Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

Well... Private messages tell me that boules might be popular outside of 
France, so here is a translation for a more international debate...


According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules a 
petanque pitch (leisure=pitch) is:

sport=boules
boules=petanque
(375 nodes, 75 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3op)

But according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:sport it is:
sport=boules
type=petanque
(607 nodes, 111 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oo)

Any opinions on a future harmonization of the tagging of boules game types ?


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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Dan S]

2014-05-15 10:00 GMT+01:00 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> Well... Private messages tell me that boules might be popular outside of
> France, so here is a translation for a more international debate...
>
> According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules a
> petanque pitch (leisure=pitch) is:
> sport=boules
> boules=petanque
> (375 nodes, 75 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3op)
>
> But according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:sport it is:
> sport=boules
> type=petanque
> (607 nodes, 111 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oo)
>
> Any opinions on a future harmonization of the tagging of boules game types ?

"type" is far too vague - it doesn't namespace at all, so it doesn't
make it definite if it's a type of boules, a type of pitch, etc. The
english wiki says, and I concur, Key:type "should be avoided":
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:type
Much better to standardise on the "chaining" approach i.e. "boules=*"
(or "boules:type=*" would have been another possibility in a parallel
universe). Luckily, the number of petanque objects is small enough
that it's possible to harmonise, so long as the nations can agree :)

Just my 2p
Dan

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

[Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[John Willis]

I have mapped some complicated intersections using links to represent turn 
lanes and other options in very large intersections. The links are connected 
exactly where they would logically connect one road to the other for each 
direction. 

Recently, I have been using Apple's turn by turn directions here in Japan (love 
it), and they seem to represent complicated intersections in a similar manner. 

Is there a philosophical or practical downside to representing a non- motorway 
in this manner? I am insure of how this effects the validity of the data, but 
for the current renderer, there seems to be no real visual issue, besides the 
arrows. 

Looking for feedback. 



Sent from my iPhone

> On May 15, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier  wrote:
> 
> Well... Private messages tell me that boules might be popular outside of 
> France, so here is a translation for a more international debate...
> 
> According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules a petanque 
> pitch (leisure=pitch) is:
> sport=boules
> boules=petanque
> (375 nodes, 75 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3op)
> 
> But according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:sport it is:
> sport=boules
> type=petanque
> (607 nodes, 111 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oo)
> 
> Any opinions on a future harmonization of the tagging of boules game types ?
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[John Willis]

Oops, forgot the link. 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.40776&mlon=139.32700#map=19/36.40776/139.32700


Sent from my iPhone

> On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, John Willis  wrote:
> 
> I have mapped some complicated intersections using links to represent turn 
> lanes and other options in very large intersections. The links are connected 
> exactly where they would logically connect one road to the other for each 
> direction. 
> 
> Recently, I have been using Apple's turn by turn directions here in Japan 
> (love it), and they seem to represent complicated intersections in a similar 
> manner. 
> 
> Is there a philosophical or practical downside to representing a non- 
> motorway in this manner? I am insure of how this effects the validity of the 
> data, but for the current renderer, there seems to be no real visual issue, 
> besides the arrows. 
> 
> Looking for feedback. 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On May 15, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier  wrote:
>> 
>> Well... Private messages tell me that boules might be popular outside of 
>> France, so here is a translation for a more international debate...
>> 
>> According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules a 
>> petanque pitch (leisure=pitch) is:
>> sport=boules
>> boules=petanque
>> (375 nodes, 75 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3op)
>> 
>> But according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:sport it is:
>> sport=boules
>> type=petanque
>> (607 nodes, 111 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oo)
>> 
>> Any opinions on a future harmonization of the tagging of boules game types ?
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 2:51 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien :

> And some of these relations (though far from the top of the list) are
> not assigned an admin_centre role, even though the node exists.
>


btw.: The current definition for administrative relations says that
admin_centre should be used one or no time in the relation, but what if
there is more than one admin_centre, e.g. entities where the administration
is split over 2 (or maybe more) places? My suggestion would be to change
this part of the relation definition in order to allow special cases:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary



>
> It seems that German capitals follow the pattern capital=[lowest
> admin_level of relations in which the city is admin_centre], except
> Berlin.
>


because Berlin has the capital=yes (because of current mapnik rules
capital=yes should be preferred over capital=2, as the style sheet only
takes account of capital=yes or not yes:

*https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/project.mml

).*


*cheers,Martin*
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 11:14 GMT+02:00 John Willis :

> I have mapped some complicated intersections using links to represent turn
> lanes and other options in very large intersections. The links are
> connected exactly where they would logically connect one road to the other
> for each direction.
>
> Recently, I have been using Apple's turn by turn directions here in Japan
> (love it), and they seem to represent complicated intersections in a
> similar manner.
>
> Is there a philosophical or practical downside to representing a non-
> motorway in this manner? I am insure of how this effects the validity of
> the data, but for the current renderer, there seems to be no real visual
> issue, besides the arrows.
>



it is clearly against the conventions to use the tag highway=* for lanes,
it is a tag for carriageways. If you want to map lanes you should use
another tag.

I agree that explicit ways to represent lanes can have some benefits, for
example are they much easier to understand and maintain in complex
situations then the parametric approach.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 11:07 GMT+02:00 Dan S :

> Much better to standardise on the "chaining" approach i.e. "boules=*"



this was also discussed on talk-it (and I think talk-de) in the past:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2013-October/038240.html

the wiki advocates for boules=* on the tag page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules
to which I'm inclined to agree.

Current usage is not very intense (80 times), and the top-level approach
sport=bocce for the Italian variant is higher still:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=sport%3Dbocc*

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Andy Mabbett]

It's very disappointing to see this minor feature rewuest:

   https://github.com/joto/taginfo/issues/47

summarily closed. Can anyone suggest a work-around or alternative, please?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Pieren]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:

> btw.: The current definition for administrative relations says that
> admin_centre should be used one or no time in the relation, but what if
> there is more than one admin_centre, e.g. entities where the administration
> is split over 2 (or maybe more) places? My suggestion would be to change
> this part of the relation definition in order to allow special cases:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary

Why not. But the definition shall be clear : it's only the
administrative(s) centre(s) "place(s)" to be linked. The risk if we
don't specify a limit is that contributors will use it to link "all"
places within the boundary (making a substitute of the infamous
"is_in" tag).

Pieren

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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Pieren]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Dan S  wrote:

> "type" is far too vague - it doesn't namespace at all, so it doesn't
> make it definite if it's a type of boules, a type of pitch, etc. The
> english wiki says, and I concur, Key:type "should be avoided":
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:type
> Much better to standardise on the "chaining" approach i.e. "boules=*"
> (or "boules:type=*" would have been another possibility in a parallel
> universe). Luckily, the number of petanque objects is small enough
> that it's possible to harmonise, so long as the nations can agree :)

+1
I don't like the key "location=*" for the same reasons.

Pieren

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 13:09 GMT+02:00 Pieren :

> Why not. But the definition shall be clear : it's only the
> administrative(s) centre(s) "place(s)" to be linked. The risk if we
> don't specify a limit is that contributors will use it to link "all"
> places within the boundary (making a substitute of the infamous
> "is_in" tag).
>


yes, of course we should only declare those places as "admin_centre"s that
are indeed administrative centres (having an administration office is maybe
not enough to be a "centre"). I was thinking of places like these:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincia_di_Barletta-Andria-Trani  (Italian
Province with 3 admin centres)
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincia_di_Carbonia-Iglesias (a Province
with 2 centres).

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[nounours77]

> 
>> Much better to standardise on the "chaining" approach i.e. "boules=*"
> 
> 
> 
> this was also discussed on talk-it (and I think talk-de) in the past:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2013-October/038240.html
> 
> the wiki advocates for boules=* on the tag page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules
> to which I'm inclined to agree.

+1

> Current usage is not very intense (80 times), and the top-level approach
> sport=bocce for the Italian variant is higher still:
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=sport%3Dbocc*

Not sure to understand you. (there are 30 sport=bocce vs 3871 sport=boules) I 
would definitely like all types of pentanque/boccia and whatever being tagged 
the same way, independent of the country.

So this would be:

leisure=pitch
sport=boules
boules=pentanque   or boules=boccia

Or did I get you wrong?

nounours




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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 13:43 GMT+02:00 nounours77 :

> > Current usage is not very intense (80 times), and the top-level approach
> > sport=bocce for the Italian variant is higher still:
> > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=sport%3Dbocc*
>
> Not sure to understand you. (there are 30 sport=bocce vs 3871 sport=boules)



what I meant was that there are only 3 boules=bocce but 30 sport=bocce
(given the small total this is not necessarily significant), I'd still
advocate for sport=boules together with boules=bocce.



> I would definitely like all types of pentanque/boccia and whatever being
> tagged the same way, independent of the country.
>
>
>

the thing is to determine whether a sport is a kind of boules or is a sport
of its own. There is a list here for instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boules#Games
but I wouldn't necessarily include this one as subtype of boules (on the
list it is) when using a tag in osm to specify a pitch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowls but maybe rather use a dedicated main
type (sport=bowls).

Indeed this is what you can also find reflected in the current usage:
6 291
*sport* 
*bowls* 
boules=bowls -> 0


cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Fernando Trebien]

Interesting. So it is in fact a rendered-related issue. Since you've
pointed out exactly where the problem is in the code, wouldn't it be
better to just submit a fix and standardize the mapping practice on
capital=[lowest admin_level of related boundary relations]? AFAIK this
should only affect rendering programs (not routing nor indexing).

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
 wrote:
>
> 2014-05-15 2:51 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien :
>
>> And some of these relations (though far from the top of the list) are
>> not assigned an admin_centre role, even though the node exists.
>
>
>
> btw.: The current definition for administrative relations says that
> admin_centre should be used one or no time in the relation, but what if
> there is more than one admin_centre, e.g. entities where the administration
> is split over 2 (or maybe more) places? My suggestion would be to change
> this part of the relation definition in order to allow special cases:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
>
>
>>
>>
>> It seems that German capitals follow the pattern capital=[lowest
>> admin_level of relations in which the city is admin_centre], except
>> Berlin.
>
>
>
> because Berlin has the capital=yes (because of current mapnik rules
> capital=yes should be preferred over capital=2, as the style sheet only
> takes account of capital=yes or not yes:
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/project.mml
> ).
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"Nullius in verba."

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[John Packer]

>
> (because of current mapnik rules capital=yes should be preferred over
> capital=2, as the style sheet only takes account of capital=yes or not yes: 
> *https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/project.mml
> 
> ).*

I disagree with that. capital=yes is ambiguous and capital=2 should be
preferred
Mapnik rules can be changed as time allows.
I wouldn't be surprised capital=yes isn't really used only on "capital=2"
cases.

When there are more than one admin_centre, perhaps we could simply use the
role "label" instead of the role "admin_centre".
It is currently used in states to indicate where to place the node of the
state name, because the administrative centre of a state tends to be the
same as it's capital city administrative centre.
 (example of the label role: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/539668890 )



2014-05-15 8:36 GMT-03:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
> 2014-05-15 13:09 GMT+02:00 Pieren :
>
> Why not. But the definition shall be clear : it's only the
>> administrative(s) centre(s) "place(s)" to be linked. The risk if we
>> don't specify a limit is that contributors will use it to link "all"
>> places within the boundary (making a substitute of the infamous
>> "is_in" tag).
>>
>
>
> yes, of course we should only declare those places as "admin_centre"s that
> are indeed administrative centres (having an administration office is maybe
> not enough to be a "centre"). I was thinking of places like these:
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincia_di_Barletta-Andria-Trani  (Italian
> Province with 3 admin centres)
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provincia_di_Carbonia-Iglesias (a Province
> with 2 centres).
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Matthijs Melissen]

> It is currently used in states to indicate where to place the node of the
state name, because the administrative centre of a state tends to be the
same as it's capital city administrative centre.
>  (example of the label role: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/539668890)

Not necessarily though. For example, Amsterdam is the capital of the
Netherlands and located in North Holland province, but not the capital of
that province (which is Haarlem).

Some more strange cases:

- The administratively centre is not always equal to the ceremonial
capital. For example, Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands, but The
Hague is the administrative centre.

- The administrative centre of a region might be licated outside the region
in administers. For example, the city of Częstochowa is the administrative
centre of Częstochowa county, but the city is not part of the county (the
county forms a ring around the city).

-- Matthijs
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 11:00 +0200, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> Well... Private messages tell me that boules might be popular outside of 
> France, so here is a translation for a more international debate...
> 
> According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dboules a 
> petanque pitch (leisure=pitch) is:
> sport=boules
> boules=petanque
> (375 nodes, 75 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3op)
> 
> But according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:sport it is:
> sport=boules
> type=petanque
> (607 nodes, 111 ways - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oo)
> 
> Any opinions on a future harmonization of the tagging of boules game types ?
> 
> 
In the UK some pubs have boules pitches, I think it is known petanque
here, but boules makes more sense to me. 

Phil (trigpoint)



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



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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[nounours77]

Am 15.05.2014 um 14:00 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:

> Indeed this is what you can also find reflected in the current usage:
> 6 291
> *sport* 
> *bowls* 
> boules=bowls -> 0


So should we then go with

leisure=pitch
sport=bowls
bowls=bowls | pentanque | boccia | whatever



nounours___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[John Packer]

Sorry, I meant the adminstrative centre of the state's capital city
"It is currently used in states to indicate where to place the node of the
state name, because the administrative centre of a state tends to be the
same as *the state's *capital city administrative centre."


2014-05-15 9:23 GMT-03:00 Matthijs Melissen :

>
> > It is currently used in states to indicate where to place the node of
> the state name, because the administrative centre of a state tends to be
> the same as it's capital city administrative centre.
> >  (example of the label role:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/539668890 )
>
> Not necessarily though. For example, Amsterdam is the capital of the
> Netherlands and located in North Holland province, but not the capital of
> that province (which is Haarlem).
>
> Some more strange cases:
>
> - The administratively centre is not always equal to the ceremonial
> capital. For example, Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands, but The
> Hague is the administrative centre.
>
> - The administrative centre of a region might be licated outside the
> region in administers. For example, the city of Częstochowa is the
> administrative centre of Częstochowa county, but the city is not part of
> the county (the county forms a ring around the city).
>
> -- Matthijs
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Pieren]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthijs Melissen
 wrote:

> Some more strange cases:

We could create an additional role (e.g. "capital") when the
"admin_centre" is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid
unnecessary duplicates).

Pieren

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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 15/05/2014 14:43, nounours77 wrote:

bowls=bowls | petanque | bocce | whatever


One could argue that locale=c would lead us toward using 'bowls' but on 
the other hand even the English-language Wikipedia article for bocce 
mentions that it "is a ball sport belonging to the boules sport family" 
thus hinting that 'boules' is the correct term for the main sport=* tag. 
The international spread of sport=boules validates that: 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oy


So I would lean toward:
leisure=pitch
sport=boules
boules=petanque|whatever


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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Richard Welty]

On 5/15/14 8:57 AM, Pieren wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthijs Melissen
>  wrote:
>
>> Some more strange cases:
> We could create an additional role (e.g. "capital") when the
> "admin_centre" is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid
> unnecessary duplicates).
some definitions to keep in mind:

capital - a city serving as a seat of government

capitol - building in which a state legislature meets

these are US usage, not sure if British usage is different.

http://www.50states.com/tools/use.htm#.U3S811hdX4o

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 11:18, schrieb John Willis:> Oops, forgot the link.
>
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.40776&mlon=139.32700#map=19/36.40776/139.32700

And you did hijack another thread.

> Sent from my iPhone

>> On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, John Willis  wrote:
>>
>> I have mapped some complicated intersections using links to represent
turn lanes and other options in very large intersections. The links are
connected exactly where they would logically connect one road to the
other for each direction.
>>
>> Recently, I have been using Apple's turn by turn directions here in
Japan (love it), and they seem to represent complicated intersections in
a similar manner.
>>
>> Is there a philosophical or practical downside to representing a non-
motorway in this manner? I am insure of how this effects the validity of
the data, but for the current renderer, there seems to be no real visual
issue, besides the arrows.
>>
>> Looking for feedback.

-100
In my town we did revert lots of intersection mapped like this. If you
want to map lanes please use *:lanes. All explained in the wiki [1].

If you tag like this a router will not direct you to the appropriate
lane once you did pass the connection node. Only split highway=* if
there is a physical barrier in between. E.g. the picture on the wiki
page above would be still only on OSM way with two lanes in one and
three lanes in the other direction (forward/backward).

Cheers fly


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes


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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 15:01, schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier:
> On 15/05/2014 14:43, nounours77 wrote:
>> bowls=bowls | petanque | bocce | whatever
> 
> One could argue that locale=c would lead us toward using 'bowls' but on
> the other hand even the English-language Wikipedia article for bocce
> mentions that it "is a ball sport belonging to the boules sport family"
> thus hinting that 'boules' is the correct term for the main sport=* tag.
> The international spread of sport=boules validates that:
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oy
> 
> So I would lean toward:
> leisure=pitch
> sport=boules
> boules=petanque|whatever

+1

boules=bocce;bocce_volo;boccia;bowls;petanque;*

fly

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 14:57, schrieb Pieren:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthijs Melissen
>  wrote:
> 
>> Some more strange cases:
> 
> We could create an additional role (e.g. "capital") when the
> "admin_centre" is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid
> unnecessary duplicates).

So far I did use admin_centre only for the capital but I guess this does
not work in the Netherlands where the capital is not the seat of the
parliament.

Another example for multi-admin-centres are the Azores. There the
executive, legislative and judicial branches have been split to
different cities on different islands.

All together it seems we need to separate admin_centre and capital as
soon as they are different and/or as soon as more than one admin_centre
is defined.

Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using
capital=[2-10]* if an additional tag is needed. The semicolon (;) is
defined as value separator so we could have capital=4;6;8 or similar.

Cheers fly

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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[John Willis]

> If you want to map lanes you should use another tag.

Is there a suggestion for a tag that would be appropriate, or is that a thing 
lost in proposal purgatory? 

I am not representing individual lanes, but choices (aka, the two through lanes 
are a single way). 

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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[Paul Johnson]

Yeah, turn:lanes=*.  JOSM even has presets and rendering options available
to help tag these.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn is pretty much The Way To Go at
this point, it seems.


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:40 AM, John Willis  wrote:

>
> > If you want to map lanes you should use another tag.
>
> Is there a suggestion for a tag that would be appropriate, or is that a
> thing lost in proposal purgatory?
>
> I am not representing individual lanes, but choices (aka, the two through
> lanes are a single way).
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Steve Doerr]

On 15/05/2014 13:23, Matthijs Melissen wrote:



- The administrative centre of a region might be licated outside the 
region in administers. For example, the city of Częstochowa is the 
administrative centre of Częstochowa county, but the city is not part 
of the county (the county forms a ring around the city).





This is even more true of Surrey in England, whose county town (capital) 
is Kingston in the neighbouring Greater London:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/57582?mlat=51.4049540555035&mlon=-0.305049035418748#map=10/51.2787/-0.3296

--
Steve

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com


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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[John Willis]

Umm... Isn't this merely the tagging mailing list? I was unaware that sending 
an email to the list was a form of hijacking in any respect. I didn't steal the 
subject line... Maybe I'm missing something. 

I will recheck the wiki re lanes. I thought I had understood the basic options, 
it seems there is more than I realize. 

I will try to undo my incorrect edits. 

J

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 15, 2014, at 10:55 PM, fly  wrote:
> 
> Am 15.05.2014 11:18, schrieb John Willis:> Oops, forgot the link.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.40776&mlon=139.32700#map=19/36.40776/139.32700
> 
> And you did hijack another thread.
> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>>> On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, John Willis  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have mapped some complicated intersections using links to represent
> turn lanes and other options in very large intersections. The links are
> connected exactly where they would logically connect one road to the
> other for each direction.
>>> 
>>> Recently, I have been using Apple's turn by turn directions here in
> Japan (love it), and they seem to represent complicated intersections in
> a similar manner.
>>> 
>>> Is there a philosophical or practical downside to representing a non-
> motorway in this manner? I am insure of how this effects the validity of
> the data, but for the current renderer, there seems to be no real visual
> issue, besides the arrows.
>>> 
>>> Looking for feedback.
> 
> -100
> In my town we did revert lots of intersection mapped like this. If you
> want to map lanes please use *:lanes. All explained in the wiki [1].
> 
> If you tag like this a router will not direct you to the appropriate
> lane once you did pass the connection node. Only split highway=* if
> there is a physical barrier in between. E.g. the picture on the wiki
> page above would be still only on OSM way with two lanes in one and
> three lanes in the other direction (forward/backward).
> 
> Cheers fly
> 
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:46 AM, John Willis  wrote:

> Umm... Isn't this merely the tagging mailing list? I was unaware that
> sending an email to the list was a form of hijacking in any respect. I
> didn't steal the subject line... Maybe I'm missing something.
>

You replied to another message in a thread rather than starting a new
thread.  You may want to look up how email threading works for the vast
majority of the internet.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 16:46, schrieb John Willis:
> Umm... Isn't this merely the tagging mailing list? I was unaware that sending 
> an email to the list was a form of hijacking in any respect. I didn't steal 
> the subject line... Maybe I'm missing something. 

The problem is that if you do reply on a different subject even if
changing the content it is still a reply and will be sorted below the
message you reply to. This way it can be easily overlooked.

If you want to open a new subject/thread, please send a new message and
not a reply.

 > I will recheck the wiki re lanes. I thought I had understood the
basic options, it seems there is more than I realize.
> 
> I will try to undo my incorrect edits. 
> 
> J
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On May 15, 2014, at 10:55 PM, fly  wrote:
>>
>> Am 15.05.2014 11:18, schrieb John Willis:> Oops, forgot the link.
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.40776&mlon=139.32700#map=19/36.40776/139.32700
>>
>> And you did hijack another thread.


Thanks fly


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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 15:12 GMT+02:00 Richard Welty :

> > We could create an additional role (e.g. "capital") when the
> > "admin_centre" is not the capital (and only in this case to avoid
> > unnecessary duplicates).
> some definitions to keep in mind:
>
> capital - a city serving as a seat of government
>
> capitol - building in which a state legislature meets
>
> these are US usage, not sure if British usage is different.





capital should be for the capital city as it usually is defined in the
constitution or some other law, and should not be confused with the seat of
the government (IMHO). The US isn't a good example because the capital
happens to be the same as the seat of government.

"Capitol" is the name of the building of the american Congress, I am not
aware of other countries using this term and I wouldn't include this into
the country relation but would rather use a distinct tag to make it
retrievable.

For the seat of government I'd use a new role (seat_of_government seams
intuitive).
This might imply new problems in some cases btw., for instance in Germany
parts of the government (6 federal ministries and all second seats of the
other ministries) remained in Bonn as part of the compromise settled when
the parliament decided to transfer the seat of government to Berlin in the
1990ies.

cheer,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Tobias Knerr]

On 15.05.2014 12:36, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> It's very disappointing to see this minor feature rewuest:
> 
>https://github.com/joto/taginfo/issues/47
> 
> summarily closed. Can anyone suggest a work-around or alternative, please?

Write the name of the tag as a level 3 or 4 headline above the box? I'm
not sure what difference it makes for you whether the tag is within the
box or directly above it.


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

Re: [Tagging] Large, multilane road tagging question

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 16:40 GMT+02:00 John Willis :

> > If you want to map lanes you should use another tag.
>
> Is there a suggestion for a tag that would be appropriate, or is that a
> thing lost in proposal purgatory?
>
>

well, proposals are just that: suggestions. I am not aware of any proposal
dealing with explicitly mapped lanes (i.e. those with their own geometry)
but I have started a proposal that might be able to deal with them a long
time ago:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Area

Problem is the complexity you add when you map things like this, you would
have to maintain 2 ways of mapping at the same time: implicit lanes
(defined by tags on highways) and explicit lanes overlapping the former.
If you do not keep the implicit version working you will get a lot of
problems with other mappers ;-) and this implies you'll have to connect the
highways (carriageways) like we do now, and overlay the lanes as geometry
and tags on top of that, and you'd have to flag the highways that are not
real but abstract versions (simplified connections between highways mapped
in the first model) as such so that the explicit-lanes enabled
dataconsumers will know where to substitute the generalized highways with
explicit lanes.



> I am not representing individual lanes, but choices (aka, the two through
> lanes are a single way).
>


Maybe you'd be better off with parametric mapping as suggested here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 14:43 GMT+02:00 nounours77 :

> Indeed this is what you can also find reflected in the current usage:
> 6 291
> *sport* 
> *bowls* 
> boules=bowls -> 0
>
>
> So should we then go with
>
> leisure=pitch
> sport=bowls
> bowls=bowls | pentanque | boccia | whatever
>



-1

what I meant to say was:
sport=boules
boules=petanque | bocce | boules | etc. is fine for me,
but I wouldn't add boules=bowls to this list because it seems quite
different (e.g. the pitch is grass and not sand or gravel). Instead

sport=bowls

is perfectly valid and used twice as much as all kinds of boules together.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Andy Mabbett]

On 15 May 2014 16:06, Tobias Knerr  wrote:
> On 15.05.2014 12:36, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> It's very disappointing to see this minor feature request:
>>
>>https://github.com/joto/taginfo/issues/47
>>
>> summarily closed. Can anyone suggest a work-around or alternative, please?
>
> Write the name of the tag as a level 3 or 4 headline above the box? I'm
> not sure what difference it makes for you whether the tag is within the
> box or directly above it.

The box is an HTML table; the name should be in, (if not the label of)
that table, for accesibility and machine-readability.

It's also not sensible to have headings above each, when placing two
or more instances side-by-side, for comparison.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Andy Mabbett]

On 15 May 2014 11:36, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> It's very disappointing to see this minor feature rewuest:
>
>https://github.com/joto/taginfo/issues/47
>
> summarily closed. Can anyone suggest a work-around or alternative, please?

In the interim, I've created a wrapper template at:

  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Taginfo_wrapper

but this functionality should be integrated.


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 15/05/2014 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
but I wouldn't add boules=bowls to this list because it seems quite 
different (e.g. the pitch is grass and not sand or gravel). Instead 
sport=bowls is perfectly valid and used twice as much as all kinds of 
boules together.


Sound reasonable to me - I'll leave sport=bowls alone.

Pretty much everyone has agreed that the type=* is being abused and that 
chaining sport=boules;boules=petanque is cleaner so I'm going to correct 
the 718 occurrences of sport=boules;type=petanque into 
sport=boules;boules=petanque.


I might also do it for sport=boules;type=bocce which would become 
sport=boules;boules=bocce.


There are 1093 occurrences of sport=boules;type=* : 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oF



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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 18:14, schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier:
> On 15/05/2014 17:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> but I wouldn't add boules=bowls to this list because it seems quite
>> different (e.g. the pitch is grass and not sand or gravel). Instead
>> sport=bowls is perfectly valid and used twice as much as all kinds of
>> boules together.
> 
> Sound reasonable to me - I'll leave sport=bowls alone.
> 
> Pretty much everyone has agreed that the type=* is being abused and that
> chaining sport=boules;boules=petanque is cleaner so I'm going to correct
> the 718 occurrences of sport=boules;type=petanque into
> sport=boules;boules=petanque.

This would be an automatic edit and at least should be open for
discussion for more than some days.

> I might also do it for sport=boules;type=bocce which would become
> sport=boules;boules=bocce.
> 
> There are 1093 occurrences of sport=boules;type=* :
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oF

Well then why not use boules:type ?

fly

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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 18:14 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier :

> I might also do it for sport=boules;type=bocce which would become
> sport=boules;boules=bocce.



+1, there is also 1 type=boccia which might be normalized to bocce.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 15/05/2014 18:22, fly wrote:


Pretty much everyone has agreed that the type=* is being abused and that
chaining sport=boules;boules=petanque is cleaner so I'm going to correct
the 718 occurrences of sport=boules;type=petanque into
sport=boules;boules=petanque.

This would be an automatic edit and at least should be open for
discussion for more than some days.


Yes - I'll let it cool down for a while.


I might also do it for sport=boules;type=bocce which would become
sport=boules;boules=bocce.

There are 1093 occurrences of sport=boules;type=* :
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3oF

Well then why not use boules:type ?


From messages here, on talk and on talk-fr, there seem to be a 
consensus about namespace chaining such as sport=boules;boules=bocce. No 
one has offered sport=boules;boules:type=bocce - maybe because the 
boules namespace most probably won't expand into complexity that 
justifies subkeys.


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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 18:24, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> 
> 2014-05-15 18:14 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier  >:
> 
> I might also do it for sport=boules;type=bocce which would become
> sport=boules;boules=bocce.
> 
> 
> 
> +1, there is also 1 type=boccia which might be normalized to bocce.

Wikipedia makes a difference between boccia and bocce, even if it is
just the italian name.

fly


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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Andreas Goss]

Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly:

Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using
capital=[2-10]* if an additional tag is needed. The semicolon (;) is
defined as value separator so we could have capital=4;6;8 or similar.


This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why 
it would be needed.


You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to admin_levels. Now 
you don't just have to ensure all relations are correct, but also all nodes.


You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one 
admin_level to a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state). 
When placing admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the 
city so you can make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria). 
And while that maybe is obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more 
compicated when you get into smaller administrative areas. This also 
makes it more complicated to find errors in the first place.


I also bet that people are going to assume that some numbers are missing 
and are simply going to add them, especially as it varies from country 
to country, from state to state etc. Others might simply add a number 
with good intend, because they had the wrong admin_levels in mind.



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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 18:32 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss :

> The semicolon (;) is
>> defined as value separator so we could have capital=4;6;8 or similar.
>>
>
> This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why
> it would be needed.
>
> You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to admin_levels. Now you
> don't just have to ensure all relations are correct, but also all nodes.



+1
The idea of adding capital=numeric to place nodes was to have a simple tag
for administrative importance. This is not an alternative to add a place as
admin_centre into a proper administrative relation. Keep it simple, use the
lowest number.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[John Packer]

Wait a minute.
As far as I understood, the key capital=* isn't supposed to simply
substitute admin_level.
capital=2 means this city (which the node represents) is the capital city
of this country (which has admin_level=2).
capital=4 means this city (which the node represents) is the capital city
of this state (which usually has admin_level=4)
capital=2;4 would mean this city is the capital city of the country AND
state.

Is my current understanding of this key wrong?


2014-05-15 13:32 GMT-03:00 Andreas Goss :

> Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly:
>
>  Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using
>> capital=[2-10]* if an additional tag is needed. The semicolon (;) is
>> defined as value separator so we could have capital=4;6;8 or similar.
>>
>
> This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why
> it would be needed.
>
> You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to admin_levels. Now you
> don't just have to ensure all relations are correct, but also all nodes.
>
> You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one admin_level
> to a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state). When placing
> admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the city so you can
> make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria). And while that maybe
> is obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more compicated when you get into
> smaller administrative areas. This also makes it more complicated to find
> errors in the first place.
>
> I also bet that people are going to assume that some numbers are missing
> and are simply going to add them, especially as it varies from country to
> country, from state to state etc. Others might simply add a number with
> good intend, because they had the wrong admin_levels in mind.
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 18:30 GMT+02:00 fly :

> Wikipedia makes a difference between boccia and bocce, even if it is
> just the italian name.
>


the Italian wikipedia states that "Boccia" is Bocce for disabled people,
the english WP says it is something very similar. I am no expert in this
field but had always assumed that both are the same ("bocce" is the Italian
plural of "boccia"). In doubt, leave it as it is.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2014-05-15 18:52 GMT+02:00 John Packer :

> Wait a minute.
> As far as I understood, the key capital=* isn't supposed to simply
> substitute admin_level.
> capital=2 means this city (which the node represents) is the capital city
> of this country (which has admin_level=2).
> capital=4 means this city (which the node represents) is the capital city
> of this state (which usually has admin_level=4)
> capital=2;4 would mean this city is the capital city of the country AND
> state.
>
> Is my current understanding of this key wrong?




I'd see it like this:
capital=2 this place is the capital of a country
capital=4 this place is the capital of a region (etc.)

i.e. you can see the administrative importance, but there is no notion of
which entity the place is the capital.

capital=2;4 doesn't make much sense then.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Andreas Goss]

I'd see it like this:
capital=2 this place is the capital of a country
capital=4 this place is the capital of a region (etc.)

i.e. you can see the administrative importance, but there is no notion
of which entity the place is the capital.

capital=2;4 doesn't make much sense then.


You are ignoring that most (BUT NOT ALL!!!) country capitals are also 
state (region) capitals.



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

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] boules=petanque vs. type=petanque

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 05/15/2014 06:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> 2014-05-15 18:30 GMT+02:00 fly  >:
>
> Wikipedia makes a difference between boccia and bocce, even if it is
> just the italian name.
>
>
> the Italian wikipedia states that "Boccia" is Bocce for disabled
> people, the english WP says it is something very similar. I am no
> expert in this field but had always assumed that both are the same
> ("bocce" is the Italian plural of "boccia"). In doubt, leave it as it is.

I certainly don't intend to touch the values - just the tagging
scheme... I'll leave the boccia vs. bocce debate to talk-it !
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[fly]

Am 15.05.2014 18:32, schrieb Andreas Goss:
> Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly:
>> Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using
>> capital=[2-10]* if an additional tag is needed.

I meant additional to the roles for the boundary relation above (cutted).

admin_centre for 1 or more nodes
capital if not equal to admin_centre or more than one admin_centre present.

>> The semicolon (;) is
>> defined as value separator so we could have capital=4;6;8 or similar.
> 
> This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why
> it would be needed.
> 
> You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to admin_levels. Now
> you don't just have to ensure all relations are correct, but also all
> nodes.

As we are talking about admin_level (<-> capital) on nodes and it was
mentioned that it might be easier to use and I am not sure if it is used.

If any I would go with capital=* and not admin_level=*

> You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one
> admin_level to a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state).
> When placing admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the
> city so you can make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria).
> And while that maybe is obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more
> compicated when you get into smaller administrative areas. This also
> makes it more complicated to find errors in the first place.
> 
> I also bet that people are going to assume that some numbers are missing
> and are simply going to add them, especially as it varies from country
> to country, from state to state etc. Others might simply add a number
> with good intend, because they had the wrong admin_levels in mind.

Cheers fly

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Colin Smale]

 

Tagging capital=* or admin_level=* on a place is IMHO not to be done
lightly. It is not actually an attribute of the place at all, because if
you moved the place to e.g. the middle of the Atlantic Ocean it would no
longer be a capital. It is an attribute of the relationship between the
place and an (administrative) area. So the place and the area
(represented by a relation in OSM) may reference each other, for example
by including the place in the relation with a role such as admin_centre.
Because a place cannot be a capital in and of itself (it can only be a
capital OF somewhere) putting these tags on the place node is a
denormalisation - to make things more convenient for the data consumers,
so they don't have to go through the relations to see if a place is a
capital or not. Such denormalisations are not always a Bad Thing (it's a
balance), but there must be an acceptance that there is only One Truth,
and zero or more derivatives. The One Truth would be in the relations
and we will need a mechanism (or at least an algorithm) to derive the
tagging for the place from the relations which reference it. 

capital=2 only means it's the capital of A country. Without a link to
the country in question, this tag could be misused to increase
prominence on the maps, AKA "mapping (incorrectly) for the renderer",
which is "frowned upon". 

So I say let's ban capital=* and admin_level=* on the place nodes! 

Colin. 

On 2014-05-15 19:36, fly wrote: 

> Am 15.05.2014 18:32, schrieb Andreas Goss:
> Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly: Regarding the original discussion I am in 
> favour of using capital=[2-10]* if an additional tag is needed.

I meant additional to the roles for the boundary relation above
(cutted).

admin_centre for 1 or more nodes
capital if not equal to admin_centre or more than one admin_centre
present.

>> The semicolon (;) is defined as value separator so we could have 
>> capital=4;6;8 or similar.
> This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why it 
> would be needed. You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to 
> admin_levels. Now you don't just have to ensure all relations are correct, 
> but also all nodes.

As we are talking about admin_level (<-> capital) on nodes and it was
mentioned that it might be easier to use and I am not sure if it is
used.

If any I would go with capital=* and not admin_level=*

> You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one admin_level to 
> a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state). When placing 
> admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the city so you can 
> make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria). And while that maybe is 
> obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more compicated when you get into 
> smaller administrative areas. This also makes it more complicated to find 
> errors in the first place. I also bet that people are going to assume that 
> some numbers are missing and are simply going to add them, especially as it 
> varies from country to country, from state to state etc. Others might simply 
> add a number with good intend, because they had the wrong admin_levels in 
> mind.

Cheers fly

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1]

 

Links:
--
[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[Fernando Trebien]

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Colin Smale  wrote:
> It is not actually an attribute of the place at all, because if you
> moved the place to e.g. the middle of the Atlantic Ocean it would no longer
> be a capital. It is an attribute of the relationship between the place and
> an (administrative) area. So the place and the area (represented by a
> relation in OSM) may reference each other, for example by including the
> place in the relation with a role such as admin_centre. Because a place
> cannot be a capital in and of itself (it can only be a capital OF somewhere)
> putting these tags on the place node is a denormalisation - to make things
> more convenient for the data consumers, so they don't have to go through the
> relations to see if a place is a capital or not. Such denormalisations are
> not always a Bad Thing (it's a balance), but there must be an acceptance
> that there is only One Truth, and zero or more derivatives. The One Truth
> would be in the relations and we will need a mechanism (or at least an
> algorithm) to derive the tagging for the place from the relations which
> reference it.

+1

Note: because apps need to support certain kinds of relations (turn
restrictions, multipolygon rendering, etc.), it "should be easy" (as
far as I can imagine the algorithm) to extend such support (without
sacrificing performance) to figure out whether a city is a capital by
reading the list of members of the relations the city's node is a
member of.

> capital=2 only means it's the capital of A country. Without a link to the
> country in question, this tag could be misused to increase prominence on the
> maps, AKA "mapping (incorrectly) for the renderer", which is "frowned upon".

+1

> So I say let's ban capital=* and admin_level=* on the place nodes!

I tend to agree, and I don't see yet any practical situation where
using those tags is absolutely necessary and reading from a relation
is not possible/too difficult.

> Colin.
>
>
>
> On 2014-05-15 19:36, fly wrote:
>
> Am 15.05.2014 18:32, schrieb Andreas Goss:
>
> Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly:
>
> Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using capital=[2-10]* if
> an additional tag is needed.
>
> I meant additional to the roles for the boundary relation above (cutted).
>
> admin_centre for 1 or more nodes
> capital if not equal to admin_centre or more than one admin_centre present.
>
> The semicolon (;) is defined as value separator so we could have
> capital=4;6;8 or similar.
>
> This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why it
> would be needed. You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to
> admin_levels. Now you don't just have to ensure all relations are correct,
> but also all nodes.
>
> As we are talking about admin_level (<-> capital) on nodes and it was
> mentioned that it might be easier to use and I am not sure if it is used.
>
> If any I would go with capital=* and not admin_level=*
>
> You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one admin_level to
> a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state). When placing
> admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the city so you can
> make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria). And while that maybe
> is obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more compicated when you get into
> smaller administrative areas. This also makes it more complicated to find
> errors in the first place. I also bet that people are going to assume that
> some numbers are missing and are simply going to add them, especially as it
> varies from country to country, from state to state etc. Others might simply
> add a number with good intend, because they had the wrong admin_levels in
> mind.
>
> Cheers fly
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"Nullius in verba."

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

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 15.05.2014 12:36, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> It's very disappointing to see this minor feature rewuest:
> 
>https://github.com/joto/taginfo/issues/47
> 
> summarily closed. 

Can you summarily do something to a single thing?

> Can anyone suggest a work-around or alternative, please?

Well I guess you could create your own template that you can include
with {{ExtendedTaginfoWithTitle|wikipedia}} which would then generate a
box that specifies the title and underneath that the transcluded iframe?

That way you could also get revenge on Jochen who closed your ticket
because there were already too many template indirections in the Wiki -
by adding one more ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

   oops, silly me, hadn't read the full thread. I see you already found
a way to annoy Jochen even without my help ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Tagging] capital and state_capital: how are they being used in your country?

[John Packer]

>
> So I say let's ban capital=* and admin_level=* on the place nodes!
>
We started this discussion because a user pointed out that it can be
incredibly inefficient for a renderer to find out using only relations if a
place node is a capital or not.

Furthermore, we cannot ban the key capital=* from nodes because there are
places where all they have is the node (without relations to represent the
city).

Yes, the key capital can be redundant, but it's not frequently used, and
has considerable benefits for the renderers, so personally I thinks it's
worth it.

Adding the key capital when it's not the case, simply to gain more
visibility in the map, is either vandalism or ignorance (or lack of
documentation) as far as I know, so it's not a problem exclusive to this
key.

The fact that the key capital does not point out which state/country it
belongs to is not a problem, because this information is available in the
boundary relation (using the admin_centre role).
That's also why it was pointed out that if the place if capital of both the
state and the country, capital=2 is enough. Because the key capital=* is
meant to help the renderer (and possibly to help people easily find
capitals in a search).



2014-05-15 16:08 GMT-03:00 Fernando Trebien :

> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Colin Smale 
> wrote:
> > It is not actually an attribute of the place at all, because if you
> > moved the place to e.g. the middle of the Atlantic Ocean it would no
> longer
> > be a capital. It is an attribute of the relationship between the place
> and
> > an (administrative) area. So the place and the area (represented by a
> > relation in OSM) may reference each other, for example by including the
> > place in the relation with a role such as admin_centre. Because a place
> > cannot be a capital in and of itself (it can only be a capital OF
> somewhere)
> > putting these tags on the place node is a denormalisation - to make
> things
> > more convenient for the data consumers, so they don't have to go through
> the
> > relations to see if a place is a capital or not. Such denormalisations
> are
> > not always a Bad Thing (it's a balance), but there must be an acceptance
> > that there is only One Truth, and zero or more derivatives. The One Truth
> > would be in the relations and we will need a mechanism (or at least an
> > algorithm) to derive the tagging for the place from the relations which
> > reference it.
>
> +1
>
> Note: because apps need to support certain kinds of relations (turn
> restrictions, multipolygon rendering, etc.), it "should be easy" (as
> far as I can imagine the algorithm) to extend such support (without
> sacrificing performance) to figure out whether a city is a capital by
> reading the list of members of the relations the city's node is a
> member of.
>
> > capital=2 only means it's the capital of A country. Without a link to the
> > country in question, this tag could be misused to increase prominence on
> the
> > maps, AKA "mapping (incorrectly) for the renderer", which is "frowned
> upon".
>
> +1
>
> > So I say let's ban capital=* and admin_level=* on the place nodes!
>
> I tend to agree, and I don't see yet any practical situation where
> using those tags is absolutely necessary and reading from a relation
> is not possible/too difficult.
>
> > Colin.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2014-05-15 19:36, fly wrote:
> >
> > Am 15.05.2014 18:32, schrieb Andreas Goss:
> >
> > Am 5/15/14 16:30 , schrieb fly:
> >
> > Regarding the original discussion I am in favour of using
> capital=[2-10]* if
> > an additional tag is needed.
> >
> > I meant additional to the roles for the boundary relation above (cutted).
> >
> > admin_centre for 1 or more nodes
> > capital if not equal to admin_centre or more than one admin_centre
> present.
> >
> > The semicolon (;) is defined as value separator so we could have
> > capital=4;6;8 or similar.
> >
> > This just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I also don't see why
> it
> > would be needed. You are doubling the risk of errors when it comes to
> > admin_levels. Now you don't just have to ensure all relations are
> correct,
> > but also all nodes.
> >
> > As we are talking about admin_level (<-> capital) on nodes and it was
> > mentioned that it might be easier to use and I am not sure if it is used.
> >
> > If any I would go with capital=* and not admin_level=*
> >
> > You also have no reference to those numbers. When you add one
> admin_level to
> > a relation that relation has a name (Bavaria is a state). When placing
> > admin_centre you know the name of the relation and of the city so you can
> > make a connection (Munich is the capital of Bavaria). And while that
> maybe
> > is obvious at level 2 and 4, it becomes more compicated when you get into
> > smaller administrative areas. This also makes it more complicated to find
> > errors in the first place. I also bet that people are going to assume
> that
> > some numbers are missing and are simply going to add them, especi

Re: [Tagging] Making TagInfo more useful

[Andy Mabbett]

On 15 May 2014 20:56, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

>> summarily closed.
>
> Can you summarily do something to a single thing?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/summarily then definition 2 on
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/summary

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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