Re: [Tagging] amenity=bicycle_repair_station

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-11-10 13:31 GMT+01:00 moltonel 3x Combo : > >> >> I like amenity=bicycle_tool_stand, >> > >> > +1, "repair_station" is ambigous / can easily be misunderstood. Even >> though >> > "amenity=self_serve_bicycle_tool_stand" looks lik

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

sent from a phone > Am 11.11.2015 um 08:20 schrieb Paul Johnson : > > I thought the problem was a 2000 member limitation in the API, though the > geographic grouping really helps manageability anyway even if the network > doesn't change at the jurisdiction line making the relations smaller

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Joachim wrote: > Using no link gives many warning in QA tools. Using > highway=residential plus noname=yes might be a workaround in the > current situation. This is not the only example when a residential road doesn't have a name. Keep in mind this is specificall

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

sent from a phone > Am 11.11.2015 um 08:48 schrieb Paul Johnson : > > Where I have run into issues that make it difficult to tell if the relation > is correct is when a route ends on a dual carriageway on one or both ends > with at least one central segment being a two-way single carriageway.

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

yes, a missing name should be no reason for a highway=residential_link. During the last days I've reviewed the remaining highway=residential_link roads, a few of them are quite special, so I fully understand that mappers have the idea that residential might not be correct, esp. when they believe t

[Tagging] Proposal: effective_hours tag for restrictions

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Nicolás Alvarez wrote: > > El 10 nov 2015, a las 09:57, Badita Florin > escribió: > > Hello, i have a question, how do you tag the opening hours for a turn > restriction that is activated only during a certain time of day or week. > Also, do you have an idea what

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: effective_hours tag for restrictions

I like the idea to use effective_hours=*. I just wonder if this oneway="Fr-Su 00:-24:00" means something like that: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28865357 I'll ask the mapper, as it may also be a typo for opening_hours, though I doubt that. I assume there is a oneway sign with an additi

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

2015-11-11 11:00 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann : > pro 2) : less confusing for those who like the duck test > (if there is a tertiary_link there should also be a xyz_link) > contra 2): more work for many people, hard to verify > reg. 2b) > I believe even tertiary links should be extremely rare. The r

Re: [Tagging] time-conditioned turn restriction

Martijn van Exel wrote: > type=restriction;restriction=no_left_turn; no_left_turn:conditional=no @ > (Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00,16:00-19:00) > > Is this the preferred way? Should it be? type=restriction restriction:conditional=no_left_turn @ (Mo-Fr 06:00-09:00,16:00-19:00) There's also a mention of "non

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:46 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-11-11 11:00 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann >: > >> pro 2) : less confusing for those who like the duck test >> (if there is a tertiary_link there should also be a xyz_link) >> contra 2): more work for many people, hard to verify >> r

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

2015-11-11 11:57 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson : > So, how do you propose the very common situation of porkchops on > tertiaries be handled? One such example is at 1st and Norfolk in Tulsa: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=36.15860&mlon=-95.97860#map=19/36.15860/-95.97860 > > these could be tagged

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: effective_hours tag for restrictions

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I like the idea to use effective_hours=*. > > I just wonder if this oneway="Fr-Su 00:-24:00" > > means something like that: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28865357 > Yes, though I would assume he me

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

Marco Antonio wrote on 2015-11-11 02:10: On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Can you provide an example of real situation where highway=residential_link makes sense? In my city (in South America) it is very common to have this type of roads https://www.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

I can see the attraction of this, but I do always worry about gross lack of backward compatibility being a huge barrier to adoption. If you have to scramble to keep up with changes like this whenever they happen, you aren't going to be keen to be a consumer of OSM data when it's only peripheral to

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

Having been negative, now the opposite... Why stop at ref? There are lots of places where it would help to group things uniquely rather than by a simple text string. Names are the obvious next one. If we put the names on a separate shared object, you can then tell when they are actually the same

Re: [Tagging] Tagging dangerous intersections

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 3:24 AM, Kieron Thwaites wrote: > Hi, > > I recently passed through an intersection in a particularly dodgy part > of town that actually had warning signs up, warning motorists that > said intersection is a hotspot for "smash and grab" robberies. (If > anyone is intereste

Re: [Tagging] amenity=bicycle_repair_station

amenity=diy_tool_station bicycle=yes iceskates=yes locked=yes opening_hours=during games. I only know of one for iceskates though, can I can't remember why it wasn't made a generic tag, the current tag is a bit like subway_entrance vs entrance. On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Bryce Nesbitt

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On 11/11/15 7:37 AM, David Earl wrote: > I can see the attraction of this, but I do always worry about gross > lack of backward compatibility being a huge barrier to adoption. If > you have to scramble to keep up with changes like this whenever they > happen, you aren't going to be keen to be a con

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > Am 11.11.2015 um 08:48 schrieb Paul Johnson : > > > > Where I have run into issues that make it difficult to tell if the > relation is correct is when a route ends on a dual carriageway on one or > both ends

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 3:19 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > Am 11.11.2015 um 08:20 schrieb Paul Johnson : > > > > I thought the problem was a 2000 member limitation in the API, though > the geographic grouping really helps manageability anyway even if the > network d

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 14:01 Richard Welty wrote: > it's an inevitable consequence of serializing a complex data structure. > we either find ways to deal with it or else we accept limits on what > we can accomplish. > Or we change the way we do it. For example, emitting the relations first woul

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On 11/11/15 9:51 AM, David Earl wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 14:01 Richard Welty > wrote: > > it's an inevitable consequence of serializing a complex data > structure. > we either find ways to deal with it or else we accept limits on what > we

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

I would assume that there are many, many more consumers than producers... --colin On 2015-11-11 17:27, Richard Welty wrote: > On 11/11/15 9:51 AM, David Earl wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 14:01 Richard Welty > > wrote: >> >> it's an inevitable consequ

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 6:48 AM, David Earl wrote: > Having been negative, now the opposite... > > Why stop at ref? > > There are lots of places where it would help to group things uniquely > rather than by a simple text string. Names are the obvious next one. If we > put the names on a separate

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Motorway link no default oneway

I can understand your concern, but please have a look at the reactions when the proposal still included "don't route over motorway_link without oneway". The reactions said there is no chance in enforcing this. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-September/026453.html 2015-10-30

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On 11/11/15 12:01 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > I would assume that there are many, many more consumers than producers... > > in terms of distinct applications, yes. in terms of network connections, there is a 1-to-1 relationship. the work is the same, it's a question of placement at the back e

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:50:41 +0100 Joachim wrote: > Many see _link only as slip roads. But using it for at-grade junctions > like described in the wiki has one advantage: _link is usually tagged > without a name because it connects two named roads and has none > itself. Using no link gives many w

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

The fact that tools don't currently support something is no reason to oppose its introduction either. If it were, we would never be able to change anything. On 2015-11-11 21:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:50:41 +0100 > Joachim wrote: > >> Many see _link only as slip

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

> On Nov 11, 2015, at 6:21 PM, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > > This is not the only example when a residential road doesn't have a > name There are no residential street names in all of Japan for tertiary roads and below (99.99%). There are a lot of numbered roads, but usually the web of reside

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Colin Smale wrote: > The fact that tools don't currently support something is no reason to oppose > its introduction either. If it were, we would never be able to change > anything. In principle I agree with you. But the road network is very specific. If you break

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:36:22 +0100 Colin Smale wrote: > On 2015-11-11 21:26, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:50:41 +0100 > > Joachim wrote: > > > >> Many see _link only as slip roads. But using it for at-grade > >> junctions like described in the wiki has one advantage:

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 04:57:45 -0600 Paul Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:46 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > > wrote: > > > > > 2015-11-11 11:00 GMT+01:00 Gerd Petermann > > > >: > > > >> pro 2) : less confusing for those who like the duck test > >> (if there is a tertiary_link there should

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:00:41 + Gerd Petermann wrote: > yes, a missing name should be no reason for a > highway=residential_link. > > During the last days I've reviewed the remaining > highway=residential_link roads, a few of them are quite special, so I > fully understand that mappers have t

Re: [Tagging] highway=residential_link

On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:45:29 +0100 Colin Smale wrote: > > > No, I can't think of any real examples at the moment, but that doesn't > make them any less existable. And if they exist, then > highway=residential_link is more logical than forcing > highway=residential and adding link=yes or some o

Re: [Tagging] amenity=bicycle_repair_station

On 12/11/2015 12:46 AM, Erik Johansson wrote: amenity=diy_tool_station bicycle=yes iceskates=yes locked=yes opening_hours=during games. I only know of one for iceskates though, can I can't remember why it wasn't made a generic tag, the current tag is a bit like subway_entrance vs entrance. Th

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:48 PM, David Earl wrote: > There are lots of places where it would help to group things uniquely > rather than by a simple text string. Names are the obvious next one. If we > put the names on a separate shared object, you can then tell when they are > actually the same