[Tagging] Difference between building=grandstand and leisure=bleachers

Reading descriptions of these two tags: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dgrandstand https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=bleachers the conclusion is that grandstand have a roof above and bleachers doesn't. Do I understand it correctly? If yes, I want to emphasize i

Re: [Tagging] Difference between building=grandstand and leisure=bleachers

The definition of the tag building=grandstand says that they are "usually" roofed, this implies that not always are roofed. I understand that the tag leisure=bleachers is discouraged for not being British English. Javier 2018-04-04 8:27 GMT+01:00 Tomasz Wójcik : > Reading descriptions of these t

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On Wednesday 04 April 2018, Warin wrote: > > So a 'beach' may include a 'tidal flat' ... confused. I tried to explain the difference - a beach is primarily shaped by waves while a tidal flat is shaped by tidal currents. The domination of waves can usually be seen in the form of a smooth surface

Re: [Tagging] Difference between building=grandstand and leisure=bleachers

On 4 April 2018 08:44:08 BST, "Javier Sánchez Portero" wrote: >The definition of the tag building=grandstand says that they are >"usually" >roofed, this implies that not always are roofed. My view is that a grandstand is a solid building and will contain services for spectators such as toilet

Re: [Tagging] Difference between building=grandstand and leisure=bleachers

2018-04-04 9:30 GMT+01:00 Philip Barnes : > > > On 4 April 2018 08:44:08 BST, "Javier Sánchez Portero" < > javiers...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bleachers are open structures, usually associated with American High > School and University sports. > > I understand that the > >tag > >leisure=bleachers is di

Re: [Tagging] Difference between building=grandstand and leisure=bleachers

in case you want to be more explicit, maybe covered=yes/no makes some sense? Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On 04/04/18 18:18, Christoph Hormann wrote: On Wednesday 04 April 2018, Warin wrote: So a 'beach' may include a 'tidal flat' ... confused. I tried to explain the difference - a beach is primarily shaped by waves while a tidal flat is shaped by tidal currents. The domination of waves can usuall

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

This is an interesting problem but it has no easy solution. Even if the Wiki definition was clear, unless you happen to be able to measure or otherwise determine the "mean high tide" line and other important characteristics, what we map as beach or tidal flat is purely an approximation, especially

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > the coastline should represent the limit of the sea, in case of a river > flowing in, people look at the level of salt in the water and whether the > level of the river is influenced by tides (afaik) > It seems some mappers go to the e

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: It seems some mappers go to the extreme opposite and map the coastline across the mouth of an estuary that is clearly part of the ocean: Yes, they do this because it's fast and they may have other more pressing issues to deal with at the moment. It's also non-controver

[Tagging] landuse=forest + ref=* : parcel number or what?

Hello, there. I hope this will not start a flamewar: I noticed that, despite being widely used, ref=* is not rendered for landuse=forest. I assumed this was used for parcel (compartment) numbers, as this tag seems to fit the definition of a parcel number; nevertheless, I saw on a Github issue

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:40 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >>u >> the coastline should represent the limit of the sea, in case of a river >> flowing in, people look at the level of salt in the water and whether the >> level of the riv

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On 04/04/2018 12:40, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: It seems some mappers go to the extreme opposite and map the coastline across the mouth of an estuary that is clearly part of the ocean: Many ocean/river boundaries are not arbitrary, but reflect off

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

Thank you much, that is me who did it, my mistake, I was trying to cover a coastline for the marine structures, the boundaries were following the same coastline and there was an island inside the estuary that the coastline was defined. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-33.6465/151.2835

Re: [Tagging] Coastal beach definition for mapping.

On Wednesday 04 April 2018, Malcolm Herring wrote: > > It seems some mappers go to the extreme opposite and map the > > coastline across the mouth of an estuary that is clearly part of > > the ocean: > > > > > > Many ocean/river boundaries are not arbit

[Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

I've noticed that someone from the Microsoft Open Map team is very busy adding turn restrictions all over the place ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/shawat94/ ). In my local neighbourhood, I noticed that he added no_u_turn restrictions to all the nodes where a road into in/out of a roundabo

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Seems like tagging “noise” to me. I’d expect a router to use the roundabout itself because exiting, making a U turn and then re-entering the roundabout will be longer and thus slower. Since the no U turn relations are there to make routing work and a reasonable router won’t need them, I’d say th

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

That is absurd behaviour. Seems like somebody programmed a bot. Polyglot 2018-04-05 1:49 GMT+02:00 Tod Fitch : > Seems like tagging “noise” to me. I’d expect a router to use the > roundabout itself because exiting, making a U turn and then re-entering the > roundabout will be longer and thus slo

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Well, the edits seem to be made in JOSM, and the speed seems to be too low to be a bot. So I do think they are made by hand. But this (and tens of other changesets are all titled "Added turn restrictions source: Probe”. I don’t know what “Probe” is, but I assume it’s some automated tool some

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

I don't see any changeset comments in either of the two you referenced. I would suggest adding a changeset comment to get their attention. You can also look on their github page to see what they are working on. https://github.com/Microsoft/Open-Maps/issues Best, Clifford On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 5

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/57747093 shows the following for me, are you not seeing this? Comment from Ds5rUy 2 days ago What's the rational for adding the no_u_turn restrictions for every single entry/exit to a roundabout where th

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Looking at the issues, I can’t actually find any that matches the activity currently performed by that user (and new turn restrictions). From: Clifford Snow Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2018 12:11 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for

[Tagging] Tagging turn restriction defaults

What would be the best way to handle setting unusual defaults on a regional basis? For example, all of the City of Tulsa and State of Oregon prohibit U-turns at traffic lights. How would one tag for this, and the inverse, tagging where such a turn is allowed by a sign? Most complicated example I

Re: [Tagging] Tagging turn restriction defaults

I was going to make a post about exactly this shortly… In all of Queensland, u-turns at signal controlled intersections are prohibited by default, except if explicitly permitted with a “u-turn permitted” sign. This raises two issues: a. How to specify that regional legislation b.

Re: [Tagging] no_u_turn restrictions for every entry/exit into a roundabout when the way is split because of physical separation?

Actually, it’s not just relatively harmless “noise”. Because such no_u_turn restrictions are indistinguishable from e.g. this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8182004 (which I just created), that actually has a sign “on the ground”: https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-27.2141567,153.001