Brian Quinion wrote:
> island=yes|no
I like the idea of marking this, but may I suggest traffic_island or
pedestrian_refuge instead? Does this mean any pedestrian refuge in the
road, or just those with some other crossing stuff like traffic signals
or zebra striping?
I'd love to be able to re-use
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brian Quinion wrote:
>
>> The only problems I can see is that because it
>> is centralised it is somewhat out of user control - so maybe it should
>> make sense to pull the list of presets from a wiki page (once a day?)
>> and
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Brian Quinion
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll have a go at implementing a local macro system in JOSM and see
> how well it works then it can be extended to pull from the server if
> it seems worth having.
Well, JOSM already supports preset files which can be l
Dave Stubbs wrote:
> Some of us really couldn't care less either way. Frankly, please stop
> talking about it -- you're not getting anywhere.
Actually, I think some fairly insightful suggestions have been made and
it is a useful discussion. You don't _have_ to read this thread if you
don't car
Brian Quinion wrote:
> The only problems I can see is that because it
> is centralised it is somewhat out of user control - so maybe it should
> make sense to pull the list of presets from a wiki page (once a day?)
> and there would be a small amount of server side load to implement it.
That woul
Dave Stubbs wrote:
> You just said that to the one guy who's actually writing rendering
> rules which use this tag. Well done there.
Yeah, he's free to make use of his shortcuts on his own rendering
system. That doesn't make those shortcuts globally useful.
-Alex Mauer "hawke"
___
> > Implementing presets for this in the editor is a viable alternative.
> > But they need to be implemented in all editors - which could be
> > tricky?
> An alternative is to have server-side processing, so the editor can upload
> data with something like "preset:crossing=toucan" and the server c
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andy Allan wrote:
>
> > Seems sensible to me to have a shorthand. So where you have a type of
> > crossing that's for cyclists and pedestrians but not horses nor
> > canoes, and it's controlled by traffic lights (as opposed
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 12 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
> > Oh, I can think of a way. Yep, I can definitely think of some
> > shorthand tags for the most common crossing types. Trouble is, as
> > soon as I mention it, everyone starts unco
Andy Allan wrote:
> Seems sensible to me to have a shorthand. So where you have a type of
> crossing that's for cyclists and pedestrians but not horses nor
> canoes, and it's controlled by traffic lights (as opposed to not being
> controlled at all), we could do with a shorthand way to tag it beca
On Monday 12 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
> Oh, I can think of a way. Yep, I can definitely think of some
> shorthand tags for the most common crossing types. Trouble is, as
> soon as I mention it, everyone starts uncontrollably ranting.
But that's the problem right? That no-one outside the UK unde
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Brian Quinion
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I like this - but would suggest a small change:
> > > highway=crossing
> > > crossing=zebra|toucan|pelican|...
> > No, get rid of the UK specific classifications of crossing completely -
> > they require too much b
On Mon, 12 May 2008, Brian Quinion wrote:
> OK - but this means that even for the simple cases you have to enter 4
> times as many tags. People are lazy (well I certainly am!) and tend
> to use the easier method - which means people stick with the existing
> solution and ignore the new method.
..
> > I like this - but would suggest a small change:
> > highway=crossing
> > crossing=zebra|toucan|pelican|...
> No, get rid of the UK specific classifications of crossing completely -
> they require too much background knowledge to interpret and are pointless if
> you have already split out the v
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Brian Quinion wrote:
> I like this - but would suggest a small change:
>
> highway=crossing
> crossing=zebra|toucan|pelican|...
No, get rid of the UK specific classifications of crossing completely -
they require too much background knowledge to interpret and are pointless
i
> > highway=crossing
> > crossing=uncontrolled|traffic_signals
> > island=yes|no
> > bicycle=yes|no
> > foot=yes|no
> > horse=yes|no
> +1. This is almost exactly what the over-ridden proposal says
I like this - but would suggest a small change:
highway=crossing
crossing=zebra|toucan|pelic
Steve Hill wrote:
> It seems to me that instead of referring to a crossing by name, we should
> just list its properties. e.g. something like:
>
> highway=crossing
> crossing=uncontrolled|traffic_signals
> island=yes|no
> bicycle=yes|no
> foot=yes|no
> horse=yes|no
+1. This is almost exactly w
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> Heh. While in london someone tried to explain to me what was so
> special about all these crossing types. They have names for crossings
> that here in NL would "normal". A crossing with a separate light for
> bikes, that's like every crossing in
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not interested in tagging animal crossings. Naturally I'm not going
> to try to document the intricacies of british naming conventions for
> their road crossings when: I will never have occasion to use them as I
> don'
Dave Stubbs wrote:
> Some more stats for you on the end of the mail.
looking at your stats, I count the same 478 tags following Andy's
original mailing list post consisting exclusively of the animal-based
system. (+refuge, but that was apparently never used at all.)
And I count 157 following th
> Fair enough; I missed that because I didn't read below your signoff
> (which happened to be at the break in my mailreader). So, OK, there's
> another 60 beyond what I found in tagwatch. Who wants to bet they're
> all in the UK, and those 60 were added since tagwatch was updated on 12
> Apr
Andy Allan wrote:
> least if you're making
> proposals on how to tag pedestrian crossings, the first piece of
> research should be how they are *already* being tagged. If you're not
> aware of it, that's no excuse for ignoring it.
Umm, OK. I'll keep that in mind if I ever make a proposal for how
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andy Allan wrote:
> > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall:
> >> *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev
> >>
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andy Allan wrote:
> > Let me be blunt: I don't have dev access, and I don't have SVN access
> > either. So stop with the moaning, and get your facts straight.
>
> I didn't say you personally did that. But if the group of p
Andy Allan wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall:
>> *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev
>> access, they also added their method to the rendering system,
>
> Let me be blunt:
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall:
> *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev
> access, they also added their method to the rendering system,
Let me be blunt: I don't have dev access, and
Andy Allan wrote:
> * Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a
> particular tagging scheme.
> * Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started
> complaining about what was going on [1]
> * This second group made an extremely detailed (or overcomplicated,
>
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote:
>> Chris Jones (who runs the Welsh language OSM) has been working on an AJAX
>> thing to make fixing road names easy without having to understand the
>> editors - I see this as a really good thing since it gets more people
>> contributing to the project,
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Andy Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My advice would be to document the predominant use of the tag first,
Putting my wiki skills where my mouth is:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:crossing - hopefully
useful to show what's in the db as we debate th
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> I totally agree. A map is basically a drawing, so the most important thing
> is the shape of the ways themselves. I would sooner say that the trivial
> part is adding the place-names.
>
No. Quite simply
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2. If the road is on the map it becomes much easier for people who are
> familiar with the area to fill in the details such as the name - no
> equipment is needed (such as GPS), they don't need to get off their backside
> an
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
>
> > [2] Another brilliant example of how people make themselves feel
> > useful by doing the trivially easy bit, c.f. tracing from Yahoo with
> > no intention of naming the roads.
>
>
Andy Allan wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> * been discussed on this list back in August 2007[]; (hmm, does that
>> count as a proper RFC?),
>
> We didn't "discuss the proposal" in that thread. What actually happened was
11:28
Para: Andy Allan
CC: osm Talk
Asunto: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
> [2] Another brilliant example of how people make themselves feel
> useful by doing the trivially easy bit, c.f. tracing from Yahoo with
> no int
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
* Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a
particular tagging scheme.
* Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started
complaining about what was going on [1]
May I take this as a cue to suggest a compl
On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
> [2] Another brilliant example of how people make themselves feel
> useful by doing the trivially easy bit, c.f. tracing from Yahoo with
> no intention of naming the roads.
I'm just going to voice an opinion (feel free to ignore it :) - putting
roads on the
Hi,
> * Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a
> particular tagging scheme.
> * Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started
> complaining about what was going on [1]
May I take this as a cue to suggest a complete overhaul of the whole
RfC/vote/etc
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Road crossings proposal[0], appears to be in limbo, and I'm
> wondering if the correct procedure as described on
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features has been
> followed. It ap
if you announce it as an rfc and then update it's status, that should
be enough. the mere fact you've asked here means anyone interested
will go and have a look and add theur comments
don't worry too much about being completely formal over the procedures
- the discussion tends to de-generate into
The Road crossings proposal[0], appears to be in limbo, and I'm
wondering if the correct procedure as described on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features has been
followed. It appears to have:
* been discussed on this list back in August 2007[1]; (hmm, does that
count as a
40 matches
Mail list logo
