On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 3:09 AM, fly wrote:
> Hey
>
> I wonder if it is useful to tag bicycle=dismount on ways.
>
> At least in Germany there is no official traffic sign despite of the
> existence of some.
>
> You are allowed to push your bike on every footway/pedestrian plus ways
> with vehicle=n
Hi all,
My cycletouring map, http://cycletour.org, has been slowly morphing into
a general topographic map[1]. One thing that's missing, though, is names
for topographic features like mountain ranges, spurs, and general areas.
Looking at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:En:Key:natural
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:50 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> the question should be: how to map a mountain range, as it seems we can't
> represent these kind of features (very big, blurry borders, not mappable in
> high zoom levels) well in our data model. That's the ma
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 19:26:55 Steve Bennett wrote:Yes please! I just added
> some hiking trails and had a named spur[1] that I
> wanted to record. I used place=locality, but it seems wrong for the same
> reasons you give.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:24 PM, bulwersator wrote:
> With mountain ranges there would be a major problem where node should be
> placed. Carpathian Mountains cover 190 000 km² - good luck with edit wars
> where node should be placed.
>
>
It'd be a way, not a node. And maybe there are strong guid
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
> And tags for other mine entrance types?
>
> Would it not be better to have
>
> man_made=mine_entrance
> type=adit etc
>
I'm a native speaker of English and I only came across the word "adit"
relatively recently. To me it
Huh. And here in Australia (well, at least amongst the people I know) the
difference between a "hike" and any other form of walking is strictly
whether it's more than one day. A daywalk is, well, a day or less, and a
hike is two or more days.
But that doesn't cause me any concerns using "route=hik
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:10 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I have at least 2 problems with this definition:
>
> 1. It doesn't seem to be a British English term (at least not with
> this definition)
> 2. It seems to exclude the use for monasteries
> (3. It was introduced without discussion or pro
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Brad Neuhauser
wrote:
> I think it'd make sense to broaden the definition:
> "Sleeping and living quarters provided by an institution for (large numbers
> of) people associated with that institution. For example, housing for
> university students."
Yeah, I think
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:58 PM, fly wrote:
>I wonder why many people try to force the approval of a tag by fast
>votes on the wiki. A tag gets approved by uses in the data and software
>handling it.
I find it remarkable that after however many years of OSM's existence,
statements like this are,
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 7:23 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> glad that this seems agreed (so far). How shall we deal with this
> change in practical? Simply change the wiki page? Do we need a vote
> for this? Maybe ask on the local lists?
>
> Are there any objections to simply change this in the w
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote:
> If i'm not wrong then there seems to be no tag for shop that is specialised
> in selling (and repairing) garden and forest machinery (lawnmovers,
> chainsaws, trimming machines, etc.) and lightweight garden/forest tools like
> saws, shovels,
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:46 AM, Josh Doe wrote:
> All feedback is welcome.
One problem I see with these kinds of proposals is that they map very
well to a particular jurisdiction or standard, but will be very hard
to apply elsewhere. Perhaps the distinction of <3cm, =3cm, >3cm is
very common som
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I don't get it. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1630619/history
> is the only one you've added - can you really not continue east on
Google Streetview wasn't very enlightening either - looks like a
bog-standard intersection t
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:14 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> what about introducing a kerb:height ? Implying heights from values
> like "yes", "raised", "normal" will probably not be very reliable or
> stable as this might vary from country to country and also in
> different cities/neighbourhoods
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I'm wondering if anyone's come up with a way to tag what lies between the
> two directions of a single carriageway. Of course the most common is a
> single or double line, possibly dashed. But there are other treatments such
> as a paved
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Hmmm. That seems a little complicated, combining separation between
> directions with passing restrictions, and concentrates mostly on physical
> dividers. I've started using center_turn_lane=yes, but have run into
Whee, you're right. I t
Hi all,
I just came across this tag in taginfo, but there's no description
in any wiki. Anyone know the story? Is this a good way to describe
hiking paths, and to distinguish well-constructed walking paths from
rough, narrow hiking trails?
Steve
___
T
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Zsolt Bertalan wrote:
> I moved the proposal to an obsolete status and started a new proposal. I
> don't want to change the body of the old proposal, because I think it can
> mess things up during voting. I know voting doesn't mean much, but it's
> better to have a
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:51 PM, SomeoneElse
wrote:
> "highway=path, path=hiking" doesn't say any more to me than
> "highway=footway" on its own would.
The distinction is "well constructed" versus "rough, minimal maintenance".
highway=path, path=hiking:
http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/pictu
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> Describe the physical condition of a way, with tags such as 'surface' & let
> the users decide if it's their idea of hikable.
Let me say immediately that the ideology of "describe the physical
characteristics, and let people make up their own mind
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Zsolt Bertalan wrote:
> Is Themed Walk better than Tourism Movement or you just accept that it's a
> thing coming from the Eastern Block and adopt the term for it?
Heh...no one will ever understand what "tourism_movement" is meant to
mean. Let's keep looking for t
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Zsolt Bertalan wrote:
> That's why we can NOT call the THING a route, trail, walk, etc. THIS would
> be confusing.
"trail" gets used in this metaphorical way, and it's not that
confusing. Here's an example:
http://www.thebellarinetastetrail.com.au/
That perfectl
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Zsolt Bertalan wrote:
> OK, hiking_course sounds good to me too.
> I understand that route, trail, etc could be applied also, but it sounds as
> foreign and misleading to me as applying movement to you. But I am not a
> native speaker, so that doesn't mean too much
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Zsolt Bertalan wrote:
> checkpoint=hiking or cycling or whatever else
I kind of like this, as it has scope to be used for other purposes.
> and instead of hiking_course=value course=value?
Still don't like "course". The term "course" is mostly associated with
co
Sounds good to me. I'd rather a clearly defined, unambiguous, possibly
American term like "splash pad" than a less clear, but "more British"
term like "water play area".
Steve
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Matt wrote:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/splash_pad
> Please
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> I'm interested in propsing an icon for "shop=farm", for highlighting
> roadside farm stands (this is a fun travel activity, as such farm stands are
> often not listed in the Yellow pages or conventional maps).
My first thought: there is so mu
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:58 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I wonder if this definition which was formerly part of the description
> for highway=unclassified is still valid:
I love it when people are brave enough to question the semantics of
very frequently used tags.
FWIW, here's how I use un
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> i'll add this alongside car_rental and bicycle_rental unless
> someone makes a strong case against it. there are many
> truck_rental sites in the US (common brands are UHaul,
> Penske, and Ryder).
And how will we handle places that hire both
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> i can see the argument for reengineering "rental" space, but i just want to
> get trunk rental into the amenity namespace for the time being.
Yes, but that's the reason that tagging is such a mess. If the
original "amenity=car_rental" had be
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
>> Maybe this:
>> amenity=car_rental
>> rental:truck=yes
>> rental:car=no
> equipment that's too expensive for most home owners to just buy. a
> subcategory for that under amenity=car_rental seems peculiar.
I wasn't proposing that. That's the
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Pieren wrote:
> You can reuse the existing entrance tags. According to the Richard Fairhurst
> duck test, if it looks like a ship, is floating like a ship, it's a ship...
> not a building magically floating on the water ;-)
By the same test, a parked ship looks li
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 12:33 AM, Sander Deryckere wrote:
> Well, I just don't know any gates with names, exept city gates like the
> Menin gate in Ypres, but they can't be closed and I should not tag it as
> barrier=gate but rather as a building. I never heard of gates that can be
> closed and ar
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Mario wrote:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Charging_station
It lists amenity=fuel as a "combination". How would you combine
amenity=charging_station and amenity=fuel?
Steve
___
Tagging mailing l
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> This is a general query that could apply to many organisations, but as an
> example I'm going to use a tennis club to illustrate.
>
> This club has on it's site a car park, clubhouse, a garden & a few tennis
> pitches. These I can tag individually
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> Presumably, by the same location having both fuel pumps and a charging
> station for electric vehicles.
As separate nodes? Is there not a way they could be combined on one node?
Steve
___
Tag
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Simone Saviolo wrote:
> I agree on that too. Personally, I've been tagging them without any
> additional tag, i.e., they're a plain highway=service to me.
Me too, but adding service=parking_entrance seems ok. Although it
could be worth thinking about how to consist
There are two pedestrian/bicycle bridges in my area that were
destroyed by a storm earlier in the year. What's the best way to tag
them? Ideally, a renderer should be able to use the information to
draw a big red X or something - there's quite a difference IMHO
between absence of bridge and "there
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:06 PM, John Smith wrote:
> How is this fundementally different than any other disused bridge?
Overnight destruction is noteworthy, whereas slow decay into disuse is
not. There are signs and safety barriers around the destroyed bridges,
there are detours in place. A big r
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Mihkel Rämmel wrote:
> Wiki page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Crane about crane has
> controversial information on it. On one place it says that these tags can be
> used on nodes and ways on other place it says that on nodes and areas.
> Shouldn't it be the
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> A light rail stop, would that be a railway=tram_stop or a railway=station?
Sounds like a third option is required. Here (Melbourne, Australia)
tram stops vary from just a sign on a telephone pole to "super stops"
(raised platforms, safety
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Until all routers understand turn restrictions, adding bogus ways for turn
> lanes and removing nodes at intersections gets the job done. But it's not
> how you should be tagging.
When there is a clearly defined standard, "OSM Tagging 1.0
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> I could see some benefit to splitting the tag into two - say,
> highway=cycle for "bikes only", highway=cycle+foot for "bikes and
> pedestrians" - and doing (whisper it) a mass change along country lines.
But then you lose the distinctio
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Now looking at routes the preferred tagging suggested in the wiki is
> different:
> it is suggested to tag all routes the same way, regardless if they are
> signposted, existing or simply proposed, and then differentiate just
> by an ad
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> I would use it for sports facilities not dedicated to specific sports.
So, to play devil's advocate: why bother with a sports=* tag at all in
that case?
What's the difference between:
leisure=sports_centre
and
leisure=sports_centre
spor
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Before we vote, shouldn't we try to clean up the proposal? E.g. there
> is this sentence: "Hint: If the waterway starts as a stream and
> becomes larger, then use the tag of the largest waterway (e.g.
> river)."
> Well, almost all rive
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> The wiki says: "For narrow rivers which will be rendered as a line.
> For larger rivers see waterway=riverbank. For really small rivers and
> streams, see waterway=stream." This is ambiguous (reads as if
> waterway=river isn't appropr
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
> I do not agree with the whole basis of this thread.
>
> There are no such things as approved tags, tagging is open and people are
> free to use *any* tags they like.
...
> Advertise your ideas and encourage acceptance. Show how well it works any
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Chris Hill wrote:
> No. It implies some official status that leads people to remove other tags,
> sometimes with mass edits.
IMHO that doesn't follow at all. If people are doing unwanted mass
edits, then we should find a way to discourage them. The solution is
not
> any thoughts or suggestions?
IMHO there is not much difference between a "almost completed then
abandoned" and "completed then abandoned" railway, from the
perspective of OSM. Either way, it's not a present day railway, yet
there are some physical features that history buffs may be interested
in
On Feb 26, 2012 3:15 AM, "Russ Nelson" wrote:
>
> It deserves its own tag. Not that I expect renderers to render it
> differently, but it would be nice if they did, and just having a note,
> with variable prose makes it unreasonable to expect them to do it.
>
Seems all up like the right solution
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> you could use abandoned_date (like start_date) and have the
> before/after completion part in another tag. Multiple things (date and
> status) for one key should possibly be avoided.
+1
Keep things simple for the person reusing the d
On Feb 26, 2012 7:42 PM, "Frederik Ramm" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On 02/25/12 01:23, Richard Welty wrote:
>>
>> how do you tag a never-completed railway which has significant important
>> landmark value in the current landscape?
>
>
> I think that what you are seeing is not a railway at all.
>
> I sug
2012/2/27 Кирилл "Zkir" Бондаренко :
> Could you please express your opinion on the issue. Building=* is one of the
> most used tags, and it would be nice to understand it in the same way, in
> the whole OSM, even in different countries.
Interesting one. I note there is both building=residential,
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Markus Lindholm
wrote:
> There was a proposal like that
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divider
> that has been abandoned. Not sure of the reason.
I also created one:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Divided_road
In
On Mar 5, 2012 6:06 PM, "Frederik Ramm" wrote:
> I've run into the same argument with people tagging construction sites
for various kinds of buildings. I always maintained that the object in
question is primarily a construction site, and the fact that a hotel or
museum is being built is at most w
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Nah, it was rather about what the priority is. A constrution site could
> always be annotated with "this is planned to become a hotel", even though it
> isn't a hotel; and a cut could always be annotated with "this was once
> planned to becom
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Pieren wrote:
> He is asking because a local community is maintaining such marks and
> would like to locate them in OSM in addition to the route itself.
> Our current proposal is to use a node tagged with:
> tourism=information
> information=trail_blaze
> hiking=ye
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I ask because this sort of description is used everywhere. One might say "at
> the end of the road, past Sand Lake Elementary School" rather than "8249
> Buena Vista Woods Boulevard", but that doesn't make the former any kind of
> real add
Clearly the change that was made was disruptive and changes the
meaning of the 80,000 or so surface=cobblestone tags already in
existence. I have thus changed the definition back and commented out
surface=sett for the moment.
Now, some issues with introducing sett:
1) No one knows what "sett" mean
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> not so sure about this. Currently there is really a lot of values in
> surface but (as far as I know) none of them gets subtagged. Instead of
> subtagging we could also keep cobblestone for "sett" and invent
> another value for old cobb
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>> surface=rounded_cobblestone
>
>
> I'd prefer to focus on the shape and therefore "rounded_cobblestone",
> because other aspects like historic can be expressed with additional
> tags. Also not all "true cobblestones" are necessarily old
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> One regional mapper uses cycleway=shoulder for this, but I see that as
> sub-optimal, since it's primarily a shoulder, not a cycleway. It would be
> like putting cycleway=sidewalk whenever there's a smooth paved sidewalk.
I quite like "c
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> It implies that the shoulder is an official cycleway, when in reality it may
> be full of debris (or worse: http://flbikelaw.org/2012/03/paved-shoulder/ ).
You think it implies that because it's a cycleway=* tag? I wouldn't
read too much
The problems with this tag are the same with most tags. The history
goes something like:
1) The original creator has a very specific real-world object in mind:
painted roundabout patterns on intersections in their local area
2) Other people in the local area recognise this real-world concept
and a
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I am not aware of a plugin, but you can draw a way with 2 nodes
> (diameter) and hit "SHIFT+O", this will create a circle (you can set
> the default node amount for the circle in advanced preferences). You'd
> then tag this correctly, en
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
> That's exactly what I was thinking about. Any chance this will find
> its way into JOSM any time soon?
Potlatch2 and JOSM are completely separate codebases, written in
different languages (Flex/ActionScript vs Java). So, it wouldn't be
tri
Hi,
I think you mean, you want to firmly state this as a principle.
Good! I actually this problem is worst for English speakers, because
we tend to find it hard to distinguish the name of the tag from its
meaning. Whereas Germans have absolutely no problem with the fact that
power=station is a su
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
> So? The wiki is the place for documenting how YOU map, not how other
> people SHOULD map. The only thing you SHOULDN'T do in the wiki is
> change the description of how other people map.
C'mon. Clearly that's not true. The primary purpose of t
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:27 PM, SomeoneElse
wrote:
> Well, it's to "document" standards, not to "create" them. If that's what
> you meant by "establish" then +1 to you too.
>
> The biggest problem the wiki has is that in some quarters editing it seems
> to have become an end in itself rather tha
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Masi Master wrote:
> Hi,
> Some month ago I tried to start a proposal for rail-trails:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/rail_trail
> I startet it with 'rail_trail=yes', but on talk-page some are against this,
> because highway=cycleway/footway
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
> As I understand it, NE2 was looking for a tagging scheme that would allow
> for searches to find trails on a railway grade. Searching for rail trails
The use case is literally to find flattish bike paths? Searching for
rail trails sounds like a
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Malcolm Herring
wrote:
> How many mappers or tag consumers are aware that either a vote or a
> discussion is taking place? The voting constituency is invariably a small,
> self-selected group.
Not me, for one. What is the issue being discussed? No one has posted
a
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> The language of OSM should be precise. If it's not then people start
> inventing tags that have similar, but imprecise meanings, which is
> exactly what has happened here.
There's nothing more "precise" about 'potable' vs 'drinkable'.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I'd like to hear from others - is sports_centre the usual tag for such
> establishments and if so, should we maybe downgrade the rendering to z16?
I use leisure=sports_centre for things like bowls clubs, cricket
clubs, football clubs, and co
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Pieren wrote:
> Bad example. power=station is a mess because we have one tag with
> different interpretations/meanings. Here, it's the opposite : we have
> several tags for the same meaning. Consolidate the wiki, the presets
> and the database makes sense here.
Co
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Michael S wrote:
> I wonder if it is the right way to tag this trail with higway=track, because
> a user which wants to use the map for non-skiing purposes may think there is
> a track where one can walk on, which is not the case.
Sounds a lot like the "winter
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Michael S wrote:
> I think tagging areas with piste:type is more for downhill piste.
Interesting - according to the wiki (key:piste:type):
piste:type=nordic (way only, not area)
A nordic/cross country ski trail (also see #Style or kind of
grooming). The direction
Hi,
With the exception of pre-schools, aren't most schools defined by the
year group, rather than age? Around a here, a primary school is Prep to
Grade 6, and high school is Year 7 to Year 12. The actual ranges of kids
varies a bit - some skip years, some repeat. I can't see much use for
coding a
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> I think 'state school' is more common. I don't think any English speaker
> would say 'government school'.
>
https://www.google.com/search?q="government+school"+site%3A.au
I think the most neutral terms here (Australia) are "goverment s
It sounds more like a water taxi. I'm not sure if that's a widely used term
in Europe, but they exist on some rivers here - you call up, it comes and
gets you. Not normally for bikes, but that still.
