Re: [Tagging] Verifiability of geometry

2019-06-16 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
Daniel, I find this whole conversation pretty off-topic for the tagging forum. Perhaps "Talk" would be more appropriate, since you closed the original discussion on github. 1)Simplification of geometries: > There can be some simplification used (just beware of oversimplification, > especially fo

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-06-16 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
Good suggestion. I've updated the page. On 6/17/19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 16:39, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > >> >> Does this clearly define the difference between a tidal channel and a >> river or stream? >> > > Yep, I reckon that's pretty good :-) > > One minor thin

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

2019-06-16 Thread Warin
On 16/06/19 22:53, Tobias Zwick wrote: Okay, to wrap this up, I added this title in the wiki and referenced back to this discussion, advising to not use lanes=0/1.5/none to signify no lane markings but instead use something like lane_markings=no. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#N

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability of geometry

2019-06-16 Thread Daniel Koć
W dniu 16.06.2019 o 21:20, Christoph Hormann pisze: > You have stated disagreement with several of these statements but you > have not challenged them in any way by pointing out a logical error or > by arguing why the suggested approach how mappers should decide on how > to map things is of dis

Re: [Tagging] About the diaper key

2019-06-16 Thread Rory
Hi, On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 16:14:59 +0200, Valor Naram wrote: > the proposal at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/changing_table has > been accepted now and I can start with the post-vote process and > creating a wiki page. The property Key:changing_table success the > Key:diape

Re: [Tagging] Verifiability of geometry

2019-06-16 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Sunday 16 June 2019, Daniel Koc4� wrote: > > Christoph (imagico) has proposed there a set of example rules that he > believes are self evident and invited to challenge them if someone > disagrees, so here I am: Not quite - this is just a collection of statements regarding matters where you cla

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - waterway=tidal_channel

2019-06-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 16:39, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > Does this clearly define the difference between a tidal channel and a > river or stream? > Yep, I reckon that's pretty good :-) One minor thing though. Your "Example: mapping a tidal channel in mangroves with the JOSM editor" It would

[Tagging] Verifiability of geometry

2019-06-16 Thread Daniel Koć
Hi, There are still some problems with verifiability of objects geometry. This has been discussed lately here: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3750 but we came to the conclusion that this is not the best place to go with fundamental problems, so I come here to talk about

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

2019-06-16 Thread yo paseopor
In Spain is easy: when there is no marks = lanes=1 The lack of the mark lanes is the reason why when a Spaniard drives by Rome thinks Italian people are crazy, because they overtake you in the same big lane, but ONLY one lane (lane without marks). One lane= one car. lane with no marks is =1 (drive

Re: [Tagging] lanes = 0

2019-06-16 Thread Tobias Zwick
Okay, to wrap this up, I added this title in the wiki and referenced back to this discussion, advising to not use lanes=0/1.5/none to signify no lane markings but instead use something like lane_markings=no. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#No_lane_markings --- Additionally, I not

Re: [Tagging] Marking legal BBQ locations

2019-06-16 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
Thanks everyone, particularly John for a very detailed explanation! A set-up like that is a new one to me - here we usually have either electric or gas BBQs in urban parks, or you BYO; & then have prepared concrete / brick wood-burning BBQs in National Parks & similar, where you usually have to BY