[Tagging] leisure=garden for private front/back gardens

Hi all I would like your opinion on the next issue. On the Dutch forum (googletranslate ) I started a thread about the tag leisure=garden for private front/back gardens. Reason

Re: [Tagging] shop=window(s) incorrectly deprecated in favor of craft=window_construction ?

On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:33:15PM -0700, Michael Patrick wrote: > > The obvious tag is > > shop=trade > > and > > trade= ??? ... > > The most obvious tagging scheme for a world wide database like OSM would be > to use the commercial classification system in effect in a particular >

Re: [Tagging] shop=window(s) incorrectly deprecated in favor of craft=window_construction ?

> The obvious tag is > shop=trade > and > trade= ??? ... The most obvious tagging scheme for a world wide database like OSM would be to use the commercial classification system in effect in a particular jurisdiction. In the U.S. that's NAICS, the U.K. has one, the EU and practically every

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:insurance:health

We would like to support the following user story, ' As a pregnant mother I would like to know if a clinic will cover my health costs through the government health plan or not so that I can select the best clinic for me.' Perhaps the values for this tag should be localised per country, just as

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - health_amenity:type

The intention of the tag is to specify physical equipment (health_amenity:type=MRI) and should be used in conjunction with amenity=clinic to show that the health facility contains that specialised equipment. This will enable mappers say that "this clinic contains an MRI" ᐧ On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:staff_count:nurses

We understand there to be three approaches we can take here: 1 - Generalised numbers: In this approach we would specify and approximate range for the nurse staff count e.g. 0-5, 5-10 etc. 2 - Aggregated numbers: In this approach we would specify an exact (e.g. 12) count of the nurses who work at

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:staff_count:doctors

Hi Joseph, Thank you for your feedback. We understand there to be three approaches we can take here: 1 - Generalised numbers: In this approach we would specify and approximate range for the doctor staff count e.g. 0-5, 5-10 etc. 2 - Aggregated numbers: In this approach we would specify an exact

Re: [Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

sent from a phone > On 11. Jul 2019, at 10:53, Paul Allen wrote: > > Oh, you mean how do you create a page for an in-use, but undocumented, key or > value > in a way that won't cause somebody to throw a wobbler and insist you delete > the page? > That's probably not possible. :) People

Re: [Tagging] Rethinking Map Features

On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 00:47, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > So how do we go with creating a page for a tag that is "in use" but has > apparently never been discussed? > Same way you create any page. Search for the key, or key=value and if it doesn't already exist the Wiki offers to let you