Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

On Tue, 15 May 2018 02:36 Paul Allen, wrote: > at least one other language makes a similar > distinction to English in that stations are for people, not goods. The U.K. has (or had) many places named 'Goods Station'. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing

[Tagging] Follow up re Aviation Obstacle lights

Hi Following up on the previous discussions re Aviation Obstacle lights to see if there was any final decision? https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-March/035311.html https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Aviation_Obstacle_Light Thanks Graeme

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote: > I think that was Martin's point. OSM tags and values aren't in Dutch > I took the Dutch to be an example that at least one other language makes a similar distinction to English in that stations are for people, not

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

I think that was Martin's point. OSM tags and values aren't in Dutch (despite the fact that some of them do appear to be in Double Dutch). On Mon, 14 May 2018 23:29 Johnparis, wrote: > That was on April 1, I note, or poisson d'avril as they say in French. > >

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

14. May 2018 10:18 by dieterdre...@gmail.com : > > > sent from a phone > On 14. May 2018, at 08:48, Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com > > > wrote: > > >>> Is the latter for oneway streets with a counterflow lane? >> >>

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

2018-05-14 11:55 GMT+02:00 Peter Elderson : > In Dutch, station means trains, also sizeable areas for trams and buses > with multiple platforms, but not planes. > in April OSMF announced [1] that, following a draft of the Babel working group, tags would soon be in German

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> -Original Message- > From: Marc Gemis > Sent: Monday, 14 May 2018 19:40 > > The wiki page on cycling infrastructure from the Lübeck Stammtish, > mentioned this explicitly "und/oder", see [1] > > I also see that they use cycleway:left/right=sidepath, I have never

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

From: Martin Koppenhoefer Sent: Monday, 14 May 2018 19:07 according to the wiki, you can't use "cycleway:left" and "cycleway:right" at the same time. Would you agree this requirement should be removed? This particular wiki page seems to be somewhat misleading in that

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> -Original Message- > From: Marc Gemis > Sent: Monday, 14 May 2018 18:55 > >> cycleway:left=opposite_lane (or cycleway:right, depending) >> oneway:bicycle=no > > I would expect that the above is for the case that there is only a > contra-flow lane. And that for

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

In Dutch, station means trains, also sizeable areas for trams and buses with multiple platforms, but not planes. 2018-05-14 11:43 GMT+02:00 Paul Allen : > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer < > dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> According to the tag

Re: [Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > According to the tag definitions for aerialway=goods [1], the endpoints > should be tagged with aerialway=station, but according to the station wiki > page [2], the tag requires passenger transport. > I'm

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

The wiki page on cycling infrastructure from the Lübeck Stammtish, mentioned this explicitly "und/oder", see [1] I also see that they use cycleway:left/right=sidepath, I have never used that, I used bicycle:forward/backward=use_sidepath What is the preferred method ? [1]

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

2018-05-14 11:30 GMT+02:00 Volker Schmidt : > > according to the wiki, you can't use "cycleway:left" and "cycleway:right" >> at the same time. Would you agree this requirement should be removed? >> > > Wher did you find this exclusion? >

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> according to the wiki, you can't use "cycleway:left" and "cycleway:right" > at the same time. Would you agree this requirement should be removed? > Wher did you find this exclusion? The "cycleway" wiki page [1] does not exclude it, I would say: " Consider using the cycleway:left

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

2018-05-14 10:37 GMT+02:00 : > For one-way streets, I’m not sure how most software is going to interpret > it. As it’s somewhat ambiguous, I would say the better solution with a > oneway street is to go with an explicit: > > > > cycleway:left=lane > >

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

From: osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au Sent: Monday, 14 May 2018 18:37 if there is only one cycle lane, but it’s allowed to travel in both directions on an otherwise one-way road use: cycleway:left=opposite (or cycleway:right, depending which side, as

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> > If bicycles are allowed to travel against the oneway, but there is no > explicit lane marked for them, use: (this is correcting my previous post) > > > > cycleway=opposite > > > > (my previous post was somewhat wrong, as if there is no explicitly marked > lane, using cycleway:left or

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

> > if one of the two is for traffic against the flow indicated by the oneway > tag, use: > > > > cycleway:left=opposite_lane (or cycleway:right, depending) > > oneway:bicycle=no > I would expect that the above is for the case that there is only a contra-flow lane. And that for drive with the

[Tagging] Conflicting wiki docu for aerialway=goods and aerialway=station

According to the tag definitions for aerialway=goods [1], the endpoints should be tagged with aerialway=station, but according to the station wiki page [2], the tag requires passenger transport. If I see it right, both requirements have been introduced roughly the same time by the same person ;-)

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

As far as I can tell, for two-way streets, there is no differences, it’s just more explicit. Given the difference in usage numbers (1522 vs. 254509) I would go with just cycleway=lane (I actually checked these numbers before I made that last post). For one-way streets, I’m not sure how

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

sent from a phone > On 14. May 2018, at 08:48, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Is the latter for oneway streets with a counterflow lane? > > > for oneway streets with a counterflow lane > > cycleway=opposite_lane is typically used > this is for situations where

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

Here is one example of a road with soft cycle lanes but no (vehicle) lanes. https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Z0DBe6sffpL7aubYj0zpaQ I use it regularly, it is plenty wide enough to pass other cars whilst staying out of the cycle lane but a lot of drivers do struggle with the concept of mostly

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

13. May 2018 23:34 by kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com : > I've long said that the final arbiters of tagging should be the intermediate > consumers of the data - not the end users, but rather the people who > implement the routers, renderers, navigation

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

14. May 2018 01:45 by ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com : >> Date: Sun, 13 May 2018 16:51:26 -0400 >> From: Bryan Housel <>> br...@7thposition.com >> >> > >> To: osm-tagging <>> tagging@openstreetmap.org >>

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

14. May 2018 08:38 by dieterdre...@gmail.com : > On 14. May 2018, at 08:05, <> osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au > > > <> > osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au > > > wrote: > > >>

Re: [Tagging] tagging of one-way cycle lanes

sent from a phone > On 14. May 2018, at 08:05, > wrote: > > So the easiest tagging is: > > > > lanes=2 > > cycleway=lane > is there a difference to cycleway:both=lane ? Is the latter for oneway streets with a