Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Before deprecating the shop=fashion tag, shouldn't we reach out to the mappers that use shop=fashion ? Maybe they have a lot more domain knowledge than the people on this mailing list and can explain why they used shop=fashion and not shop=clothes; clothes=... (you know diversity and white

[Tagging] Tagging disputed boundaries

Hi fellow Taggers, Just a friendly heads up I've started to tag more disputed administrative boundary lines in OpenStreetMap with tags for disputed=yes (but will leave the existing dispute=yes alone), adding disputed_by=* on disputed ways, and adding claimed_by=* on their relations to support

Re: [Tagging] mapping large memorial objects that roads pass through.

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:08 PM John Willis via Tagging wrote: > > I understand about tunnel=building_passage for ways that pass through > structures, but there are some objects that roads go "under", similar to > bridges, but are not bridge-like items. > > In my local area, there are two

[Tagging] mapping large memorial objects that roads pass through.

I understand about tunnel=building_passage for ways that pass through structures, but there are some objects that roads go "under", similar to bridges, but are not bridge-like items. In my local area, there are two large torii (shinto gates) that public roads pass through the center of. They

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Le 11.03.19 à 23:57, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > Mar 11, 2019, 10:28 PM by marc_marc: > Le 11.03.19 à 21:36, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > Mar 11, 2019, 8:58 PM by marc_marc_irc: > Le 11.03.19 à 19:27, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > > we map positively what verifiably

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On 12/03/19 10:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > “We will would like to map land cover in an area near the Amazonian forest” I’d recommend that you start by mapping the existing forested areas with natural=wood or landuse=forest, From aerial imagery I would recommend you  do not use

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Organized mapping is ok mapping. Mapping of landcover has been pretty decent and sensible overall, not a bunch of fanatics, no data destruction. I’ve described current mapping practice for landcover=grass and landcover=trees. It covers most of the usage including the Paraguay mapping project.

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

> “We will would like to map land cover in an area near the Amazonian forest” I’d recommend that you start by mapping the existing forested areas with natural=wood or landuse=forest, and areas of water with natural=water and water=lake / =river, or natural=wetland for swamps, marshes, mangroves,

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On 12/03/19 02:32, Peter Elderson wrote: you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users, but you should know that a. landcover is not currently rendered by OSM Carto. b. THe proposal states that "All areas in the landcover features ofnatural

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Thanks for the numbers, for explaining and for the link, Christoph. Apreciated! Sergio On 2019-03-12 00:19, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Monday 11 March 2019, Peter Elderson wrote: >> Sorry, 2000. > IIRC the saying is "two wrongs does not make a right". > > Original use of tags with the

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On Monday 11 March 2019, Peter Elderson wrote: > Sorry, 2000. IIRC the saying is "two wrongs does not make a right". Original use of tags with the landcover key, that is mappers creating a new geometry with a landcover tag, is as follows (based on data from 2019-02-28): 72848 ways/relations

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 23:29 Uhr schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick < graemefi...@gmail.com>: > > >> Looking again, there is a category for this with "women;men;children >> " >> 242 times used, "women;men" even has 489. "fashion" is

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Mar 11, 2019, 11:37 PM by graemefi...@gmail.com: > > > On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 23:04, Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com > > > wrote: > >>> >>> >> I expanded a bit >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features >>

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On 2019-03-12 00:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Mar 11, 2019, 11:38 PM by s...@smz.it: > > On 2019-03-11 18:47, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> Mar 11, 2019, 6:44 PM by s...@smz.it : >> >> On 2019-03-11 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >>> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 11:38 PM by s...@smz.it: > On 2019-03-11 18:47, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> Mar 11, 2019, 6:44 PM by >> s...@smz.it >> : >> >>> On 2019-03-11 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >>> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 10:28 PM by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com: > Le 11.03.19 à 21:36, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > >> Mar 11, 2019, 8:58 PM by >> marc_marc_...@hotmail.com >> >> : >> >> Le 11.03.19 à 19:27, Christoph Hormann a écrit : >> >> we map positively what

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 23:04, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > I expanded a bit > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features > Thanks - so first step would be a new thread "Deprecate shop=fashion & shop=boutique", linking to the several threads that have discussed this over the last

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On 2019-03-11 18:47, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Mar 11, 2019, 6:44 PM by s...@smz.it: > > On 2019-03-11 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com >> : >> >> you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Line attachments

Hi Sergio, The proposal aims to map the way lines are bound to their supports. In my mind, attachement = {Insulator set ; clamps ; accessories to secure the insulators on crossarms} for a bare power conductor. Further keys can give details about each item in this set (but out of the current

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 19:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > The apparent sub-category missing from above would be "general clothes" > which would imply only clothing (not a department store), but sections for > men, women and children (and probably lingerie and sports, while I have > hardly ever

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Le 11.03.19 à 21:36, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > Mar 11, 2019, 8:58 PM by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com: > > Le 11.03.19 à 19:27, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > > we map positively what verifiably exists > > > with different imagery, it is possible to verify: > - that an old

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Sorry, 2000. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op ma 11 mrt. 2019 om 18:18 schreef Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users > > 6000 users? How you know that? > >

Re: [Tagging] Large areas of landuse=grass in the Netherlands

Some time ago I was proposing to introduce topology rules, at least locally. Those (besides a lot of other stuff) would cover which polygons can be above which polygons, which polygons can not be above which polygons etc. Such rules are already used for years in Lithuania in regards of forests.

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 8:58 PM by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com: > Le 11.03.19 à 19:27, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > >> we map positively what verifiably exists >> > > with different imagery, it is possible to verify: > - that an old one shows trees: old:landcover=trees > - that a more recent one shows no

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Le 11.03.19 à 19:27, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > we map positively what verifiably exists with different imagery, it is possible to verify: - that an old one shows trees: old:landcover=trees - that a more recent one shows no trees. landcover=xyz landuse=farmland

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On Monday 11 March 2019, Lorenzo Stucchi wrote: > [...] > > The idea was to map: bareland, artificial surface and forest. As a general principle in OSM we map positively what verifiably exists, not the lack of something. What you call "bareland" is at odds with that because it is essentially

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

> On Mar 11, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > > Note that https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rudolf/draft_landcover > > is proposal from 2014 and is rarely used (not used) in mapping. > Maybe not that

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Am 11. März 2019 17:32:13 MEZ schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer : > >in Germany, the cells in a police facility would not be called a >prison, AFAIK there are only “drunk tanks” (Ausnüchterungszelle / >sobering cell) and people would otherwise (pre-trial detention) go to a >real prison (government

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 6:44 PM by s...@smz.it: > On 2019-03-11 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > >> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by >> pelder...@gmail.com >> >> : >> >>> you can use landcover, ithas about 160K uses now by 6000 users >>> >> 6000 users? How you know

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On 2019-03-11 18:17, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users > > 6000 users? How you know that? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/landcover says: "Objects with this key were last edited

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 3:15 PM by lorenzostucch...@outlook.it: > The idea was to map: bareland, artificial surface and forest. > > Should be a good idea to map following this idea? > Mapping forests (or more accurately tree-covered areas) is useful and welcomed. But two other categories are more

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 6:29 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 17:18, Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com > > > wrote: > >> Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by >> pelder...@gmail.com >> >> : >> >>> you can use landcover, it has

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 17:18, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users > > 6000 users? How you know that? > I'm pretty sure overpass-turbo can do that. I can't figure out how you ask it to do

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Mar 11, 2019, 4:32 PM by pelder...@gmail.com: > you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users > 6000 users? How you know that? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

sent from a phone > On 10. Mar 2019, at 19:07, Andy Townsend wrote: > > That difference might confuse - that's an American rather than a UK > difference, I think. Where "jail" (or even "gaol") is used in the UK it's > essentially a synonym for prison. in Germany, the cells in a police

Re: [Tagging] Mapping deforestation

you can use landcover, it has about 160K uses now by 6000 users, but you should know that a. landcover is not currently rendered by OSM Carto. b. THe proposal states that "All areas in the landcover features of natural =* will be transfered to

[Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Hi all, I’m Lorenzo, the vice-president of PoliMappers, the YouthMappers chapter in Politecnico di Milano, we are going to organize a mapathon in Milan talking about deforestation, in collaboration with the Semillero Geolab UdeA, a Colombian chapter of YouthMappers. We will would like to map

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

Mar 11, 2019, 12:20 PM by cascaf...@gmail.com: > Il giorno sab 9 mar 2019 alle ore 22:15 Tom Pfeifer <> t.pfei...@computer.org > > > ha scritto: > > > I have severe problems with your process. First, yes it is an import. You > > called it an import > > yourself

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Mar 10, 2019, 10:28 PM by graemefi...@gmail.com: > > On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 at 18:36, Jean-Marc Liotier <> j...@liotier.org > > > wrote: > >> On 3/10/19 9:11 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: >> >>> Mar 9, 2019, 11:16 PM by >>> selfishseaho...@gmail.com >>>

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 12:54 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny < matkoni...@tutanota.com>: > Depends on what people mean by "fashion". From discussion it seems that > various people had different opinion what is the meaning of it. > > For "shop=clothes clothes=fashion" I would consider

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Mar 11, 2019, 8:10 AM by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > sent from a phone > > On 10. Mar 2019, at 09:35, Jean-Marc Liotier <> j...@liotier.org > > > wrote: > >>> I would support editorsproposing to replace it by shop=clothes + >>> clothes=* >>> >> >> I was

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

Le 11.03.19 à 12:20, Cascafico Giovanni a écrit : > limiting by myself the number not to trigger it as an import. > > If anybody in this ML considers that this activity is different from > getting informations from hotel websites and putting them in OSM, I will > immediately abort the

Re: [Tagging] Hotel dataset import? / Re: Baby-sitting

Il giorno sab 9 mar 2019 alle ore 22:15 Tom Pfeifer ha scritto: > I have severe problems with your process. First, yes it is an import. You called it an import > yourself ("manually importing") here, and on the Italien list where you first asked about the > tagging. > Where did you see a "100

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

Am Mo., 11. März 2019 um 09:15 Uhr schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > On 11/03/19 18:10, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > most used values in “clothes” are > women > underwear > children > men > wedding > sports > yes > workwear > lingerie > > how would “fashion” relate to this, or

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

On 11/03/19 18:10, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 10. Mar 2019, at 09:35, Jean-Marc Liotier > wrote: I would support editors proposing to replace it by shop=clothes + clothes=* I was about to post to say that - so I support this proposal.

Re: [Tagging] Large areas of landuse=grass in the Netherlands

You are right about the landuse. Mostly farmland, sometimes meadow/pasture, sometimes for crop, and that may rotate constantly. INitial tagging is from an import, I hear. I guess many mappers are content with the green colour on the map. Vr gr Peter Elderson Op ma 11 mrt. 2019 om 03:16 schreef

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Am 11. März 2019 01:45:56 MEZ schrieb Joseph Eisenberg : >> “in China some police divisions even managed to setup their own >for-profit companies, like hospitals or construction companies, that >would >serve general public and compete in business environment in order to >create >additional

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Am 11. März 2019 00:40:14 MEZ schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick : >> How about police=detention as a more generic term then? >> > >Yep, that covers it nicely! Ok, so police=detention be it. I've also adapted the definition to better distinguish the facilities I have in mind from prisons or jails

Re: [Tagging] discouraging shop=fashion

sent from a phone On 10. Mar 2019, at 09:35, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: >> I would support editors proposing to replace it by shop=clothes + clothes=* > I was about to post to say that - so I support this proposal. > most used values in “clothes” are women underwear children men wedding

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 13:41, Sergio Manzi wrote: > No, they are in a very peculiar situation: they are a militarized > organzation, but not depending from the Ministry of Defence, but the > Ministry of Finance. English Wikipedia aricle about them is quite good so I > refer you to it: