Emilie Laffray wrote:
> 2009/9/11 Valent Turkovic
>
> > Hi there,
> > I'm wondering how to map different quarters of some city, town and
> > villages.
> >
> > Currently on wiki I only found place=suburb tag and I see that it is used
> > also for mapping city's quarters.
> >
> > Only issue is that
Andy Allan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Valent Turkovic
> >
> > wrote:
> >> How do you differentiate from path and footpath tag? What is the
> >> difference between them? Can you show me an example?
> >
> > As the wiki says, b
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2009/10/10 OJ W :
> > multiple plans would overlap each other and look weird?
>
> look weird where? I guess these would not be rendered in standard maps
> (or just in advanced planning phases and for main plans like
> motorways, airports, etc.).
>
> I made a proposal:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2009/10/12 Ben Laenen :
> >> I made a proposal:
> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:planned
> >
> > So what's the difference with highway=proposed + proposed=...?
> >
> > I can't seem to find the wiki pa
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Richard Fairhurst
>
> wrote:
> > highway=footway -> a path intended for pedestrian use
> > highway=cycleway -> a path intended for pedestrian and cycle use
> > highway=bridleway -> a path intended for pedestrian and horse use[1]
>
> Boy, I
Richard Mann wrote:
> If there's a lane in the "wrong" direction, that'll be marked (as being on
> both sides). If there's a separate track adjacent to the road, that'll be
> marked. But cycle tracks don't get marked if they are attached to the road
> (so cycleway=track and cycleway=opposite don't
Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Imo, this shouldn't be considered in isolation. There's a whole lot of
> situations where the value for a key, such as oneway, maxspeed,
> maxweight, access, is different depending on vehicle or other conditions
> - a common example is maxspeed:hgv (note that nobody is using
>
Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > So that's completely incorrect, bicycle:oneway=no already appeared on
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Access_restrict
> >ions a long time before the extended conditions for access tags proposal
Quick question for which I didn't find an answer in the wiki:
* is there a maximum length of tags (keys and/or values)? (I'm sure there was
one, but I don't know if there's still a limit today)
* if there is, what is it (and is in it number of bytes, or number of
characters)?
Greetings
Ben
___
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> > I don't why he feels the need to do this, it seems a pointless task, but
> > why do you think it reduces accuracy to remove trailing zeros?
> >
> > 2m =2.0m
>
> It reduces *indication of accuracy*.
>
> There's a differenc
Chris Hunter wrote:
> According to the WIKI and some discussions back in April (
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-April/000976.html)
> and again in September (
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-September/001597.html
> ), the US Interstate system was goi
On Tuesday 05 August 2008, Karl Newman wrote:
> Sounds like you're looking for this:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Segmented_
>Tag
Segmented tags doesn't solve data duplication for dual carriage ways, or
a set of roads with lots of cul-de-sacs with the same name, an
Hi all,
I was wondering if it's possible to download data from the API in a
(bz2/g)zipped format? This would be much more kind to bandwidth since a
10MB file for the plain data can be easily compressed to under 1MB.
Greetings
Ben
___
talk mailing lis
On Sunday 10 August 2008, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > I was wondering if it's possible to download data from the API in a
> > (bz2/g)zipped format? This would be much more kind to bandwidth
> > since a 10MB file for the plain data can be easily compressed t
On Wednesday 20 August 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Multipolygons
> -
>
> [...]
>
> The "no segmentation" rule is important because there are renderers
> already which use different colours for an area boundary than for the
> area itself, and such segments will then show up on the maps.
On Wednesday 20 August 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Routes
> --
>
> Routes are most prominently used for cycle routes which are rendered
> on Andy Allan's cyclemap. Generally ways which are part of a route
> don't have a role, they're just part of it. But sometimes you have
> ways in the roles
On Saturday 30 August 2008, Hugh Barnes wrote:
> So, just to clarify, if I want apply more properties to the bus stop,
> is it like this:
>
> left:highway=bus_stop
> left:name=Park Road
> … etc?
>
> Have I missed something?
Since this shows that we need an "entity" to put all data on which
wouldn
On Sunday 31 August 2008, robin paulson wrote:
> i agree with your points frederik - left and right are somewhat
> subjective and not obvious.
>
> someone suggested a while back on talk, that once a way is drawn, we
> don't allow it's direction to be changed and for one way streets, we
> use oneway
On Sunday 31 August 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > This could be very annoying if you're making a way for an area and
> > at the end suddenly remembers that you should have done it
> > clockwise and not anticlockwise.
>
> Directi
On Sunday 07 September 2008, Lambertus wrote:
> I think it's fair to assume that a cyclist isn't allowed on that type
> of road on mainland Europe anywhere...Anyway, global routing using
> only a single definition for max (average actually) speeds and other
> properties for roads isn't optimal.
>
>
On Monday 08 September 2008, Nic Roets wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Lars Aronsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Here you assume that "trunk" is a well defined concept. But it
> > isn't.
>
> Spot on.
>
> And defining things per country leads to all sorts of problem. For
> example mapp
On Monday 08 September 2008, Nic Roets wrote:
> If the community is capable of agreeing on one worldwide list of
> defaults, then yes. I suggest our defaults be constructed so that we
> need to retag a minimum of roads, e.g. by looking at TIGER
> classifications. Mappers will learn this short list
On Sunday 14 September 2008, Gervase Markham wrote:
> Shaun McDonald wrote:
> > The nonames map is hosted by CloudMade, we update them from the
> > planet file each week. The updates typically appear on a Thursday.
>
> What is the official way (read: "way that the map will recognise) of
> marking a
On Monday 15 September 2008, Erik Johansson wrote:
> 3. specify a derived tag, as with localised names:
>
>name:absent=yes
>
>disadvantage: might accumulate to a lot of extra tags in the
> database, but it only needs to be added if there really is
> uncertainty about the situation.
>
> So.
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
> Matthias Julius wrote:
> > I don't. I think it follows the "principle of least surprise"
> > better if implied values don't change too much.
>
> Great, then we should leave this as-is (implied oneway=yes for
> motorway_link)
That would work if it w
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> >> There are three options:
> >> 1. make no assumptions: This means every single motorway_link
> >> needs to have a oneway=yes or oneway=no (or oneway=-1). A pain
> >> for taggers, and does
Hi all,
just a little question about recent Potlatch versions: I've noticed that
from time to time changes are uploaded while objects are still
selected. I remember that it used to be that it only uploaded changes
on deselecting.
So, when does it exactly upload changes now? I used to find it q
On Sunday 12 October 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > just a little question about recent Potlatch versions: I've noticed
> > that
> > from time to time changes are uploaded while objects are still
> > selected. I remember that it used to be t
On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Tagging a road as something implies certain rules, surely, and only
> > when those rules are different from the standard (for that country)
> > should you need to say so. Same as the oneway=no discussion that
> > went on previously.
>
> All thos
On Friday 17 October 2008, Gert Gremmen wrote:
> In general roads have been drawn too wide.
> While it is difficult to draw roads "on scale"
> in terms of width, the new mapnik style is too wide.
Since we're now discussing some mapnik style changes, here are some:
* You should render tunnels (or
On Friday 17 October 2008, Tristan Scott wrote:
> righto; votes cleared. proposal modified. new vote set in a week's
> time.
>
> I'm not keen on the enforcement direction being forwards and
> backwards. I can think of examples:
> * Common mobile station on a bridge - on a way which has no relation
Hi all,
I'm wondering what in English language the exact difference is between
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:amenity=pub and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:amenity=cafe
I always thought they were the same thing... So, how do you decide
whether a place is a café or a
On Saturday 18 October 2008, Pete Lawrence wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Pubs tend to be more centred around alcoholic drinks, typically
> busiest during the evenings. Whereas cafe's tend to be more centred
> around food during the day time. In the UK it is pretty easy to
> distinguish between the two, els
On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
> Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > vegard wrote:
> >>> Is it really so important for the map to look the same in Chile
> >>> and in China?
Of course not, green trunk roads and blue motorways don't make a lot of
sense in 99% of the worl
On Friday 24 October 2008, Andy Allan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I see that someone is running a bot across the entire planet, and I
> don't see any discussion of it on the mailing lists. The bot is
> called "xybot" and the user is apparently "xylome"
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/xylome - I believ
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> For track I am in favor of defaulting to motorcar=no, but let's wait
> what others think
I always assumed highway=track allows cars, and we have highway=path now
for where they're not allowed...
It may be better to let each country decide f
On Friday 07 November 2008, Nic Roets wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 November 2008, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > > I like this idea of having country specific presets in the
> > > editors instead
On Thursday 06 November 2008, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> > JOSM "could" be extended to ask in the install : are you mapping in
> > Germany or in Italy ?
> >
> > If germany, a track could be recorded as :
> > highway=track
> > motorcar=no
> >
> > In Italy, a track could be recorded as :
> > highway=trac
On Monday 24 November 2008, David Earl wrote:
> I'm also reconsidering adding "in" as well as "near" (and comma) as
> the separator. The problem is that there are a couple of place names
> in England which have "In" in their names - Henley-In-Arden for
> example. (A second problem is that since it
On Tuesday 02 December 2008, Gustav Foseid wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:14 PM, David Earl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > I think we could do with a richer hierarchy something like this:
> > metropolis> 500,000
> > city > 100,000
> > large_town> 25,000? 40,000?
> > town
On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Christoph Eckert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > But meanwhile - mostly because it is so easy to do in JOSM - many
> > people simply tag the whole shebang (addr:country, addr:town,
> > addr:post_code, addr:street, addr:house_number) onto every house
> > node.
>
> though I attended t
Hi all,
can someone please fix this up:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28575357
it's a deleted way which is still belonging to two relations
The theory on how it happened is this: We were fixing up a relation with
two people at the same time in Potlatch, and when moyogo deleted a way,
On Wednesday 17 December 2008, Elena of Valhalla wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Peter Miller
wrote:
> > I wound be very interested to see the first time that a transport
> > authority took a person to court for promoting their services but
> > there may be a first time!
>
> actually, I
On Sunday 21 December 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> OJ W wrote:
> > Doesn't layer=-1 mean that something should be 'below' the landuse
> > polygons when rendering? So if you have a river at level=-1 on a
> > landuse=farm, then you will never see the river because it's under
> > the (default
The last days the administrative boundaries have been disappearing and
re-appearing on the t...@h tiles on new renderings, and now it seems like
they're not re-appearing anymore. Can this be looked into?
Greetings
Ben
___
talk mailing list
talk@opens
On Thursday 08 January 2009, Patrick Kilian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The last days the administrative boundaries have been disappearing
> > and re-appearing on the t...@h tiles on new renderings, and now it
> > seems like they're not re-appearing anymore. Can this be looked
> > into?
>
> This in an inten
On Tuesday 13 January 2009, Ed Loach wrote:
> > the parentheses around "Oman" should be reversed.
> > problem in the UTF8 shaper (or lack thereof) ?
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=22.08&lon=59.1&zoom=6&layers=
> > B000FTF
>
> It looks like they were removed yesterday from the node which I'm
On Saturday 31 January 2009, Lester Caine wrote:
> Marc Schütz wrote:
> > 4) Split the roundabout as needed, tag all parts as
> > junction=roundabout (don't use a roundabout relation), and add only
> > the needed parts into the route.
>
> 5) Properly define a relation so that it does not need to kn
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Gary68 wrote:
> in europe there are 202 ways with more than 1950 nodes. complete
> lists can be found here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/SomeChecks
>
> or the europe file directly:
> http://www.gary68.de/osm/qa/some/len_europe.htm
Does this suggest that there wi
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> It will be a 2000 node limit. It is now quickly documented at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.6#New_Limit
>s
OK, as long as there's no limit on the number of relation members, I'm
happy :-)
Ben
_
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > OK, as long as there's no limit on the number of relation members,
> > I'm happy :-)
>
> I'm pretty sure there will be, it is not implemented yet but I
> believe we said i
Did someone break the boundary rendering on the Mapnik layers?
It looks like all boundary relations on a given way are now rendering,
and that means that if two or more relations for different admin_levels
are on one way, different kinds of borders are rendered on top of each
other.
I guess th
, the boundary
relation polygon name above.
Ben
On Wednesday 18 February 2009, Ben Laenen wrote:
> Did someone break the boundary rendering on the Mapnik layers?
>
> It looks like all boundary relations on a given way are now
> rendering, and that means that if two or more rela
On Monday 23 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yann Coupin wrote:
> > Because it makes the data in it unusable. Next thing you know,
> > someone in Germany will tag doctors office "hartz"
>
> Arzt, more likely. And why not? There are enough Germans struggling
> to understand the tags th
It looks like we finally got some kind of "License plan" for the step
towards the new license, so everyone check
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan
Let me start with the obvious questions first:
* why don't you split between the votes whether you like lic
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'll comment on various other aspects later but:
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > And what with the countless relations? If there's one way added to
> > it by someone that didn't give approval, t
On Friday 27 February 2009, Peter Miller wrote:
> Would it be appropriate to continue this conversation on legal-talk?
> Talk is very busy at the moment and we have a lovely list of our own
> :)
I think this discussion is important enough to take place on the talk
mailing list. If it's held on th
On Friday 27 February 2009, Grant Slater wrote:
> Read the full announcement in all its glory:
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001
>958.html
>
> Discussion is best on legal-talk or the avenues as per announcement.
I keep disagreeing. This is important enough to
On Friday 27 February 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote:
> And even if you take the ultra cautious approach and say all edits
> are deserving of copyright protection, you can still draw a line
> around minor edits both temporal and spatial ie: a single edit can
> only possibly infect edits made after it, and
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Lambertus wrote:
> > If we change to the new license then do we have a tool available
> > that will remind me of the bits that are going to be rolled back
> > because of my contribution being dependent on someone who did not
> > agree to the licens
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > I care about whether the database will still
> > be "clean" after a possible change (meaning, properly licensed).
>
> The current license is anything but "properly licensed&
On Friday 27 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > As long as there's no answer to it [...]
> > I wouldn't even accept [...]
> > I would refuse [...]
> > I want a very detailed answer [...]
> > that's really not my concer
On Saturday 28 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > My hope basically when starting this thread was that these
> > fundamental issues would have been cleared up by now in
> > legal-talk or wherever since you now made the schedule available.
>
> Seriously - who is this "you"?!!!
With "you" I
> For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a
> UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to
> retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an
> international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives
> us to pr
On Thursday 26 July 2012 11:48:39 Jo wrote:
> Anyway, as far as OSM goes, it's the first mapper who maps something who
> decides on which order is being used.
Slightly more difficult: It's true that the first mapper decides for the
region of Brussels-capital, which is bilingual. But in the "munic
On Friday 27 July 2012 04:56:43 Tirkon wrote:
> >Rue de
> >
> > Quelque Chose
> > Iets
> > straat
> >
> >With names it can be compacted as
> >
> >Avenue
> > John Doe
> > laan
>
> For me as a non native dutch/french this looks obfuscating.
>
> Is this the way you find it
Is there a way to see the proposed colour changes for someone who isn't colour
blind and can't take the test?
Ben
On Sunday 07 October 2012 15:54:02 johannes.kroe...@hcu-hamburg.de wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I am a geomatics student currently working on my bachelor thesis (in
> Germany, not sure
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> Thomas Davie wrote:
> > Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at
> > the graph would suggest that the "no" vote is expanding at the same rate,
> > and at the same level as the "yes" vote. I agree that we can't clearly
> > show that they're
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
> To all active members of OSM !
>
> I found that only 250 or so OSM contributors out of 250.000
> are actually members of OSMF.
>
> That is about 0.1 %.
> Nevertheless it's that 0.1 % that actually decides what will
> happen with OSM in the clo
Dermot McNally wrote:
> On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC wrote:
> > I think you are confusing "support the relicense" with "accept the
> > relicense" and that difference is significant.
>
> Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
> grudging acceptance or evangelical zea
Richard Weait wrote:
> After careful consideration, effective immediately Mikel Maron, Andy
> Robinson and Mike Collinson have access to the moderation system
> across the main OSM mailing lists. They will use their best judgment
> according to the href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Etiquett
On Monday 12 March 2012 20:06:13 Alex Barth wrote:
> - Is there an official database rebuild schedule and where can I find it?
> - Until when exactly will the pre-license change OSM database be available?
While we're on the subject: is the algorithm that determines which objects
will be deleted o
Andrew Gregory wrote:
> I'd been thinking for a long time that the OSM wiki needed a table with
> some common street name abbreviations (if it exists, I can't find it).
> When I started surveying I kept on finding weird abbreviations that took
> some searching to figure out (all the other online ma
Felix Hartmann wrote:
> If in OSM we really want to get in more mountainbikers, we have to start
> with unofficial routes. I will think about it for the night, and put up
> a wiki page tomorrow, put some notices on this on the big forums
> (hopefully they will get ~5000 pageviews, put them in my fe
Felix Hartmann wrote:
> On 03.05.2010 21:47, Ben Laenen wrote:
> > Here's the thing: we just do not map unofficial routes. Only the ones
> > that are signposted. There are enough sites where you can submit your
> > route suggestions, and there's no reason why this sh
Maarten Deen wrote:
> As highway=path means no motorized traffic, it might be a footpath or
> cyclepath or bridleway (or others). That's the "more specific" part.
highway=path doesn't mean no motorized traffic, if means no "wide" vehicles.
So no cars, but mopeds are still allowed.
Greetings
Ben
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Kai Krueger wrote:
> with all the talk about imports recently, I am wondering which countries
> have actually _not_ seen any imports so far? I.e. which communities have
> chosen to build all their data from "traditional" surveying and ignored any
> other available
Ed Avis wrote:
> Patrick Kilian petschge.de> writes:
> >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bruxelles-Brussel.jpg
> >
> >See two names on the ground.
>
> To me that would suggest putting the French name into 'name'
I suggest you don't, or you'd end up in an edit war otherwise. Linguistic
iss
Toby Murray wrote:
> In my area it looks like a couple of small rural grass strips was
> added. The hospital helipad was initially duplicated but then
> re-deleted in a subsequent changeset by the same user. So it looks
> like there was at least SOME attempt at de-duplicating things, even if
> it w
On Wednesday 04 March 2009, Ed Avis wrote:
> The only sound rule that can be sure to stand up in court is to
> delete all data from the contributors who didn't give explicit
> permission, and all data that depends on it. Period.
I agree that the only legal sound way to do it is by removing all
d
On Thursday 05 March 2009, SteveC wrote:
> On 4 Mar 2009, at 23:51, Nop wrote:
> >>> 2. Provide translations of this in the major languages. Most
> >>> people speak English to some degree, but some don't and something
> >>> of this importance and with so much legalese involved does need
> >>> to be
On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> It has been pointed out that Steve, apart from being a CM manager, is
> also the founder of the project and thus has to juggle various roles.
> Please then accept that besides running Geofabrik, I, too, am an
> active member of the OSM community an
Will it be recorded?
On Saturday 14 March 2009, Mike Collinson wrote:
> This is an informal discussion about the ODbL license and adoption
> process where anyone can dial in on a phone.
>
> It's at 3pm UK time (15:00 GMT/UTC) on Saturday and will be held in
> English. Call one of the numbers at
On Saturday 14 March 2009, Pierre-André Jacquod wrote:
> Hi,
> great stuff...
>
> > With my first go a couple of weeks back for 8 languages I did do
> > fallback to at least 'name' using views as suggested on the wiki,
> > setting this up for 40 languages however was somewhat less trivial
> > and I
On Sunday 15 March 2009, Tal wrote:
> name:local_lang="fr - nl" is indeed an interesting idea, that I
> haven't thought of.
> However, I ask myself if it's flexible enough.
> It seems that for just a little more coding you get the much more
> flexible "{name:fr} - {name:nl}" (with special escape co
It looks like the t...@h rendering is horribly broken since yesterday. When
tiles are updated only a tiny amount of features are still rendered,
and the rest is just a gray field. For example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.3755&lon=4.3508&zoom=12&layers=0B00FTF
Is this in the process of
On Thursday 26 March 2009, Richard Mann wrote:
> I thought a quick tagwatch of "footway/path/bridleway/cycleway" might
> be pertinent.
>
> Europe: footway 556k - cycleway 166k - path 66k - bridleway 11k
> Germany: footway 268k - cycleway 57k - path 45k - bridleway 1k
> Netherlands: footway 19k - cy
On Tuesday 21 April 2009, Jonathan Bennett wrote:
> MP wrote:
> > How large is the current delay before uploaded data became visible?
> > I've uploaded some changes in JOSM, provided a comment ... and when
> > I re-downloaded the area again, my changes were not there.
>
> The servers are *very, ver
On Sunday 26 April 2009, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Renaud MICHEL schrieb:
> > I didn't find an answer in the wiki, how should I tag roads that
> > are one way for motorized vehicles but two way for bicycle?
>
> The documented and established way to do so is
> oneway=yes + cycleway=opposite,
> see http:
On Wednesday 29 April 2009, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx schrieb:
> > I'm looking for a way to map restrictions for a zone. This
> > includes things like maxspeed, maxweight and parking restriction.
> >
> > I want to avoid having to place those tags on all the roads inside
> > the zone, speci
On Thursday 30 April 2009, you wrote:
> So you assume that well-designed, liberally licensed (!= GPL) Open
> Source libraries will exist for all major programming languages and
> platforms soon? Well, until then, I'll continue to assume that the
> goal of OSM data being used in creative and unexpec
On Thursday 30 April 2009, Andy Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Richard Mann
>
> wrote:
> > I'd support that highway=path needs to be rendered in the cycle map
> > layer, especially now it's becoming clearer how it's being used
>
> Every time it gets discussed, it becomes *less* cl
On Tuesday 05 May 2009, Emilie Laffray wrote:
> > What might be interesting and worth a discussion: A tag to describe
> > the default language of this object, e.g. "language=en". This could
> > als be several tags, e.g.
> > name=België - Belgique - Belgien
> > name:nl=België
> > name:fr=Belgique
>
On Thursday 07 May 2009, Maarten Deen wrote:
> That still does not solve completely the problem in dual-language
> areas like Brussels, but there both local names are in the name tag
> (as both local names are on street signs).
Streets in Brussels are almost all tagged with both name:nl and name:f
On Thursday 07 May 2009, Tal wrote:
> Imagine that you plan a business trip to Tel-Aviv and want to print
> yourself a map of the city. Or maybe you'll be spending a week in
> Cairo. Can you not see the benefit in having a map with the street
> names in a different language than the one on the sign
On Wednesday 13 May 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote:
> Where "zone" is a known geographic area?
> A bounding way with tags like:
> zone = restriction
> maxspeed = 20kph
> parking = no
>
> seems like the best way to do it to me if you don't want to just
> replicate the tags on everything (and I can under
On Thursday 14 May 2009, MP wrote:
> > Except it's not a geographic area, but rather a set of streets with
> > that restriction. If a bridge or tunnel without the restriction
> > goes over/under a street with the restriction you'll have a
> > problem.
>
> In that case, that bridge can have differen
So while it seems to be a polygon vs tags on ways discussion:
I wonder what people have against using relations to combine all roads
in one built-up area, or one maxspeed zone, or some other kind of zone.
It's really the cleanest option and allows for additional tags like a
name, and it allows
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Guenther Meyer wrote:
> > relations are one of only three basic structures in OSM (node - way
> > - relation), can we please assume that someone mapping with OSM can
> > grasp three concepts? He already should be able to deal with them
> > now anyway.
>
> they are, but at l
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Mario Salvini wrote:
> Even every relevant road for _ONE_ city in one relation won't work,
> because the membercount of a relation is limited since API 0.6.
> This methode won't create any benefit.
Well, apparently it isn't limited, and luckily it isn't. It would be an
in
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
