Re: [Tagging] How to tag flood prone points and areas?

ng", then "flood_prone=yes" is verifiable and helpful to add, since that's representing a feature that can be checked when the area is next survey. On 9/1/19, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: > On Sun, 1 Sep 2019 at 05:24, Warin <61sundo

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

In Australia most people 'sunbathe' on a beach of sand. Some 'sunbathe' in their own backyard. High rates of sun exposure gets 'melanoma' and there are publicity campaigns to get people to cover up from sun exposure. It is not something that would be mapped in Australia .. you can 'sunbathe' pr

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Dehesa

On 4/9/19 12:48 am, Diego Cruz wrote: Does anybody know about other areas in the world where there is an extensive mixed use of territory? Way: Woomera Prohibited Area - Defence Infrequent Zone (544274312) Some of this area is also 'used' for cattle grazing... by farmers. The farms hav

Re: [Tagging] Hill figures

Not all of them are on hills. Marree Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marree_Man Possibly artwork=geoglyph ??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoglyph** * * On 4/9/19 8:49 am, Andy Mabbett wrote: In the UK, hill figures include: * The Cerne Abbas Giant [1], [2], [3] * The Fovant badges [4]

Re: [Tagging] Walking & Cycling Node Network tagging: undoing the hijacking of rcn and rwn

On 5/9/19 2:42 am, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Peter Elderson wrote: The network values identify transport mode and scope of routes, and these "dimensions" also apply to node networks. We do not want to add another dimension (configuration type) to the network=* values of routes. Instead, we are

Re: [Tagging] amenity=music_school vs amenity=college?

On 5/9/19 3:18 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Are music schools a type of amenity=college or should they be their own tags? Education should have its own key. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_Alternative ___

Re: [Tagging] Education on topic for music schools

/5/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: On 5/9/19 3:18 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Are music schools a type of amenity=college or should they be their own tags? Education should have its own key. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Education_Reform_

Re: [Tagging] amenity=music_school vs amenity=college?

On 05/09/19 17:55, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Paul Allen, if you know how the tag amenity=college is used in the UK, please update the wiki page with more information. Right now it's not entirely clear if the "sixth form" colleges should be amenity-college. https://usic.sheffield.ac.uk/blog/catego

Re: [Tagging] Education on topic for music schools

n 9/6/19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 19:09, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Do., 5. Sept. 2019 um 09:59 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: Pardon me. The question is about music schools and how to tag them - they are educational facilities. ... See https://wiki.o

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a milk_shake shop?

On 06/09/19 15:21, Andrew Harvey wrote: I'd tag it as amenity=cafe, even without selling coffee They sell coffee too, and hot chocolate and sweets... as well as milk shakes.. I still think it fits into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=cafe, just with a cuisine tag to specify

Re: [Tagging] Populated settlement classification

On 08/09/19 01:24, Iago Casabiell wrote: Well, as there is no clear consensus in how to classify between hamlets, villages, towns and cities, i'd tried to move the debate as best i could. My goal would be to create a default algorithm to classify these places, but as jeisenbe pointed out, the

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

On 07/09/19 19:08, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 7. Sep 2019, at 09:28, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Per taginfo, building=yes is used 7500 times with leisure=pitch, and covered=yes is used 1017 times, so I suppose it's more common to match the pitch with the same outline as the

[Tagging] Open Defecation Areas

From  a current posting on the HOT list is for Open Deification Areas. Quote: "Open Defecation, people going to the toilet in the open, specially in dense urban areas. Open defecation areas ODA are use by about 850 million people. If they each use 10 different areas a year then that is 8.5 bi

Re: [Tagging] Open Defecation Areas

On 09/09/19 11:23, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Would you also tag the area as hazardous / contaminated? Unfortunately I think that is a default condition. All the more reason to map them with suitable tags. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreet

Re: [Tagging] Open Defecation Areas

On 09/09/19 18:20, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 09.09.19 02:37, Warin wrote: Quote: "Open Defecation, people going to the toilet in the open, specially in dense urban areas. Open defecation areas ODA are use by about 850 million people. If they each use 10 different areas a year then th

Re: [Tagging] Open Defecation Areas Add disused or abandoned

One important thought. Past open defecation areas will need to remain mapped... but not as areas in use. I think these are clearly life cycle tags .. but disused does not appeal as it is unlikely that it could be used again until quite some time has past (pun sorry) abandoned might be bett

Re: [Tagging] Draft proposal for Key:aerodrome

On 10/09/19 17:35, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I've started a new proposal for Key:aerodrome. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:aerodrome This proposal uses aerodrome=* for classification of an aeroway=aerodrome as an international airport, other commercial airport, gene

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - appointment

The key 'opening_hours' has a free from text entry facility. I have used this where a museum is open by appointment only thus 'opening_hours="By appointment, phone "' (the ### is the phone number that I don't recall of the top of my head. I think this is more versatile than yet another va

Re: [Tagging] Open Defecation Areas

On 11/09/19 15:47, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 11 Sep 2019, 01:54 by pla16...@gmail.com: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 23:41, Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote: Would it need a multipolygon? My impression of the ODA is an open patch of ground in / beside

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

On 13/09/19 12:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Thanks for working on this, Bob, Check out the page "Proposal_process" and in particular Proposal_process#Creating_a_proposal_page to help improve the formatting and make sure you've included important information. Please clarify exactly what should be

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Where does it stop - RFC - Reusable packaging

On 12/09/19 21:52, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, Do we really want to go into that effort of trying to actively represent what products are sold and under what conditions? Do we even have a remote hope of achieving a level of completeness and timeliness that makes this usable? Where does it stop?

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - appointment

On 15/09/19 01:59, Ruben wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:59:29 +1000, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: 'opening_hours="By appointment, phone "' (the ### is the phone number that I don't recall of the top of my head. I think this is more versatile than ye

Re: [Tagging] Tourist bus stop

On 17/09/19 04:11, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 18:25, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: is "motorcar" a term that is common in British English? Not much. How do you tag the generic bus class in Britain? Is there such a thing?  There are bu

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Campsite properties

On 17/09/19 16:29, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I didn't think shop=laundry would work for a laundry room at a campsite. But I suppose washing_machine=yes/no + dryer=yes/no is good enough for 99% of cases.a Also features at hotels/guest-houses etc... no reason to limit them to camp sites. Example

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Campsite properties

On 18/09/19 09:08, marc marc wrote: Le 18.09.19 à 01:02, Paul Allen a écrit : Those machines are generally available for use only by people staying on the site (they could accept anyone, but usually do not).  How are you going to tag that?  We don't have access=campers access=private private=ca

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Campsite properties

On 18/09/19 09:02, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 23:46, brad > wrote: I think it's valid tag for a campsite, I think it can be, on larger camp sites, which have several washing machines in a dedicated building.  It's not much different than

Re: [Tagging] Tourist bus stop

On 19/09/19 07:02, Steve Doerr wrote: On 18/09/2019 18:57, Steve Doerr wrote: Sounds like a road-train to me. Actually I've reallized that the expression I was looking for was 'land train'. I don't think so ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train Both 'road tarin' and 'land tra

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

On 19/09/19 18:49, Volker Schmidt wrote: we may have to byte the bullet and allow semicolon-separated values for landuse. Specific word combinations are not a good solution OSM uses landuse=residential as a broad brush that includes recreation and commercial uses. It includes various densities

Re: [Tagging] Motorcycle taxis, pedicabs

On 19/09/19 15:02, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 13:57, Joseph Eisenberg mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: Is "pedicab" the best British English / International English term for these hired tricycles vehicles? That's what I've always known them as.

Re: [Tagging] Tagging meadow orchards

On 20/09/19 16:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 20. Sep 2019, at 02:13, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Why not landuse=agriculture? As a broad brush it could do well. Could includes all types of agriculture practice. we already have a broad brush for this

Re: [Tagging] Tagging ideas for a non-profit ”course center”

There are similar places , mostly to run corporate training events .. for example Baskerville Hall Hotel, http://www.baskervillehall.co.uk/ Way: Baskerville Hall Hotel (502969627). Tagged as a Hotel in OSM. You can camp there, and they have conference rooms too. Tagged as a hotel in OSOn 21/09

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - for the key to use with the value mounting block

Hi, Request for votes on the _key_ to use with 'mounting blocks'. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mounting_block These are normally used to mount horses, they could be used for other animals .. and probably other things too. I would rather have some though given to

Re: [Tagging] Tagging ideas for a non-profit ”course center”

On 22/09/19 16:10, Jyri-Petteri Paloposki wrote: On 22.9.2019 1.52, Warin wrote: There are similar places , mostly to run corporate training events .. for example Baskerville Hall Hotel, http://www.baskervillehall.co.uk/ Way: Baskerville Hall Hotel (502969627). Tagged as a Hotel in OSM. You

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Somewhat off the topic of  'was there a proposal for' .. but follow the distorted thread.. disused:*=* means it cannot presently be used for its intended purpose. That does not mean it does not exist. How renders chose to display that is up to them. But the tagging is correct and truthful. Cho

Re: [Tagging] [Key:phone] - Suggesting wiki page changing

On 26/09/19 05:34, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-09-25 21:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: before number portability was introduced, a landline was more connected to a place than to a person/business, while mobile phones always have been personal. Big companies may be different, but places with s

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 09:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny > wrote: I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying to find a buyer to redevelop.

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 02:15, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 16:49, Richard Fairhurst > wrote: Paul Allen wrote: > BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is > a pub would be of interest to some mappers. Oh, has that cl

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor

On 27/09/19 03:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Do., 26. Sept. 2019 um 19:03 Uhr schrieb Markus mailto:selfishseaho...@gmail.com>>: BTW, i find it very strange that there is a separte highway=* tag for indoor "flat ways" (i.e. corridors), but not for steps. Any reasons for that?

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 21:52, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 11:02, Marc Gemis > wrote: so disused:amenity=pub ; building=pub (it looks like a pub); building:use=house (or is it :usage?) Erm, I can't think of any pub I've ever been in or past that was in a

Re: [Tagging] Strange tags

On 30/09/19 03:24, Jan Michel wrote: Well... There is no documentation of these tags in the OSM wiki. ael mentioned that these are well-known terms. I tried several translators and dictionaries but didn't find anything. A Google search only finds the wiki "List of mountains and hills on the B

Re: [Tagging] How to map a homeless encampment/colony?

On 30/09/19 08:38, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 29. Sep 2019, at 16:48, Michal Fabík wrote: Technically speaking, it could be considered a special case of a landuse=residential because the people sort of _reside_ there, only there are no residential buildings and the mo

Re: [Tagging] Colby's "Instructions for the Interior Survey of Ireland" (Was: Strange tags)

On 01/10/19 09:00, Andrew Davidson wrote: On 30/9/19 22:42, Philip Barnes wrote: Which is how we end up with River Avon, avon (afon in welsh) meaning river hence River River. At least they asked. In Australia it was a bunch of white guys traveling around saying: that's Botany Bay, that's

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

On 05/10/19 09:58, Paul Johnson wrote: On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: sent from a phone The wiki defines railway=level_crossing as a crossing of rails and a road, while railway=crossing is for a pedestrian crossing of

Re: [Tagging] Guard booth building type

On 07/10/19 18:59, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: “Booth” implies that one wall is missing (open).   A guardhouse would be more completely enclosed, I think. So either could work, depending on the building design. Would be preferable to have a tag that has no implied restrictions. Possibly guard_pos

Re: [Tagging] How to map Irish pubs?

On 09/10/19 09:45, Jmapb via Tagging wrote: On 10/8/2019 6:20 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: I was wondering about the same thing, because you've then also got Country & Western, German, any & all varieties of Gay ... ? Bit of an awkward one, but there are pub's in Northern & Inland Austra

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

On 08/10/19 20:27, Vɑdɪm wrote: Considering the responses it may be better to give a more definite criteria for using this tag. In this regard the definition of leisure=sunbathing as *any* popular place suitable for sunbathing looks rather vague. It could be more easily also used as a trolltag.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Phone)

On 07/10/19 21:00, Valor Naram wrote: > One problem with enforcing a single tag by mappers or preprocessing > data before putting it in the database is that if there are subtle distinctions they are > forever lost. Sven gave us a list of tags which have exact meaning. So no distinctions. No d

Re: [Tagging] How to map Irish pubs?

On 09/10/19 12:11, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 08:46, Jmapb via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: On 10/8/2019 6:20 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Bit of an awkward one, but there are pub's in Northern & Inland Australia that white people are

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

On 09/10/19 20:58, Vɑdɪm wrote: Warin wrote Humm.. don't think any place here is 'designated' for sunbathing. Who has done this 'designation' for sunbathing? Actually there are some. Please have a look at the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_fea

Re: [Tagging] Tagging forest parcels

Similar problems with other features. Possibly use a site relation? Map each individual parcel as a simple way with the reference. Then place each parcel into a site relation and then the common tags on the site relation. Something like that, look up the site relation on the wiki for details

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

On 09/10/19 21:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 9. Okt. 2019 um 12:46 Uhr schrieb Vɑdɪm >: Otherwise, as pointed out earlier by some people, in some contexts you'd sunbath nearly everywhere. ... In this picture you'd see 2 different bathin

Re: [Tagging] railway crossings with cycleways

On 10/10/19 01:07, Vɑdɪm wrote: On the other hand the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic mentions crossings for cyclists separately (https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/conventn/Conv_road_traffic_EN.pdf): 3. (a) The standing or parking of a vehicle on the carriageway shall be prohibited: (

Re: [Tagging] Divided highways, and not so divided highways, one way or two

On 10/10/19 20:46, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Do., 10. Okt. 2019 um 08:40 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm mailto:frede...@remote.org>>: The original mapper claims that using two separate oneway=yes ways is clearer and easier, as it does away with the need for turn restrictions at j

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 11/10/19 18:04, John Willis via Tagging wrote: Questions about using cycle relations properly: I am mapping and repairing cycle roads in the Kanto/Tokyo area. There are a lot of designated cycling roads that follow a long rivers and other water features out into the countryside, making up a

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 12/10/19 03:28, Phyks wrote: Hi, I've found similar issues in France recently. Cycling routes is too broad and diverse and covers various realities. From a rendering perspective (disclaimer: I'm one of the maintainer of the new CyclOSM rendering style, https://cyclosm.org), it is very often a

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 12/10/19 20:13, John Willis via Tagging wrote: On Oct 12, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: A new route_type= tag on the relation would be a good way to go. Route= cycle_touring road_touring cyclist road_cyclist road_cycling ? I think the word “race” should be left out, unless

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 14/10/19 07:26, Volker Schmidt wrote: (disclosure: I am academic member, but express my personal view) The Great Divide route is, to my knowledge, not signposted. The source for thr route is most likely either a GPX track from ACA or a map set from ACA,  which has their copyright on it. aca

Re: [Tagging] Removal of rendering for waterway=wadi

On 14/10/19 17:58, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: It is proposed to remove the rendering of waterway=wadi from Openstreetmap-carto, the style used in the "Standard" layer on openstreetmap.org - see https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3931 As discussed back in January 2015, the tag

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 14/10/19 18:28, Peter Elderson wrote: brad: There are several variations and gpx tracks available on the net for the great divide route. There are also many websites which discuss the route and show maps.   It's in the public domain. I've looked at the info for the Great Divide

Re: [Tagging] Tagging forest parcels

On 16/10/19 19:08, David Marchal wrote: Mateusz, The first thing is that this tagging scheme is mainly used in Poland, so that sounded like a local, not widely approved, tagging scheme. The second thing, which is the real problem to me, is that I don't see how to link these with the forest,

Re: [Tagging] Areas of bare soil (clay, silt, loam) such as badlands?

On 20/10/19 11:19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: How should areas of bare soil, such as badlands, be tagged? Currently there are documented tags for dry areas of bedrock, stones and sand: natural=bare_rock, natural=shingle, natural=scree, and natural=sand For tidal areas, beaches and wetlands there

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (phone)

On 21/10/19 09:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I'm in favor of deprecating contact:phone now (and the other contact:XXX duplicates later), but I don't know about your other proposed changes. For example, requiring the country code in all phone numbers would not be standard practice in Indonesia or t

Re: [Tagging] Deprecating mini_roundabout

On 23/10/19 21:44, ael wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:55:04AM +0200, Colin Smale wrote: I would suggest it is not necessary to replace the simple node with a circular way. I think it is perfectly acceptable if it is considered as a simple turn instead of negotiating a roundabout, from a rou

Re: [Tagging] tagging extremely large flood control features.

On 25/10/19 00:20, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I think describing these as "flood prone" in some way is a good idea. I think it would be better to use "flood_mitigation" as that implies deliberate design rather than natural event. I imagine you've already mapped the individual features: the l

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Access Aisle

On 25/10/19 06:12, Clifford Snow wrote: I'd like to propose a tagging scheme to tag parking lot access aisle. Access aisles are marked areas often used between handicap parking spaces but also used to indicate pedestrian access between parking spaces. The proposal can be found on the wiki [1]

Re: [Tagging] Tagging estuaries: estuary=yes or river=estuary?

? Puzzled as to; estuary = tidal mount of a large river? As defined by the Oxford Dictionary. Why not tag tidal - that can be applied to many things not just large rivers? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tidal No need for yet another key? Or is there another definition of estuary? On

Re: [Tagging] Billboard or something else

On 30/10/19 19:53, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Il giorno 30 ott 2019, alle ore 08:05, Johnparis ha scritto: I'd go with traffic_sign=variable_message these aren’t traffic signs, a common, although underspecified tag is man_made=gantry (subtagging the type of gantry cou

Re: [Tagging] emergency=no on hospitals is ambiguous

On 03/11/19 18:51, Francesco Ansanelli wrote: Hello list, I don't know is anybody wrote about this before, but I have noticed that the emergency tag changes meaning on hospitals and the result is weird: emergency tag indicate whether an emergency vehicle has access to the way/point, but on ho

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On 06/11/19 09:44, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 07:23, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: sent from a phone > On 5. Nov 2019, at 18:48, Markus mailto:selfishseaho...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I guess that bicycle=no almost always me

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - sunbathing

On 06/11/19 20:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 10:19 Uhr schrieb Vɑdɪm >: The voting reached the planned end date. There are 18 votes in total submitted there plus 2 non-voting comments. The results are: 13 "yes" including m

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On 06/11/19 21:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 09:16 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>>: Also, it may be OK to carry bicycle in a box and not OK to push (not road access, but in some train you are not allowed to enter with bicycle,

Re: [Tagging] the nature of large-scale paid edits (was Re: Service road)

On 08/11/19 08:58, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 at 07:34, Clifford Snow > wrote: Every time I've contacted one of the Amazon's team, they have responded and taken responsibility to update their edits. We should first try to contact t

Re: [Tagging] How to tag Seveso sites ?

On 09/11/19 10:20, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 8. Nov 2019, at 23:47, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: hazard=chemical "risk_level"=low/medium/high what kind of risk is the risk_level addressing? “chemical” is very generic, may be fine for the first level but should get a mor

Re: [Tagging] Supermarket pick-up service

On 09/11/19 03:30, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 08.11.2019 13:40, Philip Barnes wrote: > Its not a shop, you don't buy anything there. In my local case, the payment is done at collection time with any method the main marked uses, i.e. cash and card. Thus I'd call it a shop > Maybe supermarket=custom

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features, toll (1/5)

On 12/11/19 09:06, Herbert Allmeier wrote: Hello tagging list! I agreed to move conversations from this list to the wiki and back so that the discussion can keep going here. I hope that it works that I stack all replys behind each other. If it does not work, don't hesitate to help me out by tel

Re: [Tagging] disguised communication towers

On 14/11/19 09:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 13. Nov 2019, at 22:02, Eric Theise wrote: From my morning reading it seems that entities tagged with tower:type=communication tower:construction=concealed and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up c

Re: [Tagging] disguised communication towers

On 15/11/19 00:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Do., 14. Nov. 2019 um 11:01 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>>: > tower:construction seems a tag that describes different orthogonal properties according to the mostly used values. So

Re: [Tagging] Proposed features, toll (1/5)

On 19/11/19 22:21, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 at 09:07, Herbert Allmeier > wrote: 1) There was a discussion about the proposal already. There were some problems with the preferred place of discussion. I move the discussions from the mailing l

Re: [Tagging] Several different boxes on the same pole

On 22/11/19 23:11, marc marc wrote: Le 21.11.19 à 22:51, François Lacombe a écrit : Those two boxes will be hard to describe on the same node, although they can be located on the same pole. Should we recommend to put as many nodes as required around the pole or choose another option? the easies

Re: [Tagging] Barrier=berm

Berms are also used in motocross.. and MTBs Scroll halfway down this page https://www.dirtbikes101.com/arts/dirt-bike-riding-tips-corners.html Looks like berm is a term used/misused for some different things.. may be best to use something else? On 26/11/19 19:28, Volker Schmidt wrote: Gr

Re: [Tagging] craft VS man_made

On 02/12/19 20:47, Volker Schmidt wrote: I would add that in the case of a "prosciuttificio" (small factory that produces raw cured ham) in many cases these processing plants buy the meat and run only the curing process, which takes more than a year. They may also have a shop or only resell. S

Re: [Tagging] craft VS man_made

On 03/12/19 07:06, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 2. Dec 2019, at 19:02, Volker Schmidt wrote: Martin, don't overdo this. We don't map cafè espresso, cafè espresso macchiato, macchiatone, cappuccino, americano :-) Many of these prosciuttifici produce raw cured ham and

Re: [Tagging] Use of a site relation for grouping parking spaces

On 04/12/19 05:59, Alessandro Sarretta wrote: Dear tagging list, Should we maybe rephrase the sentence "Parking spaces *always have to* be grouped together in a site relation tagged with type=site + site=parking." in something like "Parking spaces *can* be grouped together in a site relati

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (contact:phone)

On 05/12/19 00:41, Sören Reinecke via Tagging wrote: This proposal is different. It's about deprecating the `phone` key. Both proposals are to depreciate one key in favour of another. The general opinion looks to be .. no. As you probably don't believe that .. go ahead and have your vote and

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 07/12/19 05:45, Jmapb via Tagging wrote: On 12/6/2019 1:28 PM, Janko Mihelić wrote: I think the "forward" and "backward" don't belong in a role of a relation. Oneway=yes on a way should be enough. In the Wiki discussion it is said that if there is one little "oneway" way in a big branch, then

[Tagging] Route node roles - was Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 06/12/19 21:23, Andy Townsend wrote: On 06/12/2019 10:15, Michael Behrens wrote: There is no unique way to tag roles in hiking route relations I'd suggest making it clear that that table is currently for way members only - it doesn't mention node members (start, end, marker, etc.).  This

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

Thank you Michael! Saves me from doing it.. it is on my list of 'things that should be done' .. quite a long list. On 06/12/19 21:15, Michael Behrens wrote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hiking_trail_relation_roles There is no unique way to tag roles in hiking route

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 07/12/19 14:09, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 at 13:07, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 7. Dec 2019, at 01:51, Peter Elderson mailto:pelder...@gmail.com>> wrote: I think a simple oneway=yes on a hiking route relation could say it's signpo

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 05/12/19 21:08, Martin Scholtes wrote: Hello, I would like to inform you that I have made a suggestion about park and drive. This resulted from a discussion in the OSM DE Telegram Chat. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/park_drive Definition: Information that can be taken

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> het volgende geschreven:  sent from a phone On 7. Dec 2019, at 04:36, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: If oneway=yes is place

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 07/12/19 20:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 7. Dec 2019, at 09:57, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: I have also seen this referred to as "park and pool" (short for "park and carpool"). Would this be too confusing of a name as well? seems comprehensive, I agree there should be

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 08/12/19 10:43, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 07.12.2019 um 09:33 schrieb Warin: park_drive=no for parking of customers only or private. These should already be tagged with an access tag to say this .. so it is redundant? This form should not be explicitly stated but rather understood as

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 08/12/19 10:54, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 07.12.2019 um 19:44 schrieb Philip Barnes: On Thu, 2019-12-05 at 14:46 +0100, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 05.12.2019 um 12:41 schrieb Sören Reinecke via Tagging: Allows the tag the mapping of carpool meeting points? The proposal aims at marking park

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 09/12/19 07:14, Peter Elderson wrote: Sarah Hoffmann mailto:lon...@denofr.de>>: The point about the processing you have now made repeatedly in different contexts. You seem to have come to this conclusion because waymarkedtrails does not implement non-linear routes. As muc

Re: [Tagging] Route node roles - was Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 09/12/19 10:44, Peter Elderson wrote: Ok, just asking to make sure. As an overview most hiking things are on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking Could you envision a node passed by two hikes, and being a checkpoint for the one and nothing special for the other? Yes. Would a ch

Re: [Tagging] Route node roles - was Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 09/12/19 11:07, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 6:45 PM Peter Elderson wrote: Ok, just asking to make sure. Could you envision a node passed by two hikes, and being a checkpoint for the one and nothing special for the other? Certainly, for the sort of checkpoint that's to show t

Re: [Tagging] Route node roles - was Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 09/12/19 19:43, Peter Elderson wrote: Jmapb mailto:jm...@gmx.com>>: On 12/8/2019 6:44 PM, Peter Elderson wrote: > > Could you envision a node passed by two hikes, and being a checkpoint > for the one and nothing special for the other? Camino de Santiago ( https://ww

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Leisure=Skatepark

On 10/12/19 05:09, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 17:31, Tom Pfeifer > wrote: I'd prefer to keep it leisure=pitch, avoiding top-level tag fragmentation. Refinements about the sport definition can appear in the sport=* subtagging. I can under

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - park_drive

On 09/12/19 10:12, Martin Scholtes wrote: Am 08.12.2019 um 05:04 schrieb Alessandro Sarretta: Hi Martin, my doubt on your proposal is that I think the only useful value would be "designated" (anyway, can you share any example/picture of a sign describing a park specificly designated for carpool

Re: [Tagging] Route node roles - was Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - hiking_trail_relation_roles

On 10/12/19 17:54, Peter Elderson wrote: To sum up, checkpoints and trailheads deserve to be mapped. Once they are features mapped and tagged as nodes, they can be rendered, searched and used as POIs. Questions: Is it useful to include them as node members in the hiking route relation(s) or is

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >