Re: [Tagging] airport check in counters

There are 457 uses of booking=* in the data base. I have used it on camping sites that require seasonal booking. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Abooking Humm reception and checkin as the same? I did propose amenity=reception .. failed as some did not want it as amenity ... I use it.

Re: [Tagging] Residential=rural, =urban?

On 12/04/19 19:02, Ilya Zverev wrote: I agree the naming is a bit off, since in Russia it is common to have buildings in medium-sized cities “sorted” by height from outskits towards the center :) The only criteria is a number of families living in a building, actual height does not matter. One

Re: [Tagging] Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this barrier it is required not to be an area, why not use the tag area=no? Tag the unusual rather than the normal? Then, as Martin says, use the way of the barrier in a multipolygon relation for a park. On 14/04/19 06:43

Re: [Tagging] what is the meaning of bicycle=yes on highway=path

On 14/04/19 01:42, Volker Schmidt wrote: I am not happy with the assumption that a path on the map without indication that it is open to the public is better than not having it on the map at all. If I am navigating using a paper map then that road/path is usefull information. If it is not on

Re: [Tagging] What is the role of "role=guidepost"

At least some guide posts are to guide people along a particular route, particularly where a few paths meet, where the route diverges off the main path/road, or where there has been a long distance since the last guide post. Some of these are simply small signs with symbols only, nailed to a fa

Re: [Tagging] What is the role of "role=guidepost"

On 14/04/19 08:37, Peter Elderson wrote: Loose guidepost nodes are a nuisance when processing route relations by hand or by software. On the other hand, you might argue that most routes are nothing else than imaginary lines between guideposts. But I would say, practically, guideposts do not ne

Re: [Tagging] Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

barrier b) a park - that does not inherit the tags on the way. 在 2019年4月14日週日 05:16，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> 寫道： As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this barrier it is required not to be an area, why

Re: [Tagging] Was barrier=jersey_barrier approved in a proposal?

The same plastic barriers are used in Australia. While they may be capable of retaining water .. I am yet to see one with water in it ... probably too much trouble and we do have a lack of water too. Where weight is required the concrete ones look to be used, possibly easier and quicker  to do t

Re: [Tagging] tags for a live stock sale yard

In Australia commercial livestock (sheep, cattle) are sold through these livestock markets. They may be transported for several days to get to the market, rested there before sale to recover from their trip. As such the market can be large with feeding etc. Once sold they are then transported

Re: [Tagging] Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

A barrier on a park will have some means of getting in!!! So the barrier will not be continuous - having gate/s or gaps etc. The park boundary would then consist of the way that is the fence/barrier and other ways (possibly a gate etc) and that then meets the definition for a multipolygon rela

Re: [Tagging] airport check in counters

On 15/04/19 06:35, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 13. Apr 2019, at 15:21, bkil wrote: * Check-in counters: yes! Also include their count and whether there are any restrictions between the different counters (with/without bags, online only, etc). I am also supporting the id

Re: [Tagging] Subtag for place=locality?

From the original start of place=locality /All current place tags are for either populated areas, or for larger areas of County sized or bigger. The place=locality tag is useful for places that have a specific name, but do not necessarily have any geographic feature or population centre that c

Re: [Tagging] Subtag for place=locality?

past, and it still a navigational feature. Fairly certain other localities have their stories to tell too. n 15/04/19 17:23, Warin wrote: From the original start of place=locality /All current place tags are for either populated areas, or for larger areas of County sized or bigger. The

Re: [Tagging] Subtag for place=locality?

nt wheel is the original one. If the tag "place=locality" didn't exist, how would you tag this? I'd ask here, that is one of the things this group is good for. On 4/15/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: As an example of a locality that has never had a popul

Re: [Tagging] tags for a live stock sale yard

Typically these are auction sales. On 16/04/19 06:57, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 4:52 PM bkil wrote: Compared to marketplaces, I think stockyards would be interesting to a lot less map users (probably only to contracted partners who regularly bring in livestock). Not to menti

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

not populated... place=islet - many of these are not populated... place=sea place=ocean Martin and Warin suggested to use abandoned:place=* for those which were former place=hamlet, =village, isolated_dwelling, etc. Several people mentioned ways they have used this tag for a "place without po

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

On 17/04/19 15:48, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 12:21, Joseph Eisenberg mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: I have reviewed all the features tagged as place=locality in 2 places in the USA and 2 in Europe, and found that 3 out of 4, place=locality is us

