k from a larger audience and see if you are in the right
direction or not.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ad "highway=gate" and "barrier=gate" or "oneway=yes" and
"oneway=1" coexisting until it was decided to clean-up the mess. Indeed, I
only find good reasons to remove duplicates and if someone wants to do
this, I will support him.
Pieren
___
rendered on the main map styles since it is
probably for dedicated and specialized maps.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
me of the values. It
has to be discussed with the original authors but not in OSM.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
e a try. It's here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/automated_external_defibrillator
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
"press #1 for..."). I cannot say. It's up for them to
enhance the wiki if it is required.
But please, vote for the primary key first.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
> Thanks for refining this votation Pieren. Actually I think that "AED"
> (capital letters) should not even be proposed as we don't use capitalization
> in formal keys/values if not for country code
ever) reusing the building
polygon is common practice. This guideline is just saying that one
feature shouldn't be duplicated on multiple OSM elements. It's not
saying that one OSM element cannot carry multiple features.
Pieren
___
T
olygon
twice : most of the contributors will not see both but only the one
selected with the first mouse clic. Don't change the main stream for
exceptions.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
sed_features/automated_external_defibrillator#Voting_.282nd.29
Btw, at the moment, I know only one data consumer for this tag, the
special map mentionned in the wiki. Do you know any other consumer to
contact in case of change ?
Pieren
___
Tagging
ious reasons. I'm happy to see that in some
countries, everybody knows what AED means... just think about the
other countries.
> For example access
It' not originaly my proposal but I can add some sub-tags ideas like
accessing conditions or "automated=no" (where yes is c
;multipolygon" and you get
it. Not really a good proposal trying to reinvent the wheel with
different words.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
t; to create a giant multipolygon for an ocean or a continent - to me that's no
> good idea.
I agree with you but they are already in the database, e.g. the Alps:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2698607
Pieren
___
Tagging
he
"emergency" key concept ;), no reason to change it. Just combine with
any "amenity" or "whateveryoulike" keys.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Stefan Tiran
wrote:
> Depending on cultural
> differences dogs could be considered as pet, food or object, but
> definitely not as means of transportation.
Depends your size and the size of the dog...
Pieren, tagging footways with dog:dismount=yes, jus
, usually for at least a week or a
week-end, or just special bedrooms (bed&breakfast) as "guests" in
private homes. So, I'm looking if we could reuse the two existing tags
or if I should create a sub-tag like "tourism=guest_house" +
"guest_house=bed_and_breakfa
I've also modified the "Tag:tourism=guest_house" wiki and moved the
"tourism=bed_and_breakfast" to a subtag
"guest_house=bed_and_breakfast":
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house
Pieren
_
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Tom Morris wrote:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dress_code
Lol : "For nude-only spaces, dress:nude=required. "
Why not simply "dress=no" ? ^^
Pieren
PS perhaps you should explain that this is related to perm
can be required (or not).
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
't need "trunk" because they
don't have something equivalent localy.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ods, such as in a shopping centre or a university.
What is called a "crèche" in French is your nursery. Btw, we already
find ~400 amenity=nursery in taginfo. And what is the difference
between "nursery" and "kindergarten" ? age ?
Pieren
nb : we should really avoid s
ion. It could be even added
half-automatically (with some manual validation) when it's missing by
searching the nearest intersection (could be a job for a QA tool). I
guess something similar is done for speed traps.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing
of type=priority in OSM ([1]). The type
"junction" is even more popular (although mainly contributed by the
same person).
Pieren
[1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/relations/priority
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
are just prioritizing the access to an intersection.
Like traffic signals, they should have a minor impact on the routing
itself (some small penalties compared to the highway importance). What
you ask is more "please GPS, tell me the traffic signs I'm just seeing
now wit
tim which should exclusively work with
admin boundary relations or place nodes.
For the "county free big city", simply don't create a relation with
admin_level 6 but keep only the one exclusively for admin_level 8.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
policy in France where
others said that the tag "admin_level" is providing the information.
Pieren
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
> Surely the boundary way itself is unlikely to have a name, other than a
> synthetic "a/b boundary"?
To clarify, my remark was just about the tag "name" in the two
relations which are indeed identical excepted the
over what
> elsewhere has a distinct legal body with levels 7 or 8?
It's two different adminitrative levels. In this particular case, it's
also two different administrations but does it count since we just
identify "admin boundaries" ?
Pieren
___
more as recommendations. I don't like when people think
that the wiki is the bible. But I also don't like people saying that
the vote process should be completely ignored. Take it as a good
opportunity to express verbally a maximum of feedbacks, opinions
rding legal aspects and impact on right to
privacy, it's very different. I'm not sure that a subtag is enough to
distinguish them.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Pee Wee wrote:
Probably a link to the wiki would help...
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ansit throught the net. One is
public, the other not.
May I suggest:
man_made=public_webcam
website=*('url' is deprecated in the wiki)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
a public webcam.
