Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave access=private for secondary entrances that lack a guard and can only be opened by residents? access=destination says nothing about a legitimate reason to be there according to the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access) - just that it's your destination. For example, you might want to go to a park within such a community to walk your dog, which would seem to be allowed by access=destination on the gate node, roads, or parking, but that would be incorrect unless you are, or are the guest of, a resident. I tag everything within such gated communities as access=private. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
On Sunday, April 15, 2012, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave access=private for secondary entrances that lack a guard and can only be opened by residents? access=destination says nothing about a legitimate reason to be there according to the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/Accesshttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access) - just that it's your destination. For example, you might want to go to a park within such a community to walk your dog, which would seem to be allowed by access=destination on the gate node, roads, or parking, but that would be incorrect unless you are, or are the guest of, a resident. I tag everything within such gated communities as access=private. +1 Everywhere private has a class of people who are legitimately allowed there. The point about destination is that anyone is allowed but only if they are going to that place (typically the restriction is to stop rat running). There's also access=permissive, where a location is private (not a right) but the owner gives blanket permission for anyone to access. That doesn't sem to be the case here. David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
On 4/15/2012 3:55 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave access=private for secondary entrances that lack a guard and can only be opened by residents? access=destination says nothing about a legitimate reason to be there according to the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access) - just that it's your destination. For example, you might want to go to a park within such a community to walk your dog, which would seem to be allowed by access=destination on the gate node, roads, or parking, but that would be incorrect unless you are, or are the guest of, a resident. On the other hand, private says Only with permission of the owner on an individual basis. But the owner is the homeowners association, and the individual residents can allow people in. In addition, the example for destination - customer parking lots - has the same problems as a gated community. You (usually) can't park there to sleep in your car or have a tailgate party. How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Btw. I think current Mapnik rendering renders addr:housenumber=* over barrier=gate . Meaning: if u tag em both u won't see the gate icon at all but only the house number. .. Which imho is not ideal. I'd love to see both rendered (when space allows) as both are of high importance. This is based on my experience in Haiti where often the only instructions to a place is eg: about 400m down, black gate on the left with #15 on it. Has anyone bn thinking about this? (How) can I submit a ticket to suggest fixing this? .. Nico, Sev, Brian: could this be taken in consideration in the possible Haiti custom rendering style? Cheers, -Jaakko --Original Message-- From: Alan Mintz To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools ReplyTo: Tag discussion,strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination? Sent: Apr 15, 2012 05:30 At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Sent from my BlackBerry® device from Digicel -- Mobile: +509-37-26 91 54, Skype/GoogleTalk: jhelleranta ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Le 15/04/2012 10:10, Nathan Edgars II a écrit : On 4/15/2012 3:55 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave access=private for secondary entrances that lack a guard and can only be opened by residents? access=destination says nothing about a legitimate reason to be there according to the wiki (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access) - just that it's your destination. For example, you might want to go to a park within such a community to walk your dog, which would seem to be allowed by access=destination on the gate node, roads, or parking, but that would be incorrect unless you are, or are the guest of, a resident. On the other hand, private says Only with permission of the owner on an individual basis. But the owner is the homeowners association, and the individual residents can allow people in. Permission can be given 'a priori' for friends, delivery men, rather than case by case, so access=private fits. -- FrViPofm ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
At 2012-04-15 05:38, Jaakko Helleranta.com wrote: Btw. I think current Mapnik rendering renders addr:housenumber=* over barrier=gate . Meaning: if u tag em both u won't see the gate icon at all but only the house number. .. Which imho is not ideal. I'd love to see both rendered (when space allows) as both are of high importance. This is based on my experience in Haiti where often the only instructions to a place is eg: about 400m down, black gate on the left with #15 on it. Has anyone bn thinking about this? (How) can I submit a ticket to suggest fixing this? .. Nico, Sev, Brian: could this be taken in consideration in the possible Haiti custom rendering style? I would normally tag the address on a landuse area or a building node or area, not on the gate. However, I would agree that Mapnik should render whatever icon is represented by the other tagging on a node at a higher priority than using the house icon associated with addr:housenumber. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
I prefer tagging the addr:housenumber on building outline, landuse, parcel, etc, too. That's clearly the right place for it. The challenge, though, is that if/when one is simply driving by it's very difficult to know especially in densly built areas where the # should be placed -- even when looking at the imagery afterwards. So, in these cases it makes sense to me to tag the house# on the gate. .. And it might make sense to tag it on that in any case to pinpoint which gate (of the often many nearby gates) is the one with that specific #). And just to clarify: Mapnik doesn't render any house icon on addr:housenumber, it merely renders the number (and in the case of combined use of barrier=gate it does that currently at the expense of the gate icon). Cheers, -Jaakko Sent from my BlackBerry® device from Digicel -- Mobile: +509-37-26 91 54, Skype/GoogleTalk: jhelleranta -Original Message- From: Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 04:50:31 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related toolstagging@openstreetmap.org Reply-To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination? At 2012-04-15 05:38, Jaakko Helleranta.com wrote: Btw. I think current Mapnik rendering renders addr:housenumber=* over barrier=gate . Meaning: if u tag em both u won't see the gate icon at all but only the house number. .. Which imho is not ideal. I'd love to see both rendered (when space allows) as both are of high importance. This is based on my experience in Haiti where often the only instructions to a place is eg: about 400m down, black gate on the left with #15 on it. Has anyone bn thinking about this? (How) can I submit a ticket to suggest fixing this? .. Nico, Sev, Brian: could this be taken in consideration in the possible Haiti custom rendering style? I would normally tag the address on a landuse area or a building node or area, not on the gate. However, I would agree that Mapnik should render whatever icon is represented by the other tagging on a node at a higher priority than using the house icon associated with addr:housenumber. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com writes: On the other hand, private says Only with permission of the owner on an individual basis. But the owner is the homeowners association, and the individual residents can allow people in. That's creating nits where they don't even exist! Owner is a more complicated concept (and for this discussion would include a person leasing a single-family house). I think the key issue with legitimate reason is that it's tied to thinking about rights of access. With an entirely private place, only owners have a right of access (ignoring utility easements), and everyone else is there by permission. In addition, the example for destination - customer parking lots - has the same problems as a gated community. You (usually) can't park there to sleep in your car or have a tailgate party. True, but that raises the larger question we keep avoiding: are we building an ontology to represent the entire world? My impression is that access=destination is a slightly damaged version of access=yes. The road is a public way, but use for other than going within the complex/etc. is specially prohibited. It seems those lots are tagged access=customers. That's an expanded version of access=private, to note that customers of nearby stores have permission. These two uses are fundamentally different (public- vs private+). access=private/permissive/destination/yes is currently more or less based on concepts in English law. I think what you're trying to do (and I understand why and think it's reasonable) is to have a way to define the set of people How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? That's reasonable, but these are subtypes of access=private. perhaps private=residents private=guests I think it's helpful to articulate what the data consumers are going to do, and what decisions they need to make, which leads to working on the grand ontology (which is what I was doing above). pgpLl3ZnPEeai.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Am 15. April 2012 10:10 schrieb Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? There is already an extension to the barrier class which allows to mark the presence of a guard. page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:barrier:personnel from this approved proposal: Proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/New_barrier_types cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Am 15. April 2012 15:15 schrieb Jaakko Helleranta.com jaa...@helleranta.com: I prefer tagging the addr:housenumber on building outline, landuse, parcel, etc, too. That's clearly the right place for it. what is right and what is wrong depends on the circumstances. I also prefer tagging addr:housenumbers to where they apply, but in Italy this is (as I was recently told on talk-it) actually the gate, not the house or the parcel. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On the other hand, private says Only with permission of the owner on an individual basis. But the owner is the homeowners association, and the individual residents can allow people in. And so could the security company. But the HOA and security firm are acting on behalf of, and with the authority of, the owner. So effectively, exactly what private is. How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? Mark the callbox for nonresidents. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. That's only a solution if the gates actually have names. I've never seen such a name. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote: On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. That's only a solution if the gates actually have names. I've never seen such a name. I have seen gates that had number signs (1, 2, 3, etc., not a street address). This number would logically go into the name tag. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Am 15.04.2012 23:51, schrieb John F. Eldredge: I have seen gates that had number signs (1, 2, 3, etc., not a street address). This number would logically go into the name tag. If these numbers are, what I expect them to be, then it's not a name, but a reference, and should go into the ref-Tag (which is used as a rendering fallback in mapnik, AFAIK, so it should be fine, too. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de wrote: Am 15.04.2012 23:51, schrieb John F. Eldredge: I have seen gates that had number signs (1, 2, 3, etc., not a street address). This number would logically go into the name tag. If these numbers are, what I expect them to be, then it's not a name, but a reference, and should go into the ref-Tag (which is used as a rendering fallback in mapnik, AFAIK, so it should be fine, too. regards Peter No, I mean that I saw signs on the physical gates, labeling them as gate 1, gate 2, etc. Admittedly, this is more common for gates into industrial facilities. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
At 2012-04-15 13:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. That's only a solution if the gates actually have names. I've never seen such a name. You were asking how to mark a residents only entrance and I suggested one. If you want to be a purist about it, find out what other tags Mapnik might render on a gate and, if one of them is more suitable to put a description in, use it. If not, suggest Mapnik render description=* and use it. -- Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Gated communities - access=private or destination?
On 4/15/2012 10:39 PM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-15 13:55, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 4/15/2012 6:30 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-15 01:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for residents only? name= or ref= or whatever else Mapnik was designed to render on a gate. That's only a solution if the gates actually have names. I've never seen such a name. You were asking how to mark a residents only entrance and I suggested one. If you want to be a purist about it, find out what other tags Mapnik might render on a gate and, if one of them is more suitable to put a description in, use it. If not, suggest Mapnik render description=* and use it. That's not a solution. Mapnik already renders the type of access in text if you use MapQuest's rendering rules. Routers should be able to point you to the proper gate. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
