Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

This is not how the tag is used. It is often used for sports halls of sports centers, some examples can be found in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/leisure%3Dsports_hall#Examples_in_the_OSM_database . The wiki page for sports_hall says "A sports hall can often be found on a

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

7 Sep 2019, 01:36 by fl.infosrese...@gmail.com: > Ok this one is really interesting. > Why not using marker=* to give its nature and another key utility=* with > values "gas", "power", "telecom", "water"... ? > Is it typical to map "it is marker of an unknown kind" like splitting shop and open

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

(Sent to you directly since I don't want to add too many posts to the mailing list) > +1, this is exactly how I see it as well Is this how the tag has been used in Rome and in other areas that you know? I'd like to add this to the page Tag:leisure=sports_hall to help clarify how it's different fr

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

Re: > "My UK school had both a gym and a sports hall." What was the difference between the two? Was the gym like a "fitness centre" for weight training, perhaps? In US English we tend to use "gym" for what seems to be a "sports hall" in some dialects, and also for "weight lifting gyms" and "fitnes

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

> I don't get the right term here. I see only 222 items for power=marker and > nothing for power:marker=*. Which one are you refering to with 35k uses > please? Probably pipeline=marker, used 35k times: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=pipeline&value=marker > Why not using marker=* t

Re: [Tagging] Turn lanes separated by road markings

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 2:14 PM Markus wrote: > Hello everyone > > I'm unsure how to map the following situation: > > There are two lanes approaching a roundabout, both with different > destinations. The lanes are divided by a solid line (and later a panted > triangle with chevrons) for about 100

[Tagging] Mapping specifically every traffic signal

Hi! Mapping Barcelona in a more specific way (we have the authorization to use Townhall's Barcelona OpenData, we have one project to import Spain Cadastre buildings and portals, etc.) we have realized we need a more accurate way to map the traffic signals. Now we have three kinds of these artifac

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

Hi all, Thank you for yout contributions Le ven. 6 sept. 2019 à 09:13, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > I'm still opposed to this proposal: > Answers provided at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Utility_markers_proposal#Oppose_deprecating_pipeline.3Dmarker_and_marker.3Dst

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

sent from a phone > On 6. Sep 2019, at 13:47, Chris Hill wrote: > > To me a sports centre is a place that's dedicated to sport in its own space > or grounds. It may have outdoor pitches,courts etc as well as indoor > provisions. I think it could have a gym, i.e. a space with gym equipment to

Re: [Tagging] Turn lanes separated by road markings

Hi Markus, On 06.09.19 21:07, Markus wrote: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/430073056 Do we have a relation for storing the information that the left lane continues on [way 394112487](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/394112487) and the right lane on [way 290130794](https://www.openstreetm

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sunbathing

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 07:52:38AM +1000, Warin wrote: > In Australia most people 'sunbathe' on a beach of sand. Some 'sunbathe' in > their own backyard. High rates of sun exposure gets 'melanoma' and there are > publicity campaigns to get people to cover up from sun exposure. wildy offtopic so I

Re: [Tagging] Turn lanes separated by road markings

I see two good options: 1) Split the two lanes into two ways where they first split apart (but aren't yet physically divided). This doesn't follow the "physical divider" rule, but since the road markings are acting as a physical divider, and they are much more than just a line, an exception to tha

Re: [Tagging] Using destination_sign relations for pedestrian navigation

Hi Antoine, I think your suggestions are all valid, but it seems some make tagging and using data more complicated than necessary. On 05.09.19 09:29, Antoine Riche via Tagging wrote: In order to improve the user experience, we want to provide walking instructions such as "take the exit 'Rue

[Tagging] Turn lanes separated by road markings

Hello everyone I'm unsure how to map the following situation: There are two lanes approaching a roundabout, both with different destinations. The lanes are divided by a solid line (and later a panted triangle with chevrons) for about 100 m before they are separated physically: https://www.openst

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

My UK school had both a gym and a sports hall. And neither was used for the morning assembly: there was a main hall (with a stage) for that, which was also used for serving school dinners at lunchtime. Steve On 05/09/2019 16:21, Philip Barnes wrote: In terms of schools, we call them gyms in

Re: [Tagging] Using destination_sign relations for pedestrian navigation

Thank for your reponses so far. Any views on loosening the constraints on member types and cardinalities ? Le 05/09/2019 à 19:33, yo paseopor a écrit : Using established is the best way, but look at this, it could be useful https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extended_traffic_

Re: [Tagging] Tag for a milk_shake shop?

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 03:21:59PM +1000, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I'd tag it as amenity=cafe, even without selling coffee I still think it > fits into https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=cafe, just with a > cuisine tag to specify milk_shakes are the main cuisine. Well, after all the sug

[Tagging] "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

Last year there was a little discussion about unique wikidata ids in the openstreetmap database: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-August/038249.html It was more or less decided there was no problem with this. Nevertheless, I think we should consider having a hard rule of "*A

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

Re: "A sports hall, to me, is a building in an environment that is not wholly about sports,so a building in school grounds or in a business complex." That's a useful definition. Can anyone confirm if this is how it's being used? I believe most of the original discussion was about features in Germ

Re: [Tagging] Adding leisure=sports_hall to leisure=sports_centre page

On 05/09/2019 23:29, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 03:08, Chris Hill > wrote: It's a sports hall I think because it is marked out for various indoor sports,e.g. badminton, volley ball, 5-a-side football etc, with curtains or nets to sepa

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

Actually I just found out, placement also exists, but for a different purpose: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aplacement Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

Le 06.09.19 à 12:17, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > placement(?)=soil / street location seems better and already exist https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Alocation ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

I agree with your definition for marker: marker= The node corresponds to a marker seen on ground but then the actual values that you propose do not (or only implicitly) refer to the marker but to the "thing" the marker refers to: "pipeline" - Indicate that a pipeline is buried next to the mar

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

Arriving fresh to a proposal, my first action would be to look at what is currently in OSM. There are 6,043 "marker"="stone", which is 81.5% of the usage of "marker" in OSM. I would expect the proposal to support current usage. I would then look at "power":"marker" and be very concerned to see 35,

Re: [Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - Utility markers

I'm still opposed to this proposal: This proposal is quite long and complicated-looking. I believe it would be better to clarify exactly what tags are new: for example, "support", "material" etc are existing tags, not new tags. Please update the "Proposal" section at the top to clearly state the t