Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

sent from a phone > On 23 Jun 2024, at 12:35, Greg Troxel wrote: > > So I think you should absolutely have the oneway section, even if you > also add another tag. Unless of course there is evidence that the large > majority of routers would do the right thing. there is no oneway section

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

Christoph Grenz via Tagging writes: > This tagging (a short section marked as oneway) is also quite usual in Germany > for this case, but restriction=no_entry is slowly becoming popular too. As usual, I think that in the short and medium term, tagging should be done with great consideration

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

This tagging (a short section marked as oneway) is also quite usual in Germany for this case, but restriction=no_entry is slowly becoming popular too. In Germany these streets are called "Unechte Einbahnstraße" (faux oneway street) and happen quite often there when a city council or traffic

[Tagging] [Voting] Feature Proposal - Deprecate cycleway=opposite family

Hey all, voting has started for the proposal on deprecating the cycleway=opposite tagging family. See the proposal page for more details, rationale and to place your vote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Deprecate_cycleway%3Dopposite_family Best, Alex

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

On 22/5/24 01:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Di., 21. Mai 2024 um 15:01 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging : In such case I would typically place such tags on a short section (meter or two) of way near end where such restriction is applied. the restriction is not

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

sent from a phone > On 1 Jun 2024, at 19:55, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > yes, but tagging very short stretch of road (say 3m where it is not connected > to anything) > conveys the same info without using relations it is tagging for the router, you add a oneway restriction

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

May 21, 2024, 17:19 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > > Am Di., 21. Mai 2024 um 15:01 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> > tagging@openstreetmap.org> >: > >> In such case I would typically place such tags on >> a short section (meter or two) of way near end where >> such restriction is

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature proposal - Tag:natural=wadi

> On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 9:48, Volker Schmidt wrote: > > The wadies I have encountered in the desert regions of the western US states > seem all to have ephemeral borders. Every time water flows down the "border" > changes. Also the center line in most cases is difficult to determine. If you

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature proposal - Tag:natural=wadi

The wadies I have encountered in the desert regions of the western US states seem all to have ephemeral borders. Every time water flows down the "border" changes. Also the center line in most cases is difficult to determine. BTW many of thr rivers here in Northern Italy that have their springs in

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature proposal - Tag:natural=wadi

> On 25 May 2024, at 22:38:20, Peter Elderson wrote: > > I like this proposal very much. Thank you for the review and the comments. > One thing: by its nature, other naturals will overlap with natural=wadi, right? Any thoughts on that? I think that's a fairly common thing with features tagged

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature proposal - Tag:natural=wadi

I like this proposal very much. One thing: by its nature, other naturals will overlap with natural=wadi, right? Any thoughts on that? And, you say you can map it as a node. That seems a bit strange, because it's such an elongated feature. Fr gr Peter Elderson Op za 25 mei 2024 om 17:51 schreef

[Tagging] [RFC] Feature proposal - Tag:natural=wadi

I'd like to propose the use of natural=wadi to map the area of the broad, flat channel of an ephemeral stream with distinct banks. This proposal is the result of previous discussion on the OSM Community Forum [1]. This proposal suggests that the area between the banks of a wadi should be mapped

Re: [Tagging] Limited use telephone

They are phones, they usually dial a fixed number when the handset is lifted. Phil (trigpoint) On 24 May 2024 16:11:12 BST, Andy Mabbett wrote: >On Fri, 24 May 2024, 15:14 Timothy Noname, wrote: > >> There is a node 6397545656 marked as amenity telephone but it's a service >only for cyclists

Re: [Tagging] Limited use telephone

On Fri, 24 May 2024, 15:14 Timothy Noname, wrote: > There is a node 6397545656 marked as amenity telephone but it's a service only for cyclists to contact the shuttle bus that takes them through the Dartford crossing. Sounds more like an intercom than a phone.

Re: [Tagging] Limited use telephone

On Fri, 2024-05-24 at 15:14 +0100, Timothy Noname wrote: > There is a node 6397545656 marked as amenity telephone but it's a > service only for cyclists to contact the shuttle bus that takes them > through the Dartford crossing.  > > I think amenity=telephone should be reserved for general use >

[Tagging] Limited use telephone

There is a node 6397545656 marked as amenity telephone but it's a service only for cyclists to contact the shuttle bus that takes them through the Dartford crossing. I think amenity=telephone should be reserved for general use telephones where you can call any number. I personally think it's

Re: [Tagging] How to tag a campground drop box for payment of camping or parking fees?

On 23/5/24 09:58, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: What's a good way to tag a payment drop box, of the type used in the USA for campgrounds? You typically put money in an envelope, tear of a tab, and dop the payment into a metal tube slot. In addition to cash payments payment by credit card should be

[Tagging] How to tag a campground drop box for payment of camping or parking fees?

What's a good way to tag a payment drop box, of the type used in the USA for campgrounds? You typically put money in an envelope, tear of a tab, and dop the payment into a metal tube slot. See: Camping In A National Park Made Easy: 9 Essential Tips - Southerner Says

[Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Deprecate cycleway=opposite family

Hey list, a new proposal makes its way into the RFC: It aims to deprecate the cycleway=opposite tagging family that is associated with (logical) problems and is considered outdated by most mappers, since meanwhile there is the much more widespread oneway:bicycle tagging allowing to map the

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

Am Di., 21. Mai 2024 um 15:01 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > In such case I would typically place such tags on > a short section (meter or two) of way near end where > such restriction is applied. > the restriction is not applied to a section, it is

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

In such case I would typically place such tags on a short section (meter or two) of way near end where such restriction is applied. May 20, 2024, 22:02 by bry...@obviously.com: > I could use > > A one-way street with a counter-flow cycle lane > highway=unclassified > oneway=yes >

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

sent from a phone > On 20 May 2024, at 21:57, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > I tried that, but could not get the from, via and to nodes to work out. create a node at the actual start of the crossing street (some meters away from the crossing of the center ways) and split it there, that’s your

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

I could use *A one-way street with a counter-flow cycle lane* highway=unclassified oneway=yes oneway:bicycle=no cycleway=opposite_lane But motor traffic is allowed within the block, to go either way. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 5:08 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > there is also > restriction=no_entry > I tried that, but could not get the from, via and to nodes to work out. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

there is also restriction=no_entry ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Two way street, but entry of motor vehicles blocked at one end. Relation correct? Tagging correct?

Could somebody check if I get this relation correct? *Relation #17,613,415* type=restriction restriction=no_left_turn except=bicycles from Solano Avenue to Kains Avenue via 53062033 Kains Avenue is a two way street. Southbound it's open to all vehicles. Northbound barriers prevent motor

Re: [Tagging] voting shop=tortilla

sent from a phone > On 11 May 2024, at 23:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > If you do, I will appreciate it if you comment in this thread that you did > crosspost my call for votes on the proposal. I sent it to the tagging ml ___ Tagging

[Tagging] voting shop=tortilla

forwarding this from the forum: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/voting-feature-proposal-shop-tortilla/113059 Voting will start tomorrow for shop=tortilla at the proposal page. I am not familiar with mailing lists, so, please, cross post this announcement on the tagging mailing list on my

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Hey, Indeed bakeries in the West usually sell a variety of breads and usually they are very similar in the same region. In Iran for example, most shops sell only one specific kind of bread (except for the so called "fantasy bakeries" which sell foreign bread types). I think at least here it

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Sorry, forgot the link [0] https://www.germany.travel/en/experience-enjoy/german-bread-and-baked-goods.html On 10.05.24 11:10, Hauke Stieler wrote: Hi, I'm with some other folks here: Tagging specific types of bread seems not a good idea. At least in Germany there are a lot of different

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Hi, I'm with some other folks here: Tagging specific types of bread seems not a good idea. At least in Germany there are a lot of different types [0], bakeries change their offers every few months and many larger bakeries have like ten or twenty types of bread. Also, some bakeries give names

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

On Fri, 3 May 2024 13:36:55 +0200 Zoon van Michiel wrote: > What is the benefit of putting the breads a bakery sells into OSM? > I think all categories of bread that might affect someone's choice to go to a > bakery are already present in OSM. > For example: pastry , diet:gluten_free ,

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

On Fri, 3 May 2024 09:39:59 +0200 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I agree for specific types of bread, but maybe we can have "classes" of > breads, if that makes sense. Personally, when going into a bakery I am > interested in the quality of the bread more than the exact type. Typically > I would

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

On Fri, 3 May 2024 09:27:39 +0200 Frederik Ramm wrote: > In general, I would advise against trying to record which products are > offered in any kind of shop, as this is likely to change often and lead > to bitrot. > > Only map such detail if you are very likely to spot any change in the >

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Hi, Am 03.05.2024 um 09:27 schrieb Frederik Ramm: In general, I would advise against trying to record which products are offered in any kind of shop, as this is likely to change often and lead to bitrot. Only map such detail if you are very likely to spot any change in the future, and will be

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

On 30/04/2024 14:51, Jass Kurn wrote: Need to point out for others reading this than I am in England, and influenced by what I believe was likely the original intent of these tags, that is mapping of the "English/Welsh, rights of way" I've always treated " foot|bicycle|horse=yes, as a means

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Industrial tagging scheme complementing man made=works (was:works:type and works:process)

Hi Martin, I've moved some text around and made the Proposal section a lot shorter - hopefully much easier to read now. Cheers, Daniel On Fri, 3 May 2024 at 15:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 3 May 2024, at 15:39, Daniel Evans > wrote: > > > > This proposal

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Industrial tagging scheme complementing man made=works (was:works:type and works:process)

sent from a phone > On 3 May 2024, at 15:39, Daniel Evans wrote: > > This proposal has now been updated on feedback, both here and on the talk page thank you for working on this, the current improvements are promising, I think you could work a little bit on the page structure, now there

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Industrial tagging scheme complementing man made=works (was:works:type and works:process)

Hi all, This proposal has now been updated on feedback, both here and on the talk page. I've moved it to a more descriptive title: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Industrial_tagging_scheme_complementing_man_made%3Dworks In general, the changes are to split out into separate tags

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Am Fr., 3. Mai 2024 um 14:09 Uhr schrieb Zoon van Michiel < spaanse@gmail.com>: > What is the benefit of putting the breads a bakery sells into OSM? > Otherwise, bread is just bread. I will choose the variety I like best when > I get there. That even bakers might not advertise which

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

That even bakers might not advertise which sorts of bread they are selling could be another clue that it is not important. If the website is in a foreign language, you can machine translate it. If the bakery is too small to have a website, it is not special and you can expect the regular

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Unless its website is in a language you don't speak, which contains a bunch of material except it doesn't list the exact kinds of items sold there or if it's a small shop that doesn't have any website at all. On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 1:40 PM Zoon van Michiel wrote: > > What is the benefit of

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

What is the benefit of putting the breads a bakery sells into OSM? I think all categories of bread that might affect someone's choice to go to a bakery are already present in OSM. For example: pastry , diet:gluten_free , diet:lactose_free. Otherwise, bread is just bread. I will choose the variety

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

https://wiki.osm.org/Key:organic or sourdough:organic=yes On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 9:43 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > I agree for specific types of bread, but maybe we can have "classes" of > breads, if that makes sense. Personally, when going into a bakery I am > interested in the quality

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

When that question occurs to you that you need to work around the 255 character limitation by using an unbounded number of alternative keys, each coming from an unbounded domain, then it's an indicator that you are overdoing it. I think it is kind of "okay" to list some key generic types as long

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

I agree for specific types of bread, but maybe we can have "classes" of breads, if that makes sense. Personally, when going into a bakery I am interested in the quality of the bread more than the exact type. Typically I would ask "do you have bread made of natural sourdough" and the answers will

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

On 3/5/24 16:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Thu, 2 May 2024 at 21:21, bkil +a...@gmail.com> wrote: Yes, that would be even better. sells:bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z But if you're selling ="white variety-a", "wholemeal variety-a", "multi-grain variety-a",

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Hi, In general, I would advise against trying to record which products are offered in any kind of shop, as this is likely to change often and lead to bitrot. Only map such detail if you are very likely to spot any change in the future, and will be able to record it. (E.g. it is the bakery

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

On Thu, 2 May 2024 at 21:21, bkil wrote: > Yes, that would be even better. > sells:bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z > But if you're selling ="white variety-a", "wholemeal variety-a", "multi-grain variety-a", "gluten-free variety-a", then the same for varieties b, c & so on, I can see a

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

Yes, that would be even better. sells:bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 12:39 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > what about > sells:bread=X;Y;Z (xyz being bread types) > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org >

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

what about sells:bread=X;Y;Z (xyz being bread types) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] breads of bakeries

It is equivalent to stating shop=bakery bread=wholemeal:x;y;wholemeal:z Or the more conventional: bread=wholemeal_x;y;wholemeal_z On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 10:19 AM iriman--- via Tagging wrote: > > Hi > I've tagged a few bakeries for the bread they sell. > At first I used semicolon to separate

[Tagging] breads of bakeries

Hi I've tagged a few bakeries for the bread they sell. At first I used semicolon to separate values: shop=bakery bread=x;y;z Since I'm focused on adding/updating bakeries that are using wholemeal flour in their products, I added a general tag bread:wholemeal=yes. But this tag was too general

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

Apr 30, 2024, 08:48 by graemefi...@gmail.com: > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 16:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > wrote: > >> >> At least in Poland we distinguish between  >> signage with legal implications and route >> markers. >> >> In fact, some bicycle trails are

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

Jass Kurn writes: > Need to point out for others reading this than I am in England, and > influenced by what I believe was likely the original intent of these tags, > that is mapping of the "English/Welsh, rights of way" > > I've always treated " foot|bicycle|horse=yes, as a means of showing I >

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

Am Di., 30. Apr. 2024 um 01:47 Uhr schrieb Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana < jptolosanz...@outlook.cl>: > It has no sense to inflating classifications of every island in the word > for being the most important road in respective island. > > If a neighbor garage is more quieter than the mine is not a

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 23:57, Andy Townsend wrote: > In terms of access rights*, I've always thought that (in England and > Wales**) "yes" and "designated" mean both "a legal right to access", as > opposed to "permissive" that means "you can go there, but that right can be > removed by the

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

Martin Koppenhoefer: IMHO, these markers have no legal meaning for accessibility (e.g. in Germany and Italy), but I am not familiar with Hungarian law. Generally, a route is mapped as a route (relation and/or lcn/rcn/ncn tags), while access (bicycle=designated) is mapped according to

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

I would re-iterate Martin's assertion. In Norway, we tag bicycle=designated/foot=designated when there is a traffic sign for cycleway/footway/combined. Implicit in this logic is that the consequence of the traffic sign is a different legal status compared to an unsigned road. A route sign is

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

Am Di., 30. Apr. 2024 um 10:54 Uhr schrieb Szem : > There was a similar conversation in the Hungarian community as well. I > would like to ask what you think about such (and similar) official bicycle > route signs: > >

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

There was a similar conversation in the Hungarian community as well. I would like to ask what you think about such (and similar) official bicycle route signs:

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

sent from a phone > On 30 Apr 2024, at 08:51, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > >> In fact, some bicycle trails are signed where >> cycling is illegal > > So does that then make it legal? no, in Germany it also happens from time to time that we discover signposted bicycle routes where cycling

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 16:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > At least in Poland we distinguish between > signage with legal implications and route > markers. > > In fact, some bicycle trails are signed where > cycling is illegal > So does that then make it

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

30 Apr 2024, 02:39 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > On 30/04/2024 9:59 am, Andrew Harvey wrote > Everything I've seen pretty much goes with: signposted or marked in some way > to indicate usage = designated. > At least in Poland we distinguish between  signage with legal implications and route

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

Oops, M1-9, not M1-8. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

This is USA-specific in the example I now offer, though notable nonetheless in this context: there are routes, such as United States Bicycle Routes, which after they are Approved (by AASHTO), are, in a legal sense, "designated." However, some states have an aggressive signage program (MUTCD

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

On Apr 29, 2024, at 6:15 PM, Natfoot wrote: > But if a trail, road, or cycle tract does not have route markers for use then > no route=* even if designated. > -natfoot I'm nodding my head so far at what I see here. I appreciate Natfoot's reminder about routes: we're not exactly talking

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

But if a trail, road, or cycle tract does not have route markers for use then no route=* even if designated. -natfoot On Mon, Apr 29, 2024, 17:33 Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 09:04, stevea wrote: > >> In my mind "designated" means "for this infrastructure / mode-of-travel

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

On 30/04/2024 9:59 am, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 09:04, stevea wrote: In my mind "designated" means "for this infrastructure / mode-of-travel pair, DO use this." Like legislatively or because a sign says so and quotes a local ordinance or traffic code statute. "We built

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 09:04, stevea wrote: > In my mind "designated" means "for this infrastructure / mode-of-travel > pair, DO use this." Like legislatively or because a sign says so and > quotes a local ordinance or traffic code statute. "We built this, use > it." (Say, for your own safety

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

It has no sense to inflating classifications of every island in the word for being the most important road in respective island. If a neighbor garage is more quieter than the mine is not a justification to elevate road classification of one of them to compensate this difference. The highway=*

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

And "should" or "must" (use this infrastructure with this mode-of-travel) more-or-less = "designated." Finally, "can" more-or-less = "yes." That's a lot of quotes, but I think you get the drift. > On Apr 29, 2024, at 4:02 PM, stevea wrote: > > In my mind "designated" means "for this

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

In my mind "designated" means "for this infrastructure / mode-of-travel pair, DO use this." Like legislatively or because a sign says so and quotes a local ordinance or traffic code statute. "We built this, use it." (Say, for your own safety and/or comfort). With "yes" you certainly can use

[Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

On 29/04/2024 16:22, Jass Kurn wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 10:03, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote: It is "bicycles=yes" and not "bicycles=designated" because, for a bridleway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway "Cyclists also have a right, unless the

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

That doesn't seem very helpful for cycling users of the map or its routers. If there is a blue round sign with a bicycle on it, I'd call that designated, or a blue rectangular one. Or the pavement is in a pinkish colour (here in Belgium). If I find a sandy track in the forest, where it's obvious

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>: > (second note also may benefit from fix as the most important in > Vatican is not highway=trunk - though again, maybe it can be avoided > via "Vatican has no road network system"). > the

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 16:06 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien < fernando.treb...@gmail.com>: > > why you think that place=hamlet are automatically entitled to > > highway=tertiary? > > The wiki emphasizes the highway classification should consider the > relative importance of roads within regional

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 10:03, Peter Neale via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > It is "bicycles=yes" and not "bicycles=designated" because, for a > bridleway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway > "Cyclists also have a right, unless the local authority makes

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 4:58 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > 1) at least some people may be interested in places where cycling across > steps is legal (not fan of MTBing etc but at least some people like it? > not really sure here about whether it is

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 at 20:14, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana wrote: > Firstly, the unclassified value is used also to linking with hamlets > according Key:highway. As I mentioned earlier, this is a contradiction in the wiki that should be addressed. The text of Tag:highway=tertiary does not match

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

Apr 28, 2024, 02:56 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com: > On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 at 14:46, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > >> If very big island has no roads at all except single small road between >> two houses it does not mean it is highway=trunk road. >> > > I agree, but note that the

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 08:02, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > Apr 28, 2024, 22:50 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com: > > 3. If they are hamlets, shouldn't the main routes connecting them be > mapped as highway=tertiary, based on the definitions in the wiki? [1] > [1]

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

1) true, but wouldn't that by default be all steps unless otherwise noted? I guess in this case it's assumed that the steps inherit their implicit access from bridleway, so that might be different from the general case...? 2) a noble cause, but again I would think that excluding bicycle=no from

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

On 28/04/2024 23:09, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: ... how do horses handle the steps in the bridleway? better than cyclists :) Lots of historic bridleways in hilly areas in England are quite steep, and often steps have been added for foot access to stop hikers sliding down the slope. Sometimes

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

Apr 28, 2024, 22:50 by fernando.treb...@gmail.com: > 3. If they are hamlets, shouldn't the main routes connecting them be > mapped as highway=tertiary, based on the definitions in the wiki? [1] > [1] > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10078630 > why you think that place=hamlet are

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

1) at least some people may be interested in places where cycling across steps is legal (not fan of MTBing etc but at least some people like it? not really sure here about whether it is actually something that people look for ) 2) people may be interested in places where cyclists nominally have

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Thanks, all! Graeme On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 18:06, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 09:47 Uhr schrieb Jo : > >> I was wondering about that myself. They seem to be 'long' steps. So a >> horse wouldn't have too much trouble with them. >> > > > > there is this property

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Horses are good at handling various obstacles. If you can find a local 'horse trial' go along and look. Yes it is a competition... But I don't map them as they are usually on private property. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Hi, It is my understanding, from the Wiki at  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle, that "bicycles=yes" means that bicycles are permitted, but says nothing about the ease of riding one there.  It is "bicycles=yes" and not "bicycles=designated" because, for a bridleway   

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Hi,   They are, indeed, quite "long".  I do not own a horse, nor have I seen one use this section of bridleway, however, I guess that, with each step having only a modest "rise" and a long "run", horses should have little difficulty walking up or down them, just as we do.  key:flat_step *might*

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Am Mo., 29. Apr. 2024 um 09:47 Uhr schrieb Jo : > I was wondering about that myself. They seem to be 'long' steps. So a > horse wouldn't have too much trouble with them. > there is this property which might be applying: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:flat_steps

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

I was wondering about that myself. They seem to be 'long' steps. So a horse wouldn't have too much trouble with them. Also parallel with it on the other side of the small river there is a cycleway with no steps. That one is on Mapillary. Jo Op ma 29 apr 2024 om 00:15 schreef Graeme Fitzpatrick :

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Am So., 28. Apr. 2024 um 16:40 Uhr schrieb Andy Townsend : > Assuming we're talking about something that's signed as a "Public > Bridleway" in England and Wales*, then at the most basic level there are > two tags to consider: > >- highway=steps >- designation=public_bridleway > > The

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Generally speaking, how do we reconcile these two? bicycle=yes highway=steps What is a data consumer supposed to infer from this as opposed to just highway=steps? As long as foot=designated, aren't cyclists always allowed to get off the bike and push/carry it? And wouldn't they have to when

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - works:type and works:process

sent from a phone > On 28 Apr 2024, at 19:58, Daniel Evans wrote: > I've seen "industry=" proposed/discussed before, with the big problem that > it's very close to the existing "industrial" tag, and it would likely be too > confusing if they had different meanings (one for land use, one for

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

I think is much more simpler than said you. Related to King George Island: Firstly, the unclassified value is used also to linking with hamlets according Key:highway. Due the settlements of Fildes Peninsula are in the lowet limit of hamlet/village (supposing these are the correct values), then

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Completely aside from mapping them in OSM, but how do horses handle the steps in the bridleway? Thanks Graeme On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 05:41, Peter Neale via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Hi DaveF, > > Acting on advice, I have already split the Bridleway and re-tagged 2 >

Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica

On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 at 02:13, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana wrote: > I do not understand your petition Put concretely: 1. Are Villa Las Estrellas, Bellingshausen Station, Great Wall Station and Artigas Base considered settlements in OSM? Should they be considered to have population=0? 2. If they

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

Hi DaveF, Acting on advice, I have already split the Bridleway and re-tagged 2 sections as: bicycle=yesdesignation=public_bridlewayfoot=designatedhighway=stepshorse=designatedincline=down   (or up)lit=nosurface=paved The steps can be seen on aerial imagery (a bit fuzzy on Bing, but

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - works:type and works:process

Hi Martin, The similarly short "works=" has been suggested, also as an existing tag, with ~1000 uses that are quite similar to the intended one. I've seen "industry=" proposed/discussed before, with the big problem that it's very close to the existing "industrial" tag, and it would likely be too

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >