Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] National Forest trail numbering

[Alan Mintz]

At 2010-08-15 20:05, Samat K Jain wrote:

On Sunday, August 15, 2010 01:18:37 pm, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I can't speak for other states, but in Florida's Ocala National Forest
> the trails, at least the ones you can drive on, are marked with
> rectangular brown highway shields, so ref seems appropriate. But you
> probably shouldn't leave out all prefixes - for example 43 is a
> tertiary road, and with simply ref=43 it wouldn't be clear that it's a
> forest road: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=29.41438&lon=-81.68936&zoom=15&layers=M

> I'd find out what abbreviation is most common (NFS? NFD? FS? FR?) and
> use it as a prefix.

Just to be clear, I'm talking about hiking trails. Forest roads in the 
area have already been uploaded with the TIGER import (at least the ones I 
know of).


On the hiking trails themselves, labeling is very inconsistent. Typically 
they're labeled with common names (e.g.. Three Rivers Trail No. 44), but 
occasionally they're labeled with a 'T' prefix (e.g. T5004). Most forest 
service maps just list the number, e.g. 44, or 5004.



Based on various USFS docs, for roads in the USFS system I'm using:

For Forest Highways (generally major paved roads): ref=FH nn (e.g. 
name=Angeles Crest Highway + ref=FH 61).
For Forest Roads/Routes/Truck Trails: ref=FR yDxx (e.g. name=Upper Monroe 
Road + ref=FR 2N16)

For Forest Trails: ref=FT yDxx (e.g. name=Heaton Flat Trail + ref=FT 8W16)

--
Alan Mintz 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] National Forest trail numbering

[Samat K Jain]

On Monday, August 16, 2010 01:03:17 am, Alan Mintz wrote:
> For Forest Highways (generally major paved roads): ref=FH nn (e.g. 
> name=Angeles Crest Highway + ref=FH 61).
> For Forest Roads/Routes/Truck Trails: ref=FR yDxx (e.g. name=Upper Monroe 
> Road + ref=FR 2N16)
> For Forest Trails: ref=FT yDxx (e.g. name=Heaton Flat Trail + ref=FT 8W16)

What are 'y' and 'D' for forest roads and trails?

-- 
Samat K Jain  | GPG: 0x4A456FBA

Sometimes even to live is an act of courage.
-- Seneca (378)


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] National Forest trail numbering

[Alan Mintz]

At 2010-08-16 00:24, Samat K Jain wrote:

On Monday, August 16, 2010 01:03:17 am, Alan Mintz wrote:
> For Forest Highways (generally major paved roads): ref=FH nn (e.g.
> name=Angeles Crest Highway + ref=FH 61).
> For Forest Roads/Routes/Truck Trails: ref=FR yDxx (e.g. name=Upper Monroe
> Road + ref=FR 2N16)
> For Forest Trails: ref=FT yDxx (e.g. name=Heaton Flat Trail + ref=FT 8W16)

What are 'y' and 'D' for forest roads and trails?


In southern California at least, USFSroads are numbered with yDxx, where yD 
is the PLSS[0] township in which the north (?) end of the road lies and xx 
is a serial number. Trails are numbered xDyy, where xD is the PLSS range in 
which the trailhead is found and yy is a serial number.


[0]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Land_Survey_System

--
Alan Mintz 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Vacant shop tagging...

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Craig Wallace :
> On 15/08/2010 22:30, John Smith wrote:
>> I'm not sure this is the best way to do things, what do others think?
> If its vacant, then its not a shop, so shouldn't be tagged as such.


IMHO a shop is a shop because it is officially commercial space (and
not residential), it has a separate entrance (usually from the
street), it has appropriate windows, etc. Of course there might be
exceptions, but I think you get it.


> Otherwise it will show up on applications / renderers that show anything
> tagged as shop=* with a shop icon.


that might be the problem of these applications but they could filter
vacant if they don't like it.


> ie use a separate namespace, so tag it something like disused:shop=yes
> Then it can be easily ignored by applications that just want to show
> currently existing shops, or rendered differently etc.


that's a good idea as well, and very versatile.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Vacant shop tagging...

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Nathan Edgars II :

> Perhaps building=disused (not shop because it's not a shop when it's
> empty, and disused by analogy with railroads)?


-1, because the shop is usually a small fraction of the building, and
especially for vacant shops I wouldn't expect the whole building to be
disused.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Steve Bennett :
> It doesn't really fit with my understanding of "bicycle=designated". I
> understand that tag as meaning "yes, bicycles are definitely permitted
> here, and there is signage or legislation to prove it".


actually it was intended to say: this is a piece of way dedicated
explicitly to bicycles (and probably to other means of transport as
well). So I think that it fits for sharrows.


> With very few
> exceptions, bicycles are allowed on all roads, so any
> "highway=tertiary, bicycle=designated" seems a misfit.


+1, because the roads are not specially dedicated to bicycles.


> You also open
> up the question, shouldn't it be "bicycle=designated; cycleway=lane"
> as well?


that is true but implicit, so no need to tag it explicitly.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Dave F.]

 On 10/08/2010 11:54, Mike N. wrote:
There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2 
lanes + center turn + sharrows.


http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html

 What is the best way to tag these - they were  discussed briefly in 
the recent "shoulder, etc" thread, but I can't find any consensus.   I 
found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a 
solution as any. Comments?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



Hi

OK, can I get some clarification here please?

A sharrow does not describe what type of cycleway it is, or whereabouts 
it is, but purely some painted lines on the road in the form a chevron 
arrows as a sign.


Is this correct?

If so, I personally wouldn't bother, but if you feel the need to, please 
don't use it to try & fudge a description of a cycleway which already 
has far to convoluted tagging system.


Cheers
Dave F.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Anthony]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Dave F.  wrote:
> OK, can I get some clarification here please?
>
> A sharrow does not describe what type of cycleway it is, or whereabouts it
> is, but purely some painted lines on the road in the form a chevron arrows
> as a sign.

My understanding is that it's an advisory marking which tells
bicyclists the safest part of the road for them to travel on, be it
the left side of the right lane, the right side of the right lane, the
right side of the second-to-right lane (for instance if there is a
turning lane coming up), etc.

As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed.

Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

Hi everybody,

as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.

Therefore I asked at the talk page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request

I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few 
features and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to 
move them out of the list back to the proposed features.

I create a template to label them
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Non_proposed_features

Hope nobody is angry, of course everybody can tag as he like but IMHO 
the feature list needs some kind of soft moderation:

1. it is for the most people 'the reference' esp. newbies
2. the community should have the right to talk about new ideas
3. Proposals seem to be the only way to avoid conflicts and get good 
models that work fine worldwide.


Of course the proposal process is far away from beeing perfect, looks a 
little bit like master control, makes it ardous to introduce new 
features. But on the other hand we get a good overview whats new, have 
time to think about ideas and involve the community in a creative way 
instead of showing something final.


Especially complete new Keys like OFFICE=* or EMERGENCY=* should be 
discussed to show up where their items start and end and if there might 
be better solutions.


So what do you think?


regards
Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Vincent Pottier]

On 16/08/2010 16:31, Matthias Meißer wrote:

Hi everybody,

as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.

Therefore I asked at the talk page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request

I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few 
features and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to 
move them out of the list back to the proposed features.

I create a template to label them
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Non_proposed_features 



Hope nobody is angry, of course everybody can tag as he like but IMHO 
the feature list needs some kind of soft moderation:

1. it is for the most people 'the reference' esp. newbies
2. the community should have the right to talk about new ideas
3. Proposals seem to be the only way to avoid conflicts and get good 
models that work fine worldwide.


Of course the proposal process is far away from beeing perfect, looks 
a little bit like master control, makes it ardous to introduce new 
features. But on the other hand we get a good overview whats new, have 
time to think about ideas and involve the community in a creative way 
instead of showing something final.


Especially complete new Keys like OFFICE=* or EMERGENCY=* should be 
discussed to show up where their items start and end and if there 
might be better solutions.


So what do you think?

+1 !



regards
Matthias

--
FrViPofm

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Sam Vekemans]

cool,
in this system. do you recommend the creation of a wiki page for each
tag that is used and each tag that is thought of?


if so, thats great!


if not, thats unfortunate, as every tag is important to know its
purpose  just because the expert mappers know most of the tags off
by heart, doesnt mean that a newbie does.

a simple wiki page with the basic tag template, should be encouraged.


re-directs, without clearly explaining why this redirect was done,
does not help the newbies.


explaining on the wiki page exactly why the tag is not approved, is
far better than not telling the newbie why . and causing them to
want to ask on the mailing list and irc (many times over).


there are many who disagree with the above. . alas, this is
openstreetmap :)  lol



cheers,
sam

On 8/16/10, Matthias Meißer  wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
> I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.
>
> Therefore I asked at the talk page
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request
>
> I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few
> features and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to
> move them out of the list back to the proposed features.
> I create a template to label them
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Non_proposed_features
>
> Hope nobody is angry, of course everybody can tag as he like but IMHO
> the feature list needs some kind of soft moderation:
> 1. it is for the most people 'the reference' esp. newbies
> 2. the community should have the right to talk about new ideas
> 3. Proposals seem to be the only way to avoid conflicts and get good
> models that work fine worldwide.
>
> Of course the proposal process is far away from beeing perfect, looks a
> little bit like master control, makes it ardous to introduce new
> features. But on the other hand we get a good overview whats new, have
> time to think about ideas and involve the community in a creative way
> instead of showing something final.
>
> Especially complete new Keys like OFFICE=* or EMERGENCY=* should be
> discussed to show up where their items start and end and if there might
> be better solutions.
>
> So what do you think?
>
>
> regards
> Matthias
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/
http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
IRC: irc://irc.oftc.net #osm-ca Canadian OSM channel (an open chat room)
@Acrosscanadatrails

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

Well, this idea is not to telling you do's and dont's, it's just to 
manage ideas.


IMHO the current process lacks a few details that are mentioned (and can 
be discussed by everyone here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request

As some of you might noted with the weekly newsletter the things will 
become better. And I'm pretty sure, that creating a proposal will be 
more enjoyfull if there are more people that pay attention on it (before 
vote).


Is there any kind of guardian group or management team for the proposal 
process? (No Masters, just janitors)


I think the proposed page should be promoted as garage or incubator and 
let the people understand that it is on all to expend and finalise the 
single ideas.


I would like to move the corresponding tags back to /Proposal so 
everybody that searches can find them. I'm not sure that to do with 
emergency, that looks well but seem to reintroduce some objects (e.g. 
HIGHWAY=EMERGENCY_ACCESS_POINT). Or even with OFFICE=*, any ideas?


Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

Am 16. August 2010 16:31 schrieb Matthias Meißer :
> I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few features
> and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to move them out of
> the list back to the proposed features.


this might not in all cases be justified. Actually it isn't helpful if
established features are taken back to proposed status for formal
criteria.


>... but IMHO the
> feature list needs some kind of soft moderation:


which is already executed by the comunity. In unclear cases the
disputed features will usually pop up on the mailing lists for further
discussion.


> 1. it is for the most people 'the reference' esp. newbies
> 2. the community should have the right to talk about new ideas


+1


> 3. Proposals seem to be the only way to avoid conflicts and get good models
> that work fine worldwide.


I'm not so sure about this. I think many features just get somehow
into the system and get documented in the wiki later when they are
already widely in use.


> Especially complete new Keys like OFFICE=* or EMERGENCY=* should be
> discussed to show up where their items start and end and if there might be
> better solutions.


I think this is currently in discussion on the lists for emergency.
Office was already discussed quite a bit in the past months. AFAIK it
is not disputed.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Anthony :
> As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed.

-
As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any
non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden?

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

Well I'm not talking about undoing very common features but about a few 
new ones that seemed to be a bad design (even if I like the idea to get 
a feature e.g. for OFFICE=*). For fine tuning is the /Proposed list, right?


Yes soft moderation by the community but therefore the community needs 
some central space and some guidelines. You already see the lack of 
voters, just cause it's to decentral communication atm. How should 
anybody/a newbie new that there are still design problems with feature 
XYZ? :)


Later documentation is ok cause they approved their usage already. But 
introducing new ideas using the map features list is not a good idea in 
my opinion. Thats why nobody knows that there are new features, nobody 
talked about it, nobody made a review :(


Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:03 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
> 2010/8/16 Anthony :
>> As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed.
>
> -
> As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any
> non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden?

Yes, but motorists often need reminding (that they're allowed on the
road *and* that they don't have to ride in the gutter). Hence sharrows
and 'share the road' signs.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

Am 16. August 2010 18:09 schrieb Matthias Meißer :
> central space and some guidelines. You already see the lack of voters, just
> cause it's to decentral communication atm.


RFC and voting start are announced on talk-list and often on some
local lists as well. I fear that the lack of voting contribution is
due to few interest. Not even a vote on the definition of our main tag
(highway) let to more than 130 votes  (and not so few voters wrote
stuff like "abstain" "veto" "Nggh" "I just got out and
map instead of wasting time wikifidling or voting on pointless things"
etc.)

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Proposal: Energy generator power types

[Tom Chance]

Hello,

I am tagging low carbon / renewable energy generators in London, and have
made a proposal to improve the granularity of the schema:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/power_type

Basically I have deprecated "power_type=photovoltaic" and
"power_type=solar-thermal", which combine two bits of information (source of
energy, and type of energy generated). This also allows for adequate tagging
of generators that produce more than one type of energy from a single
source, such as a gas-fired combine heat and power plant.

I have downloaded a complete dump via XAPI of all photovoltaic and
solar-thermal panels; there aren't too many to correct if this proposal is
accepted.

Please comment on the proposal.

Regards,
Tom Chance


-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[John Smith]

2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer :
> opinion. Thats why nobody knows that there are new features, nobody talked
> about it, nobody made a review :(

But they do get talked about, take for example this thread where
someone added a shop that no one seems to agree with:

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2010-August/003504.html

Someone will clean up this shortly after enough time has passed.

As for emergency, there was A LOT of discussion on both the tagging
list and the main talk list, people generally notice.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

But OSM is more than just the major lists (see people like me that sign 
on/off lists to avoid to much mails). As I said it would be a good idea 
to feature our proposal incubator a little bit more ;) I'm pretty sure 
if the users have no Push but a Pop media (e.g. the weekly newsletters) 
they would be interested in co-designing some new features. I guess it's 
a little bit a problem between generations (ML vs. RSS/Forums/...).


I already asked if we should design a template to make sure that people 
leaf a useful comment?


regards
Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[John Smith]

2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer :
> But OSM is more than just the major lists (see people like me that sign
> on/off lists to avoid to much mails). As I said it would be a good idea to
> feature our proposal incubator a little bit more ;) I'm pretty sure if the
> users have no Push but a Pop media (e.g. the weekly newsletters) they would
> be interested in co-designing some new features. I guess it's a little bit a
> problem between generations (ML vs. RSS/Forums/...).

The problem with using the wiki is it is a very poor medium to try and
communicate complex topics...

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Energy generator power types

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Tom Chance :
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/power_type
>
> Basically I have deprecated "power_type=photovoltaic" and
> "power_type=solar-thermal", which combine two bits of information (source of
> energy, and type of energy generated). This also allows for adequate tagging
> of generators that produce more than one type of energy from a single
> source, such as a gas-fired combine heat and power plant.


I think that's a good idea to separate source and type. It isn't
currently reflected on the actual tagging according to tagwatch
(http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Europe/En/keystats_power_source.html
photovoltaic 266, solar 32) but it is logical and given that tagging
these details is still at the beginning I think it's a good idea to
clean this up now.

thanks for your work (and probably those of others engaged in this field in OSM)

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Andreas Labres]

 Proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dancing_school

/al

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 05:15, Andreas Labres  wrote:
>  Proposal:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dancing_school

I'm wondering if a sub-tag would be more useful, eg

amenity=school
school=dance

That way you could group other similar schools, like martial arts,
using school=* would also allow you to better tag existing schools, eg
primary/middle/secondary/tertiary

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Emilie Laffray]

On 16 August 2010 20:22, John Smith  wrote:

> On 17 August 2010 05:15, Andreas Labres  wrote:
> >  Proposal:
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dancing_school
>
> I'm wondering if a sub-tag would be more useful, eg
>
> amenity=school
> school=dance
>
> That way you could group other similar schools, like martial arts,
> using school=* would also allow you to better tag existing schools, eg
> primary/middle/secondary/tertiary
>
>
I think it is a good way to do this. In france we are using amenity=school
and then using school:fr=lycee for example to give some extra precision
while keeping the rendering and the information intact. It allows the
international use too.

