Re: [Tagging] Exit list signs?

[Hans De Kryger]

I use highway=traffic_sign for those

On Jan 19, 2017 2:05 PM, "Albert Pundt"  wrote:

> What's the best way to map signs like this
>  on freeways/motorways that list exits
> serving a particular area, including destinations, distances to the exits,
> and exit numbers? Perhaps one destination_sign relation for each exit
> listed, or is there a better way, if any at all?
>
> ___
> 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] [Talk-us] destination:street

[yo paseopor]

Little apreciation:
Please, no multiple values,no semicolon.Better subtags

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] destination:street

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi Duane, 

Thanks. I had overlooked the examples page (even though I searched the OSM wiki 
for the exact term!)
I do appreciate the granularity of the destination:street tagging and would 
encourage the Telenav mappers to use it as well then, but we like to stick to 
conventions that are properly documented (not only in an example page). Since 
there is significant usage in N-America and some other regions [1], we could 
add it to the destination tag page [2]? 

My only issue with destination:street is that there’s still ambiguity when more 
than one street is on the sign, like here [3]. Would that then be 
destination:street=1300 So.;2100 So. and destination:ref=201 and 
destination:West Valley? The advantage of having a separate tag partly vanishes 
when you still need the semicolon separator?

Martijn van Exel

[1] http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/destination%3Astreet#map
 
[ 2] 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination 

[3] http://openstreetcam.org/details/8230/168 


 

 
> On Jan 19, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Duane Gearhart  wrote:
> 
> Hey Martijn,
> 
> It looks correct to me - using the destination:street allows users to know if 
> the ramp is branching onto the specified street name vs. heading toward a 
> street name - examples are located here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Exit_Info#Road_name_Example 
> 
> 
> Mappers have been using in the US too:
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ln4 
> 
> Here is an example way:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/11502773#map=19/39.21853/-76.65894 
> 
> 
> You can see how it is used in the directions:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=mapzen_car=39.22079%2C-76.65959%3B39.22139%2C-76.65428
>  
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Duane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Martijn van Exel  > wrote:
> Hi all, 
> 
> The Telenav mapping team noticed quite a few destination:street tags on 
> (mostly) motorway_link off-ramps in Canada. This is an undocumented sub-tag 
> of the destination tag so I am curious how it is being used and if there is 
> some sort of consensus that is documented somewhere else than the OSM wiki.
> 
> An Overpass query surfaced 1883 cases, http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ln2 
>   
> 
> Looking at a random one, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34154734 
>  / 
> http://openstreetcam.org/details/10767/4194 
>  — I think in the US we would 
> just map this as destination=Carman Road;Iriquois and destination:ref=1
> 
> So my question is whether this is some relic of a past practice, or is this 
> actively used and encouraged mapping practice and if so, where should it be 
> documented? 
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Destination_details 
>  
> seems to be a good candidate.)
> 
> We’re happy to help improve these tags based on OSC / Mapillary data but I 
> wanted to make sure first that this is the way you all want to go.
> 
> Happy mapping,
> 
> Martijn van Exel
> 
> 
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> talk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] destination:street

[Martijn van Exel]

In the US the prefix would typically be in the network tag, like network=US:US 
ref=89 for US highway 89, etc.
We have seen some of this in Canada as well. (CA:ON for Ontario highways etc.)
Martijn van Exel

> On Jan 20, 2017, at 12:57 AM, Paul Norman  wrote:
> 
> On 1/19/2017 5:00 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> Looking at a random one, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34154734 / 
>> http://openstreetcam.org/details/10767/4194 — I think in the US we would 
>> just map this as destination=Carman Road;Iriquois and destination:ref=1
> 
> That is how it would be typically mapped in Canada in my experience, although 
> it might have a prefix to the ref.

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

Re: [Tagging] zero waste

[Greg Troxel]

joost schouppe  writes:

> While this all makes sense, I wonder why something like fair_trade doesn't
> follows that logic too.

That's a good point.  I don't think there is any justification for it
being different.  But, "fair trade" is obviously a political point of
view and there already was an established custom in much of society of
using it as a mark of a particular certifying body.  So the issue of
"what does this mean" was less acute.  I'm not saying that means
treating "fair trade" itself as a fact in tagging is ok (v.s. treating
"organization foo declared X to be certified as fair trade", which is a
fact).

> So, for example, certification:oxfam=yes for shops
> selling fair trade products certified by Oxfam. Which leads me to think
> that we need a double subtag (oh dear):
>
> certification:waste_policy:zero-waste.org=yes
> certification:fair_trade:oxfam=yes

Yes, that sounds entirely rational.  We should keep in mind that we are
designing tags to be produced by humans with computer help and consumed
by computer programs.   So well-organized and semantically clear really
is the biggest concern.

> And also that some kind of "general waste policy" tag is needed.

Perhaps.  But what the world really needs is not data in OSM but signs
in front of every waste receptable with really clear instructions.  I am
increasingly see people standing at a bunch of bins trying to figure out
what to do!

> Anyway, we're meeting someone who works with one of these organisations
> soon, maybe some new info that can help us here will come from that.

OK, but keep in mind that organizations that promote certifications
are likely to have a very biased view of their place in the world...


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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fuel

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-01-20 11:28 GMT+01:00 Dave Swarthout :

> By the way, how did we manage to get to this point when the OP was about
> shop=fuel?




because shop=fuel was proposed as tag for alternative places compared to
actual petrol stations (amenity=fuel) for cases where someone would sell
you fuel in parallel to the official distribution chain. In this situation,
it seems more appropriate to use a property rather than a main tag (because
these might be businesses with different "main tags" and fuel as an
additional feature). Also they likely will not have a pump (otherwise, it
would be clearly amenity=fuel).

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fuel

[Dave Swarthout]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> ultimately it's up to the mapper, but I would surely refrain from adding a
> sells:ice_icream tag to supermarkets.


Agreed. I would also refrain from adding sells:ice_icream to shop=fuel.

By the way, how did we manage to get to this point when the OP was about
shop=fuel?


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] destination:street

[Paul Norman]

On 1/19/2017 5:00 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Looking at a random one, http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34154734 / 
http://openstreetcam.org/details/10767/4194 — I think in the US we 
would just map this as destination=Carman Road;Iriquois and 
destination:ref=1


That is how it would be typically mapped in Canada in my experience, 
although it might have a prefix to the ref.


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

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - dog toilets

[joost schouppe]

Hi,

There were some previous discussions on how we could tag designated areas
for dogs to urinate/defecate. They are quite common, but unfortunately
there are many different tags going around for lack of documentation.

I have added a section to an old proposal page with these options (also
links to the previous discussions I know of here). I'm not sure how we can
get the comments here to translate to reducing the proposal to just one
tagging option? Maybe have a pre-vote?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Dog_Poop_Area

Description:
This is an area designated for pets (dogs) urinate and excrete. Unlike
dog_park label, the main objective of the area is not that dogs play. It is
usually small and fenced areas, but can also just be a designated patch of
grass by the side of the road. It is known as pee-can in some countries.



Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [Tagging] shop=fuel

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 20 Jan 2017, at 06:44, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> 
> But how do you distinguish those from the places where you can buy one
> of these or fresh ice cream (and chose between 1 to tens of flavours)
> or the Italian type. The places a typical tourist is looking for ?


if you are looking for a nice place rather than just ice cream you will want to 
look for amenity=ice_cream or amenity=cafe with cuisine=ice_cream


> Are the former  (supermarkets) excluded from sell:ice_cream or do we
> need to add more detail to express "ready-to-eat" vs "eat-at-home" ?


ultimately it's up to the mapper, but I would surely refrain from adding a 
sells:ice_icream tag to supermarkets.

For the ice cream type you might want to use the key
http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/ice_cream#values

e.g. with the value "artisanal" or industrial

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