Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 05/06/2015, Richard Welty wrote: > On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: >> The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position >> where you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough >> for one vehicle but has passing bays along it's length. It is not wide

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: > > The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position where > you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one > vehicle but has passing bays along it's length.

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On Thu, 2015-06-04 at 16:53 +0100, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: > As is the case of a narrow bridge where traffic from one side has to > give way to traffic from the other side because the bridge is only > wide enough for one vehicle so is it a single lane twoway or single > lane oneway=no. You cannot indic

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

> Am 05.06.2015 um 01:08 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > Are the majority of roads to be marked as > vehicle=yes > foot=no > horse=no > right hand drive > > etc ... is this not data base bloat? interesting you see foot=no and horse=no as defaults for the majority of roads, aroun

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

> On Jun 5, 2015, at 1:11 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > >> But neither direction has the right of way and it is up to driver discretion >> and politeness as to who will reverse back to the passing bay. So oneway=no >> but twoway is not necessary yes. > i've used > > lanes=1 > > and omitted onew

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 5 June 2015 at 00:08, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5/06/2015 1:08 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > >> >> >> Are the world of random renderers going to look for junction=roundabout >> and make the same oneway assumption ? Would it not be better for >> 'junction=roundabout' to cause a mechan

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 4 June 2015 at 16:53, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: > The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position > where you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for > one vehicle but has passing bays along it's length. It is not wide enough > to be a conventional twowa

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 5/06/2015 1:08 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: Are the world of random renderers going to look for junction=roundabout and make the same oneway assumption ? Would it not be better for 'junction=roundabout' to cause a mechanical edit by adding the oneway tag - so that rather than saying =no, the ta

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

> On Jun 4, 2015, at 9:11 AM, Richard Welty wrote: > > On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: >> The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position where >> you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one >> vehicle but has passing bays along it's le

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 6/4/15 11:53 AM, AYTOUN RALPH wrote: > The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position > where you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough > for one vehicle but has passing bays along it's length. It is not wide > enough to be a conventional twoway road

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

The oneway=yes, oneway=no conundrum.. put yourself in the position where you are looking at a road ahead of you. It is only wide enough for one vehicle but has passing bays along it's length. It is not wide enough to be a conventional twoway road so can it be tagged twoway? That would give the

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 3 June 2015 at 07:00, Maarten Deen wrote: > On 2015-06-03 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: > >> iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should >> not show oneway at all. >> > > I agree. > > In OSM if oneway=no then it's not oneway and the oneway tag should not >> appear at all.

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 2015-06-03 12:08, Shaun McDonald wrote: On 3 Jun 2015, at 07:00, Maarten Deen wrote: I agree that in every case where oneway=yes is not implied, oneway=no is superfluous (in a network design way), but that does not make oneway=no superfluous. There are some cases where oneway=no is us

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

> Am 03.06.2015 um 10:39 schrieb Shawn K. Quinn : > > I have yet to see a > case where oneway=-1 is truly needed. Do any exist? it depends what is "truly needed", most attributes and tags can be inverted without changing the way direction (forward, left, incline etc). Those ways that are d

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On Wed, 2015-06-03 at 08:00 +0200, Maarten Deen wrote: > On 2015-06-03 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: > > iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should > > not show oneway at all. > > I agree. > > > In OSM if oneway=no then it's not oneway and the oneway tag should not > > appear

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess

On 2015-06-03 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should not show oneway at all. I agree. In OSM if oneway=no then it's not oneway and the oneway tag should not appear at all. Here I don't agree. The only time oneway should appear is in t

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess (was: Craigslist OpenStreetMap Rendering Issue)

On 3 June 2015 at 01:37, Tom MacWright wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Please propose an alternative. > I see an awful lot of good in OSM and I think it's a great project. I've had it agreed with another about it being such a mess - but the fact it's such a worthwhile project it's worth battling on with i

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess (was: Craigslist OpenStreetMap Rendering Issue)

On 6/3/15, Steve Coast wrote: > >> On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >> On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, "pmailkeey ." > > wrote: >> > OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...] OSM >> > is 90% argument, 5% dead-end discussion

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess (was: Craigslist OpenStreetMap Rendering Issue)

On 3 June 2015 at 01:36, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > Perhaps http://wikimapia.org/ will better match your needs, and offer > more peace for your family, property and pets. > Well, on Monday the 'prison' idea went out the window. Having me and my brother accused of ill-treating our mother - two , nay,

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess (was: Craigslist OpenStreetMap Rendering Issue)

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:04 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should not > show oneway at all. > OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. Similarly > are 'categories' like man_made', and 'amenity'. > Why can we not simply s

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] OSM is a right mess (was: Craigslist OpenStreetMap Rendering Issue)

On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, "pmailkeey ." wrote: > OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...] OSM is 90% argument, 5% dead-end discussions and 5% progress. The whole is not a marketable product; it's not fit to be rated as 'beta'. Is this a significant cause of ex-mappers ? I