Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

I tend to include Boy Scout camps when I find them because they're often well-known landmarks. Some that I've mapped include Camp Baldwin (which I'd love to detail map since I've spent around 100 nights at that camp alone now but the canopy's too dense f

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

I decided not to include the scout camp, because it then still might be confused with a place where ordinary campers can stay (like is the case with all options in the proposal). After the long discussion I have tried to keep the proposal as clean and simple as possible. I hope someone else will st

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

> On Mar 30, 2015, at 8:49 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 30/03/2015 10:14 AM, David Bannon wrote: >> >> I note you did not do 'scout camp' on there. Its equally specialised but >> a different special I think ?? Hmm >> >> David >> >> > From very distant memory those were

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 10:49 +1100, Warin wrote: >. > From very distant memory those were temporary .. > some times once only, sometimes once every few years. > And they were restricted to scouts only .. thus access=scouts? > No Warin, don't think we are talking about the same sort of camp. Th

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

Jan, That has certainly addressed everyone concerns that I can see. Thank you. Hopefully it fits your requirements and original desires. Jonathan --- http://bigfatfrog67.me From: Jan van Bekkum Sent: ‎Sunday‎, ‎29‎ ‎March‎ ‎2015 ‎21‎:‎47 To: Tag discussion, s

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

Those are access=private + operator=[bsa or council, sponsor group] You can also put a brand tag on it maybe brand=Boy Scouts of _. It isn't a chain, and is affiliated loosely through the national group, but operated by local groups. My private Buddhist school has a little facility up in

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

On 30/03/2015 10:14 AM, David Bannon wrote: I note you did not do 'scout camp' on there. Its equally specialised but a different special I think ?? Hmm David From very distant memory those were temporary .. some times once only, sometimes once every few years. And they were restricted to

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

On Sun, 2015-03-29 at 09:31 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > Among other things, perhaps it would be better to change the final > wiki vote status from "approved" to > > something more like "debate complete" or "published". Indeed, "published" is good. I'd prefer that to "debate complete" as i

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

So you have renamed it Jan ? Happy to see the original name, camp_site, pop up in parallel ? Probably make sense to deal with them both as closely as we can. An outsider, someone who has not seen the effort put in here (especially by you), may see these as competing entries but they are really no

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 66, Issue 205

Warin, your answer does help. I meant that I was looking from a satellite image at something that may have been a building, but the imagery was not clear enough to determine if it was a building for sure. A survey would not be possible as it is a place in Africa. I think then what I should do is

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

I have made major changes to the proposal as a result of our discussions. It it is strictly limited to camping type (designation) and does no longer classify on facility level, ease of access or pricing. It can be found here . Re

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > I don't see a benefit to complicating access tagging for just one mode. > Routing engines are already capable of handling the situation quite handily > if the way that bicycles are not allowed on is bicycle=no or > bicycle=destination. > You

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

I don't see a benefit to complicating access tagging for just one mode. Routing engines are already capable of handling the situation quite handily if the way that bicycles are not allowed on is bicycle=no or bicycle=destination. On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Hubert wrote: > Hallo fellow map

Re: [Tagging] probable tag

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Lukas Sommer wrote: > Use http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed For good reasons, there is community reluctance and opposition to mapping non-existing features. Proposals come and go, and few people who map those features ever come back to clean up la

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Jan van Bekkum wrote: > I just followed the post voting instructions that ask for the listing. > There is no condition for a minimal number of votes. I believe it is good > to have a single list with all approved tags. > The tag voting instructions lead a lot of

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

Hello Ole, I see your point, but it would have been nice if you would have let me know that you removed the entry. Regards, Jan On Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 13:11 Ole Nielsen wrote: > I'm the one who reverted your edit to > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:power > > The power

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

I just followed the post voting instructions that ask for the listing. There is no condition for a minimal number of votes. I believe it is good to have a single list with all approved tags. On Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 12:48 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > Am 28.03.2015 um 22:12 schrieb Michał

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

I'm the one who reverted your edit to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Map_Features:power The power features template isn't the appropriate place for this tag. The template includes important power infrastructure features such as power=line and some of the most essential attribute t

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - power_supply:schedule

> Am 28.03.2015 um 22:12 schrieb Michał Brzozowski : > > You have to edit the Map Features template. yes, but map features are only the most used tags and not every tag that gets approved by 10 people in the wiki, indeed, map features contain tags that never have been voted but are still e

Re: [Tagging] RFC - obligatory usage - bicycle=obligatory

> Am 28.03.2015 um 21:22 schrieb Simon Poole : > > (nearby road > surfaces are already "nearby" in OSM data) in the case of several roads or different elevation (eg one of the ways on a steep hill separated by a retaining wall) it might still be very difficult or impossible to come to the

Re: [Tagging] probable tag

Use http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed 2015-03-29 1:38 GMT, Bryce Nesbitt : > By and large OSM maps things that are physically present. > > Once "probable" becomes "under construction", there are tags for that: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dconstruction > -- Lu

Re: [Tagging] Tagging method of amenities at camp_sites

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > What if you do know details .. but not the exact location? Still place a > node somewheres? > How about at that point you go visit the site, and map based on that visit. OSM has a ten year history: have a look at existing co

Re: [Tagging] Tagging method of amenities at camp_sites

On 29/03/2015 6:14 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Dave Swarthout mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>> wrote: But does having a JOSM preset that sets a tag bar=yes mean that the bar actually gets rendered, or is it just findable though a query you can make t

Re: [Tagging] Tagging method of amenities at camp_sites

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > But does having a JOSM preset that sets a tag bar=yes mean that the bar > actually gets rendered, or is it just findable though a query you can make > to OSMAnd or whatever? It all depends on which map or which renderer you're > talking abo

Re: [Tagging] Tagging method of amenities at camp_sites

But does having a JOSM preset that sets a tag bar=yes mean that the bar actually gets rendered, or is it just findable though a query you can make to OSMAnd or whatever? It all depends on which map or which renderer you're talking about does it not? On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Bryce Nesbitt