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

On 18/04/19 00:02, Christoph Hormann wrote: On Wednesday 17 April 2019, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I believe many people are using natural=peak to add the name of plateaus / mesas / tablelands. Yes, that is definitely the case for buttes and small mesas - but then again these are features that can

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

On 18/04/19 09:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: But if a locality represents only a historic location that has no physical presence today, it is debatable if this is a “real and current” feature that is appropriate for OSM rather than a historical map. If the name is still in present use then

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

On 19/04/19 05:21, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 19:54, Valor Naram > wrote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Proposal_list guided me to you. I have the following situation: I want to tag a changing table but this changing tabl

[Tagging] Other missing landform tags

Along with plateau the following look to be missing from the OSMwiki, these may not be all.. Pass A depression or gap in a range of mountains or hills permitting easier passage from one side to the other. Point A raised mass of land that projects over a lower area (water or land). Head/hea

Re: [Tagging] Other missing landform tags

features :) Are there any other land form things missing that should go in for consideration??? LeTopographeFou   Message original De: letopographe...@gmail.com Envoyé: 19 avril 2019 9:08 AM À: tagging@openstreetmap.org Objet: Re: [Tagging] Other missing landform tags Warin, Now you

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

On 19/04/19 20:23, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Apr 19, 2019, 11:57 AM by valin...@gmx.net: So you suggest to change the wiki via proposal? Then we have a problem which we should also be aware of. I quote myself: > Replacing the key `diaper` with `changing_table` [or some other key

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

+1 for starting it. Think the name could be better .. sounds like a baby exchange :) On 21/04/19 04:59, bkil wrote: Thank you for taking the time to complete this nice write up. I obviously support the proposed scheme. ;-) I don't have strong feelings about the exact naming of the used key,

Re: [Tagging] Why should we avoid overusage of amenity=* tag?

On 21/04/19 05:31, Paul Allen wrote: On Sat, 20 Apr 2019 at 19:52, 石野貴之 > wrote: I don't know the reason why we should not use amenity=* too much. If you have time, please let me know. Lack of specificity.  It's nice to be able to categorize things. +1.

Re: [Tagging] Other missing landform tags

Ok, What I have, mainly from taginfo but a couple from myself, with some rough definitions. I do not advocate all of them, just that most of them exist and there should be some thought given to there tagging. They are: Arch = A hole though some feature, usually rock. Covered overhead and to b

Re: [Tagging] 'track_detail' on railway lines - what does it represent?

On 22/04/19 06:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Apr 21, 2019, 1:37 PM by tagging@openstreetmap.org: Hi 'track_detail, used on railway tracks. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4414158 4700+ total worldwide  3900+ in the UK I can find nothing in the wiki Is track_detail

Re: [Tagging] Why should we avoid overusage of amenity=* tag?

I am one of the people who disagree about using the key amenity Would shops, crafts and offices be better in amenity? I think not. Where any set of features can be grouped together they should be, and given there own key, such as education. This helps mappers find similar things all under the o

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal -- Voting result -- shop=fashion_accessories

On 22/04/19 00:49, Paul Allen wrote: On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 at 15:46, Joseph Eisenberg mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: Would it be possible for there to be some alt text and hover-over text that shows there is a link to the proposal? +1 +1 It is certainly less visible, obv

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

On 22/04/19 00:48, Paul Allen wrote: On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 at 15:43, Joseph Eisenberg mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> wrote: "Changing table" is also the term that makes sense to me as a speaker of American English. The only possible ambiguity is if it is located in a temple.  It co

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

On 22/04/19 09:49, marc marc wrote: Le 22.04.19 à 00:39, Paul Allen a écrit : On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 at 22:56, marc marc wrote: however I wonder if it's useful to promote changing_table:height is there really any use for this tag ? A parent in a wheelchair might find that useful informa

Re: [Tagging] Walking Routes, how to tag alternatives/additions/shortcuts/approach tracks etc.

The 'Great North Walk' https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1388126 has - the ways that form the route ... and 3 relations with the roles 'alternate' that form alternative paths .. one of them is a closed section that was the original path but is in conflict with a shooting range. On 23/0

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting results - Police facilites

I too missed it. Lot going on. There is a web page that helps https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Proposals_with_%22Voting%22_status Looked at once a week it should pick up any proposal in 'voting' provided the status is set correctly.. I have not been using it of late ..  :( On 23/0

Re: [Tagging] Why should we avoid overusage of amenity=* tag?

On 25/04/19 04:39, Dave F wrote: On 21/04/2019 01:12, Warin wrote: I am all for the introduction of the key education=* It makes sense, adds detail - improves the map data base. True. The one that irks me is amenity=cafe. It isn't there for the benefit of the community; it

[Tagging] RFC - livestock_dip

Hi, I have made some changes and advanced https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/livestock_dip to status proposed. 2 Problems I have with it .. Type of dip Rather than use livestock_dip

Re: [Tagging] Why should we avoid overusage of amenity=* tag?

On 26/04/19 04:10, Philip Barnes wrote: On Wednesday, 24 April 2019, Warin wrote: On 25/04/19 04:39, Dave F wrote: On 21/04/2019 01:12, Warin wrote: I am all for the introduction of the key education=* It makes sense, adds detail - improves the map data base. True. The one that irks me

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:natural=mesa and Tag:natural=butte

On 26/04/19 11:48, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I have created 2 proposal pages for natural=mesa and natural=butte A mesa is defined as "A flat-topped elevated landform surrounded by cliffs". A mesa may also be known as a table or tableland, potrero or tepui. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:mesa

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

On 30/04/19 04:34, Clifford Snow wrote: I'd like to add a new tag to highway=footway, footway=access_aisle. An access aisle [1] is the space allowed in parking lots for vans. (Vans that are equipped with a wheelchair ramp.) According to Wikipedia [2] and the Americans with Disabilities Act Ha

Re: [Tagging] Wiki page for natural=mountain_range

Depends? Warning - my interpretation! SADDLE = low point between two high points (mountains), it does not descend near the level of the adjacent valleys. PASS =A gap in a range of mountains or hills permitting easier passage from one side to the other, it descends near the level of the adjac

Re: [Tagging] unused tags and properties

Fridge, stove and sink would be handy for some camp sites ... I came across one camp site with a fridge .. standing all by itself in the open (with a power point connection). Most of these woiuld be 'inside' a camp kitchen .. (some camp kitchens have no walls just a roof. ... On 27/04/19 16:3

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability wiki page: "Geometry" section added

On 29/04/19 15:21, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I would guess that they could be: Austinville - place=hamlet Springbrook - place=village +1 - both as nodes? Springbrook would be centred on the pub or store ... or halfway between the two. Austinville ... centred on the community hall. On 4/29/19

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability wiki page: "Geometry" section added

One problem is the 'audience' is so varied. We have the beginner.. who wants basic stuff fast. No time to read details, get on and map! The 'expert' with an edge case or problem and wants minute detail. How to deal with them in the one document? Have sections.. At the front there needs to be

Re: [Tagging] Misuse of name tag for route description

On 11/05/19 07:07, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 21:26, Markus > wrote: What kind of name are displayed on these buses? Around here, buses, trains etc. usually only display the route number (or route type) and their destination (e.g. "701

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - toll

On 09/05/19 03:22, Paul Allen wrote: On Wed, 8 May 2019 at 18:08, > wrote: I have seen that some people already started to reply to this main. AGAIN: Mails here will not be processed (by me)!! You have pretty much guaranteed that t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC (etc) for crossing:signals

On 08/05/19 19:18, marc marc wrote: Le 08.05.19 à 10:30, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : „uncontrolled“, as it is a misnomer. indeed, but what could be a better value ? crossing=not_controlled_by_a_traffic_signal is a little long I have used 'uncontrolled' where there is no marking, no aids but

Re: [Tagging] Looking for Existing Proposal/Feature - Firearm Restrictions

On 11/05/19 08:53, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 12:46, Jane Smith mailto:internetfriendly...@gmail.com>> wrote: Good Evening, I am considering submitting a proposal for restrictions or allowances on carrying firearms in a particular location. I checked t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - crossing=marked

On 14/05/19 17:14, osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au wrote: Haven’t checked if it shows up as an error, but technically, the grass on each side is the “sidewalk”, and it is simply a shortcoming of the current tagging schemes that it’s not possible to properly tag it as pedestrian routable are

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Feature Proposal - area of steps for pedestrians.

On 07/05/19 07:12, Tobias Knerr wrote: On 06.05.19 15:36, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mo., 6. Mai 2019 um 14:06 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer If you can get the second one working I don’t understand why the first one is different (presuming it is split). For the second one to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table

On 20/05/19 06:45, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 04:32, Valor Naram > wrote: Hey guys, my first proposal has been rejected for some reason. I have rewritten my proposal to hopefully please the critic. Please check it out: https:

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table

It is a 'property' tag .. like height etc and can only be used with some other feature so the definition should not be about the physical presence of a table. I'd go with a definition that says something along the lines of "indicates the provision for changing a nappy/diaper usually on a table

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table

On 20/05/19 22:20, Valor Naram wrote: then it's a property Yes. The tag highway=residential says that is a road here,  a physical presence. The tag surface=grass says that whatever is here has a grass surface, but does not say what the physical presence is. If there is a thing tagged with

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - juggling spot

On 22/05/19 05:34, Pablo wrote: Hello, A new feature proposal which could be very useful for the juggling community. Usually, jugglers meet in specific spaces in cities (usually open spaces like parcs). There is often a day of the week which is choose to meet in priority. It s like a informal

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table The present definition for the tag 'changing_table' is "A tag for tagging changing tables". This is a 'self referencing description'. One way of testing/demonstrating this is to remove any words in the description that are

[Tagging] Definition of Sport

From the talk here on juggling and private conversations with others there are various 'definitions' of the key 'sport' in use by OSM mappers. There are various definitions of the word sport in various dictionaries. The Macquarie (Australian): List some 20 various meanings/definitions .. e.g.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - camp_site=camp_pitch

On 22/05/19 18:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 20. May 2019, at 18:19, Markus wrote: I prefer the camp_site:part=camp_pitch because the :part suffix is already in use in building:part=* and could become a standard suffix for parts of other objects, such as named parts of

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

description From: marc marc To: tagging@openstreetmap.org CC: Le 23.05.19 à 01:03, Warin a écrit : > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table > 'self referencing description' > So what is a better description for OSM use? > &quo

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

On 24/05/19 03:05, marc marc wrote: Le 23.05.19 à 18:57, ET Commands a écrit : building=occupied Homes and apartments are also 'occupied'. So that is not what you are after. Humm .. 'productive'??? building=* is about what the building look like a industrial-look building with a residentia

Re: [Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

On 24/05/19 10:24, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 1:07 PM marc marc wrote: following that, building=yes building:use=yes is better yes can be improved when you'll known that's the current use, if it not the same as what is excepted for this building look I'm even fine with 'buildin

Re: [Tagging] Definition of Sport

I think it is way too soon to summarize a discussion that started less than 1 week ago. If definition C is accepted then: Bicycle riding is an accepted 'sport'. Riding my bicycle is then a 'sport', as I do it on roads and cycleways around me I can then tag these as sport=bicycle. And that can

Re: [Tagging] Definition of Sport

... I would rather see a stricter more limited definition for the sport tag ... a looser defined key could then be adopted for other things on a case by case basis? On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:38 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: I t

Re: [Tagging] Non-orthogonal crossing=* tag proposals: crossing=marked/unmarked vs crossing:markings=yes/no

On 25/05/19 07:32, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 24 May 2019 at 22:12, Kevin Kenny > wrote: Yeah, there really are combinations around here: does it have signs? does it have traffic signals? does it have specific pedestrian-facing traffic signals? (S

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

On 25/05/19 17:15, Valor Naram wrote: Hey all, something else that needs to be discussed/improved before starting the second voting? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table Key:baby_changing_table Definition: Provides a place for changing the nappy/diaper of

Re: [Tagging] Definition of Sport

On 25/05/19 17:11, Markus wrote: On Sat, 25 May 2019 at 01:19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Accepting that requirement would mean that beaches cannot be tagged with the sport swimming as there is no construction for the sport. Cycleway are specifically constructed for bicycling

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

- Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org CC: On 25/05/19 17:15, Valor Naram wrote: > Hey all, > > something else t

[Tagging] RFC for mounting_block

Hi, Following the draft for the feature mounting block (traditionally used to mount a horse) I have moved this to a 'request for comments' stage. I think most have had an input but here it is to meet the rules. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/mounting_block Definition: An

Re: [Tagging] Definition of Sport

I would not be worried about excluding some things from a clarified definition of sport. I would have a new key for those excluded .. say 'recreation' that can be non competitive, non physical. Renders can then chose to show them the same way as 'sports' or not - their choice, at the moment t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

On 25/05/19 18:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 25. May 2019, at 09:35, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Key:baby_changing_table Definition: Provides a place for changing the nappy/diaper of babies or young children. Pedantic hat on. Self references:

Re: [Tagging] Telephone poles and lines?

Around me, the 'poles' carry; power, cable internet, cable TV (some times the cable carries both TV and internet combined) and telephone. The don't usually have poles for each service. The provision of a national internet service that provides a combined telephone service means that the tel

Re: [Tagging] Telephone poles and lines?

apped with power=pole? On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 7:50 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>> wrote: Around me, the 'poles' carry; power, cable internet, cable TV (some times the cable carries both TV and internet combined) an

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

On 26/05/19 19:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am So., 26. Mai 2019 um 02:08 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com>>: Could become "Provides for replacing the nappy/diaper of very young children." I am not a native speaker, to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

diaper) of an infant or young child" Might remove the "young child" for brevity? Martin? On 5/27/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: On 26/05/19 19:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am So., 26. Mai 2019 um 02:08 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mai

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - changing table - self referencing description

t;Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" CC: sent from a phone > On 27. May 2019, at 04:42, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Almost agree :) > > "A surface for replacing the nappy (diaper) of an infant or young child" &

Re: [Tagging] Inland customs offices

On 31/05/19 19:41, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 10:19, Jan S > wrote: But independently from that, we agree that there's no reason to make a difference between customs offices at borders or at other places, as long as they control goods? I

Re: [Tagging] A modest proposal to increase the usefulness of the tagging list

On 02/06/19 20:10, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 6/2/19 10:47, Simon Poole wrote: In the interest of keeping the list at least half usable, I would suggest that we all, starting now, voluntarily submit to: - not posting more than 30 times per month (the 30 comes from the WMF mailing lists, where

Re: [Tagging] Complicated traffic light combinations

On 07/06/19 08:58, Andy Townsend wrote: Hello, I've just mapped the traffic lights for a river crossing in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71005300 (Elvington in Yorkshire, England). Along with which direction the light points and what traffic it is designed to control I've added

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:tourism=camp_pitch

On 10/06/19 13:48, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: How do you handle sites that accept both caravans and tents on different pitches? I believe you may be thinking about how to choose between tourism=camp_site vs tourism=caravan_site for a dual-use campground or campsite. I would use camp_sit

Re: [Tagging] Mismatched tag status

On 11/06/19 09:41, Paul Allen wrote: On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 00:21, Yuri Astrakhan > wrote: There is currently 267 key & tags on OSM wiki with mismatching STATUS field, as seen in http://tinyurl.com/y62j5m5e - e.g. amenity=fast_food has status=defacto i

Re: [Tagging] landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

On 11/06/19 19:30, marc marc wrote: Le 11.06.19 à 11:14, Tomas Straupis a écrit : What do you think? I find very strange that reservoir is a landuse by itself it would be a bit like putting landuse=rest on a bench or landuse=stop on a parking lot. landuse should be what the place is for. re

Re: [Tagging] landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

On 11/06/19 19:30, marc marc wrote: Le 11.06.19 à 11:14, Tomas Straupis a écrit : What do you think? I find very strange that reservoir is a landuse by itself it would be a bit like putting landuse=rest on a bench or landuse=stop on a parking lot. landuse should be what the place is for. re

Re: [Tagging] Landuse=farmyard vs residential

On 12/06/19 23:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 12. Jun 2019, at 15:04, John Willis via Tagging wrote: Am I right to consider these old-style family farm complexes landuse=farmyard? I would generally respond yes, but if they aren’t actually used by farmers any more, so

[Tagging] lanes = 0

Hi, There are a few uses of lanes=0... I would think these are errors. Even if unmarked a road would have at least one lane otherwise it is not really a road. But looking at tag info there are a fair few uses fo it in various locations. So ... what is it used for? _

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

On 13/06/19 17:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 13. Jun 2019, at 04:59, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: There are a few uses of lanes=0... I would think these are errors. Even if unmarked a road would have at least one lane otherwise it is not really

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

On 13/06/19 18:41, Tobias Zwick wrote: Here, legally, if there are no lane makings then it is considered to have one lane in either direction. I am kind of a fan of lanes=0, denoting that there are no marked lanes. Here is why: a. if a road with no lane marking is tagged as lanes=2, this situ

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of non-approved values for diplomatic=?

On 14/06/19 20:06, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I was checking the pages related to the office=diplomatic proposal, which approved the tags diplomatic=embassy, diplomatic=consulate and diplomatic=liaison - I just made pages for these 3 tags and added =liaison to the key:diplomatic page. Based on the

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

+1 with Joseph OSM is world wide. What is suitable in one place may not work in another. The use of the tags should follow local customs, the presence of lanes should be judged by local customs, in Australia they are legally required to be marked for multi lane roads, a road with a lane in ea

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of non-approved values for diplomatic=?

On 15/06/19 08:57, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: Some people disapprove of editing a database object without checking if it still exists, because an edit implies that you have confirmed that the information about the feature is still correct. I usually check on a web page, most of them have a governm

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

On 16/06/19 22:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: Okay, to wrap this up, I added this title in the wiki and referenced back to this discussion, advising to not use lanes=0/1.5/none to signify no lane markings but instead use something like lane_markings=no. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#N

Re: [Tagging] Designated spots for dogs to wait

On 18/06/19 08:50, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 23:35, Manuel Arteaga via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: I've tried to look up how to tag these “dog parking spots”, but I don't know a concise name for them. Me neither.  We have them here, but without sig

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability of geometry

On 17/06/19 23:53, marc marc wrote: Le 17.06.19 à 03:53, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : since this is where everyone can agree is in Paris. Paris maybe, but you are talking about Ile-de-France. where the single node representing "ile de france" should be located ? look at the history of the node,

Re: [Tagging] Designated spots for dogs to wait

On 18/06/19 20:16, John Willis via Tagging wrote: On Jun 18, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: Are there any objections to man_made=hitching_point? I think it will be a little used item. If you search for "dog leash hitching post" you find a lot of dif

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

On 19/06/19 18:24, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Is there some reason to prefer one of this two keys for tagging whatever ferry is a paid one? What do the cross channel ferries have for UK to France? Ha. They don't have a tag on them to indicate that payment is required. Not done on UK to Spain eith

Re: [Tagging] refugee camp

It is a land use, residential .. at least on a temporary basis. possibly landuse=residential, residential=migrants? This avoids the over used amenity key. Most renders will render it unidentified from other residential area and HOT can use their own rendering to identify it. On 20/06/19 09:49,

Re: [Tagging] paid ferry - fee or toll tag

The Oxford Dictionary says Toll : A charge payable to use a bridge or road. Fee : A payment made to a professional person or to a professional or public body in exchange for advice or services. I would go with fee, keep tolls for roads + bridges. __

Re: [Tagging] product of a landuse=vineyard

On 20/06/19 03:44, marc marc wrote: Le 19.06.19 à 17:50, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : Am Mi., 19. Juni 2019 um 16:48 Uhr schrieb marc marc : The question that arises is the tag to link the vineyard to the wine. I'm thinking about a tag like for:product=* set on a landuse=vineyard Ca

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair = hiking

On 19/06/19 21:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Il giorno 18 giu 2019, alle ore 18:43, Markus ha scritto: Are these signed wheelchair routes? If so, i would create a type=route + route=wheelchair relation. actually these are hiking routes, which are also advertised as sui

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

On 20/06/19 08:55, marc marc wrote: Hello, Le 19.06.19 à 22:17, Mhairi O'Hara a écrit : Hello Tagging Mailing List, imho you request too many comment in one email, the thread 'll soon become unmanageable +1 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:staff_count:doctors htt

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair = hiking

On 20/06/19 16:06, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 20.06.2019 um 03:15 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: In which case I would simply add wheelchair=yes to them, as the OSMwiki says "suitable to be used with a wheelchair". In which case I will repeat

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:insurance:health

On 20/06/19 16:17, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: 5) insurance:health The proposal suggests values of "no", "public", "private" and "unknown". Most of these values are not very helpful in most countries. "insurance:health=no" might be useful in the rare instance that a private clinic or facility does

Re: [Tagging] wheelchair = hiking

On 20/06/19 17:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 20.06.2019 um 08:32 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: If you mean the difference between a mapper who thinks something is wheelchair suitable compared to a mapper who uses a sign or brochure to judge it .. us

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:staff_count:nurses

I would think that the bed count would be a reasonable guide for the staffing levels. Certainly for emergency use the number of bed would be usefull and this should be something that can be reasonably verified. On 20/06/19 16:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: 2) "staff_count:nurses=" *A. Source

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >