Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

I just took another look at several exits in Germany. As in the past I found out that the OSM standard is to have the motorway_junction to the link road before or at the legal point to transition. This is perfectly in line with the motorway_junction page, which states: 'Add a highway

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

Well, the WIKI more or less has a sort of consensus. Yes, we do have the divided highways ('baulicher trennung'). But there is also the consensus that it's important to make sure the requirements for navigational devices like OSMAND should also be met. So, if the physical point is used by a mapper

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

81590> >- 3236281562, v2 <http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3236281562> >- Kreuz Köln-Süd (370544, v13) ><http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/370544> > > So the question is which node ... the answer should contain the number of > one of th

Re: [Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

The motorway_junction node of the A4 towards A555, which was moved westwards by 100 meters. 2017-03-07 0:02 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>: > Which node? > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Johan C <osm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> &g

[Tagging] Positioning motorway exits

Hi, I'm in a discussion with a user who positions the motorway exit in a, IMHO, uncommon way. Though it's not uncommon for OSM to have multipiple solutions for the same problem I would like to have your opinion on this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41264608 Kind regards, Johan

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] destination:street

2017-01-22 22:32 GMT+01:00 yo paseopor : > I need help. How to tag a roundabout destination traffic sign > https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/6bMYhgICHVBL_H70ZnyPAg ? With > correspondence it is easy (for me), but I don't know how to do it with > multiple values. > > Please

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] destination:street

I don't like your idea yopaseopor. Why: 1. It's not forbidden to use a semicolon: 'But there are cases where semicolons work and, anyway, we can’t completely avoid them. Let’s work on defining our data model better and make it clearer where those semicolons can and should be used and how they are

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Freeway exit tagging

It is quite simple, If there is a through arrow, the value is through. If there is no arrow, the value is none. Groundtruth mapping! Cheers, Johan 2016-08-26 15:41 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson : > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:19 AM, yo paseopor wrote: > >> I

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

In that case they also missed the examples on the same page :-) Op 11 jun. 2016 20:04 schreef "Mike N" <nice...@att.net>: > On 6/11/2016 12:00 PM, Johan C wrote: > >> I completely agree with Marc. Using none as a value in case no turn >> indication is pre

Re: [Tagging] Turn Lane Tagging?

I completely agree with Marc. Using none as a value in case no turn indication is present is valid, using || isn't. See the values of the turn:lanes key on this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:lanes for reference. Cheers, Johan 2016-06-11 7:44 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

2015-01-24 1:07 GMT+01:00 Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr: Le 22/01/2015 22:49, Johan C a écrit : Good to have this discussion. From a computer expert point-of-view relations are fantastic for data integrity and to keep database size low. From an OSM point-of-view, which includes

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation of associatedStreet-relations

Good to have this discussion. From a computer expert point-of-view relations are fantastic for data integrity and to keep database size low. From an OSM point-of-view, which includes being friendly towards novice users, relations should be avoided whenever possible. And associatedStreet relations

Re: [Tagging] Overhead signs (Überkopfwegweiser)

2015-01-16 10:19 GMT+01:00 Andreas Labres l...@lab.at: To map: Put a node on the way of the street exactly where the sign is located and tag it something like this: overhead-sign=|| Brno, Gänserndorf, Stadlau [A23]; | Praha [A23]; / Kagran [B3]; Ölhafen Lobau * with the arrows

Re: [Tagging] name and brand tags

It's not uncommon that actually the brand (e.g. Texaco) is being used on either operator, or brand, or name. Only the latter is rendered, which can be logical as in common speaking one easily says: I'll fill my car up at the next Texaco' rather than saying 'I'll fill my car up at the fuel station

Re: [Tagging] key:destination Signpost question

I'm using the motorway_junction node on exits, with the ref and the name as tags. Reasons: it has been done since the early days of OSM, and it looks nice on Mapnik. I'm also using the motorway_junction up to four times per interchange to have the name of the interchange appear on Mapnik (example:

Re: [Tagging] Follow up on destination= and destination:ref=

Martijn, great to hear that Telenav will be using the destination keys. Since this tagging will only be used for informational purposes to the motorist (routing won't be affected) I recommend to tag all info on the signposts, like the signs, and not only the destination and destination:ref.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Extended - amenity=boat_sharing

@ Andre, Nounours, welcome to a project without goals. If you want to change the things you're writing about, then you're most welcome to join the Future Group http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Future Cheers, Johan 2014-03-30 22:25 GMT+02:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com: On

Re: [Tagging] tag covered questions

It was a bit confusing to me, but tunnel=building_passage seems to be a better one than covered=yes for the situations when a highway is under a building. I think ideally such a building should be split giving the building a different layer than the highway. Strange enough the wiki says'' *The

Re: [Tagging] tag covered questions

Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 2014/1/23 Johan C osm...@gmail.com It was a bit confusing to me, but tunnel=building_passage seems to be a better one than covered=yes for the situations when a highway is under a building. maybe covered=building_passage is better from a semantical

Re: [Tagging] Ace Hardware

It's also nice to keep things a bit simple in OSM, because all records in the database need correct input and maintenance. I'm already seeing a lot of confusion on petrol stations. Where I just want to find the nearest fuel station (yes, I would like to have 99% coverage of amenity=fuel in OSM

Re: [Tagging] Photo links in OSM

My one year old Samsung Galaxy S3 has got the ability to geotag photos. If there would be an app which can use such a geotagged photo and link it to an OSM POI nearby, than I would go for that. Upload it under ODbL, no copyright issues, Cost is a secondary thing which can be solved. Cheers, Johan

Re: [Tagging] Through_route next steps

For my Garmin both B5065 examples are routed correct by Mapsource. If the OSRM heuristics are wrong, than OSRM should get a ticket to make its engine better. Cheers, Johan 2013/6/18 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 16:45 +0100, News wrote: You are correct, we are

Re: [Tagging] Through_route next steps

important to use Bing here to map the roads correctly: Markfield Lane should be in an angle of 90 degrees to Botcheston road. Any routing engine algorithm will turn 90 degrees into 'left' or 'right'. Cheers, Johan 2013/6/18 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 19:23 +0200, Johan C

[Tagging] Key: turn

The key:turn http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn has values for slight_left/right and sharp left/right. There are no signs associated to these four values. I also couldn't find any corresponding signs on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_European_road_signs. The

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

I've uploaded my example to this page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lane_assist I would also like to add a link to this page from the motorway_link page, since lane assist will be supported: Mapfactor has started working on it. Any comments are still welcome! 2012/11/9 Johan C osm

Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

Overlooking the discussion so far, I think exit_to cannot be deprecated. However, there's strong feelings to support both destination and exit_to. In my opinion, the following things can be done: 1. keep things the way they are now (where exit_to is the preffered choice, because the text on the

Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

JOSM supports exit_to. JOSM doesn't support destination. Following the text by Martin I updated http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction#Destinations. I indeed think it's a good idear to be clear in the communication of any (to be) deprecated tag. Most exit_to's seem to

[Tagging] Fwd: exit_to on motorway_junction

Forwarded message by NE2 -- Forwarded message -- From: Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com Date: 2012/11/20 Subject: Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction To: Cc: Johan C osm...@gmail.com On 11/20/2012 3:43 PM, Johan C wrote: JOSM supports exit_to. JOSM doesn't support

Re: [Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

Well Paul, the fundamental question is: where do you store the information needed for any router, in a node, in a way or in both? In my opinion destination on a way can work very well, please take a look at this example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:It's_so_funny Cheers, Johan ps no

[Tagging] exit_to on motorway_junction

On http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_junction you can find the following description on the exit_to tag. 'exit_tohttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:exit_to =* should be used to detail the destinations where the junction exits to—for example, if signage states a road

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

After reading the several posts I have made a simplified example on the tagging of a motorway exit. I would like to receive your comments on it. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:It's_so_funny Cheers, Johan 2012/10/18 Alberto albertoferra...@fastwebnet.it Just to be clear: I agree with

Re: [Tagging] Exclusive access rights

I don't think I understand both responses (Georg/Martin). Why should a hgv and a psv use 'a kind of' motor_vehicle? According to the map features motor_vehicle is used for: 'Access permission for motor cars and motorcycles.' A bus or a truck is not one of these two types. If I put

Re: [Tagging] Exclusive access rights

** On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 18:56 +0100, Johan C wrote: I don't think I understand both responses (Georg/Martin). Why should a hgv and a psv use 'a kind of' motor_vehicle? According to the map features motor_vehicle is used for: 'Access permission for motor cars and motorcycles.' A bus or a truck

Re: [Tagging] Exclusive access rights

I believe there is a solution, which is consistent to current tagging styles and which complies to the Keep It Simple Smart principle. In the situation of a motorway with three lanes, of which the rightmost lane is forbidden for motorvehicles (and PSV and HGV can use all three lanes) the tagging

Re: [Tagging] destination_ref vs. dest_ref vs. destination:ref

Since I love consistency: this page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination shows destination fully written with a colon. So I prefer destination:ref I'm looking forward to your proposal, you've got my vote for introducing it :-) 2012/10/18 Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com Any

Re: [Tagging] How to tag: Legally separated ways (2nd Part)

and English are not my native language) 2012/10/18 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org On Oct 17, 2012 5:35 PM, Johan C osm...@gmail.com wrote: good thing to have this discussion. Too often I've seen OSM discussions end up in 'everything is possible' which in the long run will prevent OSM to ever