There's already services offered by companies like Opensignal to do this
automatically through apps. And they record actual signal strength data
that one cannot access by simply pulling their phones out.
Also, signal strength as a value that vary continuously over space is like
elevation or climate
Is it necessary for the tag "maxweight" to be made more clear or to
document that this is a tag that should be interpreted differently in
different countries?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagg
在 2020年6月2日週二 09:26，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> 寫道：
> On 30/5/20 12:48 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> > My main point is that out there are things that consist of visible
> > objects plus objects which have left visible traces, and also some
> > pieces that have been completely erased, but of which
在 2020年6月6日週六 11:03，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> 寫道：
> On 6/6/20 8:02 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> > I need to reopen this thread.
> >
> > I do object strongly to the invitation to remove the
> > razed/dismantled-railway tag in the case of railway tracks have been
> > replaced by roads with the s
在 2020年6月29日週一 20:12，Andrew Harvey 寫道：
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 21:17, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>> > On 29. Jun 2020, at 12:18, Andrew Harvey
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I think it's better to have some kind of high level tag like
>> amenity=drinks or shop=drinks which you order at a counter (as
在 2020年7月3日週五 22:32，Paul Allen 寫道：
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 14:43, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
>> > description=* might be a better way of dealing with it (if the name of
>> the
>> place doesn't give it away).
>>
>> No, that is a bad idea. The "description" field does not provide
>> consistent da
Cureently, the wiki say the admin_level=1 tag is for supernational border
like EU, but it have not be tagged as such in the OSM database itself.
Should it the tag be applied this way?
Also, another thing is taginfo seems to be showing a number of current use
of the tag admin_level=1 on different fe
在 2020年7月31日週五 00:24，Alan Mackie 寫道：
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 16:38, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>
>> Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackie <
>> aamac...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably
>>> be to re-tag all existing
No, it would still require a mass edit and breaking changes that will come
with disadvantages already listed by other participant of this discussion
在 2020年10月19日週一 18:42，Robert Delmenico 寫道：
> Nice investigating Nathan,
>
> I would be open to using artificial instead of human_made.
>
>
> Would
Breaking change come with a cost.
Whether it is worth is a question should be asked.
在 2020年10月19日週一 21:04，Dave F via Tagging 寫道：
> Irrelevant of any implied meaning, 'man_made' always appeared to be a
> clunky, catch-all tag. OSM was being a bit lazy.
> I mean, *everything* is either man made o
I feel like it is a cherry-picked list of comment.
在 2020年10月19日週一 22:42，Robert Delmenico 寫道：
>
> I originally put the call out really to gauge if there was much interest
> in changing the term man_made because of its use of 'man', and was
> interested in hearing the thoughts from other mappers
在 2020年10月21日週三 03:25，Justin Tracey 寫道：
> On 2020-10-20 12:13 p.m., Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> >> If core aspects of the tagging schema give hints at a bias
> >> towards a particular segment of the population (in this case,
> >> English-speaking men)
> >
> > So, clearly, we need to change the langu
在 2020年10月21日週三 15:46，Rory McCann 寫道：
> (I broke my collarbone, so I'm typing one handed and can mistype)
>
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, at 9:39 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, at 6:25 AM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> > > (1) I never understood "man made" as
> > > "made by mal
在 2020年10月21日週三 17:37，Oliver Simmons 寫道：
> Agreed, if we are doing this once, we better have a way to do it again as
> doing it once guarantees that it will happen for another tag in the future.
>
>
>
> Changing in inside OSM and the OSM Wiki is the easier part though, it’s
> informing and gettin
See "Parking-Protected Bike Lanes | The City of Portland, Oregon":
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/77882
在 2020年10月27日週二 01:45，Supaplex 寫道：
> Do you have an example picture/mapillary or similar of such a street? You
> call this case yourself "parking lane" and the way you describe
How do you identify different types of soecial ecobomic zones? For exmaple,
in China, you have Hainan, which is a special economic zone for tourism,
you have Shenzhen, which is for policy innivation, you have Tianjin Binhai
new area, which is for logistics, you have a Cloud computing special
manage
Excuse me, what is the limitation here against tagging "Extremely long
Amtrak relations"? Some of those Amtrak services, while long, in my
knowledge are still far from the longest in the OSM database, like they're
shorter than the train route between Moscow to Pyongyang, which have been
tagged as a
I don't thibk it is appropriate to add one-off temporary facilities into
OSM.
在 2020年11月25日週三 01:30，Tom Pfeifer 寫道：
> 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
I think it depends on where yoj exactly are at, in Hong Kong the government
established a few dozens indoor testing spots, tested a million people and
a half, and then shutting down the facility knowing its positive rate isn't
high.
