oneway=no is very clear to me and different to not having a oneway value at
all.
this way it means it was surveyed and it is not a oneway.
maybe with lit=yes or lit=no is more clear that is actually adds something
of value?
greets,
floris
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:04 AM, pmailkeey .
On 4 June 2015 at 19:39, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
On 04/06/15 16:04, Paweł Paprota wrote:
Could you please move this discussion to the tagging list?
While some elements being picked up on are simple 'tagging' questions,
it is the general structure we are discussing which in my
On 04/06/15 16:04, Paweł Paprota wrote:
Could you please move this discussion to the tagging list?
While some elements being picked up on are simple 'tagging' questions,
it is the general structure we are discussing which in my book is the
whole point of OSM. I think there is still room to
Could you please move this discussion to the tagging list?
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015, at 16:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Am 04.06.2015 um 01:48 schrieb pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com:
A value of residential here seems to need a key to identify whether it
relates to a
Am 04.06.2015 um 01:48 schrieb pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com:
A value of residential here seems to need a key to identify whether it
relates to a building or landuse.
there is also highway=residential
However, you suggest building=residential as possibly being redundant.
On 03/06/15 12:57, Janko Mihelić wrote:
Yes, we need semantic meaning and structure, but I still don't
understand how do two strings help you with that. Key and value can only
help someone who is digging through a xml file to quickly help
themselves. But the true meaning of a k=v combination
On 3 June 2015 at 09:45, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
On 03/06/15 01:04, pmailkeey . wrote:
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 stick to hard facts rather guessing what
On 04/06/15 00:48, pmailkeey . wrote:
A value of residential here seems to need a key to identify whether it
relates to a building or landuse. However, you suggest
building=residential as possibly being redundant. In fact, I'd turn this
on its head and make landuse=residential (with the
Am 03.06.2015 um 12:21 schrieb Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
The areas I'm trying to tidy up are small shopping malls which
have shops within shops on multiple levels ... with accommodation above.
A combination of objects is just what I'm looking for, but with
different outlines for
I don't get the problem with k=v instead of just v. There is a function
called concatenate which solves that.
We should move away from mapping directly with tags, and to a system like
iDs, with descriptions that hide tags. For a database it's irrelevant if
it's oneway=yes or 4658. All this talk
Am 03.06.2015 um 10:45 schrieb Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
Just what combination is right for a single retail building with a
leisure facility on the ground floor and accommodation above?
I don't think a combination of tags is the best answer to this question, it's
rather a
On 03/06/15 01:04, pmailkeey . wrote:
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 stick to hard facts rather guessing what
categor(ies) an object fits in
This is a bit like saying XML is the
On 03/06/15 10:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Just what combination is right for a single retail building with a
leisure facility on the ground floor and accommodation above?
I don't think a combination of tags is the best answer to this question, it's
rather a combination of objects (3,
On 03/06/15 12:02, Janko Mihelić wrote:
I don't get the problem with k=v instead of just v. There is a function
called concatenate which solves that.
We should move away from mapping directly with tags, and to a system
like iDs, with descriptions that hide tags. For a database it's
On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com 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
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:04 PM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com
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
On 3 June 2015 at 01:36, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com 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
On 6/3/15, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com
mailto:pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote:
OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...]
On 3/06/2015 10:37 AM, Tom MacWright wrote:
Hi Mike,
Please propose an alternative.
He has been .. on other threads..
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com
mailto:sea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com
iD shows oneway=unknown if it's not set. If it's unknown, iD should not
show oneway at all.
In OSM if oneway=no then it's not oneway and the oneway tag should not
appear at all.
The only time oneway should appear is in the case of oneway=yes - and the
'=yes' is superfluous.
OSM's k=v design is
Hi Mike,
Please propose an alternative.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote:
OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...] OSM
is 90% argument, 5% dead-end
Fair point, I meant in the context of the list, as I thought others did too.
Steve
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 6:07 PM -0700, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com
wrote:
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,
On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:22 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 3, 2015 8:06 AM, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com
mailto:pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote:
OSM's k=v design is completely a serious and unnecessary flaw. [...] OSM is
90% argument, 5% dead-end discussions
On 3 June 2015 at 01:37, Tom MacWright t...@macwright.org 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
24 matches
Mail list logo
