Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 07:53, Paul Allen wrote: > If we need this tag (I have my doubts) then the only sane way of handling > that would be > something like noise_reduction_db=* where the figure is relative to a > "normal" surface > (e.g., smooth concrete) measured at some specified distance. >

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

On Fri, 3 May 2019 at 06:44, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: > I am envisioning something where all ED's will be designated as such, even > those embedded within the hospital. > It is an attempt to provide a common tagging system, exactly for the > purpose you point out … saving lives. I totally agree

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

Whenever the quali ...-reducing is used, I know the stuff or thing actually produces ... where ... is bad. Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 2 mei 2019 om 23:52 heeft Paul Allen het volgende > geschreven: > >> On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede wrote: > >> I would question to use any

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

Well, one use case would be for property shoppers to find an area with the quieter asphalt. But yes, all this is a bit far fetched. On the other hand, I do not want to restrict people from mapping whatever interesting information they know, as long as that information is in standardized-ish

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:43, Tobias Wrede wrote: > I would question to use any qualification at all. Whatever is now called > a quiet/whispering/noise reducing asphalt will have become a standard in > a couple of years and then a new type even more noise reducing will have > been invented. Will

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

Am 02.05.2019 um 23:23 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: I don't think we should do asphalt classification -- too difficult for many cases, and very little value, especially in this case because it is not the "type" of asphalt, it is rather a "feature" of asphalt. Multiple features could exist in the

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 22:24, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > or it could have solar panels integrated into it > Yes, roads with integrated solar panels have been proposed. Any rational engineering analysis comes to the conclusion that this is a very, very stupid idea for many reasons. Nevertheless,

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

I don't think we should do asphalt classification -- too difficult for many cases, and very little value, especially in this case because it is not the "type" of asphalt, it is rather a "feature" of asphalt. Multiple features could exist in the same asphalt - e.g. it could have noise-canceling

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 07:55:40PM +, amilopow...@u-cloud.ch wrote: > Hello > > I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering > asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can > barely hear an EV now, but that is another story. > > Since we have

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 20:57, wrote: > > I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering > asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can barely > hear an EV now, but that is another story. > > Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

On 5/2/19, Jmapb wrote: > On 5/2/2019 6:47 AM, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: > >> I am tacitly suggesting that these facilities be tagged as >> healthcare=emergency_department, hospital=no, with an optional (and >> likely present) operator=*, plus the usual addressing information. >> >> amenity shall

Re: [Tagging] Whispering asphalt

I have not heard of “whispering asphalt” but I know that in some areas of the state I live in they have been using a porous asphalt on roads to provide better traction during rain storms. So I am not sure if the current uses of “asphalt:type=porous” would be to indicate pavement designed for

[Tagging] Whispering asphalt

Hello I used to live in Fribourg, Switzerland where they put "whispering asphalt" on one of the main roads in order to prevent noise. You can barely hear an EV now, but that is another story. Since we have quite a lot of discussions about noise pollution I thought it might be a good idea to

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

On 5/2/2019 11:53 AM, Jmapb wrote: * regarding amenity, I actually think you might want to consider adding the amenity=doctors tag, at least transitionally. It's not strictly wrong, it's well within the traditional use of the tag (which, in the pre-healthcare=* era, has been basically "anything

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 7:54 AM Tony Shield wrote: > Hi > > It does appear that 'access aisle' is US and from watching the video and > your picture it is an integral part of a parking_bay or parking_lane for > disabled access. It follows that a parking bay or parking lane tagged for > disabled

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

On 5/2/2019 6:47 AM, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: I am tacitly suggesting that these facilities be tagged as healthcare=emergency_department, hospital=no, with an optional (and likely present) operator=*, plus the usual addressing information. amenity shall not be used. That would both convey that

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

Hi It does appear that 'access aisle' is US and from watching the video and your picture it is an integral part of a parking_bay or parking_lane for disabled access. It follows that a parking bay or parking lane tagged for disabled then it must follow the regulations of that country. For

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Reading the replies, it seems the open question is whether we should solely rely on the order of ways in a relation, or on a key value to deduce/specify the direction in which the signposts are visible. I'm open for either solution. My question is: If you we use "forward|backward|both" as the

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

Hi, from what I understood, "access aisle" is an official term only in the US, as described in the ADA standards (https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-5-parking), but it describes clearly (as least

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Key:golf_cart

Voting has been open for about a week for the key "golf_cart", which is already being used to define access for golf carts on highways and paths. Please remember to read the proposal and then add your vote or comments: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Key:golf_cart#Voting On

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 11:26, Hufkratzer wrote: > > Really? Which one does not? > i Dunno. But if I need to edit a relation I use JOSM (that and splitting woods so I can name the two sections differently) Is about all I use it for. This would be bug that needs to be fixed! > It's not a bug,

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

On 5/1/19, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: > On 5/1/19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: >>> On 5/1/2019 7:47 AM, Nita Rae Sanders wrote: >>> > Have we reached the conclusion that a new tagging value is needed ? >>> >> >> Getting there! >> >> >>> > If so, what is the schema for the new value ? >>> >> >> Still

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

Hi [AA] is a Mapillary picture of a typical UK disabled parking bay, the hatched area is a what I think you are calling an 'access aisle'.  Those particular disabled parking bays are legally designated and enforced. I see that tags amenity

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

On 02.05.2019 12:20, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 11:13, Hufkratzer > wrote: For a non-roundtrip route consiting of two consecutive ways the route direction can be deduced from the order of the ways in the relation. Note that (last time I

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 11:13, Hufkratzer wrote: > > For a non-roundtrip route consiting of two consecutive ways the route > direction can be deduced from the order of the ways in the relation. > Note that (last time I tried) not all popular editors preserve the order of ways in relations. --

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

On 30.04.2019 21:05, Kevin Kenny wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 2:19 PM s8evq wrote: Personally, I like signed_direction=yes. It's simple and avoids using the word oneway. Also, using the value forward|backward might not be necessary, as it's possible to deduce this from the order of ways in

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

I would consider what is here described as access aisle (according to the photo [1]) part of the parking space. Here in Italy any parking space for the disabled has a dedicated "access aisle" similar to the photo. If you want to achieve disabled (wheelchair) routing I would assume it to be

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 10:33, Tobias Wrede wrote: > The counter(clockwise) designation doesn't work well in cases of > touching or crossing ways (figure 8 shaped trails for example) A figure-eight trail could be mapped as two touching circular trails. But there are probably disadvantages to

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Am 30.04.2019 um 20:18 schrieb s8evq: - bidirectional=no - signed_oneway=yes - signed_direction=yes - designated_direction=forward|both|backward - signed=forward|backward|both|none Personally, I like signed_direction=yes. It's simple and avoids using the word oneway. Also, using the value

Re: [Tagging] Status of oneway=cw oneway=ccw

Am 30.04.2019 um 21:05 schrieb Kevin Kenny: On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 2:19 PM s8evq wrote: Personally, I like signed_direction=yes. It's simple and avoids using the word oneway. Also, using the value forward|backward might not be necessary, as it's possible to deduce this from the order of

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

Having today downloaded and read SN01360 [2] |I disagree with the interpretation. In that document there is only one mention of 'aisle' it being an 'access aisle' in Section 5.4 paragraph marked Off-Street Parking  -" *Off-street parking*: bays should be a minimum of 4800 mm long by 2400 mm

Re: [Tagging] free_standing_emergency_department, amenity or clinic ?

2 May 2019, 04:37 by cosmic...@gmail.com: > My view is that we should focus on getting the schema, keys and > attributes correct, and worry less about the rendering. > I would strongly advocate not worrying about rendering too much. In general tags require some use before rendering is going to

Re: [Tagging] Handicap Parking Access Aisles

Hi Clifford, On 02/05/19 00:13, Clifford Snow wrote: Since the off loading area is called an access aisle, both in the US and UK [2], it seem to me that it would be an appropriate term to use.  Would using highway=footway + footway=access_aisle +  wheelchair=yes be a more acceptable tagging