在 2020年11月27日週五 01:25，Brian M. Sperlongano 寫道：
> This [1] testi
The current usage is that, "Use roundtrip=yes to indicate that the start
and finish of the route are at the same location". As in a route from Paris
to Milano to Frankfurt then back to Paris would be tagged as roundtrip=yes.
You have edited the wiki against established usage to make it become a no.
Merriam Webster and some other resources you have quoted are dictionary for
American English, not the variant of English used by OSM. Posts by original
author of the topic on the wiki talk page have explained the meaning of the
term in British English.
在 2019年12月20日週五 06:19，Francesco Ansanelli 寫道
Problem with applying different road classification system from different
places with their individual tags onto local roads is that:
1. Even if we ignore countries that have different rules within different
part of a single country, there are still about 200 countries in this
world. Each of them h
sanelli
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion the options are:
>>>
>>> - deprecate roundtrip in favour of 2 tags with a generally agreed naming
>>> convention (best at this point)
>>> - keep roundtrip and closed_loop with the wiki definition
With all those different types of parking facilities, wouldn't it be easier
to create some tag combinations like the following?
amenity=parking
parking=bus
bus=tourist_bus
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/
You can consider using BCP 47 extension T as language tag in OpenStreetMap
follow BCP 47 practice. The extension T is for denoting content that have
been transformed from one language into another, so if you write fr-t-frm
then it would denote the content is transformed fron Middle French
(15th-17t
For disluted territory marked as country boundary, there is also
https://www.openstreetmap.org/ this big box in South China Sea.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
As my personal biggest use of the public transportation relationship is to
visualize the ways that public transit route would take, I must say I am
personally against the idea.
>From my personal experience of using a non-OSM website "wikiroutes", which
is a website that let public enter public tran
At 2020-03-09 Mon 16:04, John Doe wrote:
>
> Hey, thanks for sharing your views 🙂
>
> 07-Mar-2020 03:01:41 Phake Nick :
>
> > [...] for such renderer to work, access restriction for public transit
> vehicle need to be complete, which is rather difficult not just becau
On 2020-03-11 Wed 03:20，Richard wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 04:07:02PM +0100, Peter Elderson wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't know. It seems strange to me that established routes have to
> be
> > re-routed to display or use them. How can you be sure the re-created
> route
> > is the one that is defin
On 2020-03-10 Tue 19:47, Dave F via Tagging
wrote:
> On 09/03/2020 21:00, Alan Mackie wrote:
> >
> > So it's better to label them all as platforms? I can't see any raised
> area
> > in a typical bus stop:...
> >
> >
> > Why would we tag it as if it looks like this?...
>
> This is just one example
On 2020-03-11 Wed 06:03, Alan Mackie wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 20:54, Phake Nick wrote:
>
>> On 2020-03-10 Tue 19:47, Dave F via Tagging
>> wrote:
>>
>>> > A platform is a platform, a perfectly flat bit of sidewalk isn't.
>>
在 2020年3月25日週三 17:27，Frederik Ramm 寫道：
> Hi,
>
> the "name:xx" tags are something of an exception in OSM because while we
> defer to "local knowledge" as the highest-ranking source normally, this
> is not being done for name:xx tags. It is possible for no single citizen
> of the city of Karlsruhe
在 2020年3月25日週三 18:34，Frederik Ramm 寫道：
> Hi,
>
> On 25.03.20 11:19, Phake Nick wrote:
> > My guess is that about 5% of name:xx tags in OSM actually represent a
> > unique name in its own right; all others are either copies of the
> name
> > tag ("t
Names in OSM map is to show the world reader what each objects are.
Unlike Wikipedia and Wikidata, OSM map everything on the ground.
Let assume the world's common language is now priparaish, and English is
now only spoken by a small insignificant African tribe, and is also the
only language in the
在 2020年3月27日週五 17:14， 寫道：
>
>
> On March 25, 2020 11:50:15 AM GMT+01:00, Phake Nick
> wrote:
> >在 2020年3月25日週三 18:34，Frederik Ramm 寫道：
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 25.03.20 11:19, Phake Nick wrote:
> >> > My guess
在 2020年3月27日週五 21:05，Paul Allen 寫道：
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 12:31, Simon Poole wrote:
>
>> Pretending that they do isn't a useful concept and yes they typically
>> won't have transliterations either.
>>
> I'm not pretending the street I'm on has a name in Mandarin. But the
> country I'm in doe
Google Plus for Corporate is still functional.
在 2020年4月14日週二 06:25，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> the service was shutdown on 2 avril 2019
> can we set the status as discardable ?
>
> Regards,
> Marc
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.or
Since the wiki say,
> Rejected features may be resubmitted, modified, and moved back to the RFC
process.
, and given most reason appeared on the voting page, I would say the
correct action right now is to improve the reasons listed in the paragraph
on why alternative tagging are not available, an
On 2020-05-08 Fri 20:45, Jarek Piórkowski wrote:
>
> How much discussion do you think should be necessary before voting "I
> oppose, because I think using sub-tags is better"? If someone thinks
> that, they think that. A discussion would just print the arguments
> back and forth.
>
Given the pro
在 2020年5月8日週五 23:47，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> > If these arguments were given beforehand
>
> except memory problem, I exposed this opinion here during the RFC
> (=consider that taxi is a service independent of the propulsion
> of the engine which is a sub-tag), and I have the impression that
> the
That they exists doesn't mean they make a different. Taxi with low
pollution and taxi with electric power are same type of taxi as regular
taxi while motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
That is like saying we shouldn't have a separate tag for bus versus cars
because there a
在 2020年5月9日週六 07:07，François Lacombe 寫道：
> Hi
>
> Le ven. 8 mai 2020 à 20:48, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>> motorcycle are not the same type of service as regular taxi.
>>
>
> Then may I ask you why ?
> I pay a driver to take me where I want to with his vehicle.
>
rring to vehicle
> used).
>
> Default to motorcar can lead to mistakes for consumers.
> It's more valuable to consider vehicle unknown if absent (and encourage
> mappers to explicitly define it)
>
And that make the tag valueless as that cannot actually indicate what exact
Key chaining is the more complex form of representation, especially when
there are no obvious relationship between different types of objects being
represented.
在 2020年5月10日週日 04:50，Florimond Berthoux 寫道：
> Yeah, that's the point...
>
> Keep it simple.
> You know taxi key ? You know motorcycle k
在 2020年5月10日週日 07:08，François Lacombe 寫道：
>
> Le sam. 9 mai 2020 à 19:20, Phake Nick a écrit :
>
>>
>> What you said doesn't make sense.
>> The existence of a space within the word doesn't inherently make them
>> separateable.
>> Like for the tag
在 2020年5月10日週日 16:24，Martin Koppenhoefer 寫道：
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 10. May 2020, at 01:31, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > If you use amenity=taxi + vehicle=* you
> > guarantee that any carto which renders amenity=taxi will render ojek
> ranks
> > incorrectly at first, and perhaps incorrect
At the end of the day we are not taking motorcycle taxi and taxi
themselves. What's being tagged are waiting area for taxi or motorcycle
taxis. What matters is that, if one is created as an optional subtag of
another, would not using such subtag result in incorrect analysis of data
when someone use
in the
same format as that would lose the meaning of having the two types of
mobility options.
在 2020年5月11日週一 08:58，Jarek Piórkowski 寫道：
> On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 18:35, Phake Nick wrote:
> > At the end of the day we are not taking motorcycle taxi and taxi
> themselves. What's
* Also, as have already been mentioned in other replies, there are various
other differences between the two services other than number of wheels and
whether they're enclosed.
在 2020年5月11日週一 09:04，Phake Nick 寫道：
> I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or
>
在 2020年5月11日週一 09:18，Jarek Piórkowski 寫道：
> On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 21:04, Phake Nick wrote:
> > I am more thinking about analysis of geographical data of cities or
> districts where taxi and motorcycle taxi would be two very different things
> to be managed.
>
> If you a
Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi and
motorcycle taxi.
在 2020年5月11日週一 16:04，Marc M. 寫道：
> Hello,
>
> Le 10.05.20 à 01:24, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> > imagine you are ordering a taxi for yourself and 2 colleagues to the
> > airport and instead of a taxi (ca
在 2020年5月13日週三 12:24，Mark Wagner 寫道：
> On Tue, 12 May 2020 23:53:52 +0800
> Phake Nick wrote:
>
> > Except capacity is only one of many differences between common taxi
> > and motorcycle taxi.
>
> Are there any differences that can't be explained by the fact
In South Korea/Japan/China/Taiwan, the minimal administrative level are
usually equivalent of neighborhoods, and have little to no substantial
administrative functions.
