Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > If museums are not an amenity but building? Are all mappable 'museums' > buildings? I don't know. No, you're right, there are museums in parks. see e.g.[1] located here [2], which is unfortunately still mapped as a node. B

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - office=wedding_planner

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wedding_Planner Just found a tag like this when cleaning up with OSMOSE and thought I'd write a short proposal. Already was brought up a few years ago on the mailinglist, but not really documented after that. __ openstreetmap.org/use

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

On 30/05/2015 9:40 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: On 29 May 2015 at 13:06, Daniel Koć > wrote: W dniu 29.05.2015 13:47, pmailkeey . napisał(a): On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć mailto:daniel@ko%C4%87.pl>> wrote: W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Wil

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

On 29 May 2015 at 15:34, Arch Arch <7h3.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > > There do exist church buildings which are no longer in use as place of > worships. Those can be tagged with building=church without > amenity=place_of_worship > > See: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dplace_of_wor

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

On 29 May 2015 at 13:06, Daniel Koć wrote: > W dniu 29.05.2015 13:47, pmailkeey . napisał(a): > >> On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć wrote: >> >> W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): >>> >>> I know there is a way to tag what the building as to what it was initially used for

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

> On May 30, 2015, at 12:41 AM, Daniel Koć wrote: > > But if not, we have no system, just historical cases and a lot of exceptions. > I think it's time to try to make some rules instead. I though there was some tag prefix like disused: or abandoned: that could be used with the building=indus

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works (was: Re: Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging)

Sent from my iPhone > On May 29, 2015, at 9:28 PM, Philip Barnes wrote: > > Although not the type of amenity estate agents usually describe. [pure speculation on my part] that is because the amenity tag originally was for the amenities of a town. Over time, as tagging became more and more

Re: [Tagging] Tag: shop: "hifi"

I would like to ask a question about Wiki page for shop=hifi - there's a suggestion for merging it with shop=electronics, however there's only one statement on discussion page and it's 4 years old, so it looks like this proposition is not valid anymore: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

W dniu 29.05.2015 16:34, Arch Arch napisał(a): There do exist church buildings which are no longer in use as place of worships. Those can be tagged with building=church without amenity=place_of_worship Sure, I know it. But it would mean that building=church is rather just a building form, not

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Malcolm Herring < malcolm.herr...@btinternet.com> wrote: > On 29/05/2015 08:41, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > >> Why is this a property of the dock, >> rather than a property of the water body. >> > > A dock is a body of water. It may or may not be separated from a > conn

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

Am 29.05.2015 um 14:06 schrieb Daniel Koć: W dniu 29.05.2015 13:47, pmailkeey . napisał(a): On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): I know there is a way to tag what the building as to what it was initially used for - but i don't think t

[Tagging] Data Model for Address

If anyone is interested in the data model used by Royal Mail in UK addresses, this will tell you loads: http://www.poweredbypaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Latest-Programmers_guide_Edition-7-Version-6.pdf [1] Warning: you may find yourself uttering things in "rather unparliamentary langua

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On 29/05/2015 13:16, John Eldredge wrote: That is just one of the common meanings of dock. Another common meaning is as a synonym for pier, an above-water structure used to give access to a ship. You are referring to the en-us usage of the word "dock", which covers piers, pontoons & the like.

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:22 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Building is the 'common' example. In cases where plots of land receive > things then the plot area should have the address. If there are many > buildings but only one address, where is the mail to be delivered ? Put the > address on that build

Re: [Tagging] To mark as covered, or to not mark as covered?

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 03:29:53PM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Richard wrote: > > > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 01:09:56PM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: > > > If this is like many fuel stations, it's probably just a roof with no > > > walls. Typically, I've seen tho

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Zip codes, in the USA, are the same way. They are intended for the post office's routing, and don't necessarily correspond to administrative divisions of the land. A given plot of land may be in one administrative division for tax purposes, yet be lumped into a neighboring division for mail-del

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 12:57 +0100, pmailkeey . wrote: > For some strange reason, RM chose settlements rather than counties to > determine postcodes. > They chose where the sorting offices were and from that where the lines of communication went, that is why Market Bosworth (a long way inside Le

Re: [Tagging] Comms towers

Pole without a pole = pole? I am confused. What sort of structure are you describing? On May 29, 2015 5:48:33 AM "pmailkeey ." wrote: On 29 May 2015 at 05:47, Marc Gemis wrote: > according to this wiki page there is a difference between > > man_made=communications_tower > > and > > man_ma

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works (was: Re: Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging)

On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 12:47 +0100, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć wrote: > W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): > > I know there is a way to tag what the building as to > what it was > init

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

That is just one of the common meanings of dock. Another common meaning is as a synonym for pier, an above-water structure used to give access to a ship. On May 29, 2015 3:41:23 AM Malcolm Herring wrote: On 29/05/2015 08:41, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Why is this a property of the dock, > rat

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works

W dniu 29.05.2015 13:47, pmailkeey . napisał(a): On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): I know there is a way to tag what the building as to what it was initially used for - but i don't think that is the proper way (afaik). So what do yo

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 11:43, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > > > On 2015-05-29 11:58, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: > > > >Only Royal Mail think Chepstow is in Gloucestershire, England. Normal >> people think it is in Monmouthshire, Wales. This is the correct

Re: [Tagging] man_made=works (was: Re: Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging)

On 29 May 2015 at 12:42, Daniel Koć wrote: > W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): > > I know there is a way to tag what the building as to what it was >> initially used for - but i don't think that is the proper way (afaik). >> > > So what do you think about building=church + amenity

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

On 29 May 2015 at 12:27, John Willis wrote: > > > On May 29, 2015, at 7:35 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > There are no man made trees in >> the forest, they all grow naturally. >> >> >> >> > Man can plant a natural tree - or it could self-seed. > > > In osm there is a distinction between cultivated

[Tagging] man_made=works (was: Re: Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging)

W dniu 29.05.2015 13:34, John Willis napisał(a): I know there is a way to tag what the building as to what it was initially used for - but i don't think that is the proper way (afaik). So what do you think about building=church + amenity=museum then? I think we need some clear, general rules.

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

Sent from my iPhone > On May 29, 2015, at 7:58 PM, Daniel Koć wrote: > > W dniu 29.05.2015 3:54, John Willis napisał(a): > >> Currently, building=industrial +landuse=industrial has usurped >> man_made=works completely. > > I think of building=industrial like a building=church - it's just a

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

On May 29, 2015, at 7:35 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: >> There are no man made trees in >> the forest, they all grow naturally. > > Man can plant a natural tree - or it could self-seed. In osm there is a distinction between cultivated and constructed. We already do this will all other "cultivated"

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

W dniu 29.05.2015 3:54, John Willis napisał(a): Currently, building=industrial +landuse=industrial has usurped man_made=works completely. I think of building=industrial like a building=church - it's just a form, we need some way to describe the function, just like we do with amenity=place_o

Re: [Tagging] Comms towers

On 29 May 2015 at 05:47, Marc Gemis wrote: > according to this wiki page there is a difference between > > man_made=communications_tower > > and > > man_made=tower > tower:type=communications > > and then there is also > > man_made=mast > tower:type=communications > > > pretty easy to understand

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-29 11:58, pmailkeey . wrote: > On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: >> Only Royal Mail think Chepstow is in Gloucestershire, England. Normal people >> think it is in Monmouthshire, Wales. This is the correct postal address: >> >> 1 Bigstone Meadow >> Tutshill >> CHEPSTOW

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

On 29 May 2015 at 07:36, Lauri Kytömaa wrote: > pmailkeey wrote: > > johnw wrote: > >> Forest=natural ? > >> isn’t that natural=wood? > > I don't know the difference between a wood and a forest! > > landuse=forest and natural=wood are a poor example for historical > reasons, when some thought tha

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

2015-05-29 8:36 GMT+02:00 Lauri Kytömaa : > landuse=forest and natural=wood are a poor example for historical > reasons, when some thought that natural=wood together with > landuse=forest was "redundant", when it's not: > +1, also because inside a natural=wood/forest object (an entity with a nam

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

On 29 May 2015 at 03:06, John Willis wrote: > > > > On May 28, 2015, at 6:22 PM, AYTOUN RALPH > wrote: > > And with this argument for a hierarchical approach we are back to the > start point of umbrella tags that cover all possibilities which is > > landuse=educational as a polygon encompassing

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

I would like to make the decision based on the usage of a dock. Such dock=tidal would never be used to pump the dock dry, but to keep a fixed water level, I think. Then the usage of dock=drydock would be associated to the purpose of dry docks. At Bremerhaven the structures which are described by

Re: [Tagging] Removal of "amenity" from OSM tagging

On 29 May 2015 at 03:27, John Willis wrote: > > > > On May 29, 2015, at 11:02 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > > > > And that ties in nicely with my thoughts of removing the words and > generating tags and values by symbols ! > > Mapping by emoji! Just put a hot dog symbol in the hot-dog stand! > > ^_

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 10:56, Marc Gemis wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:33 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > >> Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not >>> because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) >>> >> >> Probably ! >> >> >>> The house numbers are used to ident

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > Postcodes don't have addresses, but addresses can have postcodes. I say > "can have" and not "have" as addresses can exist without postcodes, for > example when the local authority has named the roads in a new estate but > the postcodes have not

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:33 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not >> because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) >> > > Probably ! > > >> The house numbers are used to identity flats, not the building. >> > > Now you're confusing 'ho

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 07:18, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > That's a circular definition. What is the actual difference between the > two types of address, in your model? > > Only 1 type of address, just attached to a different type object. -- Mike. @millomweb

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 06:14, Marc Gemis wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > >> Addresses are used to identify buildings. Not all buildings need to be >> identified. > > > Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not > because it doesn't fit in yo

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On 29/05/2015 09:45, pmailkeey . wrote: Is, then, a dry dock an empty body of water? Only when it is pumped dry. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On 29 May 2015 at 09:18, Malcolm Herring wrote: > On 29/05/2015 08:41, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > >> Why is this a property of the dock, >> rather than a property of the water body. >> > > A dock is a body of water. It may or may not be separated from a > connecting river or sea by a lock or single g

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On 29 May 2015 at 08:41, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Why is this a property of the dock, > rather than a property of the water body. > > What's wrong with "floating" vs. "fixed"? > > Some docks are gated and some are not. Same gate could be used as per lock gate. Same function. -- Mike. @millomweb

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

On 29/05/2015 08:41, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Why is this a property of the dock, rather than a property of the water body. A dock is a body of water. It may or may not be separated from a connecting river or sea by a lock or single gate. What's wrong with "floating" vs. "fixed"? What do you

Re: [Tagging] dock=tidal

Why is this a property of the dock, rather than a property of the water body. What's wrong with "floating" vs. "fixed"? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> > Depending on the country, state, area the address does not necessarily refer > to the building. > > In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that is > defined by the cadastral plan. > > So those plots of ground may be 600 sq m or 1,000,000 hectares and may hav