Re: [Tagging] length=

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 04:18:57PM +0100, Martin Vonwald wrote: > 2015-01-27 16:13 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe : > > > I personally recommend to use the length key while mapping street cabinets > > as nodes. > > > > On a node it ma

Re: [Tagging] length=

2015-01-28 8:58 GMT+01:00 Florian Lohoff : > > Does it ? I cant think of any application where this makes sense. > A node does not have an orientation so why can it have a length? > > If it has a length it does not make sense to use a node. > > Flo > Since OSM editing tools aren't AutoCAD you can

Re: [Tagging] length=

2015-01-28 8:58 GMT+01:00 Florian Lohoff : > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 04:18:57PM +0100, Martin Vonwald wrote: > > 2015-01-27 16:13 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe : > > > > > I personally recommend to use the length key while mapping street > cabinets > > > as nodes. > > >

Re: [Tagging] length=

2015-01-28 9:14 GMT+01:00 Martin Vonwald : > I don't see why anyone would want to do it that way instead of simply > drawing a box, but I accept the fact, that some users do, so it's fine for > me. > It's more precise to use tools like compass or meters to get the cabinet's (or any other small f

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

On 28/01/2015 6:53 PM, Martin Vonwald wrote: Hi! 2015-01-28 8:48 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: I note that"if the medium of a pipeline you are tagging is not listed here, please choose a meaningful value at your own discretion."However tha

Re: [Tagging] length=

2015-01-27 17:13 GMT+01:00 Mike Thompson : > > The way in OSM is only a (sometimes not precise) drawing of an existing > feature and can be different from the reality. > > How precise is the value of the "length" tag? From what is the value > derived? > to make sense on ways, I'd expect it to r

Re: [Tagging] length=

2015-01-28 9:13 GMT+01:00 François Lacombe : > Some small features can actually be summarized as nodes when drawing their > shape sounds irrelevant regarding the cluttering it introduces. > > I'm sorry that was trivial for me. > I won't draw a circle for a 5cm diameter pole and so on... > > > wh

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

Hello Warin, Wednesday, January 28, 2015, 8:48:16 AM, you wrote: W> Request For Discussion W> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:substance thanks for picking up thus topic. I have to leave in a few minutes for a 6 week assignment, therefore only just a few words: - my intention & impression

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

On 28/01/2015 8:41 PM, Rainer Fügenstein wrote: Hello Warin, Wednesday, January 28, 2015, 8:48:16 AM, you wrote: W> Request For Discussion W> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:substance thanks for picking up thus topic. I have to leave in a few minutes for a 6 week assignment, therefore o

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 25 January 2015 at 16:29, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > patron saints. > E.g. the Basilica Sancti Petri (Saint Peter's Basilica) in Vatican City is > obviously dedicated to Sanctus Petrus (Saint Peter). There are sometimes more than one saint with the same name, This is where Wikidata tags prov

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

2015-01-28 8:48 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > Unfortunately this does not have a tag for non drinking water .. possible > values could be > > non-potable_water > > grey_water > I like grey_water > > According to taginfo the values in decreasing use are water (30%), gas, > heat, s

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

2015-01-28 12:01 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > So for natural gas worked out to that basic level, as one example, that > would be > substance = gas > gas=fuel > fuel=natural_gas > I believe this is pointlessly complicated and semantically incorrect, why not tag: substance=natural_

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

On 28/01/2015 11:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-28 8:48 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: Unfortunately this does not have a tag for non drinking water .. possible values could be non-potable_water grey_water I like grey_water

[Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

I just stumbled over this in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix *removed:* - (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are commonly seen on other sources) I propose to remove the part "or never existed but are commonly seen on other sources", beca

Re: [Tagging] length=

I understand your point. Nevertheless, using a compass + indicating direction=* will be more precise and exact than drawing the box according to aerial pictures (often according where you think the box is) Same for length=* or any other physical properties. I've no problem with hardcore micromapp

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

2015-01-27 11:42 GMT+01:00 Simone Saviolo : > Speaking of Vatican, i.e. Roman Catholic Church, Mary is Blessed, not > Saint. Her title is Beata Virgo Maria (Beata Vergine Maria in Italian, > Blessed Virgin Mary in English). She is an unordinary Blessed, as she and > her feasts are more important t

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 1/28/15 7:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I just stumbled over this in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix *removed:* * (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are commonly seen on other sources) I propose to remove the part "or never exis

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

maybe "fiction:" and an explanation in the note tag. Richard Welty wrote on 2015-01-28 13:46: On 1/28/15 7:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I just stumbled over this in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix *removed:* * (features that do not exist anymore or never e

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 28/01/2015 12:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-27 11:42 GMT+01:00 Simone Saviolo >: Speaking of Vatican, i.e. Roman Catholic Church, Mary is Blessed, not Saint. Her title is Beata Virgo Maria (Beata Vergine Maria in Italian, Blessed Virgin

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 1/28/15 7:51 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: maybe "fiction:" and an explanation in the note tag. back in the 1960s, there were a bunch of proposals for motorways in the Albany, NY area that were never built (for good reason). a mapper added those as proposed maybe two years ago, which wasn't good bec

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 28/01/2015 13:05, Richard Welty wrote: i changed them to highway:unbuilt, rather than deleting them so that they would stop rendering and wouldn't get added back in later. I guess that that makes sense here in a "fix the mapper" kind of way (I've certainly done similar things), but genera

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 26 January 2015 at 00:39, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > maybe using Wikidata should be considered through an >> additional tag such as dedication:wikidata=Q33923 for Saint Peter >> > > I dislike these numbers. They are not human readable, and typos will not

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 28.01.2015 05:01, John F. Eldredge wrote: > On 01/25/2015 10:29 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: >> Probable all christian churches (buildings) and most chapels are dedicated >> to patron saints. >> E.g. the Basilica Sancti Petri (Saint Peter's Basilica) in Vatican City is >> obviously dedicated to

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 28.01.2015 12:34, Andy Mabbett wrote: > There are sometimes more than one saint with the same name, This is > where Wikidata tags provide useful disambiguation. > > You can either tag with: > >wikidata = Q12512 (resolves to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12512 > ; the item for Saint Peter'

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 1/28/15 8:09 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: On 28/01/2015 13:05, Richard Welty wrote: i changed them to highway:unbuilt, rather than deleting them so that they would stop rendering and wouldn't get added back in later. I guess that that makes sense here in a "fix the mapper" kind of way (I've ce

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

> removed: > > (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are commonly seen > on other sources) > > I propose to remove the part "or never existed but are commonly seen on > other sources", because this has nothing to do with "removed". If people want > to tag easter eggs or errors >

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

thank you all for your comments, user:RicoZ, the creator of that page also agreed and has changed the description. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

2015-01-28 13:06 GMT+01:00 SomeoneElse : > "grey water" has a specific meaning (waste water that isn't sewage and can > be further used for e.g. irrigation). If that's what you mean - great. If > you just mean water that you can't drink, then just use something that > describes it, like "water".

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Quay

Am 28.01.2015 um 02:51 schrieb Warin: > On 27/01/2015 9:29 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: >> (This discussion originated on talk - crossposted to tagging on >> Malcolm's suggestion) >> >> On 26/01/2015 21:16, Malcolm Herring wrote: >>> On 26/01/2015 19:23, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: http://wiki.op

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 2015-01-28 13:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : > 2015-01-27 11:42 GMT+01:00 Simone Saviolo >: > > On 2015-01-27 11:25, André Pirard wrote : >> You should urgently warn the Vatican >> >>

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

2015-01-28 17:12 GMT+01:00 André Pirard : > On 2015-01-28 13:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : > > 2015-01-27 11:42 GMT+01:00 Simone Saviolo : > >> On 2015-01-27 11:25, André Pirard wrote : >> >> You should urgently warn the Vatican >>

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

On 28/01/2015 16:12, André Pirard wrote: The fact is that in French, we use no such words as "Blessed". The French equivalent is 'Bienheureux/se'. I don't suppose it's ever used of the Virgin Mary, though. -- Steve --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. ht

Re: [Tagging] patron saints

2015-01-28 17:12 GMT+01:00 André Pirard : > Speaking of Vatican, i.e. Roman Catholic Church, Mary is Blessed, not >> Saint. Her title is Beata Virgo Maria (Beata Vergine Maria in Italian, >> Blessed Virgin Mary in English). She is an unordinary Blessed, as she and >> her feasts are more important

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

Hi, On 01/28/2015 01:08 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > *removed:* > > * (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are > commonly seen on other sources) > > I propose to remove the part "or never existed but are commonly seen on > other sources", because this has nothing t

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

Several freeways that were designed by the Army Corps of Engineers in the Baghdad, IQ area got tagged similarly to that (highway=unbuilt or similar). No idea if they were later built by some authority. Also didn't know if it was inside knowledge by a returning soldier past the end of whatever app

Re: [Tagging] Ethnic shops

I started modifying the wiki following our recent discussion. For cuisine=*, I added: "May also apply to other services that deliver food, like convenience." For shop=convenience, I added (in Tags used in combination): "Stores selling specific type of food or with ethnic origin may use {{tag|cu

Re: [Tagging] Ethnic shops

2015-01-28 18:52 GMT+00:00 Eric SIBERT : > I started modifying the wiki following our recent discussion. > > For cuisine=*, I added: > "May also apply to other services that deliver food, like convenience." > > For shop=convenience, I added (in Tags used in combination): > "Stores selling specific

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

hi, first, I wouldn't use the value of substance=* as key for the detailed level, because in this case we would introduce a new key (i.e. fuel=) whenever a new substance is introduced (i.e. substance=fuel). second, I'd stick with two levels (general, detailed), otherwise we'd eventually end u

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 03:22:51PM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > thank you all for your comments, user:RicoZ, the creator of that page also > agreed and has changed the description. thank you all for the unexpected attention, the problematic text snippet was cut&paste from [[Comparison of li

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

Yes, feature that does not exist anymore (or even never existed!) or is only proposed has no place in OSM. With possible caveat that features that are extremely likely to be added (recently destroyed building visible on aerial images etc) element with note explaining situations makes sense. But n

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On January 28, 2015 7:09:01 AM CST, SomeoneElse wrote: > On 28/01/2015 13:05, Richard Welty wrote: > > > > i changed them to highway:unbuilt, rather than deleting them so > > that they would stop rendering and wouldn't get added back in later. > > > > I guess that that makes sense here in a "fix

Re: [Tagging] Ethnic shops

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:57 AM, Dan S wrote: > > 2015-01-28 18:52 GMT+00:00 Eric SIBERT : >> I started modifying the wiki following our recent discussion. >> >> For cuisine=*, I added: >> "May also apply to other services that deliver food, like convenience." >> >> For shop=convenience, I added

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 29/01/2015 12:28 AM, althio wrote: removed: (features that do not exist anymore or never existed but are commonly seen on other sources) I propose to remove the part "or never existed but are commonly seen on other sources", because this has nothing to do with "removed". If people want to t

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On 28/01/2015 21:57, John F. Eldredge wrote: Well, you also have the status "proposed, but no start date set", which would fit some subdivision maps I have seen. I am not sure how one would tag that. Again, I probably wouldn't add that, until it has got a projected start date (and a budget!

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

On Wed, 2015-01-28 at 22:42 +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Yes, feature that does not exist anymore (or even never existed!) or > is only proposed has no place in OSM. So you want to get rid of proposed roads, too? Having a proposed road on the map is good to see what has been planned for the

Re: [Tagging] RFD pipeline sub tag substance

> On Jan 28, 2015, at 8:01 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Oh.. 'multiphase' is a mixture of gas, fuel and water as it comes out of some > well heads if this is the proper term used for pipelines, then this would be the right one, Otherwise, =multi (like sports) would be the b

Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

Yes, my opinion is that all highway=proposed should be removed. OSM should map current situation - not what was there or what will be. "after it is obvious the proposed road will never be built" sounds nice but always there will be somebody convinced that proposal is real. For example my city has