Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] Trunk VS primary,

=unclassified. Julien “djakk” Le dim. 5 janv. 2020 à 16:46, Fernando Trebien a écrit : > I know this discussion is US specific, but we've struggled with > similar issues in Brazil as well, for very similar reasons. It seems > we've made some progress in the southern region whe

Re: [Tagging] roads with many names

Hello Rob ! If you have several name or several ref, you can use the “;” separator Julien “djakk” Le dim. 18 août 2019 à 17:17, Rob Savoye a écrit : > Where I live in rural Colorado, many of the roads have 3 names. The > county designated one like "CR 2", but often have a

Re: [Tagging] Road hierarchy

es …) with importance = 1 to the lower zoom, etc. (Actually tag importance already exists, used for railways, has main values regional or national). Julien "djakk" Le sam. 10 août 2019 à 13:37, Paul Allen a écrit : > > On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 11:42, Julien djakk wrote: >> >&

Re: [Tagging] Road hierarchy

rtery). Importance tags could also apply to bicycle path and footways :D Julien "djakk" Le jeu. 8 août 2019 à 22:26, Kevin Kenny a écrit : > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:12 AM Peter Elderson wrote: > > > > We're on the same page. The pavement and separations ar

Re: [Tagging] Classifying roads from Trunk to Tertiary and Unclassified

tance tags could also apply to bicycle path and footways :D Julien "djakk" Le sam. 10 août 2019 à 10:27, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > > We recently discussed the confusion about unclassified vs residential > recently, but a more significant issue is that different countries a

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

should be like the values of admin_level. Julien “djakk” Le dim. 3 mars 2019 à 20:21, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > "I would have expected the first road be rendered not like the 3 last > roads, > those last 3 roads should have been rendered the same as they look the > same&q

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello ! I’ve updated https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Djakk/new_tagging_scheme_for_roads To answer the original question of this thread, I wish you can use importance_local=5 or 6 with abutters=rural or residential ;) Julien “djakk” Le dim. 3 mars 2019 à 01:01, Sergio Manzi a écrit

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Hello ! So I have written something on the wiki : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Djakk/new_tagging_scheme_for_roads It is not definitive, feel free to add new ideas or to criticize ;) Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 11:36, djakk djakk a écrit : > I meant “road for hgv”

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

I meant “road for hgv” not “road for hybrid” ^^ Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 11:35, djakk djakk a écrit : > I forgot to mention that there are several kind of road to class : > footway, cycleway, road for cars, road for hybrid, road for psv ;) > > Julien “djakk” >

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

I forgot to mention that there are several kind of road to class : footway, cycleway, road for cars, road for hybrid, road for psv ;) Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 10:55, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit : > Service roads would be highway=service as it is now. > > road_level tag al

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Yes it must be additional tags, so that existing tools that use openstreetmap do not get lost :) I’ll try to write this on my wiki’s page in the next days ... Julien “djakk” Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 00:30, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > sent from a phone > > > On 24.

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Okay I found it ! May 2018 ;) Julien “djakk” Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 19:11, djakk djakk a écrit : > Erkin, when did you make this proposal ? > > Julien > > > Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 18:31, Erkin Alp Güney a > écrit : > >> It reminds me my road_level proposal for

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

Erkin, when did you make this proposal ? Julien Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 18:31, Erkin Alp Güney a écrit : > It reminds me my road_level proposal for some reason. > > 24.02.2019 17:48 tarihinde djakk djakk yazdı: > > ... furthermore, highway_level can be used to classify footway

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

... furthermore, highway_level can be used to classify footway or cycleway :) For example, in a park, some footway are “unclassified” (or highway_level=5) and some are “primary” (or highway_level=1). Very useful to render long-range trail. djakk Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 15:44, djakk djakk a

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

... for the unclassified / residential issue : highway_level=5 or 6 and highway_physics=countryside or town djakk Le dim. 24 févr. 2019 à 15:25, djakk djakk a écrit : > Hello ! > > I think we should decorrelate the attributes of a road : its > administrative class, its importance

Re: [Tagging] Clarification unclassified vs residential

or a primary road through a residential area or an official motorway with pedestrians actually walking on it. So that we’ll unify osm road classification through the world (remember the highway=trunk issue ;-)) Julien “djakk” Le sam. 23 févr. 2019 à 16:49, Andy Townsend a écrit : > >

Re: [Tagging] Link roads between different highways type

they want to use (probably both). Julien « djakk » Le mer. 16 janv. 2019 à 14:23, Paul Allen a écrit : > On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 13:07, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > I would argue for motorway links (and trunk links according to the "German >> trunk interpretation")

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Then, why OSM as they are some competent national geographic societies ? ;-) Julien « djakk » Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 16:19, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : > 7. Nov 2018 16:15 by djakk.dj...@gmail.com: > > Only a independent and crowdsourced database can handle that. > > >

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

crowdsourced database can handle that. Julien « djakk » Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 15:34, Paul Allen a écrit : > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:15 PM OSMDoudou < > 19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com> wrote: > >> > including the GTFS endpoints and license info as tags, and

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

That is something that OSM should map instead of the official timetable :) In Paris it is almost the same case, the bus does not follow their official timetable due to grid locks. Julien « djakk » Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 00:16, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > sent from a phone &

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

already mapped in OSM, with a travel time and a frequency. Julien « djakk » Le mer. 7 nov. 2018 à 14:37, Jonathon Rossi a écrit : > I've been following along the few threads to better understand this topic, > however I'm still feeling that mapping complex timetables is a bit li

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

:) Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 20:55, Yves a écrit : > Are you looking for a general transit feed specification? > :) > > Yves > > Le 6 novembre 2018 20:22:18 GMT+01:00, djakk djakk > a écrit : >> >> Ok I see. >> >> I am still a bit reluctant to your pr

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

proposal (it needs to know the timetable for the whole line), we’ll depend on GTFS file actually :-/ Julien “djakk” Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 19:27, Jo a écrit : > Yes, very hard to debug and we already established some change every few > months. So after a change from the operator. One tr

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

, if somebody messed up and add an extra trip inside a timetable, this would be hard to figure ? Julien “djakk” Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 18:30, Jo a écrit : > If you have a single one for a stop/route pair, no problem. As soon as you > have a few hundred and the information in them starts to co

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

In which case a timetable per stop and per route is unmaintable ? Julien “djakk” Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:59, djakk djakk a écrit : > I think it is important to have an osm object describing the timetable > user-oriented for simple editing without any tool. > The mapper is at a

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

I think it is important to have an osm object describing the timetable user-oriented for simple editing without any tool. The mapper is at a bus stop, takes a picture of the timetable, can import it later in osm without the need of any extra tool. Validator can be inside a tool. Julien « djakk

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

schedule). Julien « djakk » Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:28, Jo a écrit : > You mean per stop/route pair? That's an incredible s amount of relations! > It seems to me that it would be a nighmare to try and maintain it that way. > At first sight it seems simpler, but with the new prop

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

... and/or an abbreviation with the frequency : departures=5:15 - 1:25 every 1:30 ~ 3 minutes (This is for Rennes’ subway line) Julien « djakk » Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:07, djakk djakk a écrit : > I’ll agree with Leif, having a timetable relation per stop is better. > > > Yes Lei

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

I’ll agree with Leif, having a timetable relation per stop is better. Yes Leif, there can be a delay expressed in minutes instead of an arrival-departure pair of time. Julien « djakk » Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:04, djakk djakk a écrit : > In order to reduce the length of the value of

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

In order to reduce the length of the value of the departures= tag, should we allow this kind of abstraction level : departures=5:35 ; 6:35 ; [7-19]:[05;35] ; 20:35 ; 21:35 ? Julien « djakk » Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 15:41, djakk djakk a écrit : > Martin, maybe locals do know their bus s

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

Martin, maybe locals do know their bus stop timetable, as they always use the service they may memorize the schedules ... ? Julien Le lun. 5 nov. 2018 à 17:08, Jo a écrit : > Hi Leif, > > You made me do it! :-) I sort of stole your proposal and started creating > a new one. It differs in rathe

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

are separated by a semicolon. If no comma, it means departure time only - except for the last stop : means arrival time only. Should we use 0-24-25 hour format ? (when a trip starts at 23:45 and finishes 30 minutes later at 0:15, which is sometimes written 24:15 in a gtfs. ) Julien “djakk” Le sam. 3

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

partially map the line. The first stop has departure timetable only. The last stop has arrival timetable only. An intermediate stop has both. Julien « djakk » Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 11:38, Jo a écrit : > I took it from the official timetables and generally this line doesn't > suffer to

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Moreover, timetables in OSM can be useful even incomplete : a mapper can map only timetables of 2 bus stops, its local bus stop’s and the main stop of the line (downtown’s bus stop), then you can tell users the timetable between the bus stops of this suburb and downtown. Julien « djakk » Le sam

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Yes I trust you ;) But where the bus network does not revolutionate (that exists) every 6 months, timetables and bus stops can be in OSM ... Julien « djakk » Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 06:20, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > On 03/11/18 15:55, djakk djakk wrote: > > No : bu

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

maintain ? Most bus lines do not change their schedules for years (even in big cities, Paris for example). Because changing the schedule means buy a new bus and hire new drivers. Julien « djakk » Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 04:48, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : > It sounds like we agree: detailed timetab

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Impossible to maintain ? Maybe but let’s give a try ! djakk Le ven. 2 nov. 2018 à 08:23, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > > sent from a phone > > > On 1. Nov 2018, at 21:19, Roland Olbricht > wrote: > > > > opening_hours=... > >for the o

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Moreover, GTFS always have some errors, as they are maintained by only a few people. djakk Le mer. 31 oct. 2018 à 10:17, Topographe Fou a écrit : > Hi Leif, > > I would rather consider the ability to store a "GTFS API link" (or > something similar) in transport rel

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

If we allow timetables in OSM, transit companies will possibly maintain directly them through OSM ;) There is a lot of non-geographical informations in OSM like the opening hours of a shop so public transport schedule does not shocked me :) djakk Le mer. 31 oct. 2018 à 09:58, Frederik Ramm a

Re: [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables Proposal RFC

Hello ! I think it’s a good idea to “replace” GTFS files with OSM data. In OSM there is already half of the GTFS (the relations that describes stops and route). Most lines of big cities can be map with frequency only (subway every 90 seconds during rush hour, 3 minutes otherwise). djakk Le

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

An other example : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/k43_fyX2AuL594qhVuSY7w/photo abutter=residential and highway:legal_type=rural Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 21:41, djakk djakk a écrit : > Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : > example : it looks like the count

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

Sound cool but there may be a gap between the reality and the law : example : it looks like the countryside but legally it is inside the built up area : http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Dybpz_fHGEmWdLjfG7OMvQ/photo There should be 2 tags : abutters=rural and highway:legal_type=built_up djakk Le

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

eed=no_sign” ? Or/and “maxspeed=default” ? djakk Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 16:28, Jérôme Seigneuret < jerome.seigneu...@gmail.com> a écrit : > Hi, tagging list > I just join it. > > For your information there is part of proposed tagging schema in french > subject discuss wit

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

By the way, we should de-correlate the legal status of an highway from the highway tag : with the key highway:legal_type, values : business_area or residential_area or an other local legal classification. A highway=tertiary could also be highway:legal_type=residential_area djakk Le mer. 19

Re: [Tagging] Draft Proposal: Default Langauge Format

Lille >_< Rijsel is not used in France. But it would be very useful to display it on a map as it it used only several kilometers from the city. djakk Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 09:57, Jo a écrit : > Every street in Brussels HAS a name:fr tag. They also ALL have a name:nl > tag

Re: [Tagging] maxspeed:type vs source:maxspeed // StreetComplete

inheritance, simply tag a segment of street with maxspeed=50 for example) djakk Le mer. 19 sept. 2018 à 14:22, Paul Johnson a écrit : > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:18 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > >> >> Philip Barnes writes: >> >> > And if the default actually applies,

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

bigger place nearby :) djakk On 19 August 2018 at 04:59, Yves wrote: >> >> Who cares if the presence of a post office is the criterum to be a >> 'village' for a 200 people place if it's the only inhabited place 100km >> around? >> > > This is

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

Place=village and administrative=village or =hamlet ? djakk Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 20:50, José G Moya Y. a écrit : > Well, from the mapping point of view, these political differences between > a Spanish small village and a Spanish big hamlet matter: > > 1) Villages have their o

Re: [Tagging] areas of risk

For such a subjective thing, it should be mapped by each openstreetmap member : djakk maps this area as dangerous, baloo as not dangerous, etc and the renderer makes an average. djakk Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 06:26, Paul Johnson a écrit : > > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 16:17 Adam Fran

Re: [Tagging] consensus needed: officially a town but visibly distinct settlements?

I agree with Michael, openstreetmap should reflect what the mapers see, not what the politics and the administration see. Though it is also interesting to map administrative things like borders. djakk Le sam. 18 août 2018 à 17:33, Yves a écrit : > Michael, you don't seem to take t

Re: [Tagging] Points instead of areas

For cities there must be a point associated to the polygon to tell where the center is (maybe 2 if the city is poly centric, like Budapest maybe ?) djakk Le mer. 8 août 2018 à 05:25, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : > On 08/08/18 12:52, Bill Ricker wrote: > > > > O

Re: [Tagging] place nodes for continents?

Why not a big polygon for each continent, subcontinent, ocean, sea ... ? djakk Le mar. 7 août 2018 à 12:28, Colin Smale a écrit : > As even continents now appear to be subjective, all uses of them should be > associated with the chosen frame of reference, much like one always > ass

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

:-) Le ven. 3 août 2018 à 17:07, Simon Poole a écrit : > > > Am 03.08.2018 um 16:30 schrieb djakk djakk: > > I think it is less verbose. > > That isn't necessarily a positive (just as in programming languages). > > > There can be multiple ways to express

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

I think it is less verbose. There can be multiple ways to express something in osm, like in the Ruby language ? djakk Le ven. 3 août 2018 à 16:21, Marc Gemis a écrit : > while this might work, why would you try to replace an established > tagging system ? > The tagging system turn:

Re: [Tagging] Lane geometry in OSM

Hello ! What about a tagging method like this : lanes=3 lane_2=forward_direction;left_turn or lanes=3 lane_2:direction=forward lane_2:turn=left instead of lanes=3 lanes:forward=2 turn:lanes:forward=left|through ? djakk Le ven. 3 août 2018 à 13:13, Lionel Giard a écrit : > If

Re: [Tagging] Short-term parking zones

Hello Stefan ! I'd make a big polygon :) I think this has never been used before, but I don't see any problem using it - except that inheritance of the tags won't be mentioned in the editors Julien "djakk" 2018-01-13 20:21 GMT+01:00 Stefan Nagy : > Hi, > >

Re: [Tagging] Nicknames

Good idea ! nick_name=* ? :) djakk Le mer. 25 oct. 2017 à 08:09, Daniel Koć a écrit : > I think it'd be good to add "Big Apple" nickname as a popular (and > searchable) kind of placename for a New York: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/61785451 > > >

Re: [Tagging] Toll road sections

Hi Ákos, I would do this : "toll=hgv_only" and "toll_ref=edid_123456" or "toll_ref=HU_edid_123456" (according to the wiki, it should not be toll=hgv_only but : *toll*=no, *toll*:hgv =yes) 2017-08-28 12:30 GMT+02:00 Topographe Fou : > I'm not aware of o

[Tagging] Link roads : the Michelin style

Hello, I was thinking that the Michelin style is better than the osm style in rendering link roads : on Michelin maps, the link road refers to the lowest road level, which is better to visualize small or big exits. Julien Djakk (http://itineraires.de.bus.free.fr) -- View this message in