Note that sometimes, it can be hard to map., e.g. this pole with 11
cctv's in China :)
http://weibo.blog.lemonde.fr/files/2013/11/portique1.jpg
or that one with ~60 cams (in China again):
http://weibo.blog.lemonde.fr/files/2013/11/portique2.jpg
Pieren
___
Something similar is proposed here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Toilets#Other_proposed_or_emerging_keys_for_toilet_tagging
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
al needs more work, you can stop the process at any time, rework
the document and restart the vote later. This is really the aim of the
process : get feedbacks and improve the proposal until it reaches some
consensus.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
it should be suddently different for harbours ? because the
information comes from an import ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ot;Harbour" ([3]). Even buildings have their own
tags/namespace in your system ([4]) with e.g.
"seamark:building:function" and "seamark:building:shape". Finally, the
"seamark" namespace has to be interpreted as the "openseamap porject"
domain. You work since ye
x27;yes' to everything new.
> 6. There are more then 1 million mappers and only a few vote (24 in
> this case).
Better say : "there are 1 million subscribers and only a few mappers
and even less regular mappers."
And only a fraction of them is improving the wiki. We
ndable and less error-prone internationaly but not in some
countries where "aed" would be better.
That's why I'm considering if we could accept in the futur both values
"aed" and "defibrillator" equally and document them as such in the
wiki. But editors presets sh
of tags between the closed
way and the multipolygon relation.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Fernando Trebien
wrote:
> Listing 1: way count of paved ways
:
:
> Listing 2: way count of unpaved ways
:
:
Finally, we just need a "paved" and "unpaved" value for "surface".
This combined with tracktype would be far eno
sitive feedbacks. I forwarded the links you added to the current proposal
page. Of course, you are free to use your tag immediately in your OSM
editions.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> but in the long run it's going to give us less precise
> maps.
If you like precise maps, how can you recommend "smoothness" ? what is
precise between "smoothness=intermediate" (city bike) and
"smoo
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
>> http://geoawesomeness.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/lidar1.jpg
> surface=car_breaker
surface=bmw (or break_my_window :-)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.
ffic sign "
So maybe, there is a traffic sign for "unsuitable" which is different
from "no". An example would be appreciated.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
not
expressing a personnal opinion (not suitable for my bike), this value
is fine (it does not exist in my country anyway ;).
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
e temple
for the more specific religions.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
d the best one and
use it". Or if you want that the community (and the renderers styles
maintainers) adopt it as well, start a "vote" process and explain how
important it is in your country.
Pieren
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Surface:all_weather
ki, something decided by 16
people - and you're right - it probably wouldn't have passed). But the
question is coming back soon or later anyway. And since 2+ years the
wiki is ambiguous and does not help newcomers. This way of deprecating
a tag silently is not fair.
Pieren
htt
we shouldn't decrease
data accuracy just because one of the data consumer doesn't fully
support our data modelling.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Pee Wee wrote:
> This then means that tagging a traffic_sign:forward=* on a node that is part
> of a way is also more then arguable.
A node by itself has no direction. And a node can belong to more than
one way. I don't like this soluti
jective ? is OSM the right
place for such list ? At least, "heritage" [1] is based on something
"verifiable" [2].
Btw, "tourism=attraction" is one of the worst tag in OSM (same
category as "smoothness").
Pieren
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki
it's an
area and is not open to the public.
Something new like "amenity=public_works" ? (0 in taginfo)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
equired by municipalities (could be street
furnitures, salting of roads, plants (winter), compost, etc).
Btw, use simply "depot=*" instead of "depot:type=*". I don't
understand this recent trend to add a ":type" suffix in subtags. It
was not the ca
c attraction than a place for
education and works of art preservation.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
around the building. " ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ll publics in
a shopping mall and with a coffee shop inside. If you use 'office'
everytime you can sit down and put your laptop on a table, many
restaurants, airports, tearooms, startbucks can be moved to the
'office' key ;-)
Pieren
_
rated when nothing else is in the
"map" like sea cables or when the feature is exceptional like a metro
or a pipeline. This would be different if you start mapping all copper
or fiber underground networks (or sewer) in a city.
Pieren
___
Taggi
+1 for leisure (not presuming any combination/overlapping with a landuse)
-1 for events (could be misused for any events, not for a dedicated place)
+1 for "event(s)_space", "event(s)_place", "event_whateveryoulike"
Pieren
__
ince the relation itself is
not so widely used (even rejected by many contributors), is not supported
by many data consumers and with a definition that changed in time. For
instance, it was never clear if the relation should contain only one street
way or all of them. It was also never said that t
e the main "opening_hours" wiki if the
proposal is accepted ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
d" but below the "ground" level, is crossing a village
where we have 10 bridges. Either you add 10 times "layer=1" on the
bridges or you add 1 time "layer=-1" on the stream.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
tunnel.
> For both tunnels and bridges layer is now considered mandatory thus it is
> totally useless to put rivers at layer=-1 unless they are in a tunnel.
Who decided this and where ? The wiki about bridge says "Bridges
should have a l
on't see the point where adding one "layer=-1" is easier than
adding 10 "layer=1" ? I see the layer tag in "tunnel/bridge" in simple
cases but you should not follow all recommendations as fixed in stone.
Pieren
___
ay
instead of 10 bridges just demonstrates that you understood the
original concept of the tag "layer".
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
development/expertise either in data consumer applications (geocoding)
or in external source imports (not checking if a surrounding polygon
exists or not - for the country or for the place or for a named
street)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
2198380838 or
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/185887900)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
nd "tracktype" for tracks.
Otherwise it will be very confusing for everyone.
> http://oi59.tinypic.com/4htmag.jpg
> highway=path + smoothness=robust_wheels + tracktype=grade4 +
> mtb:scale=0 + sac_scale=hiking + surface=earth
This example is a track for me.
A tools I guess. I modified the wiki accordingly. Revert if you don't
like it.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
only required for the
non-default rule.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
aset. The question
already raised by others here is the benefit for OSM if the route is
only used by one consumer, is not visible on the ground, is not
permanent and not verifiable...
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
driving_side
> specified in that country.
But you force the QA tools to search and load country relations even
if they just have to check locally a way. This is not a problem for
tools like osmose or keepright but it is a problem for tools like JOSM
val
they will need
to know the country rule anyway since we cannot expect that all
highways will be tagged with this attribute.
- for contributors, forcing them to use "opposite" on ways is clearly
indicating that we only want to tag the exceptions (avoid an
unco
n't share you opinion that they are
wrong.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > Rivers tend to pretty universally go below bridges, don't you agree?
>
> Or bridges go above rivers? :-)
^^
Sounds like the glass being half empty or half full. We will never
reconcile the two points of
s with wiki
fiddling and josm obscure validations, you should try to open a bit
your mind and accept that contributors can supply the same information
in different ways (or nodes ;-). Stay open like "Open"StreetMap ;-)
Pieren
___
Tagging mail
tors.
Note that for QA tools, the tag on the last node or on the way itself
are both technically easy to support.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
t;noexit" is tagged on several
segments instead of one.
> We could simply deprecate noexit=* and replace it with note=noexit but I
> am not sure if this solves our problem and tools need to support strings
> and multivalues as noexit might not be the only word of the no
isible on the map, but if it were rendered
> 4. there is no need to tag each and every "noexit"; we're not
>dressing a Xmas tree.
>
> All correct. But it does not imply that the tag has to be on the last node.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
d be hard to
> quickly spot the dead end side with noexit=yes tagged only on the way
> instead of the node.
No. In such cases, only the "barrier" tag is important. No additional
tag required.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tag
uot; tag is disabling the warning report when the
highway is really not connected.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
efinition is objected, it would imply that all impasses require an
explicite "noexit" tag which is not realistic.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
last node is nearby
another highway, not when the last node is already connected to
another highway...
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ag is also clear (since we only look at ways ending nearby anothe
highway). What is unclear here ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
ode or on
the last way is not important.
Note that I'm just restoring the original state in the wiki (check the history).
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
to avoid the
> problems with way-tagging.
But we don't have "problems" with the tag on the way ! It's true that
the wiki has to document the best practices but it should not fordid
practices that are not wrong, harmfull, unclear or ambiguous ! I
regret the time when peop
t;.
> In fact, is it "the way" or is it "the highway"? Just a segment or more
> and up to where?
>
It's all about highway ways. (If it's connected to a building way, you
could add a "building=entrance" on the connection node I guess)
Pieren
___
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
>>> (2) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aaccess%3Ddesignated
>
> This is how I understood and have used it.
This is what the wiki says:
"Note that access=designated is not defining what is designated and is
me
or in the other side...
It's just a long and onerous discussion to find dubious arguments
against this tag on ways.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
onal tags like "tunnel=*" or "covered=*", a
"layer=-1" river shouldn't be rendered differently than a "layer=1" or
even in the absence of any "layer" tag. This is a bug in OsmAnd. You
clearly admit that you tag for the renderer.
Pieren
___
nse.
+1
Again, without a complementary tag like "tunnel" or "covered", you can
only speculate about the topology. QA tools report errors if two
features are crossing each other without these additional tags
(road/road, road/river, road/railway, etc... but not a
ignore all access restrictions really is.
I think the tag makes sens only where a specific road sign exists.
This is the case in my country (not U-turns but service roads or even
pedestrian streets with e.g. special removable bollards)
Pieren
___
Tagging mai
ground, otherwise it's a flood ;-)
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
g each
other. This would increase the complexity of mapping which is
something the crowd will never accept.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
eady complex and I'm not
speaking for newcomers. Doubling the amount of "land" tags/polygons is
shooting ourselves in the foot.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
deling is better than
'capital' (works for all levels and is formally linking both entities)
but I know that renderers prefer tags directly on the node for
convenience.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
"place(s)" to be linked. The risk if we
don't specify a limit is that contributors will use it to link "all"
places within the boundary (making a substitute of the infamous
"is_in" tag).
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
ugh
> that it's possible to harmonise, so long as the nations can agree :)
+1
I don't like the key "location=*" for the same reasons.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthijs Melissen
wrote:
> Some more strange cases:
We could create an additional role (e.g. "capital") when the
"admin_centre" is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid
unnecessa
gon relation (splitting the existing landuse) or you just
collect the sum of existing landuses ?
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
1 - 100 of 605 matches
Mail list logo
