Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)
On 6/12/15 04:28 , Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: that's why I suggested to use a multi tag approach. One tag to say it is a government office, one to say at which level (admin level) and then tags for the stuff you can do there (property list) or about the general classification (e.g. tax office, ministry of education, torture agency, ...) +1 So long term are we going to retag courts, townhalls, libarties, post offices etc. too ? __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging hand operated bicycle pumps (compressed_air)
2015-06-12 0:20 GMT+02:00 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com: Why not amenity=compressed_air + access:motor_vehicle=no ? I don't understand what's the problem with that tag. +1 There are 1023 amenity=compressed_air http://taginfo.osm.org/tags/amenity=compressed_air and its documented in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dcompressed_air and there are 33 generator:output:compressed_air=0 (maybe that's nerd speak for manual pump?) http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/generator%3Aoutput%3Acompressed_air#values there's also the compressed_air key, apparently used as a property (89% yes) http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/compressed_air#overview there are also 2 compressed_air:access=permissive Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] How to tag a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (US:DMV)
2015-06-12 10:45 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: So long term are we going to retag courts, townhalls, libarties, post offices etc. too ? we'll see. I did not aim at that, from a logical point of view some aspects of townhalls might integrate well, but they are also something special (council-legislation), not just an office/agency. The properties for the services offered could be interesting to add to townhalls as well. Regarding courts I don't know much about it on a global level, from looking at the map and list here, it seems as if the court districts in Germany fit the existing admin entities and could get an admin_level tag on the court object. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_deutscher_Gerichte They are not considered government agency or government office. (Those might be inside the building as well) post_offices are more tricky, as they might have responsibilities of public administration or not, depending on the country and company. I wouldn't recommend to retag libraries, museums, schools, ..., the idea was not to retag stuff for which we have common tags, but to introduce a more detailed semantic system for government agencies/offices. Currently these are only classified by their name and office=government. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] README tag with editor support
Perhaps a nice objective tag, rather than README text. If a feature is new, add a start_date tag. The editor can then have options.. 1, Alert the user if the start date is more recent than the layers currently displayed. 2. Visually indicate if the start_date is within a configurable recency (say, draw a halo around objects constructed in the past two years, or so). There is also some scope for automated analysis, rather than depend on free text. Ian. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Off Topic: alignment point help
2015-06-12 1:52 GMT+02:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: Looking over the imagery, it looks like the imagery is pretty well set already. +1 when in doubt, do no shift the imagery Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging hand operated bicycle pumps (compressed_air)
pet, 12. lip 2015. 05:20 Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com je napisao: probably better: access=no access:bicycle=yes (otherwise everything other than a motor vehicle is assumed yes). Well.. I would then at least add foot=yes. If a kid wants to fill his football :-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Airport Pet Relief Areas (toilet and watering spot for pet and service animals)
On Jun 13, 2015, at 8:04 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think that level of detail is needed. Looking at the basic diagram linked to by Bryce, it looks like there is only 2-3 main categories, - and what goes in the categories for now can be inferred from imagery (for the most part), so it shouldn’t be something a mapper is asking an airport official, let alone asking while they are traveling. It probably is on their websites - delivery trucks and people who visit the airport to service the facilities or planes need to know where to go and who to see when going there for a job - and those are not secrets. Detailed information on all kinds of airport diagrams are publicly available, as pilots need information. And when indoor mapping becomes a reality, having the proper tags all set up for the basic types of areas (departure, arrival, etc) is really, really handy. AFAIK, I think almost all of the data we would be interested in mapping - now and in the future - *is* what is secure and what isn’t for the general public at a very basic level. but there are two secure areas - what is secure for people, and what is secure for the plane and it’s equipment. Both of which is easily determined by anyone and not secret (is it inside the terminal for passengers or is it on the apron or baggage handling?). You know you can’t go play on the tarmac or jump the security line to see your cousin at the gate - these are the basics that we wish to map - because the basic extents of where you can go as a visitor, a departing traveller, and an arriving traveller is something all people going to the airport are interested in - and shown on all the signs and maps throughout the airport. It’s not secret. Mapping that information is not breaking some need-to-know thing. As with all airports, there is a further divide between “ground” and “air” operations - and all the “security stuff is over in ground - and air operations (the runway and major taxiways) is secured by a fence - but that area does have an official name and is trivial to map correctly - especially if that tag is obscured from the mapper by the mapping software. We might as well use the proper names for these areas used by officials when tagging something - the names and and the basic areas are not secret. We don’t need to render all of it either. And mapping all the private indoor ways and inaccessible corridors or private baggage handling systems inside IS NOT something we should map (unless it is outdoors or in a distinct building we can label as a whole), nor are we discussing mapping these off limits areas - but areas that are accessible by the general traveling public is totally reasonable to map - especially when indoor mapping rolls around. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Airport Pet Relief Areas (toilet and watering spot for pet and service animals)
The airport is likely to want a detailed map of the secure areas that are off-limits to the general public, but they are unlikely to place that information into a publicly-accessible database. As you say, the public map will show (1) areas available to everyone, (2) areas available only to passengers who have cleared security checkpoints, and (3) areas accessible only to authorized personnel, shown on the public map only as an amorphous block. Even for internal use, different versions of the secure-areas map are likely to exist. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On June 12, 2015 10:08:19 PM johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: On Jun 13, 2015, at 8:04 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think that level of detail is needed. Looking at the basic diagram linked to by Bryce, it looks like there is only 2-3 main categories, - and what goes in the categories for now can be inferred from imagery (for the most part), so it shouldn’t be something a mapper is asking an airport official, let alone asking while they are traveling. It probably is on their websites - delivery trucks and people who visit the airport to service the facilities or planes need to know where to go and who to see when going there for a job - and those are not secrets. Detailed information on all kinds of airport diagrams are publicly available, as pilots need information. And when indoor mapping becomes a reality, having the proper tags all set up for the basic types of areas (departure, arrival, etc) is really, really handy. AFAIK, I think almost all of the data we would be interested in mapping - now and in the future - *is* what is secure and what isn’t for the general public at a very basic level. but there are two secure areas - what is secure for people, and what is secure for the plane and it’s equipment. Both of which is easily determined by anyone and not secret (is it inside the terminal for passengers or is it on the apron or baggage handling?). You know you can’t go play on the tarmac or jump the security line to see your cousin at the gate - these are the basics that we wish to map - because the basic extents of where you can go as a visitor, a departing traveller, and an arriving traveller is something all people going to the airport are interested in - and shown on all the signs and maps throughout the airport. It’s not secret. Mapping that information is not breaking some need-to-know thing. As with all airports, there is a further divide between “ground” and “air” operations - and all the “security stuff is over in ground - and air operations (the runway and major taxiways) is secured by a fence - but that area does have an official name and is trivial to map correctly - especially if that tag is obscured from the mapper by the mapping software. We might as well use the proper names for these areas used by officials when tagging something - the names and and the basic areas are not secret. We don’t need to render all of it either. And mapping all the private indoor ways and inaccessible corridors or private baggage handling systems inside IS NOT something we should map (unless it is outdoors or in a distinct building we can label as a whole), nor are we discussing mapping these off limits areas - but areas that are accessible by the general traveling public is totally reasonable to map - especially when indoor mapping rolls around. Javbw -- ___ 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] Airport Pet Relief Areas (toilet and watering spot for pet and service animals)
On Jun 13, 2015, at 1:02 PM, John Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: The airport is likely to want a detailed map of the secure areas that are off-limits to the general public, but they are unlikely to place that information into a publicly-accessible database. As you say, the public map will show (1) areas available to everyone, (2) areas available only to passengers who have cleared security checkpoints, and (3) areas accessible only to authorized personnel, shown on the public map only as an amorphous block. Even for internal use, different versions of the secure-areas map are likely to exist. http://sanmap.san.org/Html5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=sanmap http://sanmap.san.org/Html5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=sanmap Zoom in on the terminals. the official airport map shows where the checkpoints are, what is considered secure, and other areas of the terminal. Becuase this is OSM, we also map the outside of the airport too. Having a bit more detailed maps, maybe using some industry terms - but not revealing anything that isn’t publicly viewable or knowable - isn’t a big deal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_International_Airport#/media/File:SAN_-_FAA_airport_diagram.gif https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_International_Airport#/media/File:SAN_-_FAA_airport_diagram.gif Mapping where hundreds of thousands of gallons of Jet fuel is stored at Narita (all those storage tanks!) seems like a “bigger risk” to me. Javbw___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Donation
Ruben Maes ruben.mae...@gmail.com Wrote in message: Replied inline below. 2015-06-10 6:52 GMT+02:00 Holger Jeromin gm...@katur.de: Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com Wrote in message: We have blood donation fully integrated in Healthcare 2.0 as far as I remember. I do not see the need for a separate tag proposal. The closest I could find is healthcare=blood_bank, in the proposal page for Healthcare 1.0, with a link to blood bank on Wikipedia[1] (where it says A blood bank is a cache or bank of blood or blood components, gathered as a result of blood donation or collection, stored and preserved for later use in blood transfusion.). The word blood is never used in Healthcare 2.0 as far as I can see. Sorry, it is on the speciality sub page health_specialty:transfusion_medicine -- Holger Android NewsGroup Reader http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Airport Pet Relief Areas (toilet and watering spot for pet and service animals)
In military area there are grades of security too. However they don't get tagged for a good reason. The security people call it The need to know. I don't think that level of detail is needed. I would NOT advise anyone to ask for that information .. you may be asked to explain why you want it and be delayed at least, if not give a full evaluation, maybe denied access to your flight. What is needed is simply if the area is accessible? On 12/06/2015 12:04 AM, John Eldredge wrote: How many people will understand this use of sterile? It may be a term of art in the security field, but in ordinary use it refers to biological sterility, as in sterilized bandages. In biological terms, an area to be used for pets to urinate/defecate is the opposite of sterile. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On June 11, 2015 1:37:15 AM Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: The 'sterile' I think is redundant. The sterile is /not/ redundant, it's a grouping classifier. Very important, given the blizzard of motley tags that may follow it. So what colour should we paint the bike shed? A pet relief bike shed? In a secure area or not? Pink with purple polka dots? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] README tag with editor support
I’ll add my thoughts here.. Imagery: The issue of outdated imagery is complicated because: 1. In iD we don't really know the date range that the imagery was taken (Bing is the exception not the rule, and we can get from their API only a range not a hard date) 2. It depends on what zoom the user happens to be looking at, not just the location. And the imagery changes constantly, and can depend on caching and CDN issues. So I don’t see a way for us to provide an automatic solution for this issue. Notes Tag: Yes, notes as a tag do sort of work right now. A user can draw an area (closed way with `area=yes`) around the place where the imagery is known to be outdated and add a `note` tag, and iD will show it in the sidebar if someone happens to hover or select the area. Notes are a bit problematic because they only appear in the language that the user created them in, and they can obviously be used for abuse. The idea of having some arbitrary user entered README text popup automatically as the user scrolls around in iD (possibly containing naughty ascii pictures) - this just isn’t going to happen. OSM Notes: You could use OSM notes to warn users about imagery issues, though we don’t currently show them in iD.. But we plan to add this eventually, and it might be a better way to solve this issue rather than using a tag. I like that OSM notes expire and can be marked as resolved. New Tag: Maybe we should define an actual tag for localized situations where you want to warn a future editor about something. Like a `warning=*`, tag that would go on the surrounding area. We could standardize on this so that e.g. `warning=imagery` could display a message (translated for the user) like “Imagery in this area may be outdated. Please do not make changes without local knowledge.” `note=*` could provide more detail, and you could delete the warning eventually after Bing is up to date. Thanks, Bryan On Jun 11, 2015, at 8:45 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps a nice objective tag, rather than README text. If a feature is new, add a start_date tag. The editor can then have options.. 1, Alert the user if the start date is more recent than the layers currently displayed. 2. Visually indicate if the start_date is within a configurable recency (say, draw a halo around objects constructed in the past two years, or so). There is also some scope for automated analysis, rather than depend on free text. Ian. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
