See comments below:
David
-- Original Message --
From: "Eric H. Christensen via Tagging"
To: "tagging@openstreetmap.org"
Cc: "Eric H. Christensen"
Sent: 18/11/2020 20:19:51
Subject: [Tagging] coastline v. water
After a few days of much work, a recent
n agreed by the
OSM community.
This modification primarily allows for the continuing improvement of the PGS
import without needlessly seeking prior approval in each instance
David
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
___
Ta
o the position of the coastline on 1 January
2020.
2) Any edit which moved the position of the coastline by more than 20Km
from the established position should be classed as vandalism, unless
such movement had previously been agreed by the community.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
a new established usage, how about
service=main_access ?
Happy to hear everyone's thoughts here, and I hope to get something we can
vote on on the wiki soon.
- David
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 at 21:43, Matthew Woehlke
wrote:
> On 03/08/2020 19.56, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Au
o.eu/s/WGY), and looks like it has been used in that
general 'access to facilities on a larger property/campus' sense.
For example: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WGZ.
- David
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 08:31, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 3. Aug 2020
l.com
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
Le samedi 1 août 2020 17:03, David Marchal a écrit :
> To Jan Michel (I did not have your mail, as I unsubscribed of the list mails
> to avoid cluttering my mailbox): the goal of my reques
service=? (not just service=parking) tagging
and start the formal RFC process.
Thanks for your feedback, everyone.
- David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
Le vendredi 31 juillet 2020 15:53, David Marchal a
écrit :
> Hello, there.
>
> I'm wondering, there are destination signs which only apply to some kind of
> vehicles: for HGV, for bicycles, for pedestrians, for vehicl
using a
> destination_sign relation it's best to apply the mode as eg.
> bicycle=designated, eg
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11345354#map=18/-33.82573/151.21308
> for https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/VIq-OPTiw0BVI7gqdLR-iA
>
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 at 23:55, Davi
, without explicitly
forbidding them on the other roads.
--
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
Le vendredi 31 juillet 2020 15:59, Paul Johnson a écrit :
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:53 AM David Marchal via Tagging
> wrote:
>
>&g
Hello, there.
I'm wondering, there are destination signs which only apply to some kind of
vehicles: for HGV, for bicycles, for pedestrians, for vehicles below 12t… How
would I tag such destinations? The simple way would be to use, respectively,
destination:hgv=*, destination:bicycle=*, destinat
Mateusz,
The first thing is that this tagging scheme is mainly used in Poland, so that
sounded like a local, not widely approved, tagging scheme.
The second thing, which is the real problem to me, is that I don't see how to
link these with the forest, as a parcel number is valid only in a given
There may be a misunderstanding here: what I mean about forest parcels is a
piece of forest which is numbered and whose number is displayed on site, with a
plate or a painted text. Such data can be useful for orientation in a forest
and, until some years ago, these numbers were displayed on maps
Hello, there.
My question is simple: how do we tag such things? The
boundary=forest_compartment relation is not rendered, and what is rendered is
tagging as landuse=forest both the forest and its parcels, which leads to
rendering it twice, as you can see here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/rel
Hello, there.
I mapped a forest made of several pieces of woodland, some contiguous and some
isolated, with differents leaf_types. I mapped this
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9393253) with a landuse=forest
multipolygon, with common tags such as name and operator on the relation, and
Paul,
Your landuse=forestry proposal seems good to me: it is clear enough, and the
transition process you describe here seems consistent with what I know about
such transitions which already happened. If I understand you, the main problem
for landuse=forestry is to include it in the standard st
Hello, there.
All is in the title: when hiking in a forest (I mean, an area considered as a
forest by authorities), I often encounter other landcovers, like scrubs in
recently teared down parcels, or scree in the mountains. These area, although,
clearly and morphologically, not a forest, are st
hese are "coastlines" .
David
Further west, I moved the administrative boundary off of the coastline
of internal waterways, positioning it near the low water line /
baseline, because I believe this is closer to the official Indonesian
definition for Kabupaten (admin level 6) boundar
Hello, there.
All is in the title: when access to a road is restricted to military, as it is
running through a base, should I tag it access=private or access=military? The
first gives the right restriction, but the second is more precise, although not
documented (about 1.8k uses according to t
1
À : Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Objet : Re: [Tagging] highway=motorway_junction : what about primary, secondary
or tertiary ways?
It is commonly used on non-motorway grade separated junctions. So the answer is
yes.
Phil (trigpoint)
On 12 July 2018 07:34:06 BST, David Marchal wrote:
Hello, there.
Is highway=motorway_junction also applicable to non-motorway roads? There are
primary, secondary… roads where there are exits, but can these be tagged with
this one?
Awaiting your answers,
Regards.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@op
What is the best way to specify the maximum weight when a sign specifies
different weights for different axle counts?
The situation in question is here:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/VMM_wbgzcm1jFm_APKhQww
For those who cannot see the image, the sign says
: WEIGHT LIMIT
: 2 axle - 10
Which one? Link?
There were a few.
On 24 May 2018, at 10:05, "Stefan K." wrote:
I found a wiki for 3d-tagging, is that a proposal? Can i tag using
theses suggestet tags?
Unfortunately i could not find a 3d-mailinglist so i thought i mayb
try it here. The 3d section in the forum seems not to
Hello, there.
I recently worked a bit on hiking routes, and noticed that some routes have
unordered members. That's particularly noticeable on waymarkedtrails.org, as it
makes the elevation graph rubbish and useless. I read the relation:route wiki
page, but there is only advice regarding stops
Hello, there.
I hope this will not start a flamewar: I noticed that, despite being widely
used, ref=* is not rendered for landuse=forest. I assumed this was used for
parcel (compartment) numbers, as this tag seems to fit the definition of a
parcel number; nevertheless, I saw on a Github issue
Huh?
access=motorcar is for motorhomes? That's not the way I interpreted it. I
thought a motorcar was the same as an automobile, like a family car. A
motorhome is a large vehicle that's suitable to live in. That's from an
American English perspective.
Dave
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang
?
Awaiting your answers,
Regards.
Le 12 nov. 2017 à 21:17, Yuri Astrakhan
mailto:yuriastrak...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
David, hi, just an thought - could you combine the rationale and examples
sections? The way you have it now is first you describe each concept, and
afterwards you have th
=yes as the one to use, and
will create the wiki page accordingly. Thanks to all who voted; the proposal
process is now fully finished, apart from creating all the Wiki pages.
Regards.
Le 24 oct. 2017 à 19:16, David Marchal
mailto:pene...@live.fr>> a écrit :
Hello, there.
The vote period
go back on the proposal page
and vote, in the dedicated subsection, amongst karstic=yes or karst=yes. Once
the choice will have been asserted, I’ll be able to create the corresponding
Wiki page.
Thanking you for your patience, and awaiting your votes,
Regards.
Le 8 oct. 2017 à 09:51, David
It’s a re-forestation area, but the trees have all been teared down, so it’s
now scrub, but temporarily.
> Le 12 oct. 2017 à 11:20, Volker Schmidt a écrit :
>
> Is it (permanently) scrub or is it re-forestation area that is temporarily
> without trees?
>
>
>
> __
Hello, there.
If a part of a forest has been razed and is now a scrub area, should I let this
natural=scrub area in the forest multipolygon? I thought so, as the scrub area
is still managed as a section of the whole forest, but another user updated it
to exclude the scrub areas from the forest
Hello, there.
The normal voting duration passed, but there are not enough votes yet to
approve or reject the proposal, so I extend the voting period by two weeks to
allow latecomers to vote.
Awaiting your votes,
Reagrds.
Le 26 sept. 2017 à 20:26, David Marchal
mailto:pene...@live.fr>
Hello, there.
As this proposal has been RFCed more than 2 weeks ago, and that comments have
been addressed, I’m now putting it on vote. Please go on the proposal page
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Sinkholes_refinement) to
vote.
Awaiting your votes,
Regards.
__
Many company names are trademarked, yet included in OSM.
That said, I'm uncertain of any benefits of a 'slogan' tag.
On 19 September 2017, at 08:19, Tod Fitch wrote:
It is my understanding that corporate slogans are usually trademarked and
written permission is required to use or reproduce th
Hello.
A naive tagging would be natural=fault on a way drawn along the fault, but it’s
very naive, as I never mapped anything related.
Regards.
Le 11 sept. 2017 à 04:29, J.J.Iglesias
mailto:jjiglesi...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
I am unable to find how to tag geological Faults.
Any Idea?
Thanks
. 2017 à 17:25, David Marchal
mailto:pene...@live.fr>> a écrit :
Hello, there.
I’ve created a proposal for better tagging of sinkholes, as they can be of
multiple types, not currently acknowledged by mainstream tagging practices.
This proposal can be read here:
https://wiki.openstreetm
Hello, there.
I’ve created a proposal for better tagging of sinkholes, as they can be of
multiple types, not currently acknowledged by mainstream tagging practices.
This proposal can be read here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Sinkholes_refinement Any
comments should be
-- Original Message --
From: "wille"
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
Sent: 17/08/2017 16:06:39
Subject: [Tagging] ferry relations
Hello!
The wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dferry
says that "No relation should be used even if the key route
> Le 8 mars 2017 à 23:04, Michael Reichert a écrit :
>
> Please keep OSM simple. I don't want to add a power route relation on
> every tiny minor distribution line/cable (230 V).
>
Totally agree with that. I don’t understand the usage of a relation binding the
distribution network elements: th
en thats not a suitable solution for you.
Didn't understand what you mean with "digest approach" ?
I thought you mentioned getting the list communications via digest
instead of directly receiving what you call spam. If not, sorry for the
distraction.
David
Cheers,
Thilo
Am 07
when replying, often seem to forget to
change the message title and are not always taken seriously :-)
David
Am 06.03.2017 um 18:09 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
2017-03-06 17:46 GMT+01:00 Michael Reichert <mailto:naka...@gmx.net>>:
Hi Martin and others,
Am 2017-03-06 um
of
date, in ways that are noticeable when overlaying the data.
Apparently the
http://efele.net/maps/tz/world/tz_world_ingredients.zip file there
has information that could be used to rebuild the shapefiles on top
of other sources of data, but I've never attempted to do this
Maybe its time someone put a note on the proposal page saying that the
author is posting to the list but does not appear to be receiving
messages from it ?
In case its a language issue, could that message be in German and
English perhaps ?
David
On 06/03/17 05:17, Martin Koppenhoefer
> Le 25 févr. 2017 à 12:16, Dave F a écrit :
>
> Hi Dave
>
> Won't the first node of the named way that's most upstream indicate its start
> point by default?
>
> What advantages will adding a specific 'it starts here' tag bring?
>
> Cheers
> DaveF
I agree with Dave here: the first node in t
Just about all of these services
have their own website. And its someones job to keep the information
current !
Please see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
like
laundry=yes|no|fee.
David
On 08/02/17 20:28, Volker Schmidt wrote:
I see on the wiki page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site
the option
shop=laundry
This does not seem to be appropriate to map caravan sites that offer
self-service coin-operated washing machines
prised if a cat was comfortable using a doggy smelling place. I
cannot image any other pet being very keen either. So rather than your
99% dog use, I'd suggest its 100% dog for practical purposes. Anyone's
experience different ?
David
On 20/01/17 19:36, joost schouppe wrote:
Hi,
I would find it very hard to support "potty_area". A potty is a
container used by small children during toilet training, what has that
got to do with dogs ?
David
On 10/11/16 01:24, joost schouppe wrote:
Hi,
Many cities have special little areas which are specifically meant to
. That does sound like wikidata
So, I suggest its possible your solution improves a small aspect of a
larger problem but just perhaps also makes that larger problem even worse ?
David
On 26/10/16 02:02, Sven Geggus wrote:
Hello,
in our localized German map style we try to render Country
Note that, although exceptional, some waterways can flow both ways, according
to tidal, floods, if a connected estavelle is absorbing or discharging water...
Even if it is unlikely, this tag could be of some use to highlight the fact
that the waterway is not subject to such stream variations.
F
They have a different history, a different use and a
different future.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
I would add that, according to the wiki
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dwadi), waterway=wadi has
been deprecated and should be replaced with waterway=stream or waterway=river,
anyway with intermittent=yes. Apart from that, I agree with 61sundowner: the
track and the waterway
in Oz, its probably pretty wide and may be best
mapped as an area rather than a line, that way, the highway way would be
more distinguishable. And we need be realistic about their position and
accept they move.
David
Suggestions welcome.
Hi,
I removed over specific text about the country. The description of
services does not exclude anything (like give birth).
Cheers.
Le 26/08/2016 00:44, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
sent from a phone
Il giorno 25 ago 2016, alle ore 22:46, David Picard ha
scritto:
So, my
AFAIK, no maxspeed value means that the default maximum speed for this type of
road in this area applies, so I wouldn't add this tag when there is no sign;
that would also fulfill the "Map what's on the ground" principle. Beware that,
if there that was a maximum speed sign (hundreds of) kilomete
, midwives in hospitals/clinics
usually wear a pink suit. So, I guess the doctor symbol could be used if
changed from red to pink. What do you think ?
Cheers,
David.
Le 23/08/2016 02:02, David Bannon a écrit :
David, I am very sorry to only comment after you have gone to the vote,
very rude of m
David, I am very sorry to only comment after you have gone to the vote,
very rude of me !
But I have been away, quite remote and very poor internet access, big
backlog of unread mail.
David, my partner is a midwife but of the "specialist nurse" variety.
What concerns us is how thi
The vote is open for :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/midwife
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
OK, I updated the page, using your comments.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/midwife
Le 01/08/2016 à 17:13, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
2016-08-01 17:03 GMT+02:00 David Picard mailto:dave...@yahoo.fr>>:
I think your proposal should be more explicit abo
How about healthcare=midwife ?
Le 01/08/2016 17:13, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
2016-08-01 17:03 GMT+02:00 David Picard mailto:dave...@yahoo.fr>>:
I think your proposal should be more explicit about the actual
tagging
you propose (key=value, possibly in bol
Hi,
Le 01/08/2016 à 11:15, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
2016-07-31 19:21 GMT+02:00 David Picard mailto:dave...@yahoo.fr>>:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/midwife
Definition: a midwife practising as a licensed professional in
an office
I thin
Hi,
Le 01/08/2016 à 11:15, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
2016-07-31 19:21 GMT+02:00 David Picard mailto:dave...@yahoo.fr>>:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/midwife
Definition: a midwife practising as a licensed professional in
an office
I thin
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/midwife
Definition: a midwife practising as a licensed professional in an office
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Hello, there.
I've been told in a JOSM ticket
(https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/12866#comment:2) that the wiki states
that disused:railway=* requires railway=disused, and, indeed, the wiki says
that (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:railway). I don't
understand why as, AFAIK
dering some of the detail found in the
database. And make a pretty attractive looking map at the same time.
There are lots of other 'consumers' of OSM data.
David
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists
I would discourage the use of type as a key here as it is used to differentiate
between relations. Suggest shelter:type or something similar. Cheers Dave
Get Outlook for iOS
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:29 PM -0700, "Mark Bradley"
wrote:
> From: Martin Koppenhoefer
> To: "Tag discus
Hello, there.
At least here, in France, there are numerous regions, whose unity is based
either on a common historical background, for example as a medieval county or
duchy like the Barrois, or on a uniform natural landscape, as the Bauges
mountains or the Mont Blanc massif. These regions are of
Hello, there.
I'm wondering: there are tons of natural features that have been modified or
organized by humans, like springs which emerge in man-made ponds. Is there a
tag used to model this organization, like organised=yes?
Awaiting your answers,
Regards.
Hello, Abhishek.
Nice idea to synthesize all the available stuff regarding navigation data. Not
my main interest in OSM, as I've got enough work on my rural, mainly filled by
bots area, but still a good idea. Keep it up!
Regards.
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:33:45 +0530
From: saikia.abhi...@gmail.c
o see if some of the result
can be incorporated into the current model, or even a long term transition ?
David
On 06/03/16 01:25, Alberto wrote:
Dear OSM staff, contributors, and users:
I have read the definitions, concepts and description that OSM uses to
characterize (tag) roads and notic
Hello, there.
I wondered: I saw the' tributary' role on some waterway relations; while I
understand its usage — to represent the fact that a waterway flows into another
—, I would like to know if it is widespread or even widely accepted, if not
voted on wiki, as JOSM complains about not knowing
> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:26:55 +0100
> From: matkoni...@gmail.com
> To: pene...@live.fr
> CC: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging problem for a river running in a culvert below
> a track / wiki votes enforcement
>
> I think that photo of this object would be useful to
> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:06:22 +0100
> From: dieterdre...@gmail.com
> can you please post a link to the object you think is rendered wrong, not to
> the part of the map, e.g. like this:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/350320686
> This is a track, it should likely get a layer tag and a brid
Damn Hotmail!
> From: chris_horm...@gmx.de
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 22:37:07 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] wetland=bog, why only "receive their water and
> nutrients from rainfall"?
>
> On
> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 15:59:24 +
> From: ajt1...@gmail.com
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org; tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] wetland=bog, why only "receive their water and
> nutrients from rainfall"?
>
> What does "fen" means to y
Re-sent message, the first one being misformatted.
> From: chris_horm...@gmx.de
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 22:37:07 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] wetland=bog, why only "receive their water and
> nutrients from rainfall"?
>
> On
Hello, there.
I've got a tagging problem here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/48.34992/6.15965 A side stream of the
Madon river runs in a culvert under the private track, and that makes a glitch
by rendering the culvert over the `natural=water/water=river` polygon. I asked
on the renderi
> From: chris_horm...@gmx.de
> There are of course all kind of boundary cases but the typical bog as
> common in many parts of northern Europe is rain fed. In German we have
> the more specific term 'Regenmoor' which indicates this. Mires fed by
> groundwater or water inflow from the outside a
Hello, there.
I tagged some bogs today, and I wondered: why does the wiki restricts bogs to
"depressions that receive their water and nutrients from rainfall"? AFAIK, bogs
are not necessarily isolated from water streams or bodies. Wikipedia talls
about sloping bogs where running water is interc
As always, these linguistic preferences color every discussion. I use the word
junkyard as do most Americans but I settled on scrapyard as a reasonable
compromise but YMMV. these conversations tend to go round and round and I am
satisfied with what I have.
Sent from Outlook Mobile
On Thu, J
Hello, there!
How should I model roads on which one traffic way has the priority over the
other one, like with the "Priority over/for oncoming traffic" signs the Vienna
convention registered
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals#Road_signs)?
The wiki says no
> From: g...@ir.bbn.com
> To: pene...@live.fr
> CC: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcels and national/municipal forest: how to
> map?
> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:05:01 -0500
>
>
> David Marchal wri
> From: g...@ir.bbn.com
> To: pene...@live.fr
> CC: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Forest parcels and national/municipal forest: how to
> map?
> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:05:01 -0500
>
>
> David Marchal writes:
>
>> 1) forest parcels:
Hello, there.
I'm wondering how to map 2 things:
1) forest parcels: some people use a boundary relation with
boundary=forest_compartment, but this seems mainly used in Eastern Europe, so
geographically limited; others map each parcel with landuse=forest and then use
ref=* to give the parcel num
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 14:01 Richard Welty wrote:
> it's an inevitable consequence of serializing a complex data structure.
> we either find ways to deal with it or else we accept limits on what
> we can accomplish.
>
Or we change the way we do it.
For example, emitting the relations first woul
n to be similar and are split up purely for convenience of managing
other things like bus routes or bridges which run along part of the real
object.
David
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 12:37 David Earl wrote:
> I can see the attraction of this, but I do always worry about gross lack
> of backward
s as you go and then look them up as you see
ways etc. You have to process the lot first and then go back and to the
original task. Again it pretty much mandates a huge database for anything
other than a small area.
David
___
Tagging mail
___
>
> On 06/11/2015 10:24, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> Obviously in places where a road can have multiple equivalent
> references (such as the US) route relations perfect sense (as does
> figuring out which routes are actually signed on which bits of road)
> but in p
Hello, there.
I'm trying to map some approach aid systems on a local airport, but I have
trouble choosing the correct tags: the wiki mentions aeroway=navigationaid, and
navigationaid=* to precise type, but this page has a banner telling to use
airmark=beacon, an almost empty page with no instru
Hello again,
Thanks a lot to Eric Gillet, John Willis, Warin Mateusz Konieczny,
Volker Schmidt, Martin Koppenhoefer for replying me. It has been really
helpful to have good practises.
Regards
David Lopez Villegas
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging
Hello,
My name is David, and I'm a novel user. I find OpenStreetMap really
interesting. My user in OpenStreetMap is dlv3.
I'm sourveying my little village. I'm trying to tag a "Olive Oil
Factory"(I'm not a english speaker, ¿is this name corre
Hello,
My name is David, and I'm a novel user. I find OpenStreetMap really
interesting. My user in OpenStreetMap is dlv3.
I'm sourveying my little village. I'm trying to tag a "Olive Oil
Factory"(I'm not a english speaker, ¿is this name corre
> From: g...@ir.bbn.com
> To: pene...@live.fr
> CC: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line
> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:12:55 -0400
> I'm coming into this late, but I think key questions are:
>
> transmission vs distribution: in the US, this is a big div
In fact, this problem leaded me to my question: I noticed some minor lines
tagged as power=line, cluttering the Mapnik rendering, so I searched the
correct way of modelling them, to see if it was a rendering or modelling issue,
and one thing leading to another…
Regarding the parting between mino
even if some others, as the
distribution/transport distinction, isn't modelled.
Am I correct?
Regards.
> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:12:02 +0300
> From: lkyto...@gmail.com
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line
>
> Da
Wow, I only asked about using the single line/minor_line distinction; if this
one isn't easy at all, what will it be by adding importance or usage, which
seems far less obvious than minor_line/line, itself not as obvious as I thought
at first? The current disctinction has the advantage it can be
Indeed, mappers aren't supposed to know everything, neither the recommended
modelling nor the technical details of power lines, but the landscape criteria
seems simple enough to allow them to understand it if they are informed about
it; besides, even if they are not aware of it, experienced mapp
Do you mean that the landscape impact criteria is already the one used to
distinguish minor_line and line?
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:26:26 +0200
From: dieterdre...@gmail.com
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line
I agree that additional details like
, the stylesheet guys made a logical choice, why
not adopting the same?
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:48:58 +0200
From: fl.infosrese...@gmail.com
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] power=* tag: minor_line vs. line
(Sent from a phone)
Hi David,
Many opinion exists regarding the minor or not
Well, I thought underground lines was to be tagged as `power=line`; besides, I
thought like you at first, but I've been told on the help.openstreetmap.org
link that the distribution/transmission parting should not be taken into
primary consideration, maybe because the difference is not obvious f
1 - 100 of 574 matches
Mail list logo
