Hi all,
By accident, I found the tag "landmark=cemetery" on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landmark%3Dcemetery
Then discovered that 9 cemeteries are tagged with "landuse=cemetery" +
"landmark=cemetery". Some have even an additionnal "seamark:type =
landmark" :
http://overpass-ap
Any tag whose key is in the form "seamark:" is from the OpenSeaMap
tagging scheme. Landmarks that bear these tags are features that can be
seen from the sea or river and can be usefully used for navigational
purposes. This is additional information, not duplicate information, so
they may we
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Malcolm Herring
wrote:
> This is additional information, not duplicate information, so they may well
> co-exist with the conventional OSM tags for whatever type of map feature the
> object is.
If you call:
"landuse=cemetery" + "landmark=cemetery" + "seamark=land
Pieren wrote:
> If nobody is interested by the subject
I'm interested and I agree that the "OpenSeaMap tagging scheme" needs to be
brought more in line with standard OSM practice.
Marine features don't begin at the coast; many harbour/port areas are used
by both sea-going and inland boats. Theref
On 23/11/2012 10:24, Pieren wrote:
"landuse=cemetery" + "landmark=cemetery" + "seamark=landmark" +
"seamark:type=landmark" + "seamark:landmark:category = cemetery"
As I said, those latter two tags would only appear on cemeteries that
can be seen from the water and can be used as navigational m
Hi,
On 11/23/2012 11:24 AM, Pieren wrote:
As I said, a simple landmark tag is enough. It does not need to
specifiy again it is a cemetery when we can combine it with already
existing OSM tags (like the "landuse=cemetery"). The tag can be
"seamark = landmark" or "seamark:type=landmark", I don't c
Hi,
On 11/23/2012 11:48 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
We have bothered much about that as long as OpenSeaMap
tagged offshore
haven't
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
Tagging mailing list
Taggi
Does something qualify as a seamark if it is visible from the sea? Maybe a
"visible_from_sea=yes" is enough?
Janko
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I have a suspicion that this duplication of tags is largely the
> result of OpenSeaMap trying to opt out of the rest of the
> community - "if we use our own namespace then we don't
> have to discuss with those landlubbers". We have not
> bothered much about that as long a
Hi,
Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the SeaMap, I'm just a coast dweller.
Am 23.11.2012 11:48, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
True - a cemetery is a cemetery and whether or not cemeteries are used
as landmarks by seamen doesn't change that.
I do not see, that the seamark:xxx=cemetery will repla
2012/11/23 Pieren :
> If you call:
> "landuse=cemetery" + "landmark=cemetery" + "seamark=landmark" +
> "seamark:type=landmark" + "seamark:landmark:category = cemetery"
>
> not duplicates, I don't know what you need more for duplicates ;-)
+1
what about landmark=yes? I find it strange too, that "s
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> what about landmark=yes?
But I understand that many landmarks will not interest seamen. So it
is important for them to have a special indicator saying "this is a
landmark for seamen". But where I don't agree is to create an new tag
sa
On 24.11.12 20:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> what about landmark=yes?
IMO it should read maritime_landmark=yes to indicate, that this tower or
building or quary or whatever is a landmark that is suitable for maritime
navigation. This key can then be used for a maritime map to decide whether to
13 matches
Mail list logo