[Tagging] maxspeed=signals vs. maxspeed:variable=yes + maxspeed=x
Hi! As the usage of maxspeed:variable continues to increase, I would like to draw your attention again to its proposal: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dynamic_maxspeed In my opinion maxspeed:variable is far superior to maxspeed=signals as it provides not only the information that the speed limit is variable, but additionally: * what is the maximum possible(!) speed limit * what is the reason(!) for the variable speed limit I consider both potentially valuable information to data consumers. Example: On motorways in Austria the speed limit is usually 130 km/h. Motorways which cross larger cities however have often variable speed limits and quite often with a maximum speed limit of 80 km/h. That's a long way down from 130 km/h to 80 km/h. If we provide only the information that the limit is variable, what speed limit should a consumer assume? Maybe it would be faster to drive around the city, because there is usually a limit of 130 km/h? I want to suggest to remove the recommendation within the wiki for maxspeed=signals and instead recommend maxspeed:variable=reason + maxspeed=maximum speed limit . Best regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Никита wrote: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no kids_area=* is not about these 4 tags. kids_area=* is disjoint to leisure=playgrounds. Please read proposal. http://www.imenno.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/HD_08.jpg-940x626.jpg - leisure=playground http://www.realkidfriendly.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/161.jpg - kids_area=yes http://goidapark.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/12.jpg - leisure=playground http://alpindustria.ru/UserFiles/Image/News/Novosib_kidsplace/01.jpg - kids_area=yes http://planeta-sh.by/Image/Uploaded/0.jpg - kids_area=yes http://www.labirint-bookstore.ru/images/upl/tinymce/pages_6_1281101285.jpg - kids_area=yes in shop=books http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6001/vincentventa.c/0_508b4_38a3aef3_XL - kids_area=yes inside leisure=stadium Do you have tags forplayground=pony? playground=pencils? playground=books? playground=table? pl ayground=horses? If not, there no reason to talk about it in kids_area proposal I will not use over 70 tags to simply map single kids_area=*. Why not? I don't see why the given list would be complete even for outdoor playgrounds: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:playground ...so mappers should use new values when needed rather than waiting them to magically appear on the playground=* wiki page. However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc instead of playground:swing/etc=yes (similar to recycling:*=yes tagging system). That would have allowed better inclusion of multiple equipment to the same object (e.g. climbingframe+slide is rather typical combo) and use of it for the whole playground object (area or node) instead of placing each equipment to the physical position. -- i.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Why not? Is your questions serious? Do you really want to tag 1000 pencils at 30 tables? Will you update this information from day to day? Will you separate playground:felt-tip pen=yes from playground:pen=yes? However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc instead of playground:swing/etc=yes (similar to recycling:*=yes tagging system). You will be surprised that nobody using this system in Russia. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=recycling%3A or mentioned playground schema: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=playground Similarly we don't care about exact tables and their locations or geometries. We need answers to simple questions Where should I leave my child?. We don't care about playground:pencil=yes tagging, it is useless for any purpose. 2014-12-19 14:03 GMT+04:00 Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Никита wrote: leisure=playground playground:supervised=yes/no playground:outdoor=yes/no playground:indoor=yes/no kids_area=* is not about these 4 tags. kids_area=* is disjoint to leisure=playgrounds. Please read proposal. http://www.imenno.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/HD_08.jpg-940x626.jpg - leisure=playground http://www.realkidfriendly.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/161.jpg - kids_area=yes http://goidapark.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/12.jpg - leisure=playground http://alpindustria.ru/UserFiles/Image/News/Novosib_kidsplace/01.jpg - kids_area=yes http://planeta-sh.by/Image/Uploaded/0.jpg - kids_area=yes http://www.labirint-bookstore.ru/images/upl/tinymce/pages_6_1281101285.jpg - kids_area=yes in shop=books http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6001/vincentventa.c/0_508b4_38a3aef3_XL - kids_area=yes inside leisure=stadium Do you have tags forplayground=pony? playground=pencils? playground=books? playground=table? pl ayground=horses? If not, there no reason to talk about it in kids_area proposal I will not use over 70 tags to simply map single kids_area=*. Why not? I don't see why the given list would be complete even for outdoor playgrounds: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:playground ...so mappers should use new values when needed rather than waiting them to magically appear on the playground=* wiki page. However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc instead of playground:swing/etc=yes (similar to recycling:*=yes tagging system). That would have allowed better inclusion of multiple equipment to the same object (e.g. climbingframe+slide is rather typical combo) and use of it for the whole playground object (area or node) instead of placing each equipment to the physical position. -- i. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
Let me highlight something that was said by you(!) in the email I answered to: Do you have tags forplayground=pony? playground=pencils? playground=books? playground=table? playground=horses? If not, there no reason to talk about it in kids_area proposal ...and then you proceed to talk something below that entirely contradicts what you said above?!? On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Никита wrote: Why not? Is your questions serious? I answered to what I thought that was a serious question from you but you seem to not care about the response in the first place. Do you really want to tag 1000 pencils at 30 tables? Will you update this information from day to day? Will you separate playground:felt-tip pen=yes from playground:pen=yes? Again, you're asking not so serious questions I suppose? Would you blame me again if I answer? However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc instead of playground:swing/etc=yes (similar to recycling:*=yes tagging system). You will be surprised that nobody using this system in Russia. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=recycling%3A ??? That's around 1000 using it already? Put that in contrast with only 2.5k amenity=recycling, I don't think I agree with your claim that nobody would be using it! or mentioned playground schema: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=playground playground=* is significantly newer than e.g. recycling:*=yes and considered micromapping by many. As such, I wouldn't expect very high numbers to appear on it except on very high quality mapped areas. Similarly we don't care about exact tables and their locations or geometries. We need answers to simple questions Where should I leave my child?. We don't care about playground:pencil=yes tagging, it is useless for any purpose. I think that others have given a reasonable answers to this already but you replied to them with ponies. Why did you bring up the ponies then? :-) -- i.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 63, Issue 53
The principle yes vs. no vs. unrecorded is no total ban of default values. But if both, yes and no have a certain likelyhood, you mustn't use no as a default value. Toll is a good example: In a region without toll roads or on a type of roads that is always for free, you need not tag tool=no. In coutries like France and Italy, where most motorways are tollroads, but some are for free, you ought to tag toll=yes to the pay sections and toll=no to the free sections. But motorways tend to be the best recorded part of a road system. Residential streets often are not, nor tracks in the fields. In old narrow urban districts more than 50% of the streets may be oneway roads – there you'd better tag oneway=no, if a section of a street is bidirectional. In the outer suburbs and the scattered settlement around, some streets may have sidewalks but some not, some may be paved but some not, some may be lit but some not. The ratios may be 95%/5%, 50%/50%, 5%/95%, or anything in between. Such are classical conditions where you have to note no as well as yes. Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:14:08 +0100 From: Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] User:Ulamm/Mappers, evaluators and feedback Message-ID: CALDvra7Vp39=jhbec25qs0e52-6o__594uypa4kcx37prcu...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 This advocates adding [oneway=no; toll=no] to nearly all roads (just because some are with toll and oneway). I consider this as a bad idea. 2014-12-18 15:28 GMT+01:00 Ulrich Lamm ulamm.b...@t-online.de: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers,_evaluators_and_feedback This article is an attempt to write down basic rules of/for OSM that had been forgotten to fix in the very beginning. I had started that page with an invitation on the discussion page to do the move now done by Frederik Ramm, if anybody would disagree. As you can see, there was a considerable discussion. Therefore I dared to remove the original invitation after a month. If now still somebody considers anything of this short text wrong, please tell it. Ulrich ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
This topic not about leisure=playground tagging. We need to define 2 ned tags: amenity=kids_area and kids_area=*. Please don't tell us about leisure=playground (it was mentioned in proposal that new tags will be opposite to leisure=playground) or amenity=recycling or recycling:*=* shema (WTF). I think that others have given a reasonable answers to this already but you replied to them with ponies. Why did you bring up the ponies then? :-) You trying to invent useless pointless shema when nobody asked you for this. We need two new tags. We don't need 1 tags for micromapping maniacs. We don't use even 16, http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=playground. We need 2 simple tags that people will actually use. Therefore I provided link about unused playground schema in Russia, but you missed the point. 2014-12-19 14:49 GMT+04:00 Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: Let me highlight something that was said by you(!) in the email I answered to: Do you have tags forplayground=pony? playground=pencils? playground=books? playground=table? playground=horses? If not, there no reason to talk about it in kids_area proposal ...and then you proceed to talk something below that entirely contradicts what you said above?!? On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Никита wrote: Why not? Is your questions serious? I answered to what I thought that was a serious question from you but you seem to not care about the response in the first place. Do you really want to tag 1000 pencils at 30 tables? Will you update this information from day to day? Will you separate playground:felt-tip pen=yes from playground:pen=yes? Again, you're asking not so serious questions I suppose? Would you blame me again if I answer? However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc instead of playground:swing/etc=yes (similar to recycling:*=yes tagging system). You will be surprised that nobody using this system in Russia. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=recycling%3A ??? That's around 1000 using it already? Put that in contrast with only 2.5k amenity=recycling, I don't think I agree with your claim that nobody would be using it! or mentioned playground schema: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ru/search?q=playground playground=* is significantly newer than e.g. recycling:*=yes and considered micromapping by many. As such, I wouldn't expect very high numbers to appear on it except on very high quality mapped areas. Similarly we don't care about exact tables and their locations or geometries. We need answers to simple questions Where should I leave my child?. We don't care about playground:pencil=yes tagging, it is useless for any purpose. I think that others have given a reasonable answers to this already but you replied to them with ponies. Why did you bring up the ponies then? :-) -- i. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 8:27 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: kids_area=* is not about these 4 tags. kids_area=* is disjoint to leisure=playgrounds. Please read proposal. http://www.imenno.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/HD_08.jpg-940x626.jpg - leisure=playground http://www.realkidfriendly.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/161.jpg - kids_area=yes http://goidapark.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/12.jpg - leisure=playground http://alpindustria.ru/UserFiles/Image/News/Novosib_kidsplace/01.jpg - kids_area=yes http://planeta-sh.by/Image/Uploaded/0.jpg - kids_area=yes http://www.labirint-bookstore.ru/images/upl/tinymce/pages_6_1281101285.jpg - kids_area=yes in shop=books http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6001/vincentventa.c/0_508b4_38a3aef3_XL - kids_area=yes inside leisure=stadium how do you suggest to tag a kids_area? All these examples (but the playgrounds) seem to be attributes to say that a certain feature (like a book shop, a fast food or a stadium) provides a kids_area, but you won't be able to tag where it is (it is implicit mapping). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 11:03 GMT+01:00 Ilpo Järvinen ilpo.jarvi...@helsinki.fi: However, I think it was bad decision to have it tagged as playground=swing/etc +1, and it is also diverging from how tagging in OSM often works. Typically I'd expect from leisure=playground playground=foo to express that foo is some subtype of a playground, but swing is an element of a playground. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 12:06 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: how do you suggest to tag a kids_area? sorry, forget about this, I overlooked one of the links in the beginning... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
IMO, kids_area=* is prefered when you have bigger feature: name=Joe pub amenity=pub kids_area=yes kids_area:fee=no or explicitly using: amenity=kids_area fee=no operator=Joe pub opening_hours=10-20 2014-12-19 15:06 GMT+04:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 8:27 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: kids_area=* is not about these 4 tags. kids_area=* is disjoint to leisure=playgrounds. Please read proposal. http://www.imenno.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/HD_08.jpg-940x626.jpg - leisure=playground http://www.realkidfriendly.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/161.jpg - kids_area=yes http://goidapark.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/12.jpg - leisure=playground http://alpindustria.ru/UserFiles/Image/News/Novosib_kidsplace/01.jpg - kids_area=yes http://planeta-sh.by/Image/Uploaded/0.jpg - kids_area=yes http://www.labirint-bookstore.ru/images/upl/tinymce/pages_6_1281101285.jpg - kids_area=yes in shop=books http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6001/vincentventa.c/0_508b4_38a3aef3_XL - kids_area=yes inside leisure=stadium how do you suggest to tag a kids_area? All these examples (but the playgrounds) seem to be attributes to say that a certain feature (like a book shop, a fast food or a stadium) provides a kids_area, but you won't be able to tag where it is (it is implicit mapping). ___ 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] Tagging Digest, Vol 63, Issue 53
Some weeks ago, there was a post in the forum by a mapper, who remembered that there was a cycletrack at a road he had used, but he had forgotten on which side. Furthermore, Opencyclemap renders cycleway=track but doesn't detect cycyleway:right=track. Therefore, some mappers don't tag the side even if they know it. I don't understand what sort of structural element might exist on one side or the other of a road and a mapper cannot determine which ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 12:12 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: IMO, kids_area=* is prefered when you have bigger feature: name=Joe pub amenity=pub kids_area=yes kids_area:fee=no or explicitly using: amenity=kids_area fee=no operator=Joe pub opening_hours=10-20 I think this tagging is generally OK, but I am not sure when a standalone feature is a playground and when it is a kids' area. We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two. IMHO the current definition of leisure=playground is flawed [1][2] because it says they were commonly small outdoor areas, therefor implicitly stating that they might also be indoor areas and maybe big. small and big are quite useless attributes because you don't know about the scale or what to compare it to. IMHO we should either require leisure=playground to be outdoor only (and kids' areas as an independent feature to be always at least partly indoor) or make kids' area a feature that is always provided by another feature and cannot stand alone, otherwise there would be useless overlap. We should also explicitly state in playground that it is only about stand-alone features and not for playing areas provided by shops or similar. The current playground definition already includes places with surveillance and which require to pay a fee (suggested keys surveillance and fee). cheers, Martin [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dplayground [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dplayground#Better_definition ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
otherwise there would be useless overlap It is similar to hotel vs motels. Once you see good hotel you will filter out motels (hostels etc) from hotels. You don't want to classify motels. You want good hotels. We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two. Ok, lets try: leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp in Russia during winter) leisure=playground (poor equipment, often vandal resistant), kids_area (fragile or expensive equipment is not rare) leisure=playground (almost never fee=yes), kids_area (it will cost you directly fee=yes or indirectly fee=no via your prices in restaurant/cafe/pub/stadium) leisure=playground (provided by local municipality), kids_area often provided by commercial company (malls, private kindergartens, hotels) Trust me, there no overlap between: Детская площадка (leisure=playground) Игровая зона для детей (amenity=kids_area) Just try to google these words and you will see real difference between two. 2014-12-19 15:30 GMT+04:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 12:12 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: IMO, kids_area=* is prefered when you have bigger feature: name=Joe pub amenity=pub kids_area=yes kids_area:fee=no or explicitly using: amenity=kids_area fee=no operator=Joe pub opening_hours=10-20 I think this tagging is generally OK, but I am not sure when a standalone feature is a playground and when it is a kids' area. We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two. IMHO the current definition of leisure=playground is flawed [1][2] because it says they were commonly small outdoor areas, therefor implicitly stating that they might also be indoor areas and maybe big. small and big are quite useless attributes because you don't know about the scale or what to compare it to. IMHO we should either require leisure=playground to be outdoor only (and kids' areas as an independent feature to be always at least partly indoor) or make kids' area a feature that is always provided by another feature and cannot stand alone, otherwise there would be useless overlap. We should also explicitly state in playground that it is only about stand-alone features and not for playing areas provided by shops or similar. The current playground definition already includes places with surveillance and which require to pay a fee (suggested keys surveillance and fee). cheers, Martin [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dplayground [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dplayground#Better_definition ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 13:07 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp in Russia during winter) why can't we get rid of the exceptions (usually, almost always) and state that one is outdoors, the other indoors (if standalone), or one is standalone, the other is part of another feature like a shop. leisure=playground (poor equipment, often vandal resistant), kids_area (fragile or expensive equipment is not rare) not convinced. poor equipment is not my experience for some places, this is really depending on the actual place (overall but not only country, also city and individual playground). leisure=playground (almost never fee=yes), kids_area (it will cost you directly fee=yes or indirectly fee=no via your prices in restaurant/cafe/pub/stadium) almost never=sometimes and indirect fees via prices means you only pay if you buy something (i.e. fee=no). - Not helpful for distinction leisure=playground (provided by local municipality), kids_area often provided by commercial company (malls, private kindergartens, hotels) you would then tag the exact same feature with different main tags, if the operator is public or private? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=public_bookcase
-1 for amenity=reuse. Building=house can also be reused. This might be the most vague tag I've ever seen. Dana 18. 12. 2014. 14:55 osoba Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com napisala je: for reference, there have been discussions on this previously: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2013-August/014401.html and this tag amenity=public_bookcase was indeed discussed. I also think it is a good tag and far better than amenity=reuse. 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] Mapping of kids areas
state that one is outdoors, the other indoors We speak for new tags now. I don't want to touch old tagging schema (leisure=playground) with over 200K+ uses, there will be even more people who don't see need in kids_area=*. not convinced. poor equipment is not my experience for some places, this is really depending on the actual place (overall but not only country, also city and individual playground). Not truly poor, but you cannot afford TV at playground but you can afford TV for kids_area=yes. Not because you don't have money for TV but because you sane enough to keep TV, pencils, mats, fragile toys indoor. Is there better word to describe it instead of poor? You cannot use plastics and other fragile materials outdoor. We have -40C during winter even for our european part. Even when you use plastics outdoor, you will use not only low temp resistant, but also durable (by durable I mean near vandal resistant). Not helpful for distinction It is not primary distinction but it might help you with particular object among others suggestions and pictures. you would then tag the exact same feature with different main tags, if the operator is public or private? I'm sry, I meant usually by local municipality and usually by commercial companies here I don't think it is possible to define clear difference between hotels/motels or playgrounds/kids_area, but people prefer to classify them instead of distinguishing them by their individual properties (indoor-outdoor, fee-no fee, poor equipment-rich equipement, unclear ownership-most likely commercial company). Instead of 4 or 10 tags in OSM, real people use words: детская площадка (leisure=playground), детская игровая комната(kids_area=*) - this is much simpler and native way to map objects. This will work for short term, since we want to use kids_area. We cannot resolve/refine or define leisure=playground, this task is too heavyweight and out of this proposal. 2014-12-19 16:17 GMT+04:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 13:07 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp in Russia during winter) why can't we get rid of the exceptions (usually, almost always) and state that one is outdoors, the other indoors (if standalone), or one is standalone, the other is part of another feature like a shop. leisure=playground (poor equipment, often vandal resistant), kids_area (fragile or expensive equipment is not rare) not convinced. poor equipment is not my experience for some places, this is really depending on the actual place (overall but not only country, also city and individual playground). leisure=playground (almost never fee=yes), kids_area (it will cost you directly fee=yes or indirectly fee=no via your prices in restaurant/cafe/pub/stadium) almost never=sometimes and indirect fees via prices means you only pay if you buy something (i.e. fee=no). - Not helpful for distinction leisure=playground (provided by local municipality), kids_area often provided by commercial company (malls, private kindergartens, hotels) you would then tag the exact same feature with different main tags, if the operator is public or private? 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] Feature Proposal - RFC - amenity=public_bookcase
2014-12-19 13:30 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com: This might be the most vague tag I've ever seen. OT - just for a smile: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
Hi! 2014-12-19 13:17 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 13:07 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp in Russia during winter) why can't we get rid of the exceptions (usually, almost always) and state that one is outdoors, the other indoors (if standalone), or one is standalone, the other is part of another feature like a shop. I would prefer leisure=playground for standalone and kids_area=yes for an additional feature. This seems intuitive to me. Best regards, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 13:52 GMT+01:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: I would prefer leisure=playground for standalone and kids_area=yes for an additional feature. This seems intuitive to me. +1, I'd see it the same. We could still have amenity=kids_area as well (for explicit mapping of the kids_area, inside the other feature). I wouldn't add secondary criteria to the definition that is only sometimes or usually true. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
-1, there is no reason to tag two identical playgrounds (outdoor, standard set of playground toys) differently just because one is near mall and other not. 2014-12-19 13:59 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 13:52 GMT+01:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: I would prefer leisure=playground for standalone and kids_area=yes for an additional feature. This seems intuitive to me. +1, I'd see it the same. We could still have amenity=kids_area as well (for explicit mapping of the kids_area, inside the other feature). I wouldn't add secondary criteria to the definition that is only sometimes or usually true. 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] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 13:59 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: I wouldn't add secondary criteria to the definition that is only sometimes or usually true. That's usually not a good idea, because sometimes a common motorway might also be some kind of runway for something similar to an aeroplane ;-) usually, sometimes co are good for examples but bad for definitions. We should try to avoid those. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
2014-12-19 14:05 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: -1, there is no reason to tag two identical playgrounds (outdoor, standard set of playground toys) differently just because one is near mall and other not. You are right. But we are not talking about near, we are talking about part of. This is relevant, for example a playground near a mall might be accessible 24/7, but a playground in a mall only when the mall is also open. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
is near mall and other not. -1 to you. You failed to understand proposal/discussion. There a lot more differences beside simply indoor/outdoor criteria. Please read discussion from start. 2014-12-19 17:06 GMT+04:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 13:59 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: I wouldn't add secondary criteria to the definition that is only sometimes or usually true. That's usually not a good idea, because sometimes a common motorway might also be some kind of runway for something similar to an aeroplane ;-) usually, sometimes co are good for examples but bad for definitions. We should try to avoid those. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
we are talking about part of I think we can use this in definition, but lets wait for Dmitry. Here is my point: Definition: (required, must be tagged) kids_area=* - used for areas dedicated for kids within bigger facilities (restaurants, fast_foods, hotels, hospitals, airports, shops) (required, but can be untagged) with opening_hours (defined by specific shop or parent building=* opening hours), (required, but can be untagged) with limited maxstay (see also opening_hours) (recommendation) usually with richer or fragile toys or equipment that cannot be found at regular leisure=playground, (recommendation) almost always indoor (this is 100% true for some countries, but we should let other countries with less demanding climate be more flexible about this tag. If we define it as always indoor there will be people who will simply remove this tag because proposal said this MUST be indoor) You cannot imply opening_hours or maxstay tags because their value will be different from place to place. 2014-12-19 17:09 GMT+04:00 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com: 2014-12-19 14:05 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: -1, there is no reason to tag two identical playgrounds (outdoor, standard set of playground toys) differently just because one is near mall and other not. You are right. But we are not talking about near, we are talking about part of. This is relevant, for example a playground near a mall might be accessible 24/7, but a playground in a mall only when the mall is also open. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
On 19 December 2014 at 14:09, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote: 2014-12-19 14:05 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: -1, there is no reason to tag two identical playgrounds (outdoor, standard set of playground toys) differently just because one is near mall and other not. You are right. But we are not talking about near, we are talking about part of. This is relevant, for example a playground near a mall might be accessible 24/7, but a playground in a mall only when the mall is also open. As I understand you do not need a tag to specify this kind of things. It is automatically/implicitly handled because your POI (node or smaller area) is included in the bigger area. We are in a geographical database and the relative position (inside=part of /OR/ outside) of elements are known. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 01:52:22PM +0100, Martin Vonwald wrote: I would prefer leisure=playground for standalone and kids_area=yes for an additional feature. This seems intuitive to me. Just a quick interjection from a native English speaker. Kids is slang. The proper English term is children. A kid is young goat. Of course, kid is widely used in English, but is not really acceptable in formal English. I have be watching this thread with mild interest and am slightly surprised that no other native English (GB) speaker has raised the point. So childrens_area is probably better. I, for one, would be uncomfortable using a tag kids_area. ael ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] maxspeed=signals vs. maxspeed:variable=yes + maxspeed=x
* what is the maximum possible(!) speed limit The possible max speed limit is most likely the speed limit fo that type of road in that country, unless you have better information (from what source with what licence?), but that's not really helpful for a router * what is the reason(!) for the variable speed limit A many of these panels are freely porgrammable, this information is most likely difficult to provide. The same panel may indicate at different times 30km/h Ice on Road 100km/h Rain 50km/h queue ... Volker, Italy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 15:13 +, ael wrote: On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 01:52:22PM +0100, Martin Vonwald wrote: I would prefer leisure=playground for standalone and kids_area=yes for an additional feature. This seems intuitive to me. Just a quick interjection from a native English speaker. Kids is slang. The proper English term is children. A kid is young goat. Of course, kid is widely used in English, but is not really acceptable in formal English. I have be watching this thread with mild interest and am slightly surprised that no other native English (GB) speaker has raised the point. I had spotted it, and was considering brining it up, but had taken it no further than a joke on @talk-gb. So childrens_area is probably better. I, for one, would be uncomfortable using a tag kids_area. +1 Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014, Никита acr...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, lets try: leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp in Russia during winter) leisure=playground (poor equipment, often vandal resistant), kids_area (fragile or expensive equipment is not rare) leisure=playground (almost never fee=yes), kids_area (it will cost you directly fee=yes or indirectly fee=no via your prices in restaurant/cafe/pub/stadium) leisure=playground (provided by local municipality), kids_area often provided by commercial company (malls, private kindergartens, hotels) Trust me, there no overlap between: Детская площадка (leisure=playground) Игровая зона для детей (amenity=kids_area) The key criterias are wether it's indoor or outdoor and wether a fee is required. No need to introduce amenity=kids_area for those. Please don't create another footway vs cycleway vs path dilema. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
just tag the amenity with playground=yes. That doesn't work. We have a 20 km^2 airport. Will you really tag it with a 20 km^2 playground (child_area)? that I feel it's hopeless to try to tag it. For the same reason you prefer hotels over motels or hostels. There many differences but you cannot tag them precisely or decide which properties you will need and which are available in OSM. In the end you will simply search for hotels first and then motels, etc. 2014-12-19 20:40 GMT+04:00 moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com: On 19/12/2014, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-12-19 12:12 GMT+01:00 Никита acr...@gmail.com: IMO, kids_area=* is prefered when you have bigger feature: name=Joe pub amenity=pub kids_area=yes kids_area:fee=no or explicitly using: amenity=kids_area fee=no operator=Joe pub opening_hours=10-20 I think this tagging is generally OK, but I am not sure when a standalone feature is a playground and when it is a kids' area. We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two. IMHO the current definition of leisure=playground is flawed [1][2] because it says they were commonly small outdoor areas, therefor implicitly stating that they might also be indoor areas and maybe big. small and big are quite useless attributes because you don't know about the scale or what to compare it to. IMHO we should either require leisure=playground to be outdoor only (and kids' areas as an independent feature to be always at least partly indoor) or make kids' area a feature that is always provided by another feature and cannot stand alone, otherwise there would be useless overlap. We should also explicitly state in playground that it is only about stand-alone features and not for playing areas provided by shops or similar. I don't like to fuel this already long thread, but I just want to note that I don't see a need for kid_area, as playgound (with associated tags) can already describe all the usecases. Note that I'm a father of two yound kids, and playgrounds are very important in my day to day life. I agree that an outdoor park playground, a kid-friendly area in a shop, and a purpose-built playground business are very different beasts, but they still all fit within the playground domain by adding playgound:FOO=yes, fee=*, surveillance=*, being located in a building or not, etc. If it's just a minor service in a bigger amenity, just tag the amenity with playground=yes. As a father, I know pretty much all I need by seeing where the playground is located and wether it requires a fee or not. The only other things I need are opening times and website. Mapping individual playground components is fun for the mapper, but fairly useless for the parent (unless the thing is huge or your kid really *can't* enjoy a playground without, say, a climing frame). Whether you can leave your kids there for a while depends on so many things (kid's age, surveillance type, parenting style...) that I feel it's hopeless to try to tag it. The current playground definition already includes places with surveillance and which require to pay a fee (suggested keys surveillance and fee). I plead guilty to recently adding these two suggested tags to the wiki. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014, Никита acr...@gmail.com wrote: Instead of 4 or 10 tags in OSM, real people use words: детская площадка (leisure=playground), детская игровая комната(kids_area=*) - this is much simpler and native way to map objects. This will work for short term, since we want to use kids_area. We cannot resolve/refine or define leisure=playground, this task is too heavyweight and out of this proposal. By any measure, adding a brand new tag is a much more heavy-weight approach than refining an existing and common tag. If you're worried about the barrier of entry, just let people use a single tag. The most important criteria (wether the amenity is indoor or outdoor) and that's already handled by mapping the amenity inside a building or not. The second-most important criteria is the fee, and that's one were both playground and kid_area can have either fee=yes/no values. In contrast, a new tag would just add confusion. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014, Никита acr...@gmail.com wrote: just tag the amenity with playground=yes. That doesn't work. We have a 20 km^2 airport. Will you really tag it with a 20 km^2 playground (child_area)? Tagging playground=yes on an amenity is just intended as a tagging shortcut (like atm=yes), but of course you can map things more precisely. that I feel it's hopeless to try to tag it. For the same reason you prefer hotels over motels or hostels. There many differences but you cannot tag them precisely or decide which properties you will need and which are available in OSM. In the end you will simply search for hotels first and then motels, etc. Indeed, and deciding between hotel/motel/hostel/guesthouse can be a real PITA in OSM. And I don't want to face the same quandary deciding between playground and children_area. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
but of course you can map things more precisely. Exactly this was discussed. And I don't want to face the same quandary deciding between playground and children_area. I'm sorry for inconvenience, shall we remove several countries from OSM so you can easily use single tag you like to see? Cycleways? Motels? What tags should we remove? adding a brand new tag is a much more heavy-weight approach than refining an existing and common tag. Good luck with downloading over 230K+ instances worldwide just to see what was mapped before in places you never visited http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/leisure=playground. You are smart, because I feel myself as complete retard then I see all these objects. But you are true hero we need. Please, clarify leisure=playground for us! Define one tags that will suite every single case mapped before for every single application at once! Make proposal about leisure=playground deprecation! It's easy! 2014-12-19 21:06 GMT+04:00 moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com: On 19/12/2014, Никита acr...@gmail.com wrote: just tag the amenity with playground=yes. That doesn't work. We have a 20 km^2 airport. Will you really tag it with a 20 km^2 playground (child_area)? Tagging playground=yes on an amenity is just intended as a tagging shortcut (like atm=yes), but of course you can map things more precisely. that I feel it's hopeless to try to tag it. For the same reason you prefer hotels over motels or hostels. There many differences but you cannot tag them precisely or decide which properties you will need and which are available in OSM. In the end you will simply search for hotels first and then motels, etc. Indeed, and deciding between hotel/motel/hostel/guesthouse can be a real PITA in OSM. And I don't want to face the same quandary deciding between playground and children_area. ___ 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] Mapping of kids areas
On Fri, 2014-12-19 at 17:45 +0100, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: Trust me, there no overlap between: Детская площадка (leisure=playground) Игровая зона для детей (amenity=kids_area) The key criterias are wether it's indoor or outdoor and wether a fee is required. No need to introduce amenity=kids_area for those. Also whether it is for customers or not. A play area in a pub is likely to be free providing the parents are buying food or drink. And please make this childrens_area, kids is a slang word and is not appropriate in formal english, such as OSM tagging. Please don't create another footway vs cycleway vs path dilema. +1 Phil (trigpoint) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On Dec 19, 2014, at 9:34 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: And please make this childrens_area, kids is a slang word and is not appropriate in formal english, such as OSM tagging. Unless, of course, it is an area where young goats are kept. :) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014, Никита acr...@gmail.com wrote: but of course you can map things more precisely. Exactly this was discussed. I was only arguing for using playground + subtags instead of playground vs children_area and noting that playground=yes could be added to the main amenity instead of mapping the playground explicitly (this would also work for children_area=yes as has been suggested elsewhere). Then you say this doesn't work for big amenities (airports), I repeat that it is only an optional shortcut, and you say this is what was being discussed. I wonder why you said it didn't work then ? And I don't want to face the same quandary deciding between playground and children_area. I'm sorry for inconvenience, shall we remove several countries from OSM so you can easily use single tag you like to see? Cycleways? Motels? What tags should we remove? Can't make anything of such an over-the-top comment. adding a brand new tag is a much more heavy-weight approach than refining an existing and common tag. Good luck with downloading over 230K+ instances worldwide just to see what was mapped before in places you never visited http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/leisure=playground. Why would anybody want to do that ? Nobody's arguing for a mass-retag. All the currently-existing leisure=playground are fine (AFAIK). Actually, since you bring up the subject, introducing an amenity=children_area could potentially bring up the we need to check all existing playgrounds to see if they should rather be tagged as children_area discussion, which in itself is an argument against children_area. Please, clarify leisure=playground for us! Define one tags that will suite every single case mapped before for every single application at once! Make proposal about leisure=playground deprecation! It's easy! Leisure=playground it is. I certainly don't want to deprecate it. In my view, introducing amenity=children_area *is* deprecating some current usecases of leisure=playground, which is unecessary. Let's try to recap the usecases : * Indoor/outdoor is already inherently mapped with building=* * Size is also inherently mapped. Minor playgrounds inside a small amenity can be tagged on the amenity itself. * Fee, surveillance, opening_hours, max/min_age are standard tags * The kind of activities found in the playground are a factor of indoor/outdoor, fee, and surveillance. * Specific activities can be tagged using playgroud=tv or (better) playground:tv=yes * Wether parents/gardians can leave the kids or not is a factor of too many things to be mappable. Let the parent decide. Did I miss a usecase, an important distinction ? Is it one that justifies adding a new tag, with the associated issues of definition overlap and mapper/renderer/etc uptake ? Or are we just getting confused and talking about different problems ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - admin_title=*
On 18.12.2014 17:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: yes, legally it's Einheitsgemeinde, but that's maybe not a title... The Land has the title Stadtstaat, and of course it's also Bundeshauptstadt. Which one should go into admin_title and why? Have a look at Gemeinde Gutenbrunn: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/406819 Zoom to the borders and see how they are labeled. It reads Gemeinde Gutenbrunn, Gemeinde Bärnkopf, and so on. In the Talk-AT mailinglist, someone raised the issue that Gemeinde Gutenbrunn is not the correct name. It's actually just Gutenbrunn. But imagine the borders just labeled Gutenbrunn. You won't know whether it's a commune, or a district, or a state, etc. Some borders are state border, district border, and commune border at the same time. They are labeled with the names of state, district, and commune. You won't know which is which. I am happy with current rendering, and I want to keep that when the names are stripped. The OSM mapnik layer will hopefully add the amin_name to the border labels, so that Gutenbrunn will show up as Gemeinde Gutenbrunn again, or as Gutenbrunn (Gemeinde) or Gemeinde: Gutenbrunn or similar. How would you like the Berlin border labeled? Well, I guess just Berlin, because there's only one administrative unit with that name, and everybody in the world knows what Berlin is. This is really an exceptional case. But imagine Brandenburg would be called Land Berlin. Then you would probably want to distinguish the city of Berlin from the state of Berlin. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014 15:13, ael wrote: Just a quick interjection from a native English speaker. Kids is slang. The proper English term is children. A kid is young goat. +1. I had been planning at some point to throw that particular spanner in the works. -- Steve --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Mapping of kids areas
On 19/12/2014 18:02, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: I was only arguing for using playground + subtags instead of playground vs children_area It's childrens_area, not children_area. In normal prose, it would be children's area (possessive, with an apostrophe). I think we generally accept the dropping of apostrophes in keyword tag values. Similarly, the phrase used in the thread subject should actually be kids' areas. -- Steev --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
