Re: [Tagging] defining service on railway=tram

Hi all, Last month I wrote about defining service=* tag values for railway=tram ways, which were previously not defined and used somewhat varyingly in the wild. Thanks Mateusz for your help refining the definitions! I have now written

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

Typo in link! Correct link is: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/building:soft_storey Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On 11/02/19 11:57, Paul Allen wrote: On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:35, Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:24, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: Many of them are more than just hedges. there are different kind of

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:35, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:24, Paul Allen wrote: > > Many of them are more > than just hedges. > > > there are different kind of hedges, trees may occur within hedges > So far, so good. > > >

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

Le 11.02.19 à 00:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit : > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:48, marc marc wrote: >> if you are in front of a tank, man_made=tank > man_made=storage what value will you use when the tank is made for an industrial process (e. g. oxygenation in a wastewater treatment plant, the

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > & at what level does a hedge become a tree row, & vice versa? :-) > > https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.0839404,153.4133042,3a,75y,78.53h,84.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skH3zHyokMiuFfbFxTGAezQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 >

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 10:26, Paul Allen wrote: > > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:07, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> barrier=hedge >> I would not tag these as tree rows. >> > > Check the shadows. Some of those are hedges. Some of those are hedges > with occasional > trees. And some are

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:24, Paul Allen wrote: > > Many of them are more > than just hedges. there are different kind of hedges, trees may occur within hedges

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - building:soft_storey

Thanks to all who contributed to refine the proposal. I addressed all the concerns raised on the talk page on on the mailing list. I opened the voting phase today on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_featur/building:soft_storey Definition: a type of construction where any one floor

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 00:07, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:02, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > All very neat and planned. Most of what I see around here are much > closer together. Sort of like > > overgrown hedges. Which they might well be. > > > barrier=hedge > I

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 11. Feb 2019, at 01:02, Paul Allen wrote: > > All very neat and planned. Most of what I see around here are much closer > together. Sort of like > overgrown hedges. Which they might well be. barrier=hedge I would not tag these as tree rows. Cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 23:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > some random examples: > All very neat and planned. Most of what I see around here are much closer together. Sort of like overgrown hedges. Which they might well be. But they're very common, so i think it's deliberate, possibly as

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 10. Feb 2019, at 23:10, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > As said before, I could call any two trees a "row", e.g. each pair of trees > on the opposite sides of the road. this is up to the mapper. In architecture, a tree row is seen as a linear space, it structures land in a

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 10. Feb 2019, at 23:10, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > Thus it is more comparable to the addr:interpolation which we use before all > addr:housenumber are mapped individually. Once we have achieved that, the > interpolation line becomes obsolete. I believe this is

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

sent from a phone > On 10. Feb 2019, at 23:10, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > > The tree_row is then unverifiable, as there is no definition where it begins > and where it ends. Seems easy: starts at the first tree (or even tree stump if you like) and ends at the last tree of the row. I would

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 08:48, marc marc wrote: > if you are in front of a tank, man_made=tank > I'd suggest possibly man_made=storage "type"=tank / silo / bin then > after, you can add (sub)tags describing : > - if a cover/roof exist or not > - if its use is storage or an industrial process

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

Le 10.02.19 à 23:27, Warin a écrit : > On 11/02/19 07:31, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >>> On 10. Feb 2019, at 09:45, Markus wrote: >>> >>> According to the wiki, covered=no would signify that the storage tank >>> isn't covered by something else, not that it isn't closed. Therefore >>> my

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 17:10, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > In a related discussion I have heard the argument that, after mapping the > individual trees, "if we > delete the tree_row way, we lose the information that they are part of a tree > row." > > The problem with that argument is that a tree_row

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

On 11/02/19 07:31, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 10. Feb 2019, at 09:45, Markus wrote: According to the wiki, covered=no would signify that the storage tank isn't covered by something else, not that it isn't closed. Therefore my suggestion with open_top=yes (or maybe just

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On 10.02.2019 09:53, Markus wrote: On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 20:41, Paul Allen wrote: [...] I see individual trees and tree rows as alternative ways of dealing with things and plotting individual trees on a tree row seems bizarre (a row of individual trees is obviously a tree row, there's no

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

sent from a phone On 10. Feb 2019, at 13:28, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: >> (tunnel=culvert and man_made=pipeline) > tunnel=culvert is supposed to be used with waterway=*, isn't it? yes, what I meant was either tunnel=culvert with a waterway tag, or man_made=pipeline location=underground.

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

sent from a phone > On 10. Feb 2019, at 09:45, Markus wrote: > > According to the wiki, covered=no would signify that the storage tank > isn't covered by something else, not that it isn't closed. Therefore > my suggestion with open_top=yes (or maybe just open=yes). I would have imagined a

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 15:28:00 +0300 Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > > > пн, 4 февр. 2019 г. в 02:55, Martin Koppenhoefer > > > >: > > there is established tagging for buried man made waterways > > (tunnel=culvert and man_made=pipeline) > > tunnel=culvert is supposed to be used with

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

Le 10.02.19 à 14:34, s8evq a écrit : > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 14:58:42 +1100, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 03/02/19 13:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 12:07, marc marc >> > wrote: >>> >>> I think it would be better to

Re: [Tagging] Micronations

There is something really wrong going on around that bogus micronation: more than half of Harmony Way (from the crossing with Allens Lane to the one with Mont Vernon Avenue) has disappeared, leaving many other ways isolated (e.g. Rose Avenue and Walnut Hills Drive). Beside, the f..ing thing is

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Short summary of what we have ended up with so far. - *Variant #1* Keep both "drain" and "ditch" tags but update their definitions to make a clear cut between the meanings: drain - Small artificial free flow waterways usually lined with concrete or > similar used for carrying away

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 14:58:42 +1100, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/02/19 13:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 12:07, marc marc > > wrote: > > > > I think it would be better to continue the current club=scout > >

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

> > пн, 4 февр. 2019 г. в 02:55, Martin Koppenhoefer >: > there is established tagging for buried man made waterways (tunnel=culvert > and man_made=pipeline) tunnel=culvert is supposed to be used with waterway=*, isn't it? Cheers, Eugene пн, 4 февр. 2019 г. в 02:55, Martin Koppenhoefer : > >

Re: [Tagging] tree rows vs individual trees

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 20:41, Paul Allen wrote: > > [...] I see individual trees > and tree rows as alternative ways of dealing with things and plotting > individual trees on a > tree row seems bizarre (a row of individual trees is obviously a tree row, > there's no need to > map both at the

Re: [Tagging] man_made=storage_tank for open containers?

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 at 23:44, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Perhaps use the tag covered=no to signify an uncovered storage tank? According to the wiki, covered=no would signify that the storage tank isn't covered by something else, not that it isn't closed. Therefore my suggestion with