Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On 08.08.2013 01:24, Pieren wrote: On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: It should rather be a type=collection relation. I really hate "type=collection". One of the worst idea in OSM. All relations are collections. At least it is semantically correct, while type=site re

Re: [Tagging] waterway highway

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 5:13 PM, André Pirard wrote: > The waterway=dam definition is > all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) > ... > And, once again, I'm baffled by a dam being a waterway, like a crossing > being a highway and an ar

Re: [Tagging] waterway highway

Am Thu, 08 Aug 2013 02:13:38 +0200 schrieb André Pirard : > Hi, > > The waterway=dam definition > is all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) > Can I have > waterway=dam > highway=* > ? You could map the dam as area with the highway

Re: [Tagging] waterway highway

I don't see how those tags are mutually exclusive. As for a dam being a waterway, makes about as much sense as highway=traffic_signals to me. On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 7:13 PM, André Pirard wrote: > Hi, > > The waterway=dam definition is > all well but it

[Tagging] waterway highway

Hi, The waterway=dam definition is all well but it doesn't give a damn about what runs on top ;-) Can I have waterway=dam highway=* ? I feel like Osmose hides nearby ready to jump. The actual case I meet is one of a dam incorrectly tagged as a bridge. And

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > It should rather be a type=collection relation. I really hate "type=collection". One of the worst idea in OSM. All relations are collections. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstre

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > After reading the discussion and incorporating what I could, I am moving > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dranger_station > to the next step. Please comment per voting procedures, here or on the > talk p

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On 06.08.2013 15:51, Yuri D'Elia wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/45.2466/6.0866 which has been tagged with a multipoligon relation. Unfortunately, the relation has some problems: - not rendered anywhere? This is a super-relation, with other relations as members. This is not allow

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station

Note there is overlap between amentiy=ranger_station and tourism=information. A ranger station generally provides information in addition to other services. In the USA ranger stations have well established symbols, distinct from those used for tourist information only sites. _

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - ranger_station

After reading the discussion and incorporating what I could, I am moving http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dranger_station to the next step. Please comment per voting procedures, here or on the talk page. ___ Tagging maili

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

2013/8/7 Martin Koppenhoefer > > > If you look closely onto this you'll see that there are not only the > oceans but a whole hierarchy of names seas and oceans and parts of them, > so there is not only one name per coastline but a lot of them. Dependent on > the scale of your map you'll emphasiz

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

2013/8/7 Janko Mihelić > The best way I can think of for drawing oceans, is to put a tag on all > natural=coastline ways that are bordering it. Something like > "ocean:name:en=Atlantic ocean". > > If you look closely onto this you'll see that there are not only the oceans but a whole hierarchy o

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

The best way I can think of for drawing oceans, is to put a tag on all natural=coastline ways that are bordering it. Something like "ocean:name:en=Atlantic ocean". Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/li

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 10:00, Eugene Alvin Villar > ha scritto: > > > We currently (I think) do not tag the ***extent*** (even if fuzzy) of > > seas, bays, inlets, coves, fjords, and the like. > > don't know about the rest, bu

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 10:00, Eugene Alvin Villar ha scritto: > This solution can also apply to bodies of water that are not whole lakes or > rivers. We currently (I think) do not tag the extent (even if fuzzy) of seas, > bays, inlets, coves, fjords, and the like. don't know about

Re: [Tagging] amenity=police

Il giorno 07/ago/2013, alle ore 08:17, Bryce Nesbitt ha scritto: >> office=government ? >> i was just looking at something similar with immigration offices, oft >> frequented by travelers. embassies, yes. in-country immigration offices, >> no. > > That's broader, and works for some ranger

Re: [Tagging] Tagging of topographic areas with a name

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:19 PM, fly wrote: > On 06.08.2013 16:27, Yuri D'Elia wrote: > > Fortunately, the boundaries of the area are not important in themselves. > > Nobody renders valley or mountain group borders. But we *do* use such > > boundaries for name placement. > > I think the best wou