According to wiki[1] waterway=lock_gate should be used only on nodes. Some
are tagged on
ways[2]. Why wiki considers node as the only valid element where this tag
may be used? Is it
because page is older than mapping rivers also as areas? Routing for boats?
Some other reason?
Is it a good idea to
2015-03-16 10:53 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny :
> According to wiki[1] waterway=lock_gate should be used only on nodes. Some
> are tagged on
> ways[2]. Why wiki considers node as the only valid element where this tag
> may be used? Is it
> because page is older than mapping rivers also as areas? Ro
I'm embarrassed to admit I have tagged 82 of those features as ways here in
Thailand. I guess I simply never thought to look at the Wiki because it
seemed so obvious to me that most lock_gates cross the waterway. These
features are not rendered on any OSM map I've seen so my mistakes never
"came to
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:53:21AM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> According to wiki[1] waterway=lock_gate should be used only on nodes. Some
> are tagged on
> ways[2]. Why wiki considers node as the only valid element where this tag
> may be used? Is it
> because page is older than mapping river
On 16/03/2015 10:37, Richard Z. wrote:
I think it makes sense to tag them as ways, analogous to weirs and dams.
+1
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> For boat navigation purposes this should be crosslinked:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap/Gates
>
Isn't it the other way around? That is, the people who tagged
seagate:category:gate=lock (24 objects) should be making sure to also tag
waterway=lock_gate (15K objects), not vic
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 3:14 AM, Dave Swarthout
wrote:
>
> On the other hand, these features are actually a linear barrier with a
> finite length that extend across a channel or canal. It makes sense to
> allow tagging them as ways as well as nodes.
>
If you're a router following a way, having th
On 16/03/2015 16:35, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
If you're a router following a way, having the node marked makes the job
easier.
Is that not "tagging for an app"?
A similar case is bridges. Here the bridge tag could be on a segment of
the way over the bridge, the way under the bridge, a node on eit
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 08:50:48AM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote:
> >
> >
> > For boat navigation purposes this should be crosslinked:
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap/Gates
> >
>
> Isn't it the other way around? That is, the people who tagged
> seagate:category:gate=lock (24 obje
> Am 17.03.2015 um 13:28 schrieb Richard Z. :
>
> Actually in some cases I am wondering if the OpenSeaMap tags
> are really usefull where other tags exist
+1, this has been a problem since the beginning of OpenSeaMap, their tagging
scheme is somehow a parallel universe, inviting to add red
On 17/03/2015 13:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
their tagging scheme is somehow a parallel universe,
Not parallel, but in some cases complimentary. For 95% of objects there
are no overlaps with standard OSM objects. It is those 5% of cases that
do overlap that people notice & hence assume tha
> We always recommend that all natural and cultural features are tagged as
> per OSM Wiki & only add Seamark tags where there is a non-coincident
> definition and the nautical definition is of special navigational
> importance.
>
> Locks & their gates do not fall into that category & so we do not
>
On 17/03/2015 16:06, Brad Neuhauser wrote:
Is there something I'm missing?
No, you have spotted the fact that (as always!) that the documentation
is unfinished. I had done it on this page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSeaMap/INT-1_Cross_Reference but
I need to add notes/links on th
On 17/03/2015 16:16, Malcolm Herring wrote:
On 17/03/2015 13:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
their tagging scheme is somehow a parallel universe,
Not parallel, but in some cases complimentary. For 95% of objects there
are no overlaps with standard OSM objects. It is those 5% of cases that
do ov
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 04:31:12PM +, Malcolm Herring wrote:
> On 17/03/2015 16:06, Brad Neuhauser wrote:
> >Is there something I'm missing?
>
> No, you have spotted the fact that (as always!) that the documentation is
> unfinished. I had done it on this page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w
On 18/03/2015 11:58, Richard Z. wrote:
so should for example the OpenSeaMap tagging for bridges become
deprecated?
Not deprecated, but considered on a case-by-case basis. It is a question
of whether important navigation information would be deleted if the
seamark tags were removed. In the cas
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Malcolm Herring <
malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Not deprecated, but considered on a case-by-case basis. It is a question
> of whether important navigation information would be deleted if the seamark
> tags were removed. In the case of bridges, the safe a
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:49:26PM +, Malcolm Herring wrote:
> On 18/03/2015 11:58, Richard Z. wrote:
> >so should for example the OpenSeaMap tagging for bridges become
> >deprecated?
>
> Not deprecated, but considered on a case-by-case basis. It is a question of
> whether important navigation
On 19/03/2015 17:41, Richard Z. wrote:
do you have any background info regarding the many
"obstacle" nodes which are present in German waterways?
I don't. I found a key:obstacle page in the Wiki that associates it
OpenSeaMap - I don't know why the authors thought that. Those authors
are unkno
19 matches
Mail list logo