Re: [Tagging] opening_hours for public transport routes?

[Éric Gillet]

2017-11-13 1:51 GMT+01:00 Albert Pundt :

> Is it common practice to represent the starts/ends of public transport
> route schedules with the opening_hours tag? For example, Red Rose Transit
> Route 1 in Lancaster, PA uses this
> 
> schedule. The leg going out to Park City Mall only starts on weekdays at
> 6:50; in the 45 mins before then, the bus just turns around on a different
> street back toward downtown. I would guess that the best way to map this
> would be have two route variants with the appropriate opening_hours tag,
> which are united by a route_master relation.
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Emergency phones with blinking lights

[Éric Gillet]

2017-11-02 19:27 GMT+01:00 marc marc :
>
> Le 02. 11. 17 à 19:15, Éric Gillet a écrit :
> > light:blinking=yes
>
> light:blinking doesn't exist yet.
> so maybe it's better to use this one
> light:flash=yes (80 uses)
>

Didn't find this one, but sure it's better to use an already-used tag.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Emergency phones with blinking lights

[Éric Gillet]

2017-11-02 15:50 GMT+01:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira :

> Is there a way to represent emergency phones (emergency=phone) which
> have a blinking/flashing light (so they can be identified at night,
> with fog, etc), please?
>

Maybe you can reuse the lit=yes tag. It's not exactly the original meaning
of the tag, but the effect is really close, as it means the feature is
visible at night thanks to a light source.

If not, what would be a good tag for this? (something like
> blinking_light=yes)
>

Or, I'd be more inclined to use something like :

visibility(?)=light
light:blinking=yes


>
> ___
> 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] New OSM Quick-Fix service

[Éric Gillet]

2017-10-13 23:25 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan :

> I would like to introduce a new quick-fix editing service.  It allows
> users to generate a list of editing suggestions using a query, review each
> suggestion one by one, and click "Save" on each change if they think it's a
> good edit.
>
> For example, RU community wants to convert  amenity=sanatorium  ->
> leisure=resort + resort=sanatorium.  Clicking on a dot shows a popup with
> the suggested edit. If you think the edit is correct, simply click Save.
> Try it:  http://tinyurl.com/y8mzvk84
>
> I have started a Quick fixes wiki page, where we can share and discuss
> quick fix ideas.
> * Quick fixes 
> * Documentation
> 
>
> This is a very new project, and bugs are likely. Please go slowly, and
> check the resulting edits. Let me know if you find any problems. Your
> technical expertise is always welcome, see the code at
> https://github.com/nyurik/wikidata-query-gui  The service has adapted
> some code from the Osmose project (thanks!)
>
> TODO:
> * Allow multiple edits per one change set
> * Show objects instead of the dots
> * Allow users to change comment before saving
>

First of, I comend you for the calm you've expressed in this thread, in
face of the hostile (I don't mean constructive criticism) answers you've
been getting.

I think this is a nice tool, however as for every tool, it can be used for
good and bad things. As long as you adress pertinent feedback I encourage
you to continue developping this tool.
As Simon pointed out, having a "False positive" button on each correction
would be really helpful (like Osmose for example).

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

Re: [Tagging] zero waste

[Éric Gillet]

2017-01-17 17:01 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> > On 17 Jan 2017, at 13:50, Greg Troxel  wrote:
> >
> > certification:zero-waste.org=yes
>
>
> +1


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

Re: [Tagging] Public transport cards

[Éric Gillet]

2017-01-17 11:51 GMT+01:00 Marc Zoutendijk :

>
> Op 17 jan. 2017, om 11:02 heeft Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> 2017-01-17 8:47 GMT+01:00 Tijmen Stam :
>
>> However, I would warn against using OSM as a database for public
>> transport. It seems as if public transport is sometimes overmicromapped in
>> OSM.
>
>
>
> +1, I'd see public_transport cards somehow included in the ticket vending,
> and there's generally a move away from any kind of physical ticket or cards
> towards electronic solutions in combination with smartphones etc., so it
> might not even be worth the hazzle ;-)
>
>
>
> +1, In addition I would note that I have never met one single person who
> is using OSM to plan his public transport journeys. I’m a very heavy user
> of public transport and I always use the website from the operator to find
> out when/where/how my bus/train is going. I would not even think of OSM
>

Just right this morning I tried to find where PT stops are localized when
making a route, and this is not possible with the transport company website

(there
is only a schematic map), so I had to use OSM.

However you're right, OSM stand little chance if used by itself for PT
routing and other needs, but can be a big help when associated with other
data sources (like what the folks at CityMapper do).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] shop=estate_agent and office=estate_agent

[Éric Gillet]

2016-12-08 11:25 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

> > On 8 Dec 2016, at 01:49, Mike N  wrote:
> >
> > Like all things in OSM, I'm not sure how to migrate to a new consensus
> of office=
>
>
> just use office, and add a hint to the wiki. As was pointed out above,
> actual migration has already taken place, given the usage numbers and
> support by the 2 mostly used editors.
>

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

Re: [Tagging] Discarding converted_by

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-23 5:06 GMT+02:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira :

> Do we have any need for "converted_by"
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/converted_by#values or it could
> be discarded while modifying an object, exactly what we already do
> with "created_by" and some other tags? (ie, we won't mass remove the
> tag, but only drop it while editing an object with this tag).
>
> I am asking this because it seems to be as unimportant as created_by
> (it doesn't add any useful information).
>

I agree that this tag should have the same status as created_by
(discardable), and should be removed while editing.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Abusing name tags on type=route

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-18 19:44 GMT+02:00 Mike N :

> On 9/18/2016 11:28 AM, Craig Wallace wrote:
>
>> use the "note" key
>>>
>>
>> Or the "description" key, if it is something that may be useful for the
>> end user, ie displaying in an app.
>>
>
>  Neither note nor description display when browsing an OSM changeset.


 Maybe the website could use description as a fallback when there is no
name, or more intelligent name display by combining other tags.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Minibus routes

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-08 9:19 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> > - Are those built/maintained by the bus company or a related contractor ?
>
> it doesn't matter who builds or maintains the bus stop, the important
> thing is that the bus stops there. There could be a contractor building and
> maintaining them, also for "free" (financing them through advertising,
> that's what Wall AG does for instance)
>

As said by OP, some platforms/shelters are unofficial, so they may be
unrelated to PT. Of course we don't really care about who does build and
maintain them, but it helps to tell whether they are platforms/shelters
designated for PT or not.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Minibus routes

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-08 3:30 GMT+02:00 Michael Tsang :

> On some minibus routes, there are platforms (i.e. poles placed near the
> road)
> along the route but they are just for the convenience of the passengers.
> However, in most of the cases, these platforms have no legal effect and
> passengers can actually wait for the minibus along the route, whether
> there is
> a platform or not (especially in rural areas). When alighting the minibus,
> the
> passenger just calls out the place to the driver (e.g. "bus stop",
> "junction",
> "convenience store", "no. 23", etc.).
>
> Does that mean I should just map what exist on the ground, without
> regarding
> where the passengers enter / leave the minibus?


If something exists on the ground, it should be mapped when possible.
What's not 100% sure for me is whether to include them in route relations.

In my experience "regular" bus services are not expected to stop on
designated bus stops if no one want to get off or come aboard, so it's
kinda the same with these minibuses.

Two more questions that could settle whether they should be included :
- Is there a timetable mentionning those platforms ?
- Are those built/maintained by the bus company or a related contractor ?

Finally, I don't think there is a a already-used tag to mean that the
vehicle can stop "on-demand" in the type=route relations, but feel free to
start or propose a new one.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Minibus routes

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-07 18:23 GMT+02:00 Michael Tsang :

> Minibuses have fixed route but not fixed stops (i.e. you can catch it
> anywhere
> along the route). When I map those routes, should I put in the platforms
> and
> route without putting in any stop position?
>

If there are platforms (marks on the ground, pole or shelter) made for
waiting, entering and leaving the vehicle, they should be mapped as
nodes/ways.

In the case such platforms are used for minibuses, I think they are
standard bus stops with both platform and stop_position and should be
included in the route relation. Another criteria to think of them as usual
PT stops is whether they are named or not.

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

Re: [Tagging] bus route with reversing

[Éric Gillet]

2016-09-02 23:55 GMT+02:00 Jo :

> I'm not adding stop_position nodes to the route relations either, but
> that's a personal preference to keep things simple. Platform nodes for the
> stops are enough to describe the sequence order of the stops.
>

I think stop_positions are more important as these relations are mainly
about the route of the PT vehicle, and the vehicle stop at these points.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bus bays

[Éric Gillet]

The bus direction can be determined by routing software using the ways
present in a type=route relation, assuming they ordered.

2016-08-28 16:15 GMT+02:00 Michael Tsang :

> Dear all,
>
> What is the commonly-used practice to denote if there is a bus bay at a
> public_transport=stop_position and bus=yes? On two-way streets, how do you
> denote which direction of buses is the bus bay for?
>
> Michael
> --
> Sent from KMail
>
> ___
> 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] For comment: proposed mechanical edit: pitlatrine=yes to toilets:disposal=pitlatrine

[Éric Gillet]

I agree with the proposal, good idead !

2016-07-08 22:56 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt :

> See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Bryce_C_Nesbitt
> The semantics of the two tag styles are believed to be identical.
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] New tag

[Éric Gillet]

2016-06-30 6:27 GMT+02:00 Hans De Kryger :

> How does everyone feel about (store_number=) for store numbers that
> companies assign their stores?
>

Why not use ref=* ?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Recycling Containers with opening_hours or service_times

[Éric Gillet]

2016-03-27 17:20 GMT+02:00 Thorsten Alge :

> I was wondering about the tagging for recycling containers. In Germany
> they have defined times in which it is allowed to use them to prevent
> noise pollution.


I believe that an amenity can be closed by "administrative" means (a set of
rules for containers, maybe laws for other entities) as well as by a
physical barrier (closed door for example).

It is the same argument as for administrative restrictions on roads. For
example an highway/freeway can be physically accessible for bikes, but it
doesn't mean that it is legal (or a bright idea).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Remove name_1 and alt_name_1 from wiki)

[Éric Gillet]

2016-01-26 17:52 GMT+01:00 Colin Smale :

> So how ARE we going to represent multi-valued attributes from real life in
> an OSM context?
>

I believe that if a multi-value tag system is added to the OSM API, the
migration would be easier from semicolumns multi-values than from _N
suffixes.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a "Olive Oil Factory"?

[Éric Gillet]

Hi and welcome on OSM !

There is a proposed feature about olive oil mills
 on
the wiki.

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

Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line

[Éric Gillet]

2015-10-15 11:31 GMT+02:00 Éric Gillet :
>
> If the height of a mountain define its importance, simply use the 'ele=*'
> attribute to sort them, no need for another subjective 'importance' tag.
>

Sorry for typos in my previous email, I meant 'importance' and not
'important'.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line

[Éric Gillet]

>
> > On Oct 15, 2015, at 4:02 AM, François Lacombe 
> wrote:
> >
> > importance=*
>
> That word is not allowed over in -carto github,  no matter how relevant or
> useful - like with mountains or regional features that need to shown at
> varying z levels based on... Importance.
>
> In OSM, 30m tall hill and Mt Everest (and all its little named points) are
> equal - usability and readability of the map be dammed.
>

If the height of a mountain define its importante, simply use the 'ele=*'
attribute to sort them, no need for another subjective 'importante' tag.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] new access value

[Éric Gillet]

Hello,
I know this is not a vote or anything close, but wanted to say I don't
think a ban, especially a month-long ban, was warranted by Frederik's two
last messages.

Maybe the problematic idiom was a bit harsh, but most of the posts
contributed to the ongoing discussion.

2015-10-10 10:49 GMT+02:00 Richard Fairhurst :

> I have suspended Friedrich Volkmann from this list for one month for
> incivility.
>
> Please be tolerant and considerate in your postings, and avoid insults. If
> you do not understand a particular idiom, please don't use it.
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Bus route relations. Forward/backward tag

[Éric Gillet]

2015-02-16 13:03 GMT+01:00 fly :

> There are still cases where forward/backward are useful with P2-routes.
> E.g. a route with a loop and some members used twice but different
> directions.
>

Shouldn't one just duplicate the stop_positions in the relation, and add
ways twice in order, without roles ?

Also, as Jo said, the public transport v2 scheme is cleaner as each variant
of the route have its own relation, making loops in routes a rare case.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Route relations - Forward & Backward

[Éric Gillet]

>
> Now if it were me, I wouldn't add roles to stops either, except for those
> which are only to let people off or on. But usually I add a platform role
> anyway. Even though it's obvious that a node tagged with
> public_transport=platform/highway=bus_stop is a platform and a way is part
> of the route.
>

In a bus station for example, there can be multiple stops for multiple bus
lines, and each bus/line only stop once. I think it's better to add all
stop_position and platform to routes relations for this reason.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Unification of google-plus links

[Éric Gillet]

It can be done easily with JOSM, you just need to download all
nodes/ways/relations, select them all and rename the offending tags in one
go.


On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Andreas Neumann 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to unify the keys for google-plus-pages of objects in the
> Database. In TagInfo I found this variants:
>
> contact:google+
> contact:google_plus
> link:google_plus
> contact:google
> Google +
> Google Plus
> Google+
> contact:googleplus
> contact:google +
> GooglePlus
> googleplus
> contatc:google+
> google business
> [https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=google]
>
> I would like to change the Keys in "contact:google_plus"
> [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact].
>
> I found also some "Facebook"-keys (with uppercase "F"). I would like to
> change them in "contact:facebook"
> [http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact]. The same with
> "Twitter" (-> "contact:twitter").
>
> And I would like to move the social-network-links
> "link:[facebook|twitter]" in the contact-namespace.
>
> Andreas
>
> --
> sorry for my bad english...
>
> Andreas Neumann
> http://map4Jena.de
> http://Stadtplan-Ilmenau.de
>
>
> ___
> 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] Bitcoin ATM (amenity=atm | currency:XBT=yes)

[Éric Gillet]

Maybe we should move towards a scheme more specific about accepted
currencies :

currency:in:USD=yes
currency:out:BTC=yes

For a one-way Bitcoin ATM dispensing BTC in exchange of USD, for example.


On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Janko Mihelić  wrote:

> Maybe create a new tag that tells if the ATM is connected to the interbank
> network[1] which makes an ATM a classical ATM. For example
> interbank_network=yes, or interbank_network=ATH, or whichever interbank
> network an ATM is connected to. Maybe there are some ATMs that only take
> their own cards, which makes that ATM not very useful to the general public
> just like the Bitcoin ATM.
>
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbank_network
>
>
> 2014-06-09 14:30 GMT+02:00 Janko Mihelić :
>
> 2014-06-09 13:58 GMT+02:00 Henning Scholland :
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I don't know if this would be a good idea. Of course it would be the
>>> correct tagging, but on the other hand the typical interpretation of
>>> amenity=atm is, that you get "real" money. As this fact is kind of
>>> default, it is never tagged. AFAIK bitcoin-atm only handle bitcoins, so
>>> it could lead to problems.
>>>
>>> Henning
>>>
>>
>> AFAIK most Bitcoin ATMs right now take "real" money and convert it to
>> Bitcoins. Some can take Bitcoins and convert them to real money and give it
>> to you. So I'm not sure why this wouldn't be called an ATM. Calling it
>> anything else would be tagging for the renderer (we don't want it to show
>> up on maps because it isn't a classical ATM)
>>
>> We only have to insist on the tag cash_out=no, and then tell renderers to
>> not render amenity=atm+cash_out=no.
>>
>> Janko
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging