Re: [Tagging] barrier=net ?

TLDR: consider fence_type=net I think that these huge nets on poles are barriers, then fences and then nets. So it fits well within barrier=fence. from wiki osm [1]: A fence is a freestanding structure designed to restrict or prevent movement across a boundary. It is generally distinguished from

Re: [Tagging] barrier=net ?

On 07/01/2015 11:42 am, "johnw" wrote: >> There are 544 uses of barrier=net, and I want to add it into the wiki. On 7 January 2015 at 05:50, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I've also used it to tag nets in the water used to provide swimming areas > safe from sharks. Andrew your case is more specialized

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

How about... > non-denominational places (Airport chapels ...) religion=all > places shared between faiths religion=multi Optionally more details with a scheme similar to: religion:christian =yes/* religion:muslim

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC: Reverse Vending Machine

Building on Janko's comment, is this acceptable or lacking in some way? amenity=shop/vending_machine/... service:refund=yes refund:plastic_bottles=* refund:*=* ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/ta

Re: [Tagging] kind of a shop=ticket

This is very related to amenity=vending_machine (taginfo = 54 000) with its associated key: vending=* (taginfo = 50 000) http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/vending#values Maybe we could come up with something that unite the used keys. On 12 January 2015 at 09:55, k4r573n wrote: > Hi, > > I

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

John Willis wrote: > "multi" fits the sports tagging scheme well, and I think it is best for the > religion tag too. > > "All"is not good, as most sports places don have a clay sumo ring or a sandy > pit for beach volleyball set up, so "all" would be wrong. @John I guess this is a reply to my i

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

Jgpacker asks on the PoW talk page: >> Are [Airports prayer rooms] really tagged with amenity=place_of_worship? >> I would say it's quite a different place from a normal religious place, >> and should get another tag. I think they are definitively for worshiping and prayers. amenity=place_of_worsh

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > religion=multi looks OK to me, the similarity to sport makes it easier > to remember than religion=all (and it is very likely more accurate, as "all" > is too inclusive I guess). Some airports REALLY wants to be that inclusive. > "a prayer room for all faiths and deno

Re: [Tagging] religion=multi* ?

> that is not a problem, as "multi" doesn't exclude "all", but "all" requires > "all" Indeed, it is not a problem, it is a solution ! :) Use two values for slightly different concepts. multi == multifaith == multiconfessional == various == value1;value2;... all == non-denominational == nondenomin

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

On Jan 14, 2015 5:53 PM, "Marc Gemis" wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I appreciate you concerns. They should have been raised in the commenting period of the proposal rather than the voting period that is coming to a close. > > > -1. Why wo

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

I didn't follow every bits of the discussion, so sorry for interrupting. Sorry also if my proposals are out of scope or already reviewed. Maybe a fresh view can help. @Marc amenity=drinking_water // amenity=non_drinking_water It feels like a good start and compromise. Either can be associated with

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - Voting - Water tap

It seems that Pieren and I agree on most points. @François Maybe drinkable water is a very special case... but here service/use is much more important than object/feature. The ability to find this water on a map or from any data consumer is useful. It can even be essential to many people from hike

Re: [Tagging] Basic philosophy of OSM tagging

"Kotya Karapetyan" > 2) Suggested tags functionality should be implemented. I have seen that in the Android editor Vespucci. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem

My main suggestion would be to re-use the same scheme as Key:opening_hours to define the time when the waterway is likely to flow. I would also discard rare/frequent as too subjective. Instead: approximate duration are not perfect but should improve mutual understanding. For instance as in: waterw

Re: [Tagging] waterway=wadi problem

On 19 January 2015 at 13:42, Eric SIBERT wrote: > One may also not that road are also subject to intermittent (un)usability. > Some unpaved one are closed during rainy season. Some part of road have > concrete parts that are flood_prone during cyclone. > > How can we (or not) extend it to roads?

Re: [Tagging] Ethnic shops

John Willis wrote: > I think there should be ethnic=*, Nationality=* , or culture=*tag that can be used [...] I find culture=* the best so far. I find it specialised enough (compared to _type=*, origin=*, category=*, group=* ...) I find it accurate enough. I find it generic enough (compared to m

Re: [Tagging] Ethnic shops

> like: > amenity=hairdresser > name=Scalp > culture=punk > ? Exactly, I provided other examples in my previous message such as culture=country, culture=grunge, culture=shinto. Using several keys ethnicity=* + nationality=* + subculture=* all together would be unambiguous but I think culture=* do

Re: [Tagging] Basic philosophy of OSM tagging

Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is the basic philosophy of OSM tagging at the top level? > ... > Is there an FAQ on this? Or has this never been documented I do not have a FAQ on philosophy, only this and that... A few entries about 'how to create/propose/use' tags: http://wiki.openst

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

> Please vote here: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:associatedStreet Is this a formal voting? Is there a date for start and end vote? It looks strange, hidden on a Talk:page without the usual template or RFC or call for votes on the international mailing lists. althio __

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

First point: It is good that several people invent, propose and use various schemes. Second point: At some point, unification of schemes with similar intent would be great. As usage grows, having the same kind of data treated differently is a pain for everyone, mappers, developers, maintainers and

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

Hi Jo/Polyglot and list, On 22 January 2015 at 12:01, Jo wrote: > Which too schemes? I think you'd need to be more specific. 1. key=values;separated;by;semicolon 2. several key:subkey=* > route_ref:De_Lijn=1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8;9;284;285;310;315;316;317;333;334;335;337;351;352;358;370;371;372;373;374

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

> I even find the second example more difficult to visualize. It's just worse > than the first in every respect. >From a mapper's point of view My little +1 for key:subkey=* In free text like this thread, several key:subkey=* may look more heavy and complicated than key=values;separated;by;semico

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

> It is not as formal as a proposal voting. I would like to know how the > community (those who vote) think about associatedStreet relations. I think > that in Germany the majority does not like them (anymore). > I will announce a end date. This end date will be date of announcement of end > of