[Tagging] Other missing landform tags

Along with plateau the following look to be missing from the OSMwiki, these may not be all.. Pass A depression or gap in a range of mountains or hills permitting easier passage from one side to the other. Point A raised mass of land that projects over a lower area (water or land). Head/hea

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 at 07:26, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Thursday 18 April 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > > And how do you verifiably determine if two things are part of the > > > same physical object? > > But as already hinted i am not sure if the Drake Passage is something i > would consider m

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

On 19/04/19 05:21, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 19:54, Valor Naram > wrote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Proposal_list guided me to you. I have the following situation: I want to tag a changing table but this changing tabl

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

> there are many cases in OSM where different things are all tagged the same ... > brook, creek, stream, rivulet -> stream These are mapped with one tag because there is not an objective distinction between these names for waterways. There is waterway=stream vs waterway=river for wide natural wate

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 7:. > I was wondering about leaving them all under peak? > > natural=peak > peak=hill/mountain/plateau/butte/mesa > > Would that work? > A peak is well defined as the local high point. A Mesa or butte will always have at least one peak, but the peak may be in one corner, whic

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 23:40, Andrew Harvey wrote: > It may be worth having different definitions, but I did want to point out > there are many cases in OSM where different things are all tagged the same, > > peak, knob, hill, mound, mountain, pinnacle, tops -> peak > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 16:0

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thursday 18 April 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > And how do you verifiably determine if two things are part of the > > same physical object? For example: [examples snipped] > > I'm all for a rule of, 'if in doubt, split,' possibly paired with > creating a new relation to carry the grouping. You

[Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

> The idea that every object, even among those that can be easily mapped in a day, has a single True Name, is simply an incorrect assumption around here. A few months ago, I went to a mixer hosted by a new online real estate startup, and the attendees were an interesting mix of neighborhood low i

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

This sounds reasonable. On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:10 PM marc marc wrote: > Le 18.04.19 à 20:53, Valor Naram a écrit : > > I want to tag a changing table but this changing table > > is in the toilet room for wheelchair users. > > imho diaper is a little ugly : documented values are mix > of how

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

Le 18.04.19 à 20:29, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > you verify the information on the ground and if there is still > disagreement it is by definition something that is not verifiable > (because several mappers evaluating the situation independently > do not consistently come to the same results).

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

>> But if a locality represents only a historic location that has no >> physical presence today, it is debatable if this is a “real and >> current” feature that is appropriate for OSM rather than a historical >> map. > If the name is still in present use then it belongs in OSM, even if > there

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 21:00, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > The controversy lies not in the choice of tag but rather in the > presence of long indefinite boundaries. > I thought part of the controversy was the very large polygons involved. You can map a strait as a way or a node. Some may think of it

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 2:30 PM Christoph Hormann wrote: > No, the concept of verifiability defines a clear path for resolving > disagreement - you verify the information on the ground and if there is > still disagreement it is by definition something that is not verifiable > (because several mapp

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

Le 18.04.19 à 20:53, Valor Naram a écrit : > I want to tag a changing table but this changing table > is in the toilet room for wheelchair users. imho diaper is a little ugly : documented values are mix of how many, what and where. if I wanted to fill this in as precisely as you do, I would do it

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:49 PM Paul Allen wrote: > How about natural=strait? For very large values of "strait." Or, if you > don't like the idea > of large values of strait, rewrite the wiki page changing > > A strait is a narrow area of water surrounded by land on two sides and by > water on

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:09 PM Greg Troxel wrote: > Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > > If the name is still in present use then it belongs in OSM, even if > > there is no physical presence on the ground people still use the name > > to define the place. > > Agreed. Around me, my impressio

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 20:27, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > We have that at one extreme, a case where almost all the boundaries > are indefinite. Nevertheless, the Drake Passage has some sort of > existence. If a map user reads the sentence, 'The _Nancie Belle,_ > having survived the perilous journey t

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

... INRE: http://bit.ly/2IGkgoj > Nobody proposed ban on mapping things far away from your place of residence. > That's an amazing image, thanks Michael. Hmmm ... it's not a really a bona fide 'map', per se,it's really just a silly snarky sarcastic cartoon based on narrow assumptions and a highl

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 12:53 PM Christoph Hormann wrote: > How should they determine that based on local knowledge? What if there > is disagreement? Is > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/83015625 > the same river as > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4769426 > or > https://www.openstreetmap.

Re: [Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 19:54, Valor Naram wrote: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Proposal_list > guided me to you. I have the following situation: I want to tag a > changing table but this changing table is in the toilet room for > wheelchair users. The page at https://wi

[Tagging] diaper subkey for wheelchair toilets including a changing table

Hello there, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Proposal_list guided me to you. I have the following situation: I want to tag a changing table but this changing table is in the toilet room for wheelchair users. The page at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:d iaper states ta

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

On Thursday 18 April 2019, marc marc wrote: > > What if there is disagreement? > > it's not related to large feature, it's a issue with all > source=local knownledge changeset (or no source at all). No, the concept of verifiability defines a clear path for resolving disagreement - you verify the

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

Le 18.04.19 à 18:52, Christoph Hormann a écrit : > What if there is disagreement? it's not related to large feature, it's a issue with all source=local knownledge changeset (or no source at all). a hudge river may have a sign every km a road in a village I like doesn't have a sign. ___

Re: [Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead

Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> writes: > On 18/04/19 09:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> >> >> >> But if a locality represents only a historic location that has no >> physical presence today, it is debatable if this is a “real and >> current” feature that is appropriate for OSM rather than a >> histo

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thursday 18 April 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > And therefore the Amazon, the Nile, or the Mississippi ought not to > be named in such a way that a large-scale map can show the names? Map producers are obviously free to show labels however they want. They don't need mappers to hand curate dedi

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 5:49 AM Christoph Hormann wrote: > You apparently misunderstood what i said. My 'surveyable in a single > day by a single mapper' rule of thumb refers to mapping something as a > single feature. A river several thousand kilometers long for example. > The river is locally

Re: [Tagging] More large feature problems: Seas, Bays and Straits

Le 18.04.19 à 15:42, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > I am thinking of changing the place=sea wiki page back to the earlier > version that only recommended mapping as nodes, because I cannot > download and manage these new huge relations. Should Russia or the USA boundary relationship be reduced into

[Tagging] More large feature problems: Seas, Bays and Straits

Either seas should be mapped as areas, or should bays and straits should not be mapped as areas. Which is the best option? Right now, mappers are changing seas to bays and mapping as large multipolygons to get them to render. In the past year the number of natural=bay relations has increased from

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

It may be worth having different definitions, but I did want to point out there are many cases in OSM where different things are all tagged the same, which I generally think is a good thing (easier for mappers to find the right tag and less disagreement on which tag to use). Just some food for thou

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

On Thursday 18 April 2019, Warin wrote: > > There are also 'points' and 'heads' to name a few other landforms > missing in OSM. While i have an understanding of what a mesa and a butte are i have no idea how you define a 'point' or 'head' so no comment on that. > To say that they should not be m

Re: [Tagging] Stop the large feature madness (was: Tag for a plateau or tableland?)

On Thursday 18 April 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > I doubt very much that you're saying what you intended here. > > It comes across as saying, for instance, that lakes too big to map on > the ground in a single day should not be mapped, or should not be > named. I think that making large waterbodies

Re: [Tagging] Subtag for place=locality?

sent from a phone > On 17. Apr 2019, at 01:48, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > Yes, that’s my recommendation. You just need a tag that is for groups of > lakes. multipolygon relations have different semantics, they “combine” the parts while the group is about an ensemble. With the group re

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a plateau or tableland?

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 07:09, Andrew Harvey wrote: > This does make it harder for mappers to decide which one they should use, > but if in doubt they can just pick one they think is best. > The local convention as to what it is may help them decide. An alternative is natural=plateau + plateau=b