC: place=neighbourhood

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 06:43 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: > The same situations occur in the USA. Neighborhood names can also > shift over time. My neighborhood shows up on maps as "Murray > Heights", probably dating back to the original real-estate development > in the 1950's. In the 19 years

Re: [Tagging] short 2nd RFC for additional barrier values

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 19:29 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Yes, I see this basically the same. Someone else put them and I kept > them because it does not really matter to me, if someone bothers to > tag them that way, they can do it. cable_barrier seems to be a variety > of guard_rail but ma

Re: [Tagging] RFC: place=neighbourhood

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 21:41 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 8/31/2011 9:27 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Where I live, suburbs are well known, have fixed borders (though they > > can be and are sometimes adjusted), and are part of your address > > according to the post office and lo

Re: [Tagging] Mechanism for linking to a traffic_sign object in the source tag?

On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 00:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > I'm wondering if there's an accepted way of specifying that the sign > being used as a source has been mapped. For example: > maxspeed=45 mph source:maxspeed=sign (node 43920231) > where node 43920231 is traffic_sign=maxspeed maxspeed=45

Re: [Tagging] Mechanism for linking to a traffic_sign object in the source tag?

On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 04:02 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 9/4/2011 3:09 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 00:09 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> I'm wondering if there's an accepted way of specifying that the sign > >> being used as

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 07:43 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > if it's about whether the subway/rapid-transit system is connected to > the national rail system That doesn't quite work. For example, the US doesn't have a national rail system. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed m

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 11:43 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/9/22 Chris Dombroski : > > On Thursday, September 22, 2011 07:54:29 AM sabas88 wrote: > >> > How is someone to determine whether something is a railway=station or a > >> > railway=subway_station? > >> If it's on a metro (subway) l

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 13:15 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: > On 9/25/11 1:01 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Doesn't Amtrak and New York MTA have a couple stations where subways > > and Acela bullet trains share tracks and stations? > Acela goes into Penn Station, the only stop

Re: [Tagging] railways, subway stations and train stations

On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 13:16 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 9/25/2011 12:59 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 07:43 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > > > >>if it's about whether the subway/rapid-transit system is connected to > >>the nat

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 13:13 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: > This discussion has happened before. I guess it will happen again. > > The argument that more hard-core riders can't judge the bicycle > friendliness of a road is ridiculous. So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to such tagging is c

Re: [Tagging] rest_area and service road

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 21:46 -0400, James Mast wrote: > > From: a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk > > On Thu, September 29, 2011 04:08, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > On 9/28/2011 3:04 PM, Pieren wrote: > > > > > >> What is our recommendation for tagging the access roads entering > or > > >> leaving motorw

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 11:22 -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > > On 9/28/2011 12:08 PM, Josh Doe wrote: > > > Width of outside lane (no tags for this AFAIK) > > > Shoulder details (width, surface: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Shoulder) > > > > This only applie

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 19:48 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 10/1/2011 6:19 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to such tagging is > > creating problems for mapping areas that explicitly assign such ratings > > officially! > > As

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 21:02 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 10/1/2011 8:36 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 19:48 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> On 10/1/2011 6:19 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >>> So much so that the anal-retentive opposition to

Re: [Tagging] Commuter Rail

On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 14:37 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/10/4 : > > Hello list! > > In the German speaking forum we have been discussing about tagging commuter > > or suburban rail: > > http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=13907 > > I really think it is a necessary tag to di

Re: [Tagging] different access restrictions for different entrances to an area

On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 09:58 -0400, Anthony wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> access=destination > > > > "Private Property / Walt Disney World Resort Guest, Cast, and Business > > Invitees Only" > > > >> and access=private mean? > > > > "Service & Authorized Veh

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 21:59 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 22/11/2011 20:33, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 11/22/2011 09:17 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Surely the road in this case simply has tide-related opening times (and > >> a variable surface?). It may be secondary, tertiary, unclassifie

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:43 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2011/11/23 John F. Eldredge : > > Stephen Hope wrote: > >> > What would the correct highway classification be for an Oregon > >> beach? > >> > These fall under the Oregon Department of Transportation's > >> jurisdiction > >> > despite

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 21:09 +, Dave F. wrote: > On 24/11/2011 18:15, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Well, if we're going to exclude ways from being ways because they're not > > improved for vehicular use, then i have a lot of cattle trails I need to > > remove (desp

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 17:18 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 11/24/2011 5:10 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Dave F. wrote: > >> That's not what he said,& you know it. Typical Paul "I ignore > >> facts just so I can start an argument" Johnson. > > > > Traditionally I try to act as an administr

Re: [Tagging] proposed routes, state-tag

On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 15:17 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > But I'd like to propose to adopt the scheme to that of highways and > change the tagging to: > route=proposed > proposed=bicycle (for instance). Are you sure you're not getting route and way tagging confused here? What's wrong with t

Re: [Tagging] proposed routes, state-tag

On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 12:29 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Maybe I was exaggerating. Generally I don't see a big difference > between routes and ways, and tags that change the overall meaning of > other tags significantly should be avoided in favour of more > fail-proof solutions. If a tag st

Re: [Tagging] Bus pullout?

On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 09:11 +, Richard Mann wrote: > But I haven't tagged any (might be something to do with the negative > value I associate with them...) Curious what negative value this is? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >