Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

I, too, would tend to interpret opening_hours=none as "never open". I think that opening_hours=unknown would be clearer. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther

Re: [Tagging] Parcel box tagging

Is this a store or kiosk, with staff present, or are the packing materials sold via a vending machine? -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

sent from a phone > Am 16.10.2015 um 14:18 schrieb johnw : > > and also - how do we handle the grounds? is there landuse=castle? the historic=castle tag will go on the whole site, the individual buildings get their own building tags cheers Martin

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 17/10/2015 3:58 AM, John Eldredge wrote: I, too, would tend to interpret opening_hours=none as "never open". I think that opening_hours=unknown would be clearer. If I don't know something .. I don't tag it. So I would simply not add the tag.

Re: [Tagging] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle

When editing, JOSM. When consuming, Osmand. Both seem to treat lanes as lanes. I would prefer we kill the legacy and be all-inclusive on lanes of travel, rather than motor vehicle lanes of travel as it does make for a much more comprehensive and coherent tagging syntax rather than working out

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

sent from a phone > Am 16.10.2015 um 05:09 schrieb John Willis : > > the intended use of the facility was a lavish residence in the style of a > castle. that's what castles are ;-) > My aunt has a giant log cabin on a 1500m hill, much higher than Hearst's > lavish

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

Javbw > On Oct 16, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > I d call the hearst residence at least a villa, if castle doesn't find > agreement. A villa or mansion or something more than a common house - but... It just feels weird to tag a more modern

Re: [Tagging] WG: how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

Thanks for the examples, i definitely disagree with both examples. Makes no sense to have those at all to me. In my opinion they need to be reverted/deleted. *Regards,* *Hans* *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 * On Thu, Oct 15,

Re: [Tagging] WG: how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

Hi Hans, that was my thought as well. I assume I have to check all the suspicious entries that http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/highway#values shows. The data is a bit out-aged now (2015-10-14 23:58 UTC) as I am constantly cleaning up but I think 842 different highway=* tags are far

Re: [Tagging] manège - area for horse training

Javbw > On Oct 16, 2015, at 3:31 PM, Georg Feddern wrote: > > > Ever worked/trained with horses? > > What is the key definition for sport? > Concentration? Reactions? Best moves? Power? > > Is a carrière > - sport_practice when there is just training > but > - sport

Re: [Tagging] manège - area for horse training

Am 15.10.2015 um 22:57 schrieb Warin: On 16/10/2015 7:08 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: What the picture shows is a Carrière, which is to be tagged as leisure=pitch sport=equestrian +1 And someone will now say that it is not a sport... just like for cricket_nets ... Anyone for another key

Re: [Tagging] post_box:type values, meter in particular

sent from a phone > Am 16.10.2015 um 03:16 schrieb Craig Wallace : > > Sometimes known as a "business mail post box". my suggestion would be to not use amenity=post_box but rather a different main tag on these like amenity=business_post_box or business_mail_post_box It

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

sent from a phone > Am 16.10.2015 um 05:09 schrieb John Willis : > > Its easy to use language to make anything anything, especially if you > conflate the personality of the occupants with the building, rather than the > usage and purpose(s) of the building itself. well, use

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

On 16/10/2015 7:49 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-10-16 10:02 GMT+02:00 John Willis >: It just feels weird to tag a more modern structure never used as a castle as a castle. You are right - the duck test tells me it is an imposing

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

sent from a phone > Am 16.10.2015 um 12:12 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > A building without defensive capabilities is not a castle. I think that's the key question, and it could be further specified (once fortified or still fortified, would be relevant for many cases, e.g.

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

2015-10-16 10:02 GMT+02:00 John Willis : > It just feels weird to tag a more modern structure never used as a castle > as a castle. > > You are right - the duck test tells me it is an imposing historic > building. And yea, it looks a bit like a castle and is named "castle" - > like

Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line

> From: g...@ir.bbn.com > To: pene...@live.fr > CC: tagging@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line > Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:12:55 -0400 > I'm coming into this late, but I think key questions are: > > transmission vs distribution: in the US, this is a big

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

sent from a phone Am 16.10.2015 um 12:12 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: >> And btw., you have not yet answered the question regarding the >> Neuschwanstein case. I could name a similar example (besides the other >> Ludwig II castles in Bavaria), much smaller, here: >>

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

> On Oct 16, 2015, at 5:49 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > And btw., you have not yet answered the question regarding the Neuschwanstein > case. I could name a similar example (besides the other Ludwig II castles in > Bavaria), much smaller, here: >

Re: [Tagging] Postindustrial Castle

> On Oct 17, 2015, at 3:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> >> Am 16.10.2015 um 14:18 schrieb johnw >: >> >> and also - how do we handle the grounds? is there landuse=castle? > > > the historic=castle tag will go on the

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 17 Oct 2015 06:00, "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 17/10/2015 3:58 AM, John Eldredge wrote: >> >> I, too, would tend to interpret opening_hours=none as "never open". I think that opening_hours=unknown would be clearer. >> > > If I don't know something .. I don't tag it. > So I

Re: [Tagging] WG: how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

Let me know if you need any help. *Regards,* *Hans* *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 * On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi Hans, > > > that was my thought as well. I

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 2015-10-17 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: Agreed. Why would you add a tag when you don't know a value to assign? N In addition, concerning the signed:opening_hours=yes/no, there is no need to assign more tags to describe a lack of information about the first one. The point is, it is useful

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

How about using note:opening_hours=* ? 2015-10-17 10:45 GMT+09:00 Craig Wallace : > On 2015-10-17 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: > >> >> Agreed. Why would you add a tag when you don't know a value to assign? N >> >> >> In addition, concerning the signed:opening_hours=yes/no,

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

On 17 Oct 2015 10:48, "Craig Wallace" wrote: > > On 2015-10-17 01:59, Dave Swarthout wrote: >> >> >> Agreed. Why would you add a tag when you don't know a value to assign? N >> >> >> In addition, concerning the signed:opening_hours=yes/no, there is no >> need to assign more

Re: [Tagging] how to tag a "highway" that doesn't exist?

Hi Hans, thanks for the offer. I still try to decide what to do with these elements. In some cases it is obvious that editors have invested time to document something, so I'd not want to simply delete their work. I guess I'll start to comment those changesets which introduced the unusual

Re: [Tagging] Unmarked opening hours

Javbw > On Oct 17, 2015, at 9:59 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: > > > If I don't know something .. I don't tag it. > > So I would simply not add the tag. > > This is the right answer. > > +1 > +1 > Agreed. Why would you add a tag when you don't know a value to assign?