On 18/05/2012 17:31, Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote:
Am 18.05.2012 um 16:32 schrieb Tobias Johanssont...@mensa.se:
Are we talking about
this?http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Uvl-p3eVBeM/Tr8xUuhRYbI/Iho/NJZGrhCH6yk/s400/53242_1431458077448_1562786087_30891073_4275686_o.jpg
If would think this
On 15/05/2012 16:30, Anthony wrote:
Okay, so, for OSM terminology, a roundabout means 1) traffic goes in
one direction; 2) entering traffic must yield; and 3) entering traffic
need not stop (no stop signs).
I hope not...OSM currently has no way of reflecting priority at
junctions. Introducing
In general, the world considers a city to be a very large town. In the
UK (and possibly other places) the concept of city has specific
connotations, namely the granting of Letters Patent by the Crown (a
cathedral is not a prerequisite, nor is it a guarantee of city status!)
A similar system
Wouldn't this discussion benefit from a summary of the use cases we are
trying to address? I see multiple semantics being suggested for the
lanes tag, and at the end of the day we will have to choose one.
* Renderers such as mapnik might want to reflect the number of lanes in
the width of the
There are three cases in NL, all referred to as spitsstrook
(literally, rush-hour lane):
1) the hard shoulder is sometimes opened to traffic, creating an extra
lane on the right
2) the left-most lane is sometimes open (if traffic is heavier), and
sometimes closed (if the extra capacity is not
In Europe at any rate there are proper weighbridges which
drivers/operators can use to check for compliancy with weight limits or
for the registration of the transport of certain bulk materials (such as
coal, oil etc - the truck is weighed before and after (un)loading).
There are also
Yes please!
I was also thinking on the lines of documenting implicit tagging:
*to save mappers time
*to save space in the database
*to avoid confusion
*to allow a single point of maintenance
At a generic territory level with some kind of hierarchy please, so
for example cities
explicit tagging. I just
don't see that happening. A more heuristic approach involving
documenting assumptions/defaults would allow the data's usability
dramatically to be improved without full explicit tagging.
regards
Peter
Am 13.04.2012 08:11, schrieb Colin Smale:
Yes please!
I was also
On 13/04/2012 08:20, Peter Wendorff wrote:
-10 for adding defaults as a hint for mappers!!!
What would you do with this page? Enhance/complete it, or delete it?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions
Just noticed that links to a proposal for defaults -
Putting lots of traffic signs on nodes on the way would result in a lot
of new nodes on the ways, which will need optimising out by
routers/mkgmap etc. The sign is not really an attribute of the road.
Putting a tag on the road segment to which the warning applies would
seem to me a more
There seem to be several dimensions to this. Bathing can mean
different things to different people, with different English
words/usage. I can give a few examples.
Firstly, the activity itself:
*to get clean (with soap etc)
*to exercise or as a sport (swimming pool with lanes)
*as a
On 08/02/2012 13:40, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
6. building:levelPlan=* What each storey is used for, Examples: 0-2:
shop, 3-12: residential; 0: restaurant, 1: residential; -1: unused, 0:
lobby, 1: restuarant, 2-12: offices, 13: unused, 14-66: offices
- missleading key (one would expect a link
On 08/02/2012 20:25, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/2/8 Colin Smalecolin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
On 08/02/2012 16:00, Martin Vonwald wrote:
question of syntax rather than concept. What triggered my post was actually
a comment by Martin K who also felt a need for multi-value tags (i.e.
arrays) in the
On 08/02/2012 21:03, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 2/8/2012 2:25 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
The lane-case is a little different though, because if you have
multiple values there (plus a definition from where to start) you
won't need lane numbering. For buildings you will have unambigous
On 08/02/2012 22:00, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 2/8/2012 3:47 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
For building floors, are there any cultures which number their floors
downwards?
The Troglodytes.
:-D
There is of course the common leaving off of the 13th floor.
Mentioned that a couple of posts ago
On 17/01/2012 14:20, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Colin Smalecolin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
On 17/01/2012 03:31, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM, John Sturdyjcg.stu...@gmail.comwrote:
I understand access=no as meaning no *public* access, but perhaps
that
On 17/01/2012 03:31, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM, John Sturdyjcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand access=no as meaning no *public* access, but perhaps
that is better covered by access=private.
access=private doesn't make much sense on land that is publicly owned.
Right
On 22/11/2011 20:45, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
This is the proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tidal_road
Surely the road in this case simply has tide-related opening times (and
a variable surface?). It may be secondary, tertiary, unclassified or
whatever. The fact
On 22/11/2011 21:33, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 11/22/2011 09:17 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
Surely the road in this case simply has tide-related opening times (and
a variable surface?). It may be secondary, tertiary, unclassified or
whatever. The fact that it is sometimes closed by the tide
On 20/10/2011 19:34, David Earl wrote:
While we're at it, you also sometimes find barriers on car park exits
which have fierce, curved, spring-loaded spikes which are pushed into
the ground if you drive over them in the intended direction, but which
would rip your tyres to shreds if you
On 17/08/2011 12:19, Sander Deryckere wrote:
It has a bad discription, it's a tag for a temporary feature (at
least how I interpret it) and it didn't go via the voting process.
So I would just delete it and point the writer to the voting process.
Since when is the voting process
On 22/06/2011 03:18, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Mihkel Rämmelr...@hot.ee wrote:
If i'm not wrong then there seems to be no tag for shop that is specialised
in selling (and repairing) garden and forest machinery (lawnmovers,
chainsaws, trimming machines, etc.) and
On 22/06/2011 09:00, Stephen Hope wrote:
On 22 June 2011 16:14, Colin Smalecolin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
That's for the renderer to sort out... We just need to make sure that the
data makes/enables the distinctions that we do as humans. The renderer can
always map multiple tags onto the same
On 20/05/2011 11:05, pavithran wrote:
How do we tag a land which belongs to the government .
tags like
landuse = official
landuse = civil
landuse = government
sound nice .
There was a proposed feature which got abandoned .
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Civil
What you
On 17/05/2011 20:51, Dominik Mahrer (Teddy) wrote:
I propose hazmat:adr_tunnel_category=
Teddy
Now that one I can definitely live with. It gets grouped with the other
hazmat values, and contains the (for me) key elements of adr, tunnel
and category. I wish I had thought of it myself!
Colin
Following a brief exchange on the list a couple of weeks ago I have now
put this into a formal proposal.
The proposal is to introduce a new tag tunnel:adr_category to contain
the ADR (hazardous materials by road) category of a tunnel.
On 15/05/2011 23:25, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/15/2011 4:49 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
Following a brief exchange on the list a couple of weeks ago I have now
put this into a formal proposal.
The proposal is to introduce a new tag tunnel:adr_category to contain
the ADR (hazardous materials
On 15/05/2011 23:50, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/15/2011 5:35 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
On 15/05/2011 23:25, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/15/2011 4:49 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
Following a brief exchange on the list a couple of weeks ago I have
now
put this into a formal proposal.
The proposal
On 11/05/2011 05:27, Josh Doe wrote:
It's been about a month now, and I've gotten some feedback from the
talk page. My thoughts are that we either:
* reuse the existing place=suburb (as the wiki definition seems like
it might work)
* use the new place=neighbourhood
Either way I think we need
On 11/05/2011 20:28, Josh Doe wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that they're important to map. But they're not administrative units,
and shouldn't be mapped as such.
How do you suggest doing this without breaking the way people expect a
ADR (see [1]) is a set of rules governing transport of hazardous
materials by road, produced by UNECE (see [2]). It is responsible for
those yellow/orange diamond-shaped signs on trucks with a UN substance
number and particular hazard warnings. It also covers classifications of
tunnels in
On 01/04/2011 17:47, j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
One example of a waterway with reversing flow would be the estuary of a river.
While the tide is rising, the flow in the estuary may slow, come to a
standstill, or even temporarily reverse directions (called a tidal bore).
Surely most estuaries
On 21/02/2011 02:51, Paul Johnson wrote:
This whole question suggests that we're somehow responsible for data
consumers paying more attention to their navigation than what's out
their windshield, which is an entirely specious argument for obvious
reasons.
OSM officially only does the data, not
I'm not sure that it would be wise to imply that a capital of an area is
also the capital of lower-level areas. There are plenty of examples
where this is NOT the case; Amsterdam is the capital of The Netherlands
(but NOT the seat of government), but Haarlem is the capital of the
province
On 02/01/2011 19:24, Ralf Kleineisel wrote:
On 01/02/2011 05:42 PM, Robert Elsenaar wrote:
This was a expected answer. I frequently try to discover the reason OSM
mappers accepting this anarchistic rule of NOT having tagging rules at all.
What are the advantages for this?
I prefer this over
As the concept of disused could apply to millions of different things,
I would prefer to see a more generic system which could be applied
uniformly. I would like to see the life_cycle tag resurrected
(proposed in 2008) something like this:
life_cycle=planned (only exists on paper)
This sounds like it might be similar to the minicab in the UK. They
are licensed differently from taxis and are only permitted to operate on
a pre-booked basis, i.e. you can't just stop one on the street but you
have to phone or go to the office to make a reservation. They are not
allowed to
On 14/11/2010 22:39, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 1:09 PM, esperanzaespera...@no-log.org wrote:
Is it right to use busway or should we use another tag ? (like psv ?)
psv includes taxis; use access=no bus=yes unless taxis are allowed.
The definition of psv will vary by
From the better late than never department:
I just discovered a description of how Inrix work with speeds to assist
with predicted journey times.
Inrix are a leading supplier of this kind of information to
organisations such as ITIS (in the UK) and TomTom, so I think they have
probably
On 12/10/2010 17:51, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Pierenpier...@gmail.com wrote:
layer is just saying what is on the top when two objects/lines are
crossing each other. If you have only one element, the layer tag is really
optionnal (this until someone is tracing
On 07/10/2010 01:03, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote:
On 2010-10-06 at 21:20:08 +0200, Colin Smale wrote:
Some places but not all...At least in NL you are not allowed to turn
left or make a U-turn across a solid centre line, nor are you allowed to
cross the line to overtake anything at all.
It's
On 06/10/2010 00:12, John Smith wrote:
Someone just added this, it's a good idea on principal, but is this
the best way to tag it?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Map_Features:highwayoldid=534629diff=next
The page for the overtaking tag appears to have been in
On 06/10/2010 21:05, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Colin Smalecolin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
This came into the limelight in NL following a discussion about
single-carriageway (main) roads with a double white line (i.e. do not
cross, effectively no overtaking) and
Oops, sorry, wrong list!
On 04/10/2010 00:41, Colin Smale wrote:
Sinds kort bestaat de N201 tussen Vinkeveen en de A2 nu (in OSM) uit
twee wegen met oneway=yes, alsof het gescheiden weghelften zouden
zijn. Ik heb altijd begrepen dat alleen fysieke afscheidingen tellen
(zie [1]), en die zijn
On 02/10/2010 02:07, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2010/9/30 Colin Smalecolin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
Also important for routing systems is the practical speed for a road.
Many country roads may have a high legal limit, but for reasons including
width and curviness you may never achieve anywhere near
we as mappers have no control over how the different routing systems
select default speeds. we should not be making assumptions about that.
Also important for routing systems is the practical speed for a road.
Many country roads may have a high legal limit, but for reasons including
width and
The discussion here (and in talk-nl) seems to boil down to the question
whether these traffic circles are a subtype of roundabout, or a junction
type in their own right.
I fully support all those who suggest they are a separate junction type.
My proposal was based on the premise that most people
I am making a simple proposal of roundabout=priority_to_right to
indicate a specific non-standard priority arrangement on some
roundabouts occurring in some parts of mainland Europe.
Please see:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Roundabout_Priority
Comments and suggestions
On 04/09/2010 06:53, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 2:37 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
so you are talking about rendering?
Primarily, yes. But could be useful for other applications. For
example, to do public transport routing, you would want to operate
On 08/08/2010 20:39, Paul Johnson wrote:
Let this side of the Atlantic win at least one tagging war,
please...after all, we call them freeways and expressways, not motorways
and trunks; guess who won that one?
Surely the whole point is that there shouldn't be these tagging wars.
There is (I
On 02/08/2010 17:28, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Anthonyo...@inbox.org wrote:
If I wanted the list of colors to be controlled and
finite I'd use a check constraint.
By the way, if I were going to use a separate table for the list of
colors, for instance for performance
I think there might be more types of public fire control
equipment... I remember often seeing fire beaters (broomstick with
flaps of rubber/leather) in a rack on moor and heathland prone to fires.
Maybe amenity=fire_beater can be added to the proposal?
Colin
On 28/07/2010 02:41, Richard
Shouldn't the layer_change be on the common point, not a way? A way
(usually) has two ends, so putting the tag on a way will not indicate at
which end of the way the layer change takes place. But then it
degenerates to two (or more) connected ways with a different layer=*
value, so the layer
On 06/07/2010 21:02, Ulf Lamping wrote:
Am 06.07.2010 20:38, schrieb Colin Smale:
On 06/07/2010 18:44, Richard Mann wrote:
I'm not really clear what is the value of tagging a zone, except in
a note. Why not just use the standard maxspeed tag?
+1
Here in NL it warns you that the given road
On 06/07/2010 18:44, Richard Mann wrote:
I'm not really clear what is the value of tagging a zone, except in
a note. Why not just use the standard maxspeed tag?
+1
Here in NL it warns you that the given road sign (could be maxspeed,
could be some other restriction) is valid until further
I have been thinking recently about how to represent special lanes
in OSM. I have been working on a flexible scheme for this which I am
calling lane groups. Below is my current draft...If there is any
support out there I will turn it into a wiki-page and get the ball
rolling. All comments are
Pieren wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
no, you can always compare it to the width of your vehicle, therefore
it doesn't require that all streets are tagged width it.
?? With my Fiat 500 or you
Bill Ricker wrote:
i generally also set access=private for the official vehicle only u-turns.
would access=official here be an overly fussy distinction ?
access=official sounds as if it would need a lot more definition. In
many countries anything with blue flashing lights and/or
601 - 658 of 658 matches
Mail list logo
