Re: [Tagging] Business which sells static caravans / mobile homes: shop=mobile_home or shop=static_caravan?

I looked back at that discussion but it seems to be about RVs/caravans/motor homes/camper trailers. I'm not asking about shops that sell "motor homes" or "RVs" or "5th wheels" or "camper trailers" or "caravans" or "camper vans". I understand that both self-propelled "motorhomes" and pulled "carava

Re: [Tagging] Business which sells static caravans / mobile homes: shop=mobile_home or shop=static_caravan?

Joseph Back in January when I created shop=caravan & the other versions, there was *very* extensive discussion on here regarding the various options & combinations of names. You may like to find a comfortable seat, pour yourself either a hot coffee or a cold beer, & have a read of https://lists.o

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

Javbw, Are you sure that the information that you want is not already available from a Digital Elevation Model? See for example how your area looks in Opentopomap.org, on Opencyclemap, or on the Terrain layer of Google Maps, or a similar rendering. Large embankments should be clearly visible in

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

I'm skeptical about the need to tag this differently. If we do this, wouldn't we also need to tag differently a "T" intersection of a `highway=residential` into a `highway=trunk`? Doing this for every intersection between a path and road, or lower classification road with a high classification ro

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

First off I like this proposal and agree that it be applied more broadly. However there is a difference between a motorway=link (and similar) and a footway=link. A motorway=link is a physical feature unlike a footway=link. A footway=link is more of an attempt to bridge vector representation of a fo

[Tagging] Business which sells static caravans / mobile homes: shop=mobile_home or shop=static_caravan?

There are places in the USA where you can buy a "mobile home" which is meant to be semi-permanently installed in one place, unlike an "RV" which is meant for camping in different places. I believe these are called "static caravans" in Britain, and there is a tag "building=static_caravan" for the in

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

On Nov 19, 2019, at 6:53 AM, Richard wrote: > > Other than that, "dyke_area" or "area:dyke" in analogy to > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway ? I think dykes/levees are made of inner and outer embankments, and pairing them might be the only way to do it properly. Whatever

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

+1 Make the proposal cover all non-road ways (footway, cycleway, path, bridleway, etc) While we may not imagine a use-case for all of them, it is *far better* to have it standardized so mapping is similar - and when the issue comes up for a mapper in an unexpected situation, it’s there waiting

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

When there should be a footway=link then there should also be a path=link cycleway=link This is then a new method to tag a virtual T connection on the road. This must be well thought out. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

All waylines inside a area:highway=footway footway=sidewalk is a highway=footway footway=sidewalk When there is a connection to the road, inside the area:highway=footway, footwalk=sidewalk is till the barrier=kerb. Only on the road from barrier=kerb till the centerline of the road (wayline) co

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

Markus Will this fix the "error" of "Footpaths are disconnected from other roads"? Thanks Graeme On Tue, 19 Nov 2019 at 07:25, Markus wrote: > Hello everyone > > As the discussion has moved from pedestrian lanes to linking ending > sidewalks with a road and as there haven't been any more cha

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

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 11:15:49AM +0900, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > 1) Map the central line as man_made=dyke, or highway + cutting=yes / > embankment=yes as relevant. This line should not be 100 kilometers > long, but a reasonable length: probably no more than 10 kilometers, > and even shorter

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=link

Hello everyone As the discussion has moved from pedestrian lanes to linking ending sidewalks with a road and as there haven't been any more changes or suggestions to the proposal on pedestrian lanes, i'm opening the vote on that proposal and requesting comments on the proposal on footway=link: ht

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Pedestrian lane

Hello everyone As the discussion has moved from pedestrian lanes to linking ending sidewalks with a road and as there haven't been any more changes or suggestions to the proposal on pedestrian lanes, i'm opening the proposal for vote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Pedestri

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

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 02:48, John Willis via Tagging wrote: > > I use “unmarked crossing” for all connections of sidewalks where they > dead-end and have to be connected into the road. If there's a second sidewalk or a pedestrian lane on the opposite side of the road, this may make sense. But i

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

Am Mo., 18. Nov. 2019 um 12:08 Uhr schrieb Philip Barnes < p...@trigpoint.me.uk>: > Maybe to reflect driving licence requirements? > Only those with relatively recent licenses need a special license to drive > a vehicle between 3.5 and 7.5t. > Many of us can drive a 7.5t vehicle on a car license.

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

Maybe to reflect driving licence requirements? Only those with relatively recent licenses need a special license to drive a vehicle between 3.5 and 7.5t. Many of us can drive a 7.5t vehicle on a car license. Phil (trigpoint) On Monday, 18 November 2019, Volker Schmidt wrote: > Wikipedia inclu

Re: [Tagging] shop selling trucks

Wikipedia includes pickups in the "Truck " category. But HGV excludes many pickups because of the H in HGV ("GCM over 3500kg"). An aside: in the EU,