Emilie Laffray
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

Well ok might be possbile but for that reason there are other channels 
e.g. forums, MLs that have their own pros and cons.


So nobody really has a problem with refactoring /Proposed, right? If so 
it would be nice if you review the upcoming changes. But this will take 
time cause I'm involved in other projects, too.


good night
Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Energy generator power types

[André Riedel]

2010/8/16 Tom Chance :
> Basically I have deprecated "power_type=photovoltaic" and
> "power_type=solar-thermal", which combine two bits of information (source of
> energy, and type of energy generated). This also allows for adequate tagging
> of generators that produce more than one type of energy from a single
> source, such as a gas-fired combine heat and power plant.

The difference between photovoltaic and solar-thermal isn't the type
of produced energy. In both cases it is electric energy, but via
different physical ways.

photovoltaic - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaic_system
solar-thermal - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_tower
... - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower
... - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_tower_%28downdraft%29

But it would be good to propose a tag for heat plants or smaller block
heating stations.

André

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[John Smith]

2010/8/17 Matthias Meißer :
> Well ok might be possbile but for that reason there are other channels e.g.
> forums, MLs that have their own pros and cons.

There is software that can show mailing list posts in the same way as
forums, the forums are only used by a minority of people, most people
seem to use the mailing lists.

> So nobody really has a problem with refactoring /Proposed, right? If so it
> would be nice if you review the upcoming changes. But this will take time
> cause I'm involved in other projects, too.

You seemed to have ignored the existing comments, most seemed
indifferent to the changes or disagreed.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Cartinus]

On Monday 16 August 2010 22:07:07 Matthias Meißer wrote:
> So nobody really has a problem with refactoring /Proposed, right?

Yes, many people will have a problem with that. The people actually voting on 
the wiki are a very small group. Pushing tags already documented and in use 
back into the proposal process will upset a significant number of people.

People subscribing to this mailinglist (and particularly actively contributing 
to) this mailing list are a minority of the mappers too. Tagging discussions 
got moved from the talk list to this list because most people didn't want to 
see the long winded discussions.

Concluding less than six hours after your initial post to this mailinglist 
that nobody has a problem with what you propose is: youthfull exuberance ? 
impatience ? It is certainly is not the way to go.


-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

Sry @all, was my mistake, what I tried to say is that I will improve the 
/proposed page (and only this one). So restyling, splitting text but 
nothing on the features itself, is this ok?


Yes you can read MLs in a forum or RSS like way, but mostly you have to 
be member of the mailinglist to participate. Indeed I believe that the 
mass doesn't listen to ML, forums, or anything else ;) But I doesn't 
want to talk about this communication channel thing to much


Well please pay attention that the whole discussion doesn't get to 
emotional. Think about I'm new to this list and doesn't want to tell you 
how the things work...I just want to show you show you my suggestion and 
asking you for advice.
I participate like the most of us cause I try to improve OSM and not to 
hurt somebody ;)


regards
Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Anthony]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:03 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
> 2010/8/16 Anthony :
>> As a side-effect, it also makes it explicit that bicycles are allowed.
>
> -
> As an European I am interested in this: aren't they allowed on any
> non-highway/freeway/interstate unless explicitly forbidden?

Sure.  They're implicitly allowed already.  But this does make it explicit.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:27:30 -0400, Anthony wrote:

> But it's not effectively the same thing.  If it were, sharrows wouldn't
> have ever been invented.

Not true, the old-style "BIKE ROUTE" signs no longer appear in the 
current MUTCD (thus are being phased out nationwide).  Sharrows and 
bicycle guidance signs giving destinations of routes replace the old 
style signs.  Otherwise, there is no difference between the old Bike 
Route signs and the new pavement and signage markings.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:01:09 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote:

>>He wasn’t saying that bicycle=designated is always a sharrow, but that a
>>sharrow is effectively the same thing as a sign saying “bike route”.
>>They’re both ways of marking something as a designated route for
>>bicycles.
> 
> I don't agree with this. A single isolated road could have a sharrow,
> but wouldn't be part of a "route".
> 
>> Now, Steve (and Mike), what's wrong (if anything) with
>> bicycle=designated; sharrow=yes?
> 
> It doesn't really fit with my understanding of "bicycle=designated". I
> understand that tag as meaning "yes, bicycles are definitely permitted
> here, and there is signage or legislation to prove it".

It means it's a designated route.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[edodd]

> Hi everybody,
>
> as I noted in my diary, the forums,...
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/11477
> I would like to improve the features page and other wiki pages around.
>
> Therefore I asked at the talk page
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features#Cleanup_Request
>
> I checked the current german map feature list and noticed a lot few
> features and key that are new but non proposed. I beg the authors to
> move them out of the list back to the proposed features.
> I create a template to label them
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Non_proposed_features
>
> Hope nobody is angry, of course everybody can tag as he like but IMHO
> the feature list needs some kind of soft moderation:
> 1. it is for the most people 'the reference' esp. newbies
> 2. the community should have the right to talk about new ideas
> 3. Proposals seem to be the only way to avoid conflicts and get good
> models that work fine worldwide.
>
> Of course the proposal process is far away from beeing perfect, looks a
> little bit like master control, makes it ardous to introduce new
>

that is the complete problem, the proposal process is imperfect and occurs
in two places, although only the wiki is noted as the place "on the wiki"
before you decide to move everything around on the wiki
1. rewrite the proposals process closer to reality and get agreement
2. decide with others, not by yourself what is approved and not approved
3. long ago a committee was suggested to get this sort of thing organised
and howled down by the groups who like free tagging and free
documentation.
Those who liked consensus were annoyed by the incredibly small number of
wiki voters who approved and disapproved tags


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Richard Welty]

 On 8/16/10 3:33 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote:



On 16 August 2010 20:22, John Smith > wrote:


On 17 August 2010 05:15, Andreas Labres mailto:l...@lab.at>> wrote:
>  Proposal:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dancing_school

I'm wondering if a sub-tag would be more useful, eg

amenity=school
school=dance

That way you could group other similar schools, like martial arts,
using school=* would also allow you to better tag existing schools, eg
primary/middle/secondary/tertiary


I think it is a good way to do this. In france we are using 
amenity=school and then using school:fr=lycee for example to give some 
extra precision while keeping the rendering and the information 
intact. It allows the international use too.

i like this too. in the US, we could then do this:

amenity=school
school=middle

for a middle school, for example. places where schools are organized 
differently

would just use the appropriate local terms. school=* might end up with a big
list of tags, but that's ok. examples:

school=driving
school=equestrian
school:us=high/middle/grade (tiers of US public schools)
school=truck_driving

richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 07:41, Richard Welty  wrote:
> amenity=school
> school=middle

I know I brought up middle schools, but are they deemed a type of
secondary school?

The reason I ask, it might be more useful to tag which grades, for
example in Australia there are central schools which cover k-10 or
k-12 and they primary+secondary at the same location...

> school=truck_driving

school=driving
driving:type=[car|truck|bike]

?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 Emilie Laffray :
> On 16 August 2010 20:22, John Smith  wrote:
>> On 17 August 2010 05:15, Andreas Labres  wrote:
>> >  Proposal:
>> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dancing_school


nice


>> I'm wondering if a sub-tag would be more useful, eg
>>
>> amenity=school
>> school=dance


-1, IMHO no. A dancing school, boxing school, ski school, etc. are
IMHO not in the same category than general-education schools. They
might be classified in one category, but that is IMHO not school.


>> That way you could group other similar schools, like martial arts,


are they similar, martial arts schools and highschools?

>> using school=* would also allow you to better tag existing schools, eg
>> primary/middle/secondary/tertiary


+1

> In france we are using amenity=school
> and then using school:fr=lycee for example to give some extra precision
> while keeping the rendering and the information intact. It allows the
> international use too.

+1, that's fine

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 John Smith :
>> school=truck_driving
>
> school=driving
> driving:type=[car|truck|bike]


what about school=dolphins for a school of dolphins? Or hospital=tree
nursery? IMHO we shouldn't create our categories/keys only based on
language which might sometimes be ambiguous or misleading.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 07:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> -1, IMHO no. A dancing school, boxing school, ski school, etc. are
> IMHO not in the same category than general-education schools. They
> might be classified in one category, but that is IMHO not school.

That's what the sub tag is for, a school is where you gain knowledge
or experience in what is being taught, so as long as the sub-tag
distinguishes things sufficiently, and this is where primary/secondary
or even just school=general would come in, there should be no issue.

> are they similar, martial arts schools and highschools?

You attend to be taught don't you?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 08:03, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> what about school=dolphins for a school of dolphins? Or hospital=tree
> nursery? IMHO we shouldn't create our categories/keys only based on
> language which might sometimes be ambiguous or misleading.

So far you seem to be giving silly examples, all the school examples I
gave were for people wanting, or forced to, to learn or gain
experience...

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging for streets with sharrows?

[Paul Johnson]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:09:43 +0100, Dave F. wrote:

> On 10/08/2010 11:54, Mike N. wrote:
>> There are a number of local streets being converted from 4-lane to 2
>> lanes + center turn + sharrows.
>>
>> http://bikehugger.com/2006/12/whats-a-sharrow.html
>>
>>  What is the best way to tag these - they were  discussed briefly in
>> the recent "shoulder, etc" thread, but I can't find any consensus.   I
>> found the proposed cycleway=shared_lane , which seems to be as good a
>> solution as any. Comments?
>>
>> ___ Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
> Hi
> 
> OK, can I get some clarification here please?
> 
> A sharrow does not describe what type of cycleway it is, or whereabouts
> it is, but purely some painted lines on the road in the form a chevron
> arrows as a sign.
> 
> Is this correct?

Incorrect.  A sharrow is used on a designated bicycle route to indicate 
what part of a shared lane bicyclists should use (ideally the center of 
the chevrons) and to remind motorists that they're driving on a bicycle 
route.  It doesn't indicate what network (LCN/RCN/ICN/NCN), just that the 
lane is one on a designated bicycle route where bicycles frequently use 
that lane.

Downtown Portland has plans on putting these markings on all lanes of 
most downtown streets soon.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Richard Welty]

 On 8/16/10 6:06 PM, John Smith wrote:

On 17 August 2010 08:03, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

what about school=dolphins for a school of dolphins? Or hospital=tree
nursery? IMHO we shouldn't create our categories/keys only based on
language which might sometimes be ambiguous or misleading.

So far you seem to be giving silly examples, all the school examples I
gave were for people wanting, or forced to, to learn or gain
experience...


yes, really, that's more ridicule than an argument, Martin. not at all
up to your usual high standard.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Ulf Lamping]

Am 17.08.2010 00:04, schrieb John Smith:

On 17 August 2010 07:57, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

-1, IMHO no. A dancing school, boxing school, ski school, etc. are
IMHO not in the same category than general-education schools. They
might be classified in one category, but that is IMHO not school.


That's what the sub tag is for, a school is where you gain knowledge
or experience in what is being taught, so as long as the sub-tag
distinguishes things sufficiently, and this is where primary/secondary
or even just school=general would come in, there should be no issue.


There has been a long discussion about this on talk-de some time ago.

Outcome was to not tag "special schools" with amenity=school.


If a renderer wants to differentiate between a general purpose school 
and a ski school (and I really think renderers want to do that), it has 
to know all possible school=xy subtags that's probably out there.


What is the benefit to put this all under amenity=school - and then have 
a tag no renderer actually can use, because it is far too generic?


Regards, ULFL

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 08:24, Ulf Lamping  wrote:
> What is the benefit to put this all under amenity=school - and then have a
> tag no renderer actually can use, because it is far too generic?

The benefit is an existing tag that isn't very specific, so we could
imply the existing tag to be amenity=school, school=general if there
is no school=* tag.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Ulf Lamping]

Am 17.08.2010 00:31, schrieb John Smith:

On 17 August 2010 08:24, Ulf Lamping  wrote:

What is the benefit to put this all under amenity=school - and then have a
tag no renderer actually can use, because it is far too generic?


The benefit is an existing tag that isn't very specific, so we could
imply the existing tag to be amenity=school, school=general if there
is no school=* tag.


That's not a benefit, that's only one of the possible definitions.

Implying a specific meaning in the absence of a tag is usually asking 
for trouble. People tend to forget tags while not knowing "your" 
implication.


Regards, ULFL

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/17 John Smith :
> On 17 August 2010 08:24, Ulf Lamping  wrote:
>> What is the benefit to put this all under amenity=school - and then have a
>> tag no renderer actually can use, because it is far too generic?
>
> The benefit is an existing tag that isn't very specific, so we could
> imply the existing tag to be amenity=school, school=general if there
> is no school=* tag.


it doesn't change the good point Ulf made: a potential data consumer
would have to know all school types for a pleasant results. Currently
most schools are tagged with amenity=school and maybe a name. This is
sufficient for many maps. If we now start to put all kind of special
interest schools, sports facilities and other in this category, it
will get useless. Renderers would have to know all local types of
general schools that will get entered in the subtag school (because it
will not remain general and because it is a good idea to tag
school=fr:lycee, de:Gymnasium, it:liceo, highschool, etc.). Or they
will only evaluate one tag (amenity=school) because they do this for
years, and they will start to display rubbish.

I'm generally in favour of subtagging, where it is adequat. I just
don't see the benefit here and worse, I feel it would harm. In the
case of schools I think there are already enough different types of
general-education schools to differentiate. If you make a map of
schools you will in most cases don't want the boxing schools in.

Another hint might be to see how others handle this. If you look at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_schools_by_country
there is not the faintest hint to other than general education
schools. No word about driving schools or dancing schools. They are
very different. Really. Btw: the OSM Wiki refers to Wikipedia's
definition of school.

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Energy generator power types

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/16 André Riedel :
> But it would be good to propose a tag for heat plants or smaller block
> heating stations.


it is there. In the wiki.

Cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 08:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> it doesn't change the good point Ulf made: a potential data consumer
> would have to know all school types for a pleasant results. Currently

That's actually a reason to sub-tag, so they can show a generic icon
instead of needing to constantly update their rendering style sheet
for a new amenity added every other day.

> most schools are tagged with amenity=school and maybe a name. This is
> sufficient for many maps. If we now start to put all kind of special
> interest schools, sports facilities and other in this category, it
> will get useless. Renderers would have to know all local types of
> general schools that will get entered in the subtag school (because it
> will not remain general and because it is a good idea to tag
> school=fr:lycee, de:Gymnasium, it:liceo, highschool, etc.). Or they
> will only evaluate one tag (amenity=school) because they do this for
> years, and they will start to display rubbish.

You seem to be trying to convince me that subtagging is a good idea
and others are already doing it anyway.

> I'm generally in favour of subtagging, where it is adequat. I just
> don't see the benefit here and worse, I feel it would harm. In the
> case of schools I think there are already enough different types of
> general-education schools to differentiate. If you make a map of
> schools you will in most cases don't want the boxing schools in.

You haven't really shown a bad harm, schools will continue to render
as is, these other types of schools are also for learning, so where is
the problem?

> Another hint might be to see how others handle this. If you look at wikipedia:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_schools_by_country
> there is not the faintest hint to other than general education
> schools. No word about driving schools or dancing schools. They are
> very different. Really. Btw: the OSM Wiki refers to Wikipedia's
> definition of school.

Wikipedia is a good starting point for research, but no one usually
uses them as a primary source.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/8/17 John Smith :
> On 17 August 2010 08:53, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> it doesn't change the good point Ulf made: a potential data consumer
>> would have to know all school types for a pleasant results. Currently
>
> That's actually a reason to sub-tag, so they can show a generic icon
> instead of needing to constantly update their rendering style sheet
> for a new amenity added every other day.


The point was (maybe my message was too long to get this clear) that
the same generic icon for schools which do general education in the
morning and maybe afternoon to kids AND the same time for all other
places that educate all kind of people at all times in all kind of
special interests like dancing, driving, swimming, cooking, boxing,
playing chess, knitting, sex, etc. is IMHO a bad idea.

> You seem to be trying to convince me that subtagging is a good idea
> and others are already doing it anyway.


yes, the ones that said they were doing it did it the way I promote
it: for "real" schools.

