On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
simple example
I tagged shop=lawyer
On this list someone said that they didn't think that lawyer belonged in
shop but office=legal.
I saw that. Simply because someone else offered a different idea
doesn't make your idea not good. If I
Liz writes:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
simple example
I tagged shop=lawyer
On this list someone said that they didn't think that lawyer belonged in
shop but office=legal.
I saw that. Simply because someone else offered a different idea
doesn't make your
Dave F. writes:
The just go ahead do it philosophy that some advocate just puts
errors into OSM that may not get fully removed, especially if they've
been around for a while have been copied by others.
Please go back to my proposed steps. What errors do you see defined
there? The only
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
Map it, tag it, and document it. Worry less about making a misteak,
and map more.
could we make research other tags in similar use be part of this list
and make the search process easier?
___
talk mailing
Liz writes:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
Map it, tag it, and document it. Worry less about making a misteak,
and map more.
could we make research other tags in similar use be part of this list
and make the search process easier?
This google search has always worked for
Liz writes:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
Before you propose a tag, you should be using it.
Why?
To show people how you're using it. http://osm.org/
Doesn't it make sense to ask around before using something -
someone may come up with a good example they are
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
or a simple reason why your tag is not good.
Could you list some simple reasons, please? I don't understand what
you mean by not good.
simple example
I tagged shop=lawyer
On this list someone said that they didn't think that lawyer belonged in shop
2009/10/16 Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com:
Liz writes:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
Before you propose a tag, you should be using it.
Why?
To show people how you're using it. http://osm.org/
Just because you use something, doesn't mean you picked the right
Liz writes:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Russ Nelson wrote:
or a simple reason why your tag is not good.
Could you list some simple reasons, please? I don't understand what
you mean by not good.
simple example
I tagged shop=lawyer
On this list someone said that they didn't think
Pieren writes:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Why wait? Tag boldly and document what you did in the wiki.
No, no and no. If you are unsure or unhappy with existing tags, then
document, suggest and discuss before putting crap in OSM !
Why? If
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
Joseph
In my opinion, the tag landuse=military should only be used for specificly
military activities, like those discribed in the wiki.
Some of you have suggested to create 2 areas, covering the same place. I
don't think this is correct. One of
Hello everybody,
I propose to add a tag boundary=military : the problem is that, with the
existing tags, it's almost impossible to mark correctly lots of data, like
(non limitative list) forest, scholl, parking lot,
Rather than multiplying the military=* tag, I suggest to only mark the
Gilles Corlobé writes:
I propose to add a tag boundary=military
Where is this tag currently being used? Please point to several
examples so we can see what you mean.
--
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1
-Message d'origine-
De : Russ Nelson [mailto:nel...@crynwr.com]
Envoyé : mardi 13 octobre 2009 16:38
À : Gilles Corlobé
Cc : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary=military)
Gilles Corlobé writes:
I propose to add a tag
On 13 Oct 2009, at 16:35, Gilles Corlobé wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : Russ Nelson [mailto:nel...@crynwr.com]
Envoyé : mardi 13 octobre 2009 16:38
À : Gilles Corlobé
Cc : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary=military)
Gilles
-Message d'origine-
De : Shaun McDonald [mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk]
Envoyé : mardi 13 octobre 2009 17:46
À : Gilles Corlobé
Cc : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : **SPAM ENGLISH BODY** Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary=military)
On 13 Oct 2009
Gilles Corlobé writes:
This tag is not currently used. But it could be very usefull here :
http://osm.org/go/xXEahwWz--
Why wait? Tag boldly and document what you did in the wiki.
--
--my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd.
-Message d'origine-
De : talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
boun...@openstreetmap.org] De la part de Russ Nelson
Envoyé : mardi 13 octobre 2009 17:54
À : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : **SPAM ENGLISH BODY** Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Why wait? Tag boldly and document what you did in the wiki.
No, no and no. If you are unsure or unhappy with existing tags, then
document, suggest and discuss before putting crap in OSM !
Pieren
2009/10/14 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
I didn't know I didn't have to wait the approval.
It's now done : http://osm.org/go/xXEahwWz--
Gilles, your approach was the correct one. Don't follow those stupid
advices from guys how want the chaos in OSM.
On 13/10/2009, at 10.14, Gilles Corlobé wrote:
Hello everybody,
I propose to add a tag boundary=military : the problem is that,
with the existing tags, it's almost impossible to mark correctly
lots of data, like (non limitative list) forest, scholl, parking
lot, …
Rather than
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
Before you propose a tag, you should be using it.
Why?
Doesn't it make sense to ask around before using something - someone may come
up with a good example they are already using, or a simple reason why your tag
is not good.
2009/10/13 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
I didn't know I didn't have to wait the approval.
It's now done : http://osm.org/go/xXEahwWz--
Gilles, your approach was the correct one. Don't follow those stupid
advices from guys how want the chaos in OSM.
Shaun McDonald wrote:
On 13 Oct 2009, at 16:35, Gilles Corlobé wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : Russ Nelson [mailto:nel...@crynwr.com]
Envoyé : mardi 13 octobre 2009 16:38
À : Gilles Corlobé
Cc : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC
To be honest I don't see the point. You should use the already
existing landuse=military. School, parking lot, etc. that you
mentioned should be rendered on top of that, like landuse=residential.
Using landuse also avoids certain ambiguities like: which side of
the boundary is the military
Pieren wrote:
2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
I didn't know I didn't have to wait the approval.
It's now done : http://osm.org/go/xXEahwWz--
Gilles, your approach was the correct one. Don't follow those stupid
advices from guys how want the chaos in OSM. Making
2009/10/14 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com:
Pieren wrote:
2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
I didn't know I didn't have to wait the approval.
It's now done : http://osm.org/go/xXEahwWz--
Gilles, your approach was the correct one. Don't follow those stupid
advices from guys how
-Message d'origine-
De : Joseph Reeves [mailto:iknowjos...@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 14 octobre 2009 00:07
À : Morten Kjeldgaard
Cc : Gilles Corlobé; talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary=military)
To be honest I don't see
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
In my opinion, the tag landuse=military should only be used for specificly
military activities, like those discribed in the wiki.
Some of you have suggested to create 2 areas, covering the same place. I
don't think this is correct. One of you said
-Message d'origine-
De : John Smith [mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 14 octobre 2009 06:55
À : Gilles Corlobé
Cc : talk@openstreetmap.org
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal
- RFC - (boundary=military)
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé gil...@corlobe.tk:
You're right : If the area is covered by a forest (or a lake, or whatever),
it should appear like this on the map. What would a user think if he finds a
forest (even if it's in a military area) that is not on the map?
And we should remerber that all
2009/10/14 Liz ed...@billiau.net:
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
Before you propose a tag, you should be using it.
how ridiculous
prohibiting discussion before polluting the data base with even more tags
There seems to be 2 completely distinct camps within OSM.
Those that think
32 matches
Mail list logo