Steve
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> > I would use for 'vaporetto
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Dave Sutter wrote:
> This may be a radical suggestion for OSM but I think POIs should be
> removed from the map database and put in an external database. Each
> POI should have an address and the address is used to match the POI to
> the map.
>
> This can also be
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> How would you connect POIs that have no address?
> Janko
Logically, you would make the connection through some kind of permanent
ID - not literally an address. I believe there have been various
discussions about permanent IDs, but no
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Martin Vonwald wrote:
> I was thinking about a problem that affects renderers and navigational
> devices in more or less the same way. I came up with a solution and
> would like to know if it is understandable. I mapped four areas with
> currently used tagging styl
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Balgofil wrote:
> So one solution that was pointed out in the thread is to tag the
> "Schutzstreifen" with cycleway=shared_lane because of the description
> in the wiki. I then pointed out, that in the UK there is a similar
> situation, but no solution to it (see
Hi,
A few problems with the current approach:
1) When several things pass over the same bridge (eg,
highway=secondary, highway=cycleway and highway=footway; or even just
two independent lanes), renderers currently draw multiple bridges.
2) In areas where structures (buildings, paved areas, piers,
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Martin Vonwald (imagic)
wrote:
We have a spatial database so if all features are within a closed way
there is no need for a relation. Why is there a different reasoning
for a bridge?
Btw, is this actually true? Does the OSM API actually provide
functions to determi
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Дмитрий Киселев
wrote:
> I didn't like leisure=resort because in such case we will have
> leisure inside leisure in case of swimmingpools or pitch inside
> resort.
IMHO, that is of absolutely no concern. There's no rule against
key=tag1 being inside key=tag2. The
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Pieren wrote:
> By "consumer", we all think about "renderer" (which is in my knowledge
> the only consumer looking for bridges in OSM atm). If you keep the
> "bridge" tag on the multiple highways, it is duplicating the
> information. And you don't fix the rendering
All of these exist in taginfo, and have at least 10 hits:
railway:historic=station_site (376)
railway:historic=station (188)
historic:railway=station (230)
historic=station (10)
historic=railway_station (37)
historic=station_site (65)
disused:railway=station (223)
disused=station (64)
(And of c
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Jonathan Bennett wrote:
> There was this discussion on talk-gb recently:
>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2013-January/014376.html
Yeah, that's actually what prompted this discussion - I was pointed
there by Andy Allan when I commented on some O
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> Around my area in the UK a user is presently adding bicycle=no to all
> motorways. There was a discussion a while back whether it that tag was
> implied for motorways. If I remember, it was claimed there were some places
> (not UK) that allowed bic
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Philip Barnes wrote:
> I have had a quick look around Melbourne's motorway entrances on
> streetview and all I have looked at have a sign like this
> http://goo.gl/maps/0hC6c.
>
> Please can you point out one that does allow cyclists?
Western Freeway:
http://goo.g
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Erik Johansson wrote:
> I feel dirty every time I do that, they are usually tagged as
> surface=mud.. :-) Basically I map them if there really is a path
> there and it seems usefull, even though it's clearly not a designated
> path.
There definitely should be a
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> It happens often on mountain hiking routes. You have a signpost with the
> red-white sign of the Alpine Club that indicates the direction that you have
> to take across a meadow, for example. On the other side you have to find a
> correspon
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:29 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> Footpath, not footpad. A footpad is a type of robber. If I saw a path
> marked as highway=footpad, it would suggest that the path is through a
> high-crime area, and you are likely to be mugged.
Hmm, it must be a fairly uncommonly use
Hi Jo,
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Jo wrote:
> pad is Dutch for path. (It also means toad in Dutch, but that is, of course,
> unrelated)
>
> In English I only knew pad as something to jot on. Like a notepad.
>
> Maybe you should add those other meanings to Wiktionary.org,
Good suggestion. T
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Peter Wendorff
wrote:
> But where's the border? In the following examples let all these facilities
> serve food and drinks.
> - an event location that has daily concerts and opens only for these events.
> - an event location that has daily concerts, but is open two
Hi Janko,
I definitely like the idea. In addition to the uses you mention, I
think it will be useful for other sites to retrieve relevant OSM data.
Eg, showing a map with appropriate bounding box by querying for the
right wikidata ID.
It's worth menitioning that Wikidata is still very new. How s
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Pieren wrote:
> Tag "operator:wikidata=Q38076" much better than "operator=McDonalds" ?!
>
> Are you all so disconnected from real contributors ?
In addition to, not instead of. operator:wikidata=* is computable.
Martin wrote:
>What is the relation between wikid
1 - 100 of 470 matches
Mail list logo
