Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

> I think there is a need for a basic relation, ... to simply associate the two > lines ... When mapped, they are not joined The easiest way to do this is to make an area which represents the area of the cliff, embankment, dyke (levee) or whatnot. Have it use the same nodes as the upper and lowe

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

> On Nov 13, 2019, at 3:44 AM, Richard wrote: > > We need new tags for the bottom of embankmets, top of cuttings, bottom of > cliffs, earth_banks > and maybe a few others if we want to map them. that is very true. I think we can cleanly do this with the ways you mentioned. We need to cho

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Pedestrian lane

You make a very good point! A road can have a pedestrian lane, shoulder, both, or neither, so it wouldn't make any sense for a pedestrian lane to be a type of shoulder. The widths do vary quite a bit as well, regionally. > You mean a situation like this?: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fil

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 07:04:42AM +1000, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 05:05, Richard wrote: > > > > > We need new tags for the bottom of embankmets, top of cuttings, bottom of > > cliffs, earth_banks > > and maybe a few others if we want to map them. > > > > Imho all those

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 05:05, Richard wrote: > > We need new tags for the bottom of embankmets, top of cuttings, bottom of > cliffs, earth_banks > and maybe a few others if we want to map them. > > Imho all those should be tagged ways such as cliff:base, relations could > be used optionaly > to r

Re: [Tagging] Additional detail of Levee mapping via embankments

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 01:53:55PM +0900, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 2019, at 10:26 AM, Joseph Eisenberg > > wrote: > > > > If you are mapping an area, as in this case, just use a closed way or > > multipolygon. > > How would a closed

Re: [Tagging] shop=ice_cream vs amenity=ice_cream and OSM Wiki vs tagging

On Tue, 2019-11-12 at 18:04 +0100, Markus wrote: > > I wouldn't look for a café if i were hungry. Instead i would look for > a restaurant, pub or fast food booth. > > In mainland Europe i expect from a café that i can drink a coffee > there and maybe have a sweet snack. While some also serve salt

Re: [Tagging] shop=ice_cream vs amenity=ice_cream and OSM Wiki vs tagging

On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 14:15, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 00:23, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> >> from the description, light meals aren’t a hard requirement, or it could be >> seen as satisfied by selling cakes (or ice cream cups in the case of cuisine >> =ice_cream): > > I

Re: [Tagging] emergency=ambulance_station vs amenity=fire_station

12 Nov 2019, 11:47 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > We are (almost) all volunteers, Joseph. It's irritating that this claim is > repeatedly rolled out as an excuse. > You are not entitled to map renderer focusing issues that you consider important. You have no right to demand that other will sp

Re: [Tagging] shop=ice_cream vs amenity=ice_cream and OSM Wiki vs tagging

On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 00:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > On 11. Nov 2019, at 14:38, Paul Allen wrote: > > For better or worse, shop=cafe is documented as selling beverages AND > light meals, and this > is how it is understood in British English. > > > from the description, light meals aren’t

Re: [Tagging] emergency=ambulance_station vs amenity=fire_station

On 12/11/2019 11:20, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Di., 12. Nov. 2019 um 11:49 Uhr schrieb Dave F via Tagging mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>>: Is OSM-Carto fit to be promoted as OSM's flagship, de-facto rendering? Dave, I find it extremely unfair to write this explicitly to Joseph,

Re: [Tagging] emergency=ambulance_station vs amenity=fire_station

Am Di., 12. Nov. 2019 um 11:49 Uhr schrieb Dave F via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > We are (almost) all volunteers, Joseph. It's irritating that this claim > is repeatedly rolled out as an excuse. > > I'm increasingly disappointed my *voluntary* contributions to the OSM > database are ar

Re: [Tagging] emergency=ambulance_station vs amenity=fire_station

We are (almost) all volunteers, Joseph. It's irritating that this claim is repeatedly rolled out as an excuse. I'm increasingly disappointed my *voluntary* contributions to the OSM database are are not being fairly or accurately being represented by OSM-Carto due to errors in the programming.