attempt to retain people mentally in the country where
they live,
instead of allowing them to enjoy the advantages of the international project.
Ulrich Lamm
Fesenfeld 121
D 28203 Bremen
0049 421 701968
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https
scher Nationalismus.
Beste Grüße
Ulrich Lamm
Fesenfeld 121
28203 Bremen
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
1. The critics, I have answered on this way were not that I had used forbidden
sources, but that my entries were not reliable.
2. Woodpeck has banned me just in the moment, when all geographic data of the
state of Brandenburg got ODB status.
3. It is a difference either to take copies from databa
In some parts of Germany, especially in the northern half of former DDR,
in the second half of 20th century hundreds of kilometers of previously openair
dtches and streems have been laid into culverts.
To understand the waterways, which is finally understanding the landscape,
these culverts have
Am 26.06.2019 um 11:22 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
> copying 1 fact from another database
That is a great understatement.
Two examples:
• An equalization of object identities between regional mappers and a regional
road authority that provides its data under the condition "commerc
Hello all!
In his explications of his ban against me, user Woopeck wrote, "leider machst
Du unbeirrt mit Deinen Wasserweg-Edits weiter. … Diese Edits sind unerwünscht."
(You have unflinchingly continued with your waterway edits. … These edits are
disapproved.)
As, after my first ban, I have avo
8 by f...@zz.de:
>
>>
>> Hi Ulrich,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:16:18AM +0200, Ulrich Lamm wrote:
>>
>>> This way, my mapping of courses of water including the culvert
>>> sections does not violate the principles of OSM. And the ban is
&g
99.9% of the background is missing.
> Perma-bans for contributors in OSM are extremely rare and definitely not
> imposed lightly, just as they are not in this case: see
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ulamm/blocks for just a tiny bit of
> the very long story behind this.
>
> Am
the maintaining companies, the
Wasser- und Boden-Verbände (WBV).
This way, my mapping of courses of water including the culvert sections does
not violate the principles of OSM.
And the ban is totally injust.
Best regards
Ulrich Lamm
___
Tagging
in one session.
Other coasts, such as on the Baltic Sea, but also in England, have very low
sections, that are protected by dykes, and hilly sections that do not require
dykes.
There the dykes end at slopes of natural hills – which are not mapped, unless
they are prominent escarpments.
Ulrich
Am 14.02.2019 um 12:51 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
> If you can justify it within your own tortured logic about
> copyright, you can even use the
> OSM database as a foundation for your efforts.
Openstreetmap is present, almost everywhere.
On some kinds of contents, Openstreetmap
Am 12.02.2019 um 05:59 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
>> the commercial exploiter has the choice either to sell a product
>> without informations that are available for free,
>> or he has to pay.
>>
>
> Your method of including CC will mean not more use by commercial firms.
Rules a
Am 08.02.2019 um 20:37 schrieb Ulrich Lamm:
> OSM is already used like a quallity product.
> We have to provide that quality, now, or we have to warn people that they
> should not use OSM until ten years later.
>
> If / As official databases provide their contents under C
gging] Tagging Digest, Vol 113, Issue 29, Co-ordinate
> sets vs. background informations
> Message-ID: <4467b49b-84bd-49b6-8faf-6a620ea9e...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 8. Feb 2019,
sons for ODbL.
ODbL necessary for the import of geometries.
But if everything in OSM is ODbL,
OSM isolates itself form references (available under Creative Commons
conditions, only), which are essential for its reliability.
>
> On 07/02/19 22:20, Ulrich Lamm wrote:
>> There are
eneral problem: Co-ordinate sets vs.
> background informations
> Message-ID:
>
>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Le 07.02.19 à 12:20, Ulrich Lamm a écrit :
>> it has to distinguish between
>
> it's why good changeset h
ut-a-proposal
> with high usage : status=De-facto
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 14:30:22 +
> From: marc marc
> To: "tagging@openstreetmap.org"
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] A general problem: Co-ordinate sets vs.
>
made or ODbL,
and referenced background informations, fulfilling Creative Commons rules.
Best regards
Ulamm = Ulrich Lamm
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
The German Guideline "DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen kartieren" since longer
time has contained a wrong description of the designation of bidirectional
cycletracks.
It claimed that they were generally marked with sign 1000-32, a couple of
vertical arrows.
In reality this sign is used, if the bi
Meaning of verbs
Am 02.01.2015 um 23:44 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
>>
>> "It is also possible to use {{Tag|sidewalk|right}}/*=left [on
>> highway=cycleway] to indicate which side of the segregated path
>> pedestrians should walk on (where right/left is relative to the way's
>> dir
Am 02.01.2015 um 00:00 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 22:09:49 +0100
> From: 715371
> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Tagging] Sidewalk tagged on highway=cycleway
> Message-ID: <54a5b79d.1020...@gmx.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; chars
ormal streets.
If the regulation in Poland is different, please tell me.
(P.S. You might also explain matter with the two different layouts of Polish
sign C-13-16)
>
> 2014-12-28 18:35 GMT+01:00 Ulrich Lamm :
>
>> Hi mapping and cycling friends,
>>
>> I have suggeste
fifteen meters
> (too complicated, anyway it will be not supported by routers).
If this tag tells the router, ""please consider the adjacent carraigeway,too",
why do you think, routers won't understand that.
Routers also find a house next to the roadline.
>
> 2014-12
Hi mapping and cycling friends,
I have suggested a special highway-class for the slim tagging of this very
common kind of cycling facilities that up to now affords a combination of four
tags.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/foot_cycleway
Yours'
Ulrich
Hi mapping and cycling friends,
I have suggested an overall parameter for separately drawn cycletracks to
record the (average) layout of crowded crossings of a cycletrack and particular
accessways.
As these crossings at the same time serve as links between cycletrack and
carriageway, the combin
Hi mapping and cycling friends,
I have suggested an overall parameter for separately drawn cycletracks, to
record crowded links between roadside cycletrack and carriageway:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Traverse_link
Yours'
Ulrich
09:38:40 +0100
> From: Marc Gemis
>
> I never added the opposite tag in my neighborhood.
>
> regards
>
> m
>
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Ulrich Lamm wrote:
>
>> Now I've understood you, and I think I agree with you:
>>
>> This "
yklopiktokoridor" is part of a shared lane and NO suggestriestrook. A German
"schutzstreifen" is neither a "suggestiestrook" nor a shared lane), but cycling
facilities of several countries that are almost identical ought to be rendered
in with the same signature. And that a
Now I've understood you, and I think I agree with you:
This "cycleway=opposite" is something like an abused tag, as in reality there
is no cycleway.
The problem is that no renderer understands "oneway:bicycle=no", which would be
the correct tag.
I have mailed and phoned to the maintainers of t
Does this table help you?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Tables_of_street_layouts
As you can see, it suggests some innovative tags.
And it also suggests an alternative for opposite track.
best regards
Ulrich
Am 25.12.2014 um 20:45 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
> Me
Dear mapping and cycling friends
as that article is in German, it is questionable, if the international mailig
list is a good adress,
but in German language, I've found only local mailing lists.
As one can hear and read in discussions, and as is visible from the results of
mapping, a lot of map
Some weeks ago, I have written something on reliable mapping, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers,_evaluators_and_feedback
For a special feature, I'd also added it to an existing article, but it was
reverted, see "Attention" in the upper table of
https://wiki.openstreetma
>
>
> --
>
Make a better suggestion that describes the feature in the same quality of
relaibility and of slim tagging!
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:47:53 +0100
> From: 715371
> To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Hi all,
I've written a proposal for the tags cycleway=obligatory and cycleway=optional.
Now I hope for your comments.
Ulrich
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Some weeks ago, there was a post in the forum by a mapper, who remembered that
there was a cycletrack at a road he had used, but he had forgotten on which
side.
Furthermore, Opencyclemap renders "cycleway=track" but doesn't detect
"cycyleway:right=track". Therefore, some mappers don't tag the s
ng [oneway=no; toll=no] to nearly all roads (just
> because some are with toll and oneway).
> I consider this as a bad idea.
>
> 2014-12-18 15:28 GMT+01:00 Ulrich Lamm :
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers,_evaluators_and_feedback
>>
>
Hi!
By the revert of
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren
from19 Dec 2014 18:06,
a lot of essential inormations were swept away.
To cope the criticism of lacking consense,
I have now revised it in a way that nobody can compliain of omitted variants,
see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Mappers,_evaluators_and_feedback
This article is an attempt to write down basic rules of/for OSM
that had been forgotten to fix in the very beginning.
I had started that page with an invitation on the discussion page to do the
move now done by Fred
Am 18.12.2014 um 05:04 schrieb tagging-requ...@openstreetmap.org:
> On 11/08/2014 04:47 PM, Pee Wee wrote:
>> We are writing to you for advice on what steps we should or could take
>> next. The situation is best summarized as:
>
> [...]
>
> After some consideration I have today asked user ulamm
see 'facultatif' in French, I normally translate this as
> 'optional' in English. You will find 'facultative' in the Oxford English
> Dictionary, but it will be a meaningless word to most English people.
>
> Steve
>
> On 14/12/2014 10:35, Ulri
0...@atownsend.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 12/12/2014 13:13, Ulrich Lamm wrote:
>>
>> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Tables_of_street_layouts
>>
>
> This could benefit from an explanation of what probl
Hi,
as an approach for the development of a set of unequivocal tools for the
description of all kinds of road layouts,
I've made a large (though not conceise) list with graphics of the layouts and
their conventional and innovative taggings.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ulamm/Tab
42 matches
Mail list logo
