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
> >
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".
Pieren writes:
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson 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 it's docum
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
2009/10/16 Russ Nelson :
> 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
combination
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
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
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 worke
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
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?
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé :
>> 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 you said tha
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé :
> 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 users are not
> -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)
>
> 20
2009/10/14 Gilles Corlobé :
> 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 that's done e
> -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=milit
2009/10/14 Dave F. :
> Pieren wrote:
>> 2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé :
>>
>>> 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
Pieren wrote:
> 2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé :
>
>> 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 proposals and
> 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 milit
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@ope
2009/10/13 Pieren :
> 2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé :
>> 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 proposals and
> havin
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.
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
2009/10/14 Pieren :
> 2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé :
>> 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 proposals and
> havin
2009/10/13 Gilles Corlobé :
> 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 proposals and
having discussions will show you if
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Russ Nelson 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
___
> -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 Propo
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 : 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=m
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)
G
> -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 Corlo
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. | +1 315-323-1
31 matches
Mail list logo
