Re: [Tagging] Cash_withdrawal draft
Good idea! These services are expanding here in Germany, too. Am 21. August 2019 20:53:08 MESZ schrieb amilopow...@u-cloud.ch: >Hello > >I filed a draft for a new tag called "cash_withdrawal". > >Please comment in the wiki. >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Cash_withdrawal > >With my best regards >Ueli aka amilopowers > > >Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] bear box in campground ?
Am 22. August 2019 03:41:08 MESZ schrieb Rob Savoye : >On 8/21/19 7:27 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> For someone who is not familiar with the term 'bear box' it may >> sound like bears are stored in there. That would seem like a rather odd idea. Why would a bear be stored in a box, and even more so at a camping site? >> "Food storage box" might be better? > > Actually something like that is probably a better term. I think 'bear >box' only because that's the term I'm familiar with. I find "bear box" a pretty instructive term. More generic terms don't seem to catch the idea of protecting food from animals quite as well. The boxes were developed against bears and thus got their named. Also, from my Jack London influenced imagination, I immediately understood what we're talking about here. Thus, I'd go for "bear box=yes/no", even in areas where there are no bears. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential
>The rationale behind collecting this information is, that if a street >is >explicitly surveyed as having no sidewalk, it is no longer implicated >that naturally the street is accessible on foot (foot=yes). Roads >explicitly signed as motorroads are not the only roads that are not >accessible on foot. > >And this is an important information for pedestrian routers and maybe a >useful information for car routers (because they might want to prefer >routes without the sidewalk=no + foot=yes First, thanks for all the effort put into "StreetComplete". I really like the app and frequently use it. Concerning the new task, I think the rationale to explicitly map highways that are actually accessible to pedestrians is laudable. But the approach chosen here may be inaccurate as it mixes the legal and the physical realities. The legal situation is already represented by the default OSM setting, considering all highways as "foot=yes" except some like motorways or those explicitly marked as "foot=no". Although walking on a street may be allowed, it may however be unpleasant or even unsafe to really do so. But this physical reality should, IMHO, be reflected in a separate (afaik still non-existant) tag, like "walkable=1-3" or so. This could then be taken into account by routers when calculating alternative routes between to points. But that certainly goes beyond this thread. I would, in consequence, support the deactivation of the task in its current form. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