For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3987250 this is
admin_level=9 in South Korea, https://www.openstreetmap.org/re
I personally think such should still be tagged as long as the space, or the
right of way, still remain, but not when it have been completely removed,
integrated into surrounding area, and redeveloped, unless traces or marks
of either the remain of the rail system itself or the space previous used
b
在 2020年5月25日週一 16:12，Florian Lohoff 寫道：
>
> Hola,
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 08:52:21AM +0200, Colin Smale wrote:
> > 1. Live and let live - OSM has always been a broad church. It might not
> > be your hobby, but it is their's. The bar to actively deleting other
> > people's work should be set v
在 2020年5月25日週一 21:39，Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> 寫道：
>
>
>
> May 25, 2020, 15:27 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
>
> On 2020-05-25 14:58, Marc M. wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> following a small thread on irc, I have review 20 usage of admin_level=1
> all are mistakes, often by new
在 2020年5月25日週一 19:35，Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> 寫道：
>
>
>
> May 25, 2020, 09:47 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 25. May 2020, at 08:54, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> 1. Live and let live - OSM has always been a broad church. It might not be
> y
I think there are some cases that might not be sufficiently covered by the
current proposal and it might be a good idea to explain how they can be
tagged in example section of the proposal if they can be represented by it:
* Minamitorishima, where it is undoubtably a Japanese natural feature,
howev
have
different claims on territory from existing government of the country, like
Free France vs Vichy France? (in both the situation when such government in
exile control some overseas territory and also in situation when such
government does not control any territory)
在 2019年1月4日週五 20:22，Phake Nick 寫道：
And there are also Tuk Tuk (Auto-Ricksaw?) in SE Asia, the use of golf cart
to offer for-hire service at some specific enclosed locality like theme
parks, and then maybe there are still places that you can ride on a
Palanquin. (Tuk Tuk and Golf cart are automobiles but their different
nature probab
I believe many time the boundary of a peninsula are politically defined,
for instance most would often see the Iberia peninsula end at where Spain
meet France, Indochina peninsula's boundary will probably be the southern
border of China, and Sinai peninsula's boundary would be the current border
be
>M (for mezzanine) is often in between G and 2, and often but not always
has some notion of being less than a proper full floor
Speaking of which many editors, users, editing software, tenderer and such
seems to assume levels must be integer which is not necessary to be
correct. For instance, I am
>
> One reason that's of particular interest to me is that SIT is intended
> to be compatible with 3D rendering, allowing for the creation of 3D
> models that represent both the inside and outside of buildings at the
> same time.
>
> At the moment, Simple 3D Buildings has no support for "half" leve
Wasn't that only for the currently abandoned parts?
在 2019年2月12日週二 05:52，Jo 寫道：
> The proposal was voted upon.
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:54 PM Tijmen Stam wrote:
>
>> On 31-10-18 00:54, Leif Rasmussen wrote:
>> > Hello everyone!
>> > I recently wrote up a proposal page for public transport
In Hong Kong, we have many area that are officially destinated as
"sitting-out area" that would fit the description. These area usually have
a few benches along with little bit of plantation around them for people to
sit inside. They are managed by government and usually sandwiched between
differen
Nope. For example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3352395 The route
us currently operated by two different operators on coordinated timetable
and each operator have their own ETA system. While they do not provide a
GTFS feed for now, it can be expected that each of them will provide their
o
I have checked some of these features in Taiwan some are tagged
office=educational_institution, some are tagged amenity=prep_school, some
are simply tagged as shop=yes.
A discussion on Japanese osm mailing list suggest using amenity=prep_school
for this type of facility.
On OSM Taiwan's hackpad it
Is it actually a good idea to put everything under police=*? Like
prison/detainment facilities, yes in China police have some sort of
detainment facilities that can detain people for a given number of days, as
an alternative to go through juridical trial and get into actual correction
facilities, b
It would probably be more appropriate to use lifecycle prefix if a shop
have beeb replaced by another shop. For example name=KFC+was:name=McDonald's
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
s.
2019年3月13日 05:58 於 "Martin Koppenhoefer" 寫道：
sent from a phone
> On 12. Mar 2019, at 16:15, Phake Nick wrote:
>
> It would probably be more appropriate to use lifecycle prefix if a shop
have beeb replaced by another shop. For example name=KFC+was:name=McDonald's
thi
relationship is the one they want. It's also
unnecessarily increasing the number of route variants that need to be
maintained by the order of magnitude of hundreds.
在 2019年3月7日週四 22:17，Martin Koppenhoefer 寫道：
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 7. Mar 2019, at 15:02, Phake N
There are processed data for each stop, but in term of GTFS I don't think
anyone in the world supply data individually for each stops. My
understanding is that each GTFS file usually cover a line or a network.
在 2019年3月13日週三 10:32，Graeme Fitzpatrick 寫道：
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 11:18, Andrew
maybe we can use some keys like eta_link:shortnameofbuscompanyA=*
and eta_link:shortnameofbuscompanyB=* to show different operators
information
在 2019年3月13日週三 15:01，Graeme Fitzpatrick 寫道：
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 14:30, Phake Nick wrote:
>
>> but in term of GTFS I don
I found that the current way of mapping opening time of features in
OSM map are too limiting, and the opening time of some features cannot
be properly represented with only the current syntax, therefore I have
written a brief idea about how the syntax in key opening_hours could
have been expanded t
familiarize yourself with the actual
> >> grammar
> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours/specification
> >> first , in particular your proposal begins with a couple of non-starters
> >> that conflict directly with the existing specificatio
在 2019年3月14日週四 20:38，Simon Poole 寫道：
> Some more comments:
>
> - the OH values are currently always evaluated in the local time zone
> (or to go even a bit further in a local context as the location they
> apply to is always known), so a time zone indicator would be only needed
> in the cases tha
It really depends on exactly how complex the route is, something like
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4776035 this bus route can
definitely use it. (and I haven't mentioned other similar bus routes with
different numbers in different relationship yet)
在 2019年3月15日週五 03:31，Paul Allen 寫道：
>
if not, currently valid route 'll become unusable in all app.
so sure that's the best/most need thing todo with PT version :(
Le 14.03.19 à 23:25, Phake Nick a écrit :
> It really depends on exactly how complex the route is, something like
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relatio
Come to think of it, if the goal is to represent different perspective of
disputed territory, then mapping disputed territories as disputed territory
using claimed_by=* controlled_by=* does not seems like a good idea, as such
an area in OSM would need to include a line separating the disputed
terri
In Hong Kong, it is previously decided that, when tagging routes or
access restriction of public service vehicles, a large-sized
franchised bus can be represented with key/value or "bus", a green
minibus can be represented with key/value of "minibus", while a red
minibus can be represented with the
match the calendar of the year.
在 2019年3月17日週日 01:57，Simon Poole 寫道：
>
> Am 14.03.2019 um 23:18 schrieb Phake Nick:
>
>
>
> 在 2019年3月14日週四 20:38，Simon Poole 寫道：
>
>> Some more comments:
>>
>> - the OH values are currently always evaluated in the local time zon
The scheme seems a bit unnecessarily confusing by being unnecessarily
specific. Like what tag should I use for a place that can top up my Alipay
account directly?
在 2019年1月29日週二 23:06，Daniele Santini 寫道：
> The first voting for the Top up proposal was rejected. I have changed the
> proposal remo
So, If I understand correctly, Mosque are more like a Islamic version
Monastery?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
A problem with using something like service=bus is that it implies all
buses can use it but in many cases BRT roads are only open to BRT buses and
ban all other buses?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/list
Then how to tag brt-bus-only road that ban regular buses?
在 2019年3月29日週五 05:40，Martin Koppenhoefer 寫道：
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 28. Mar 2019, at 21:07, Phake Nick wrote:
> >
> > A problem with using something like service=bus is that it implies all
> b
There are religion=chinese_folk and religion=vietnamese_folk for indigenous
religion for Chinese people and Vietnamese people, you might wish to check
is there similar existing value in use for Australian aboriginal religious
sites, if not you might wish to create a new value.
在 2019年4月3日週三 05:30，
>Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
>barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
>rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
>polygon. This happens for all closed ways that are tagged "area=yes",
>but it also happens if
area=no would also applies to amenity=park or landcover=* if you are
tagging them in the same object.
在 2019年4月14日週日 05:16，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> 寫道：
> As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this
> barrier it is required not to be an area, why not use the tag
That doesn't seems to solve the problem that would occur. For instance, how
to represent the first Sunday (a feature in Gregorian calendar) after
Chinese traditional ceremony X (a feature in Chinese traditional calendar)
in the opening time syntax, if they're split up for "simplicity"? What
about w
then again, what about month numbering in Chinese calendar? There are no
month name, only lunar month 1, lunar month 2, etc.
在 2019年5月22日週三 20:33，Paul Allen 寫道：
> On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 09:16, Rory McCann wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't know much about the islamic calendar. Could you give some
>> exampl
Ah, and about the Chinese calendar leap month I mentioned a while ago, it
seems like some algorithm nowadays would tweet those leap month as negative
values, for instance if it is the 8th month that get leaped, then it could
be computationally represented as Lunar month -8.
在 2019年5月24日週五 14:57，Co
If you look at it from a temporary residence for the group of people
perspective, then I guess tags like place=village/town/neighbourhood could
be better choices?
在 2019年6月10日週一 20:18，Joseph Eisenberg 寫道：
> I understand why refugee camps have been mapped with
> amenity=social_facility - it's the
92 matches
Mail list logo
