Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
t seems that the Emergency shelter situation for Hurricane Irma is very dynamic with over 200 new shelters being opened in just one day. Apparently the Red Cross have released an app (using Google Maps) that tracks the emergency shelters and also indicates which ones can't accept new evacuees because they are full. Therefore I think we do need a tag for "status" which would have values of "closed" "open" and "full". PS , I haven't seem the Red Cross app but the reviews are not good, with one review describing it as "half baked", which, if true, would make it, in my opinion, worse than useless. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
Eric wrote " This is an open database and we all "garden" the data to make sure that the information is correct." I think that information critical to safety needs a higher level of verification than just peer review. So the argument comes down to what is critical information. I normal times, road geometry on maps should not be critical to drivers because we expect them to use eyes/brain ahead of navigation prompts.(and yes I know this doesn't always happen) In times of emergency, certain information just must be correct and can not be allowed to be tampered with. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
Eric wrote "Why would you delete data that is still valid and useful?" My concern is that if these are permanent features, then people will say "ooh - they'll be the same as last time" and of course they probably won't be the same as last time and we may route people to a wrong place, with possible tragic results. I agree that this information should be left in place, but marked , unusable, until specifically activated by authorities, which I agree should be well ahead of time, so long as people know that they will not be usable until a state of emergency is declared. Activation should be on a center by centre basis so that authorities will be more likely to ensure the list of centers is accurate and up-to-date. I also think that this information should NOT be edited, in any way by anyone other than the authorities. This brings back the old arguments about read only data in OSM. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Evacuation Route
Hi Eric, I noticed that in one of the briefings , the Govoner of Florida mentioned that Goggle was going to dynamically change their "evacuation routes", should one become unavailable. Will this proposal contain alternate evacuation routes, and an indication by whom and when they would be activated? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
Marc wrote "*open=yes/no *except this one. what do you mean ?" Yes, I agree , this one is silly and means nothing. They are always open, and if closed will be just deleted from the map. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
The list of emergency centers would be very much dependent on where the threat is and what the nature of the threat is. Therefore I see these as being loaded (by the relevant authorities) only when a state of emergency is declared and only for the areas affected. These locations would therefore be available (on OSM) online, immediately, and available for download shortly after. Since the areas are relatively small the downloads would not be a big issue. Once the state of emergency is rescinded, the data could be deleted. Since these tags would only be used by the authorities, I believe that they should be unique to them. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
Marc wrote "The social facility shelter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:social_facility%3Dshelter mentions emergency shelter." Yes it does, although I would think that these would usually be of limited capacity and meant for use at all times. I think we need tagging for large scale relief centres that would be open (and known to be open) if, and only if, a state of emergency has been declared. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Emergency shelters
Gerd wrote "I think amenity=shelter is well established " Yes, I read that but saw that it said "a small place", so it doesn't seem appropriate for disaster relief situations. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Emergency shelters
Do we have a tagging scheme for emergency shelters to be used in times of natural disasters? Off the top of my head I could see tags such as emergency=shelter protects_from= wind flood radiation/nuclear fallout fire earthquake bomb blast pet=yes/no bed=yes/no water=yes/no food=yes/no medical_aid=yes/no open=yes/no ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More no_u_turn
My suggestion is only for intersections. U_turns along a road are a whole new ball-game and are dependant on inter carriageway markings that are not normally tagged. I think these turns are best left to the driver, the map-data and the router should ignore them. Cheers Nick ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More no_u_turn
What would be really easy and flexible would be to tag u_turn=no on a node. This would mean that this node is not allowed to take part in a u_turn manouver either as part of a from a to or a via. Since most traffic light intersections seem to be all 4 way no u_turn, all we need is one tage on each entry nodes to an intersection. Intersection that differ from this would be tagged on an individual basis. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] More no_u_turn
Hans wrote "I had the same question On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Nick Hocking https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>> wrote: >* A car travelling westbound on an undivided road is about to cross a *>* north/south divided road at traffic lights. *> >* We wish to prevent the car from doing a U-turn at this intersection. *>* Do we have to put in two no_u_turn restrictions, one for each of the *>* north/south carriageways. *> >* If we only need one, where do we tag this - on the left carriageway or *>* the right one? "* *I'll ask the question over on the routing list. It does beg the more basic question of...* *Do we make the routing software smart, which has the risk of the software making a wrong assumption/decision and giving the user an incorrect or dangerous directive or do we make the routing software really dumb which entails micro mapping every intersection to a ridiculous degree, which in turn makes it very hard to keep the map complete up-to-date and accurate.* *A third option would be to ban all u-turns world wide :-)* *Nick* ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] More no_u_turn
A car travelling westbound on an undivided road is about to cross a north/south divided road at traffic lights. We wish to prevent the car from doing a U-turn at this intersection. Do we have to put in two no_u_turn restrictions, one for each of the north/south carriageways. If we only need one, where do we tag this - on the left carriageway or the right one? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Permissive turn restrictions
Would it be a reasonable solution to have area defaults tagged into the boundary relation/polygon that defines that area. (e.g an administrative boundary). For example, we could have values similar to "unsigned residential ways" - maxspeed 50 U-turn at traffic signals yes/no unsigned motorway maxspeed 130 school hours 08:00-09:30;14:30-16:00 school days mo-fr public holidays 1/1; Then we only have to tag the exceptions. It would however, mean that we have to define permissive restrictions. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Permissive turn restrictions
Hi, Apparently, in Australia the default rule at traffic lights is that u-turns are not permitted. At some ,there are signs saying " U Turn permitted". How do we tag this. Turn restriction seem to be either mandatory (only) or prohibitive (no) but I think we need a permissive one, maybe (allowed) Nick ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
