[Tagging] Tag for livestocks pens
Hi, Thanks for providing these links. My comments inline below. Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 14:00:00 +0200 > From: Martin Vonwald > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tag for livestocks pens > Message-ID: > > tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > >Re: Tag for livestocks pens (Martin Vonwald) > > > >> Am 01.09.2014 12:20, schrieb Severin Menard: > >> > How should we map the livestock pens in farmyards? > >> barrier = fence > >> And (IMHO): it should be a permanet installation and no temporary > thing... > >> > > > > Thanks for your answer. Sure for barrier=fence, but it does not say what > > is inside the fence. The houses have a fence for the people and those > ones > > are for the animals. When it deals with potential epizootics, it is not > the > > same thing. What about pen=yes or run=yes? (I do not find any occurrence > in > > taginfo, though). livestocks=* would serve to mention the kind of penned > > animals. > > > > This should help: > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=animal_keeping > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Danimal_keeping > > Best regards, > Martin > Actually we have used a landuse=livestocks so far and the issue is we cannot always draw their extent as they can be small (but mapping them remains important), what would lead to just put a node, but this is incompatible with the landuse key. And I do not feel logical to draw a polygon that does not represent the reality. I am wondering if for a node we could not use the combination of: animal_keeping=yes (or animal_keeping=pigs, goats, etc. as suggested animal_keeping:type=* as also suggested and if a polygon is doable: barrier=fence landuse=animal_keeping animal_keeping=pigs, goats, etc. as suggested animal_keeping:type=* as also suggested What do you think? Sincerely, Severin > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140907/01ebf5d3/attachment-0001.html > > > > -- > > Subject: Digest Footer > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > -- > > End of Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 18 > *** > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tag for livestocks pens
FYI, according to taginfo (http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/landuse) landuse is already used 226 432 times on a node. So not everybody thinks it is incompatible with nodes. regards m On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Severin Menard wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for providing these links. My comments inline below. > > Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 14:00:00 +0200 >> From: Martin Vonwald >> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" >> >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tag for livestocks pens >> Message-ID: >> > >> tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org> wrote: >> >>Re: Tag for livestocks pens (Martin Vonwald) >> >> >> >> Am 01.09.2014 12:20, schrieb Severin Menard: >> >> > How should we map the livestock pens in farmyards? >> >> barrier = fence >> >> And (IMHO): it should be a permanet installation and no temporary >> thing... >> >> >> > >> > Thanks for your answer. Sure for barrier=fence, but it does not say what >> > is inside the fence. The houses have a fence for the people and those >> ones >> > are for the animals. When it deals with potential epizootics, it is not >> the >> > same thing. What about pen=yes or run=yes? (I do not find any >> occurrence in >> > taginfo, though). livestocks=* would serve to mention the kind of penned >> > animals. >> > >> >> This should help: >> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=animal_keeping >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Danimal_keeping >> >> Best regards, >> Martin >> > > Actually we have used a landuse=livestocks so far and the issue is we > cannot always draw their extent as they can be small (but mapping them > remains important), what would lead to just put a node, but this is > incompatible with the landuse key. And I do not feel logical to draw a > polygon that does not represent the reality. I am wondering if for a node > we could not use the combination of: > animal_keeping=yes (or animal_keeping=pigs, goats, etc. as suggested > animal_keeping:type=* as also suggested > > and if a polygon is doable: > barrier=fence > landuse=animal_keeping > animal_keeping=pigs, goats, etc. as suggested > animal_keeping:type=* as also suggested > > What do you think? > > Sincerely, > > Severin > >> -- next part -- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140907/01ebf5d3/attachment-0001.html >> > >> >> -- >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> >> -- >> >> End of Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 18 >> *** >> > > > ___ > 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] Tag for livestocks pens
2014-09-08 14:24 GMT+02:00 Severin Menard : > Actually we have used a landuse=livestocks so far and the issue is we > cannot always draw their extent as they can be small (but mapping them > remains important), I think livestocks usually would classify as either farmland or farmyard landuse. I would not go for a subtype of these on the first level, but rather use something specific for the feature (like stable, grazing/pasture, henhouse etc.) and maybe also a subtag like farmland=livestock or farmland:type=livestock. Why did you choose the plural "livestocks"? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tag for livestocks pens
2014-09-08 14:44 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis : > FYI, according to taginfo (http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/landuse) > landuse is already used 226 432 times on a node. So not everybody thinks > it is incompatible with nodes. > FYI, also "area:highway" is used occassionally on nodes, but it doesn't make any sense... area=yes is currently used on 3446 nodes ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 5 floating bridges
> Subject: Tagging Digest, Vol 60, Issue 5 > To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 15:29:42 + > Today's Topics: > >1. Re: Feature Proposal - Voting - nudism (John Packer) >2. Feature Proposal - RFC - cliff clarification (Friedrich Volkmann) >3. Re: "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? (Volker Schmidt) >4. Re: "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? (Martin Koppenhoefer) >5. Re: "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? (Clifford Snow) >6. Re: "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? (John F. Eldredge) >7. Re: "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? (Richard Z.) > > > -- > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:14:06 +0200 > From: Volker Schmidt > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] "floating" or "pontoon" bridges? > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > Hi Volker, What’s up against the tag building=bridge, floating=yes, with additional floating=pontoon / ship, a pontoon is a sturdy hardly to move object, a ship bridge where each part / section is based on a one or more ships, and one section can be removed to let a vessel pass by. https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/RP-P-OB-79.978 The Duke of Alva made this crossing at Antwerp, a road upon ships. It looks more like a barrier then the possibility to remove a section out of the way. With one exception the Dutch vlotbrug. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlotbrug The Sint Maartensvlotbrug consists of 2 pontoons floating to and from the middle with a bridge (ramp) on each side. Hendrikklaas ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] "floating" or "pontoon" bridges?
I am not an expert. The four bridges in "my" area are similar in construction. They use boat-shaped floating devices, similar to your antique example. I do not know whether these are actually (ex-) boats. As far as I know, when they are opened, typically because of high water flow and consequent danger of them being damaged, they are swung by 90 degrees as a complete unit and anchored to the river bank. They are not normally opened to let boats through and I don't think they can be partially opened. But they are not floating bridges as in your second link. If you give me time I most likely do have photographs of all of them, at least one of them both opened and closed. (My photos are geotagged, but my archive does not allow search by coordinates) Volker > > Hi Volker, > What’s up against the tag building=bridge, floating=yes, with additional > floating=pontoon / ship, a pontoon is a sturdy hardly to move object, a > ship bridge where each part / section is based on a one or more ships, and > one section can be removed to let a vessel pass by. > > https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/RP-P-OB-79.978 > > The Duke of Alva made this crossing at Antwerp, a road upon ships. It > looks more like a barrier then the possibility to remove a section out of > the way. With one exception the Dutch vlotbrug. > > http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlotbrug > > The Sint Maartensvlotbrug consists of 2 pontoons floating to and from the > middle with a bridge (ramp) on each side. > > Hendrikklaas > > > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
