Re: [Tagging] Add some tag to identify disputed borders

To me "agreed" seems better than "confirmed" (/and other possibilities could be "recognized" or "accepted"/) , but... do we really need to find an adjective qualifying such borders? I guess they represent the vast majority of boundaries, so we could just leave them alone and just qualify anomalo

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

t;ref:" could be go, IMHO... Cheers, Sergio Manzi On 2018-11-28 21:07, bkil wrote: > payment:sms=yes > payment:WhateverPayApp=yes > contact:sms= > ref:payment= > > As an alternative, ref:sms=* would also work for me, though I think > it's redundant if the code

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

Hello, Warin, a couple of quick, non-exhaustive, notes on antenna use (or is it /usage/?) even if I'm still doubtful we should map with such detail: * amateur_radio: antenna systems used by *licensed *radio amateurs * transponder: I think they are mostly used on *mobile *systems (/unmappabl

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boundary=aboriginal_lands

+1000! On 2018-11-29 03:52, Paul Johnson wrote: > Treating tribal boundaries as other political boundaries humanizes the > situation. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lis

Re: [Tagging] antenna use key to replace some of the antenna type

Hello Warin, On 2018-11-29 07:27, Warin wrote: >> >> * amateur_radio: antenna systems used by *licensed *radio amateurs >> > > A mapper will not be able to tell if they are licensed. So I would not > stipulate it. And this is tagging the use, not who uses it (operator=licensed > radio amateur?

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

the ticket machine if I use pay by phone. But the wiki > only suggests payment=* keys for vending=parking_tickets, not for > amenity=parking. > > > Sergio Manzi schrieb am 21:15 Mittwoch, 28.November 2018: > > > Sorry, but it should be

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

Hi Martin! On 2018-11-29 17:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > payment:sms:WhateverPayApp:contact= > > > Does not look very sustainable, are we going to mass retag all of these if > the number changes? I agree it might be useful to have this information, but > it shouldn’t need to be tagged on ev

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

On 2018-11-29 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > maybe just “ref”, unless it is different? We are using ref for example for > bus stops where you can use this code to dynamically query an api for bus > arrival times. As long as it is just one reference number, there’s no need to > declare 5 lev

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

.. Sergio On 2018-11-29 17:20, Sergio Manzi wrote: > On 2018-11-29 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> maybe just “ref”, unless it is different? We are using ref for example for >> bus stops where you can use this code to dynamically query an api for bus >> arrival t

Re: [Tagging] Suggestion: ref:mobile_payment for amenity=parking

-11-29 21:29, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 02:19, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > Right! Too many payments! :-) To spare some bytes it could be: > payment:sms:ExampleApp:code=.  What do you think? > > I would think that it sh

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

Seems very good to me. * already used: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=gantry * proposal exist: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gantry In the proposal I don't like very much the way to indicate clearence, maxheight:physical=* (/what? opposed to...  maxhe

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing! See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place Cheers! On 2018-11-30 18:10, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Seems very good to me. > > * already used: https://taginfo.

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

r board_type in information=board, but welcome signs are far from being restricted to boards On 2018-11-30 18:18, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourhood" thing! > > See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Places and > https://wiki.ope

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

If so, then place=neighbourhood is more likely to be usable by a routing > engine than usage=welcome_sign. > > Cheers! > >> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:18 AM, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> >> wrote: >> >> No, wait, I disagree with the "place=neighbourh

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

Oh, and, BTW, by doing that the neighbourood will not suddenly disappear if they ever take down the gantry...  :-) On 2018-11-30 21:21, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > I understand what you mean (/and it reminds me of my first arrival in India, > to the neighbourood of Pahrganj in New Delhi!

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

Doh... every day harder... :-) I'd say information=board + board_type=welcome_sign look at it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board_type Cheers! On 2018-11-30 23:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > OK, so man_made=gantry, or in some cases =archway, works for "things" > crossing over

Re: [Tagging] Neighborhood Gateway Signs?

This! This! This! :-) On 2018-12-01 00:12, Kevin Kenny wrote: > The 'description' tag, perhaps? Things eventually get to the point where even > the obsessive classifiers on this list might as well admit that even if they > do introduce a taxonomy, it is likely that no data consumer will use it. 

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (office=diplomatic)

Great job, Allan! One more small quirk, thus: in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dembassy the deprecation banner says that the reason for the deprecation is documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features but I don't see anything about amenity=embassy in

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

About the "/École primaire des Quatre Fils/, the proper name would be the officialy registered one (/or at least that's how it works in Europe/), and I'm ready to bet whatever you want that it is not "/de Quatre Fils/". About the "/Lac des Quatre-Cantons/" [1

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

Once again, reality is complex and multifaced: I don't think one should try to frame what is a local French reality, an "École primaire", into an US or UK based context: let the French decide... I have the same problem for some shop categories which are not part of the US/UK tradition: an Itali

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

P.S.: ... but if I want my /salumeria /to show up on the map, I *have to* "/lie for the rendering/" and tag it as a shop=deli: but'I'm not happy at all... On 2018-12-05 22:02, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Once again, reality is complex and multifaced: I don't think one

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

There is no way I can think of: for lack of better tagging some very different shop categories (/very different in our culture..//./), like the aforementioned "salumeria", "rosticeria", "polleria", the generic "alimentari", and many others, have all been tagged as "shop=deli", so we have "/lost

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

But maybe I've misunderstood your question: if you where asking how I would like to tag a salumeria, the answer for me would be really simple: "shop=salumeria" On 2018-12-05 22:23, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > There is no way I can think of: for lack of better tagging some v

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

... or maybe a better solution, if we would like the kind of shop to be comprhensible to people of different culture, then I would establish a namespace for food shops and then specify the (/locally relevant/) kind of shop, like eg. shop:food=salumeria. On 2018-12-05 22:26, Sergio Manzi wrote

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

you're probably right, but it would nonetheless be the "/child of a lesser God/" compared to a "deli" in New York, USA... On 2018-12-05 22:51, Dave F wrote: > Going off topic, but you /can/ tag it as "shop=salumeria", it will still be > searchable & will be displayed on the standard map with i

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

dry, that may only actually have water in > them very rarely,  > or in some cases, never in human memory! But they are still called lakes, > the same as the "normal" inland bodies of water. > > There is intermitent=yes tag to denote dry lakes as far as I remember. > >

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

I understand your concerns and tend to agree, but how would you manage the situation where a Russian want to name the lake as it is known in his language, just "Байкал" (/assuming this is the case.../), but also wanting to find it with the "озеро" (lake) keyword? On 2018-12-06 00:12, Joseph Eis

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

ge, perhaps? > > (That’s “natural=water” and “water=lake” in Bahasa Indonesia. Yes, “air” > means “water”) > > -Joseph > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:19 AM Sergio Manzi <mailto:s...@smz.it>> wrote: > > I understand your concerns and tend to agree, but how would you

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

Naaahhh... just "complex/" /or/"/complicated"  (/I don't know which one is better in English/)...    :-) On 2018-12-06 00:48, Paul Allen wrote: > The real world is messy. > smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

If this is meant to be a statement of the superiority of the English language (/and hence English culture/)  in face of any other language/people of world, I'd be really cautious... As I said, I'd leave to each one to deal with its culture/sensibility and be open to the possibility to have (som

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

wouldn’t suggest that I add tags such as “alam=air” and “air=danau” > to every lake in your country so that Indonesians can search in their own > language, perhaps? > > (That’s “natural=water” and “water=lake” in Bahasa Indonesia. Yes, “air” > means “water”) > > -Jos

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

ponds and *their *sensibility to "see" the two as whatever they think they are. On 2018-12-06 01:37, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > In this case I think the "alt_name:ru" tag solution could be a very good > solution (/but I leave this to our Russian friend to decide.../)

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

s often considered part of the name.  > > Eg, alt_name:ru=, loc_name=, official_name= etc, as appropriate based on > local usage. > > -Joseph > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:47 AM Sergio Manzi <mailto:s...@smz.it>> wrote: > > I mean, in a more general way and

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

That's (/quite obviously I would say.../) not a solution: all it does is to move the problem from one place to another: how would you make up the name for one of yoursпруд or копанка in English? On 2018-12-06 12:51, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > Another solution is to always put category name int

Re: [Tagging] Salumeria(it) / charcuterie(fr) / Wurstwaren (de) WAS Re: Can OSM become a geospacial database?

not willng to dilute their history with the history of different similar places. On 2018-12-06 09:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 5. Dec 2018, at 22:08, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > >> P.S.: ... but if I want my /s

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

e" but have mentioned it because it is currently used in every > country for highway=residential ways. > > чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 15:08, Sergio Manzi <mailto:s...@smz.it>>: > > That's (/quite obviously I would say.../) not a solution: all it >

Re: [Tagging] Salumeria(it) / charcuterie(fr) / Wurstwaren (de) WAS Re: Can OSM become a geospacial database?

OK, sorry, a lot of typos... it's all salumeria (singular) and salumerie (plural)! On 2018-12-06 13:39, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Martin, > > I see you have "/spawned/" my comment from another thread into this thread. > > I take for granted your good willingness

Re: [Tagging] Salumeria(it) / charcuterie(fr) / Wurstwaren (de) WAS Re: Can OSM become a geospacial database?

I understand this is not a discussion between you and me, but as you cited me, I felt obliged to explain you why I'm not (/much/) interested in the specific, just as an act of courtesy toward you (/but //apperently you misunderstood.../) take care, Sergio On 2018-12-06 14:02, Martin Koppenhoe

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

That's what I'm often hearing, and not only from you, but have a look at wiki page about the /craft /key [1 ], as in there I can read: "/You are *free *to use *values *that match your needs as a mapper and your local or country environment, cul

Re: [Tagging] Can OSM become a geospacial database?

o find a place where to buy food, and "/an Italian in Rome/" trying to find a proper salumeria... On 2018-12-06 15:51, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:31 AM Sergio Manzi <mailto:s...@smz.it>> wrote: > > That's what I'm often hearing, and no

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

Maybe because not all (/probably few.../) ambulance stations occupy an entire building? On 2018-12-09 16:58, dktue wrote: > But why are we using emergency=ambulance_station and not > building=ambulance_station? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature _

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

an ambulance, I don't hink you could consider that an... amenity. Cheers! On 2018-12-09 17:06, dktue wrote: > You're right! But amenity=ambulance_station could be used. The point I tried > to make was: Why are we using the emergency-key in that case at all. > > Am 09.

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

Me too!  :-) But, as others have already pointed out, I'm really unsure if this kind of information is relevant/appropriate here... On 2018-12-09 17:29, Markus wrote: > On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 at 17:22, dktue wrote: >> I've been convinced that the office-key is a suitable place to put the tag. > On

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

Sorry, but I don't think so: office=control_centre could be the control center for whatever infrastructure (/unless some more specific tag exists in some specific namespace/). *If* (/and it is a big if of which I'd like to say something later/) we want to tag the places where emergency phone ca

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

I totally agree on that and, with my limits, I too try doing the same... Cheers! Sergio On 2018-12-10 00:32, Warin wrote: > On 10/12/18 10:17, Sergio Manzi wrote: >> >> I know that there are ones who think that every little detail of the world >> should be tagged, but

Re: [Tagging] leisure=hammock_hook

are thought for something else... On 2018-12-10 00:40, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Wow! Either those things are high enough that a would be suicide could make > good use of them, or sooner or later a kid will loose an eye on one of those > hooks...  :-/ > > > My advice? Don&#

Re: [Tagging] leisure=hammock_hook

Wow! Either those things are high enough that a would be suicide could make good use of them, or sooner or later a kid will loose an eye on one of those hooks...  :-/ My advice? Don't map those: you could be held liable... On 2018-12-10 00:29, Sérgio V. wrote: > Hi, I've found a playground e

Re: [Tagging] leisure=hammock_hook

Got it, thanks! Those ropes did look strange, didn't they? :-) Sergio On 2018-12-10 04:25, Michael Patrick wrote: > > ... beside, are you sure those hooks are for hammocks? How can you hang 3 > hammocks radially from the center point? There doesn't seems to be enough > "angle" between them

Re: [Tagging] leisure=hammock_hook

; On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 2:44 AM Sergio Manzi wrote: >> Wow! Either those things are high enough that a would be suicide could make >> good use of them, or sooner or later a kid will loose an eye on one of those >> hooks... :-/ >> > So we should stop mapping railwa

Re: [Tagging] emergency=control_centre

Just a short note to let you know that in the Italian mailing list (talk-it) we recently had the contribution of an ambulance driver who reported how in his zone he uses OSM maps as the best solution availabale. Cheers! Sergio On 2018-12-10 13:06, Paul Allen wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

Hello Warin, I think that extending the defined values for intermittent=* could yield the same result and convey the very same information *without adding a new tag* (/don't we have enough?/) Assuming (/and this is just an assumption at this time.../) that we are able to define a correct and a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

Sorry, read: /we could simply add the following //*values *//for intermittent=*:/ On 2018-12-13 01:52, Sergio Manzi wrote: > /we could simply add the following //*keys *//for intermittent=*:/ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signat

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

On 2018-12-13 02:36, Warin wrote: > At the moment developing a system to render seasonal values on requires a  > determination on spring/summer/autumn/winter etc .. this would add some new > terms. Not too hard but does add to things. Also developing a system to render the ephemeral key would

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

You can do *exactly the same* with my new proposed values for intermittent=* No need for a new key, I think. Cheers, Sergio On 2018-12-14 00:48, Warin wrote: > On 13/12/18 12:48, Sergio Manzi wrote: >> >> >> On 2018-12-13 02:36, Warin wrote: >>> At the moment

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

And of course my apologies to Warin too! On 2018-12-14 11:26, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Hello Mateusz, > > On 2018-12-14 10:40, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well established as >> having boolean values. > > Sorry

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Ephemeral a water property key.

Hello Mateusz, On 2018-12-14 10:40, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > New keys are much, much better than new values for tags well established as > having boolean values. Sorry, you are absolutely right: in my head I had mixed up the values for intermittent=* with the values for seasonal=*. My bad! P

Re: [Tagging] Printing company for newspapers

Hello, I would abstain from shop=* as a shop is a place where products can be bought: "/Use shop=* to mark the location of a shop and the products that it *sells*./" [1]. I would also abstain from craft=* as it applies to "/small production of goods *on demand and by order*/"  [2] The places

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

For what is worth, it sounds good to me. If you want to be even more precise and "/taxonomist/-minded", it could be building:structure:soft_storey=yes/no (/no being the default value/). Sergio On 2018-12-17 00:42, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Hello, You are mixing correct namespacing (like railway:switch) with... mistaken namespacing (like hydrant:position). Now, for the reasons for namespacing and just as an example (/it is not the only good reason.../), think about documentation: the documentation for describing a power switch sh

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Sorry, I meant to say: the documentation describing *railway switches* should not be intermixed with the documentation describing power switches On 2018-12-17 02:36, Sergio Manzi wrote: > the documentation for describing a power switch should not be intermixed with > the documen

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

BTW, if that's not clear: * railway:switch describe/is an *object* * fire_hydrant:position describe/is an *attribute *of the fire_hydrant object, for which, you are right, location=* would had been correct. On 2018-12-17 02:36, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > You are mixing correct

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

Yeah... you're right... "/Buildings are classified as having a "soft story" if that level is less than 70% as stiff as the floor immediately above it, or less than 80% as stiff as the average stiffness of the three floors above it./" [1] hard to eyeball that... But the key would be right for i

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

Hello Martin, On 2018-12-17 11:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > yes, _*it is a structural detail*_ (insufficient stiffening/strutting, if I > interpret it correctly), that's why it is _*not suitable as a value for > building:structure*_, as that key is about the structural system, not about > i

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Bonjour François, On 2018-12-17 11:50, François Lacombe wrote: > I own no switches. Sorry, I didn't meant to be rude in any way: I just assumed you were the one who introduced the switch=* key for power lines (/and apparently I was wrong, you just "expanded" the information about those...)/ > S

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > On 17. Dec 2018, at 13:34, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > >> I added emphasys to part of your quote to underline how I fail to understand >> how a "structural detail" cannot be construed as a sub-

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Thanks, me too! :-) If you are interested in this kind of things, have a look at the following (/not an exaustive list of topics, just a random one.../): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Name * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_(URN

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Thank-you Claudius, I've posted an answer in the forum, but I'm afraid it is awaiting for moderation (I'm new to the forum...). Cheers, Sergio On 2018-12-18 22:20, Claudius Henrichs wrote: > I couldn't be happier to have the "Benefits of namespaces" discussion > happening right now on this M

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

Visible now! :-) On 2018-12-19 03:30, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > Thank-you Claudius, > > I've posted an answer in the forum, but I'm afraid it is awaiting for > moderation (I'm new to the forum...). > > Cheers, > > Sergio > > > On 2018-12-18 22:20

Re: [Tagging] Walking route on a beach

Why don't you use trail_visibility=no on the sections of path which are invisible as they are just plain beach? Routing will not be affected (/it will work.../). See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:trail_visibility Cheers, Sergio smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signatu

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

François, The discussion about this has also been brought to the forum, here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64825 I'm unsure if it is better to continue it here in the ML, there in the forum, or in both places... On 2018-12-20 01:04, François Lacombe wrote: > > Le mer. 19 d

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

... unless we start putting columns (":") into keys according to a different logic. On 2018-12-20 11:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Claudius Henrichs > mailto:claudiu...@gmx.de>>: > > It feels like the two arguments are about stying true to how n

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

On 2018-12-20 12:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > [...] > it really doesn't matter, unless we would actually need those namespaces > (i.e. they would collide by using the exact same string on the left side, to > express something different), ... Your "/unless/" part is what really concerns me.

Re: [Tagging] Glamping

Yeah, I know what you are talking about: my brother-in-low is setting up one in Mexico and he too refers to it as "/a Glamping/". It is in Dictionary.com too: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/glamping Sergio On 2018-12-20 13:00, Volker Schmidt wrote: > This is definitely a luxury establishmen

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

part and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK. Sergio On 2018-12-20 13:27, Xavier wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:00:20PM +0100, Sergio Manzi wrote: >> I *never *heard of a transformer's /tertiary/, thus: try asking an >> electrical e

Re: [Tagging] Benefits of namespaces

l Allen wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 12:36, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > The definition of primary v.s. secondary is about which is the exciting > part and which is the excited part. "tertiary" is pure nonsense, AFAIK. > > > Power transf

Re: [Tagging] Yay, new howto map for diabilities created in wiki

Perfect! On 2019-01-15 10:00, Philip Barnes wrote: > How to map the needs of people with disabilities smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tag

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Only about the cited point (/tagging natural forests as natural=wood/), I think a natural forest should be tagged as natural=forest (/quite logically, I would say.../), while natural=wood should be reserved for "small forests" (/which is one of the possible meaning of "wood" in English, if I'm n

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Well, sorry, obviously I did an editing mistake and the "/Wikipedia defines 6 types of forest/" phrase jumped up in the wrong place: it should be just above the dotted list of forest types... Sorry about the confusion... Sergio On 2019-01-23 01:52, Sergio Manzi wrote: > >

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

Hi! On 2019-01-23 02:10, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > The one thing that’s missing is a tag for the density of the main vegetation > type; is it a dense canopy of trees, or dense scrubland, verses more widely > spaced. Not only that (and the "leaf cycle" thing): again, a forest is not a bunch of

Re: [Tagging] Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 2019-01-23 04:14, Warin wrote: > Temperate and Tropical moist/dry are climates... if those are to be mapped > them go right ahead .. but they are not confined to forests, so should be > mapped separately. Those are simply the names biologists give to that forest types.  E.g. "Tropical moist

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

Thank-you very much, Stefano: very nice job! I hope you don't mind: I made some very minor adjustements to the wording, but of course you can revert them if you do not agree... Cheers, Sergio On 2019-01-24 09:53, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > Hello folks, > > I put together a proposal page after

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 2019-01-27 00:42, Paul Allen wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 at 23:28, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > The only problem is the 'ton'. > > I n the USA 2,000 pounds > In the UK 2,240 pounds. > > Resolving this? units 'ton us' and 'ton uk' ??

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 2019-01-27 01:32, Paul Allen wrote: > I have no idea what a "cental ton" is.  Should I drink more covfefe? > Aahahhahahh! :-) Nice, and I had quite a similar reaction when I first heard about it (by an English gentleman): /"cental" /from the Latin "centum" (one hundred), because the US short t

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

... but now I have a doubt... I don't find any referenece... have I been pranked? :-/ On 2019-01-27 01:45, Sergio Manzi wrote: > On 2019-01-27 01:32, Paul Allen wrote: >> I have no idea what a "cental ton" is.  Should I drink more covfefe? >> > Aahahhahahh! :-

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 2019-01-27 17:53, OSMDoudou wrote: > Indeed, it's very strange to require mappers do the maths when there is a > notation to indicate the unit and let the renderers do the maths. Hi! Why do you talk about math? Do you expect renderers to automatically convert weights from whatever unit to

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

If I understand it correctly, you have 2 higways (both with cycleway=lane) that connect at a node further away, but cycles should cross at that point, before the point where motor traffic merge into one way. In that point I'd probably draw a cycleway (no motor traffic, no pedestrian) between th

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

Actualy the "left side" highway continues to have cycle traffic throughout, so the "triangle" will be: * 1 side for motor vehicles * 1 side for cycles * 1 side for mixed traffic Sergio On 2019-01-27 23:59, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > If I understand it correctly

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Yes, great descriptions! My only marginal objection is for canal: why don't you ditch (pun intended...) the "/used to carry useful water for transportation, hydro-power generation, //irrigation or land drainage purposes/" clause? Are there any other "/Large man-made open flow (free flow vs pipe

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

If you think it is important to differentiate between lined vs. unlined minor waterways (/and I'm not objecting to that/), I guess the best option would be to use a specific tag (lined=* ?) IMHO relying on the tagger knowledge of the OSM dictionary semantic subtleties (/which sometimes happen t

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

I'm pretty sure that's the case in UK, but are you willing to bet on all drains (/e.g. industrial/) of the world being lined? On 2019-02-01 23:22, Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 at 22:09, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > If you think it i

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Right in these days you can read in the Italian newspapers of an industry having contaminated with industrial sewage an area inhabited by 300.000... And let's not get started with what we /"westerns" /normally call "the third world"... So, how do you tag drains which are not lined? On 2019-02

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

e, as a ditch or trench. 2. a natural watercourse modified to increase its flow of water. On 2019-02-01 23:46, Paul Allen wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 at 22:43, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > So, how do you tag drains which are not lined? > > > Ditch.

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

I know, that's why I asked for a good one... On 2019-02-02 01:23, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Dictionary.com usually provides definitions in American English, so it > wouldn’t be a good source. > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 8:35 AM Sergio Manzi <mailto:s...@smz.it>> wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Thank-you for confirming that, Mark. Personally I think we, in OSM, should stop with this folly of overloading English words with meanings they do not have in *any *dictionary (be it AmE, BrE, CaE, or whatever). Both the "ditch" and "drain" words *can *be used to describe certain features in E

Re: [Tagging] edit war about deletion of proposal

+1!! :-) On 2019-02-05 21:57, Kevin Kenny wrote: > Oh, please bring back amenity=bikeshed! I hadn't seen it before, and > it's hilarious! > > (Unless we have a rule that the Wiki shall be devoid of the least > indication that mappers have a sense of humour...) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cry

Re: [Tagging] edit war about deletion of proposal

done! On 2019-02-05 22:47, Richard wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:25:34PM -0800, Tod Fitch wrote: >> Another +1 >> >> That wiki page [1] should be reverted back to its prime, no need for it to >> be labeled for deletion. >> >> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dbikeshed >

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

"/ad hoc/" (for this)  signifies a solution designed for a specific problem or task, non-generalizable, and not intended to be able to be adapted to other purposes. "/extempore/" (or more correctly "/ex tempore/", "from the time") means something done without preparation or forethought, as if p

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

ing you proposed. Cheers, Sergio On 2019-02-07 14:48, Paul Allen wrote: > On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 13:23, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > "/ad hoc/" (for this)  signifies a solution designed for a specific > problem or task, non-generalizable, and no

Re: [Tagging] Micronations

The thing is quite obviously fruit of immagination, creativity, and/or delusion: there surely isn't out there such a concoction of toll booths (/many of them/), bunkers, town halls, dams, towers, campgrounds, etc. The creator's name too, "landhahaha", is also an hint for a probable vandalism. B

Re: [Tagging] Micronations

"fake maps" era, after the "fake news" one... Sergio On 2019-02-09 21:16, Paul Allen wrote: > On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 19:48, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> > wrote: > > But, yes, "there is /something/ out there": Google too report the >

  1   2   3   >