Re: [Tagging] deforestation tag

2014-05-02 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-04-29 15:19 GMT+02:00 fly : > Are you talking about landcover or landuse ? > > If the trees where cut and new ones are growing this is still > landuse=forest. > > If there are plans for building houses this might be landuse=greenfield > and later on landuse=construction. > > landuse=farm is d

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (bicycle=use_sidepath) (was use_sideway)

2014-05-02 Thread Pee Wee
On march 16 we launched the RFC for a "use_sideway" tag. There has not been much discussion about the proposal. The most discussion was on the NL forum about the name of the tag. It was mentioned that the word "sideway" is not a clear English word and can be confusing. There have been a few othe

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-05-02 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-04-24 0:52 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > If one could simply delete the layer=-1 on a waterway, without getting > yelled at by validators, then human effort could be directed to those true > oddball situations (like canals crossing each other) that really need > detailed tagging. why would y

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-05-02 Thread John F. Eldredge
Layer = -1 is not valid data for a waterway that is on the surface, which by definition is layer 0. It is only valid data on an underground waterway. On May 2, 2014 7:16:04 AM CDT, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2014-04-24 0:52 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > > > If one could simply delete the laye

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-05-02 Thread Pieren
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Layer = -1 is not valid data for a waterway that is on the surface, which by > definition is layer 0. It is only valid data on an underground waterway. Pfff, Martin, why did you restart this thread ? Water is always below the ground, othe

Re: [Tagging] layer=-1, rivers, bridges and tunnels

2014-05-02 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-05-02 17:23 GMT+02:00 Pieren : > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM, John F. Eldredge > wrote: > > Layer = -1 is not valid data for a waterway that is on the surface, > which by definition is layer 0. It is only valid data on an underground > waterway. > > Pfff, Martin, why did you restart this

Re: [Tagging] deforestation tag

2014-05-02 Thread John Packer
> > +1, landuse=grass does not make sense, as "grass" is not a "use", use > landcover=grass for grass covered areas, and landuse=meadow, if it is a > meadow I would love to replace all landuse=grass to landcover=grass on my city, but Mapnik doesn't render landcover=grass. (e.g. http://www.openstre

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - leaf_type and leaf_cycle

2014-05-02 Thread Rudolf Martin
Hi all, there are several tags to indicate vegetation with leaves, e.g. "landuse=forest", "natural=wood", "natural=scrub", "natural=tree" and others. Today we have one additional key "wood=" to describe the type of leaves. This key is arguable. The oxford dictionary says: "wood = 1. The hard