> You haven't really shown a bad harm, schools will continue to render
> as is, these other types of schools are also for learning, so where is
> the problem?


too generic. Schools will not be distinguishable any more.


>> very different. Really. Btw: the OSM Wiki refers to Wikipedia's
>> definition of school.
>
> Wikipedia is a good starting point for research, but no one usually
> uses them as a primary source.


Well OSM did. The definition of the wiki says in the first line: see
wikipedia and a link to:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool

cheers,
Martin

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 09:20, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> The point was (maybe my message was too long to get this clear) that
> the same generic icon for schools which do general education in the
> morning and maybe afternoon to kids AND the same time for all other
> places that educate all kind of people at all times in all kind of
> special interests like dancing, driving, swimming, cooking, boxing,
> playing chess, knitting, sex, etc. is IMHO a bad idea.

Ok, so don't use amenity=school, but do you agree that maybe these
other schools could be still tagged as school=* instead of
amenity=dance_school, amenity=driving_school etc?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Richard Welty]

 On 8/16/10 7:23 PM, John Smith wrote:

On 17 August 2010 09:20, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

The point was (maybe my message was too long to get this clear) that
the same generic icon for schools which do general education in the
morning and maybe afternoon to kids AND the same time for all other
places that educate all kind of people at all times in all kind of
special interests like dancing, driving, swimming, cooking, boxing,
playing chess, knitting, sex, etc. is IMHO a bad idea.

Ok, so don't use amenity=school, but do you agree that maybe these
other schools could be still tagged as school=* instead of
amenity=dance_school, amenity=driving_school etc?


right,

amenity=special_school

or something on that order, and then subtag with school=

i don't object to splitting that way, but there's no good reason
to further pollute amenity when we can subtag with school=

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 09:29, Richard Welty  wrote:
> amenity=special_school
>
> or something on that order, and then subtag with school=
>
> i don't object to splitting that way, but there's no good reason
> to further pollute amenity when we can subtag with school=

Do we even need an amenity tag?

After all we don't tag shops as amenity=shop, shop=*...

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Andreas Labres]

 On 17.08.10 01:29, Richard Welty wrote:
> amenity=special_school
> or something on that order, and then subtag with school=

I can't see any benefit subsuming those "...schools that are no schools" under
one tag. They all need special icons, there is no generic icon for these.

One more thing, a dancing school has more of a leisure time amusement, sometimes
of practicing good behaviour, than of lerning (the steps).

/al

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] tagging farmers markets?

[Richard Welty]

 i don't see an obvious tag in the system.

i'm not talking about shop=farm, where the shop is
physically located at the farm, but about places where
one or more producers come together to sell. some are
intermittant (and would need schedule tags), but others
are somewhat permanent.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Richard Welty]

 On 8/16/10 8:39 PM, Andreas Labres wrote:

  On 17.08.10 01:29, Richard Welty wrote:

amenity=special_school
or something on that order, and then subtag with school=

I can't see any benefit subsuming those "...schools that are no schools" under
one tag. They all need special icons, there is no generic icon for these.

One more thing, a dancing school has more of a leisure time amusement, sometimes
of practicing good behaviour, than of lerning (the steps).

there are dancing schools and there are dancing schools, my daughter
has gone to both. it's not a good idea to generalize something like this.

richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dancing school

[Andreas Labres]

 On 17.08.10 02:46, Richard Welty wrote:
> there are dancing schools and there are dancing schools

Well, maybe we need a subtag... ;)

/al

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Michael Barabanov]

Hi,

How would one tag a turn restriction (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active say
6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be  sufficient for
one time interval.

Michael.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Ross Scanlon]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:30:26 -0700
Michael Barabanov  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> How would one tag a turn restriction (
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active say
> 6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be  sufficient for
> one time interval.
> 
> Michael.

Maybe:

hour_on=06:00;15:00
hour_off=09:00;18:00



-- 
Cheers
Ross


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Michael Barabanov
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How would one tag a turn restriction
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active say
> 6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be  sufficient for
> one time interval.

FIXME=this restriction is only active 6-9AM and 3-6PM; add this
information when we come up with a good way of tagging it :)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tagging farmers markets?

[Craig Wallace]

On 17/08/2010 01:43, Richard Welty wrote:

   i don't see an obvious tag in the system.

i'm not talking about shop=farm, where the shop is
physically located at the farm, but about places where
one or more producers come together to sell. some are
intermittant (and would need schedule tags), but others
are somewhat permanent.


amenity=marketplace would seem to cover that. With the opening hours tag 
for the times it is there.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dmarketplace

Though it doesn't specify that its specifically a farmers market, maybe 
an additional tag for that?
Though what is the definition of a "farmers market" anyway? Is it just 
for farmers / producers?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tagging farmers markets?

[Richard Welty]

 On 8/16/10 9:56 PM, Craig Wallace wrote:

On 17/08/2010 01:43, Richard Welty wrote:

   i don't see an obvious tag in the system.

i'm not talking about shop=farm, where the shop is
physically located at the farm, but about places where
one or more producers come together to sell. some are
intermittant (and would need schedule tags), but others
are somewhat permanent.


amenity=marketplace would seem to cover that. With the opening hours 
tag for the times it is there.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dmarketplace

Though it doesn't specify that its specifically a farmers market, 
maybe an additional tag for that?
Though what is the definition of a "farmers market" anyway? Is it just 
for farmers / producers?
ok, but how about a physical building named "Ryan's Farmers Market" 
where i presume
(i haven't been inside, i just saw it for the first time today) the 
produce is from local
farmers, but it's a conventional brick-and-mortar store with "normal"  
hours.


richard


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Michael Barabanov]

Seems like double work to me.  Ross's suggestion may just work.  If there're
no objections, I'll update the wiki.

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Michael Barabanov
>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > How would one tag a turn restriction
> > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active
> say
> > 6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be  sufficient
> for
> > one time interval.
>
> FIXME=this restriction is only active 6-9AM and 3-6PM; add this
> information when we come up with a good way of tagging it :)
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Michael Barabanov]

Thanks.  BTW, tagwatch does have those:
http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Planet/En/keystats_hour_on.html

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Ross Scanlon  wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:30:26 -0700
> Michael Barabanov  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > How would one tag a turn restriction (
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turn_restrictions) which is active
> say
> > 6-9AM and 3-6PM every day? hour_on/hour_off seem to only be  sufficient
> for
> > one time interval.
> >
> > Michael.
>
> Maybe:
>
> hour_on=06:00;15:00
> hour_off=09:00;18:00
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Ross
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] tagging farmers markets?

[Craig Wallace]

On 17/08/2010 03:09, Richard Welty wrote:
>

ok, but how about a physical building named "Ryan's Farmers Market"
where i presume
(i haven't been inside, i just saw it for the first time today) the
produce is from local
farmers, but it's a conventional brick-and-mortar store with "normal"
hours.


amenity=marketplace + building=yes, if it is actually an indoor market, 
ie with individual stalls selling their own products etc.


Though from what you describe, it sounds more like its just one shop - 
ie all operated by the same company, and with just one set of checkouts 
etc - but just calling itself a "farmers market"?
In which case, I would suggest tagging it as shop=greengrocer (if its 
mostly fruit and vegetables), or maybe shop=supermarket if it has a 
wider range of products.
Or maybe shop=food if it sells a range of foods (though that tag is 
currently undocumented).


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 12:18, Michael Barabanov  wrote:
> Seems like double work to me.  Ross's suggestion may just work.  If there're
> no objections, I'll update the wiki.

That would probably be fine for every day of the week, and yes I
noticed day_on/off, but that seems to overly complicate things and
also limit you if there is more complex restrictions, if there wasn't
anything already existing I would have suggested an access tag based
on opening_hours, eg:

access:time=mo-fr 00:00-05:59;09:00-14:59;18:00-23:59

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Michael Barabanov]

I agree. But I'm not in the mood to start a voting process on changing
hour_on to access:time.

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:58 PM, John Smith wrote:

> On 17 August 2010 12:18, Michael Barabanov 
> wrote:
> > Seems like double work to me.  Ross's suggestion may just work.  If
> there're
> > no objections, I'll update the wiki.
>
> That would probably be fine for every day of the week, and yes I
> noticed day_on/off, but that seems to overly complicate things and
> also limit you if there is more complex restrictions, if there wasn't
> anything already existing I would have suggested an access tag based
> on opening_hours, eg:
>
> access:time=mo-fr 00:00-05:59;09:00-14:59;18:00-23:59
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[John Smith]

On 17 August 2010 13:14, Michael Barabanov  wrote:
> I agree. But I'm not in the mood to start a voting process on changing
> hour_on to access:time.

We keep getting told this is a do-ocracy, so if you find something
more useful, just do it? :)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Dealing with types of places (possibly US-specific)?

[Nathan Edgars II]

First, what's the US standard for incorporated places? Should the
actual form of government (town/city/etc) be used?


More importantly, how are unincorporated places handled?

With respect to boundaries, census-designated places are not really
suited for our use. Sometimes it's easy to define a boundary based on
various historical or current factors such as subdivision plats or
land use, but often this can't really be done and the only thing that
makes sense is a single node. When there is a boundary, should it have
boundary=administrative? (Probably not, since it's not an
administrative boundary, but what if it's a well-defined planning
area?)

What place=* values should be used for unincorporated places? In some
states villages are incorporated; do we skip this value? Do we use
suburb at all, or is everything village or hamlet?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Dealing with types of places (possibly US-specific)?

[John Smith]

You should check out the 50,000 other threads on place=*, it varies
too much from country to country and even regions within countries
based on what people expect to see on maps, there doesn't seem to be
any objective methods to do this that would be consistent within
countries, let alone the world, for many various cultural and
historical reasons.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] turn restrictions, multiple time intervals

[Michael Barabanov]

I will, once I see a restriction that doesn't fit:)

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 8:29 PM, John Smith wrote:

> On 17 August 2010 13:14, Michael Barabanov 
> wrote:
> > I agree. But I'm not in the mood to start a voting process on changing
> > hour_on to access:time.
>
> We keep getting told this is a do-ocracy, so if you find something
> more useful, just do it? :)
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Non Proposed Features

[Matthias Meißer]

>1. So what is your idea? What do you think of how it can be improved?

>2. Yes of course, otherwise I wouldn't ask here ;) But once again, 
this is not a good/bad feature discussion. It's just the question of new 
and may be problematic features should be taken back to /proposed for 
further discussion


>3 Yes a team of moderators would be fine. But everybody that does this 
task might be accused to be unfair, nagging,...and to supress 
freedom.(again we are not talking about final tagging, this is everyones 
personal decission, just a 'well ok we think the idea is wellformed'). 
This is funny because nobody accused the editor devs to beeing some kind 
of anti-freedom even if they have to take similar choices ;)


Might it be true that there is gap between the people that are wiki 
centered and this ones on the mailinglists? Thats bad that are similar 
tolls but with different pros/cons. :(


Matthias

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging