2013/2/23 John F. Eldredge :
> When would junction=no be used? When one way passes over another on a
> viaduct without actually connecting?
yes, I also never used junction=no, this was a "just in case"-idea,
practically you can also read it as junction=*.
cheers,
Martin
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2013/2/23 Andrew Errington :
> > I agree that there is a need for this, and I am happy with the
> simplicity of
> > using junction=yes and name=*. If you don't submit a trac request,
> I will,
> > but the link to trac is not working for me:
> > trac.openstreetmap.org
2013/2/23 Andrew Errington :
> I agree that there is a need for this, and I am happy with the simplicity of
> using junction=yes and name=*. If you don't submit a trac request, I will,
> but the link to trac is not working for me:
> trac.openstreetmap.org/query?component=mapnik&order=id&desc=1
I
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 05:54:16 Hans Schmidt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just wondered if there is something productive in the making
> concerning the crossroad names, or did it somehow end without anything?
>
> How can I participate?
>
> Thanks.
>
> ___
> talk ma
Hello,
I just wondered if there is something productive in the making
concerning the crossroad names, or did it somehow end without anything?
How can I participate?
Thanks.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org
Am 15.02.2013 09:28, schrieb Janko Mihelić:
What about when a junction is a roundabout? Should that be rendered
the Japanese way (a box with letters in the middle of the roundabout)
or the European way (words going along the street)? Or are we going to
have different rendering in different part
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> Or better, if there is a junction=* and name=*. Except when junction=no.
+1
Like the dozen "building" or "bridge" values. The wiki says
"junction=yes" which is the easiest.
Pieren
___
talk maili
Am 15.02.2013 00:24, schrieb Andrew Errington:
junction=crossroads would be fine, but it doesn't add any information.
-1
Following the general approach to handle *=yes as kind of a fallback
for cases where more detailled information is missing
junction=crossroads in fact would add information
2013/2/15 Andrew Errington
>
> So, what I want is for Mapnik to render a label at a node if the there is a
> junction=yes tag (and name=* tag) present. This has been stated in the
> wiki
> for a long time.
>
Or better, if there is a junction=* and name=*. Except when junction=no.
What about wh
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 02:23:08 Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> On 02/14/2013 05:12 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> >
> > wrote:
> >> 2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> >>> though I consider the everything=yes trend as namespace pollution. So :
> >>> - juncti
On 02/14/2013 05:12 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>> 2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
>>> though I consider the everything=yes trend as namespace pollution. So :
>>> - junction=* if there is enough diversity to justify that namespace
>>> - high
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
>> though I consider the everything=yes trend as namespace pollution. So :
>> - junction=* if there is enough diversity to justify that namespace
>> - highway=junction if junction=yes is going to represent
2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> though I consider the everything=yes trend as namespace pollution. So :
> - junction=* if there is enough diversity to justify that namespace
> - highway=junction if junction=yes is going to represent most of the
> junction=* space
there is no risk that "yes" would
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> My position in regards to highway=junction vs. junction=* is neutral -
> though I consider the everything=yes trend as namespace pollution. So :
> - junction=* if there is enough diversity to justify that namespace
> - highway=junction
On 02/14/2013 12:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
>> On 02/13/2013 08:03 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
>>> How would it work when the intersection also has traffic lights? I
>>> know that there will always be some cases where there are tag key
>>> collisions but it seems t
2013/2/14 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> On 02/13/2013 08:03 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
>> How would it work when the intersection also has traffic lights? I
>> know that there will always be some cases where there are tag key
>> collisions but it seems that they will be *very* common in this case
>> between hi
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 20:08:11 Maarten Deen wrote:
> On 2013-02-14 11:59, Andrew Errington wrote:
> > In Korea we also have named junctions at overpasses, so the junction
> > name is
> > where the two roads cross (or meet) but they physically don't join
> > because
> > one road is on a bridge over th
On 02/13/2013 08:03 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
> How would it work when the intersection also has traffic lights? I
> know that there will always be some cases where there are tag key
> collisions but it seems that they will be *very* common in this case
> between highway=junction and highway=traffic_s
On 2013-02-14 11:59, Andrew Errington wrote:
In Korea we also have named junctions at overpasses, so the junction
name is
where the two roads cross (or meet) but they physically don't join
because
one road is on a bridge over the other, and there are sliproads to
move
between them.
In the t
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:46:45 Floris Looijesteijn wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Andrew Errington
wrote:
> > I don't think that's an appropriate way to name it. It's not a locality,
> > nor
> > is it really a place. It's a junction, with a name.
> >
> > I think junction=yes and name=*
>>
>> Where would you place this node if it is a more complex crossing?
>> Like a crossing of 2 roads with dual carriage ways?
I just saw one such case in Tokyo yesterday :
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/254367454
Here the two nodes with traffic_signals tags carry the name (I suppos
2013/2/14 Floris Looijesteijn :
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Andrew Errington
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think that's an appropriate way to name it. It's not a locality,
>> nor
>> is it really a place. It's a junction, with a name.
>>
>> I think junction=yes and name=* is the best way to recor
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> I don't think that's an appropriate way to name it. It's not a locality,
> nor
> is it really a place. It's a junction, with a name.
>
> I think junction=yes and name=* is the best way to record it, the next step
> would be to get it ren
Hi All,
We also have many cross-road or T-junctions junctions in the United Kingdom
that have names. Particularly in rural areas where early fingerpost signs
still exist:
Devon: I believe I am right in saying that the name on the column is the
junction name. I seem to remember that I've been prov
Am 13.02.2013 19:21, schrieb Peter Wendorff:
Agreed for "no special name tag", but please use highway=junction +
name=whatever in combination instead of the name tag alone.
Yes, in retrospect, this is really better.
Am 13.02.2013 15:10, schrieb Janko Mihelić:
How is it best rendered? With a l
> From: Peter Wendorff [mailto:wendo...@uni-paderborn.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:21 AM
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Display names of crossroads
>
> Am 13.02.2013 14:44, schrieb Hans Schmidt:
> >
> > Concerning tagging: I do
Am 13.02.2013 14:44, schrieb Hans Schmidt:
Concerning tagging: I don’t think that there should be some special
tag. The node which intersects both roads should just get a name
property. JOSM displays the name there, and I think this is how it
should be displayed on osm.org, too.
Agreed for "
Named roundabouts is also ordinary : "junction=roundabout" + "name=*"
So "junction=yes" + "name=*" looks a bit strange but it's by far
better than a "highway" key on nodes and more consistent with other
junctions tagging.
Pieren
___
talk mailing list
t
2013/2/13 Kevin Peat :
> Be sure to let everyone know when you have developed your "classes" ;]
we won't have to do this all at once (like always in OSM). One class
that there could be is: junction
cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreet
On 13/02/2013 15:03, AJ Ashton wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:56 AM, AJ Ashton mailto:aj.ash...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Let's not add to the "everything=yes" approach to tagging but go
with an existing key - "highway seems appropriate. In fact
"highway=junction" seems to already be in u
AJ Ashton writes:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Andrew Errington wrote:
Let's not add to the "everything=yes" approach to tagging but go with an
existing key - "highway seems appropriate. In fact "highway=junction" seems
to already be in use for this purpose with ~123 occurences.
junction=y
Andrew Errington writes:
I think junction=yes and name=* is the best way to record it, the next step
would be to get it rendered.
This is the way I also tag it in Thailand. junction=yes and name=*.
Stephan
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap
place=junction?
That would emphasize that a named junction is commonly used as a "place"
to indicate nearby locations. We already have place=farm, which is
practically the same... just thinking aloud.
Am 13.02.2013, 15:37 Uhr, schrieb Kevin Peat :
On 13 Feb 2013 14:20, "Martin Koppenhoefe
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:56 AM, AJ Ashton wrote:
> Let's not add to the "everything=yes" approach to tagging but go with an
> existing key - "highway seems appropriate. In fact "highway=junction" seems
> to already be in use for this purpose with ~123 occurences.
>
Or nevermind, I guess junctio
I'm starting to wonder if something could be adapted from the cycleway node
style network tagging.
On Feb 13, 2013 8:41 AM, "Joseph Reeves" wrote:
> The thing with the UK is that you get places named after junctions -
> Church Cross, or whatever. That may well be a locality, but it's not the
> sa
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> I think junction=yes and name=* is the best way to record it, the next step
> would be to get it rendered.
>
Let's not add to the "everything=yes" approach to tagging but go with an
existing key - "highway seems appropriate. In fact "high
The thing with the UK is that you get places named after junctions - Church
Cross, or whatever. That may well be a locality, but it's not the same as
naming the junction. That seems to be the difference with these Japan /
Korea examples.
Joseph
On 13 February 2013 14:37, Kevin Peat wrote:
>
>
On 13 Feb 2013 14:20, "Martin Koppenhoefer" wrote
> +1, place=locality is generally a generic placeholder, which
> should/could be substituted by the time we dig deeper into toponyms
> and develop more specific classes...
Well a place is just a named geographical location and I believe this tag
c
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Hans Schmidt wrote:
> Yes. Generally I think that non-Western map styles are completely
> neglected in OSM, but I have no idea to change that. How can we get in
> touch with the people who define the rendering styles? Somehow it seems to
> me (from the perspective
2013/2/13 Joseph Reeves :
>>place=locality
>
> Looks like tagging for the renderer to me, although I am not a resident of
> Japan or Korea.
+1, place=locality is generally a generic placeholder, which
should/could be substituted by the time we dig deeper into toponyms
and develop more specific cl
2013/2/13 Andrew Errington :
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 22:56:40 Kevin Peat wrote:
>> On 13 Feb 2013 12:59, "Hans Schmidt" wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Is there some way to display the names of crossroads on the OSM map?
>>
>> place=locality
>>
>> Kevin
>
> I don't think that's an appropriate way to na
2013/2/13 Andrew Errington
>
> I don't think that's an appropriate way to name it. It's not a locality,
> nor
> is it really a place. It's a junction, with a name.
>
> I think junction=yes and name=* is the best way to record it, the next step
> would be to get it rendered.
>
I agree, it's a n
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 22:44:07 Hans Schmidt wrote:
> Am 13.02.2013 14:22, schrieb Andrew Errington:
> > I would also like this, for Korea. Obviously it's a rendering issue, but
> > it would be nice if the map on osm.org would have this.
> >
> > I tried adding a junction=yes tag to a named junction a
>place=locality
Looks like tagging for the renderer to me, although I am not a resident of
Japan or Korea.
As it is the rendering that is not working as expected, a better resolution
would be to change the renderer so that it displayed junction names.
Joseph
On 13 February 2013 13:56, Kevin
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 22:56:40 Kevin Peat wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2013 12:59, "Hans Schmidt" wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is there some way to display the names of crossroads on the OSM map?
>
> place=locality
>
> Kevin
I don't think that's an appropriate way to name it. It's not a locality, nor
is it re
Hi there,
My experience in Japan is that the junctions are named, but not oriented. You
give directions by saying 'go down this street and turn left at NAME
junction'. Or 'take the third right after NAME junction'. Or if you are
looking at a map, some junction names are shown, which makes it
On 13 Feb 2013 12:59, "Hans Schmidt" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is there some way to display the names of crossroads on the OSM map?
place=locality
Kevin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Am 13.02.2013 14:34, schrieb Clifford Snow:
Can help me better understand the naming of junctions. Do junction
names have a direction attribute? How are they used to give directions
with no street names?
Take a look at this Google maps example from some small suburb of Tokyo:
http://goo.gl/m
Am 13.02.2013 14:22, schrieb Andrew Errington:
I would also like this, for Korea. Obviously it's a rendering issue, but it
would be nice if the map on osm.org would have this.
I tried adding a junction=yes tag to a named junction as described in the
wiki[1], but it would not render a label for
Can help me better understand the naming of junctions. Do junction names
have a direction attribute? How are they used to give directions with no
street names?
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Andrew Errington wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:57:56 Hans Schmidt wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is there
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 21:57:56 Hans Schmidt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there some way to display the names of crossroads on the OSM map?
> This adress scheme is more important than street names in Japan, but
> currently, OSM does not display it. In consequence, it is very hard to
> locate something on th
Hello,
Is there some way to display the names of crossroads on the OSM map?
This adress scheme is more important than street names in Japan, but
currently, OSM does not display it. In consequence, it is very hard to
locate something on the OSM map in Japan. There are almost no street
names, a
52 matches
Mail list logo
