bike everywhere in my area, so I do not use cycleway.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
The feature is now approved. So let's start mapping mineshafts.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmineshaft
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
So let's start voting:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mineshaft
lesi
It is planed to close the voting tomorrow. So vote now.
Preliminary result: 7 times approved, 1 time opposed, one fun vote.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mineshaft#Voting
Due
with an integrated voting mechanism
would be the best to introduce new features.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
In the last days no further problems appeared and it seems that all helpful
suggestions are included now.
So let's start voting:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mineshaft
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http
In the last days no further problems appeared and it seems that all
helpful
suggestions are included now.
So let's start voting:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mineshaft
lesi
It would be nice if further votes would be more serious.
If you do not like voting, do
this discussion again so soon?
I do not know which discussion you mean?
According to the wiki voting is still neccessary to approve a new feature.
If there have been any changes to this, they are not documented in the wiki.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk
content.
So IMO such contributions should be immediately deleted. If the users
uploads them again, he should be banned.
Using Google is also really unfair towards those people who map with their
GPS devices and invest so much time and energy into this project. It is
really demotivating.
lesi
2009/10/24 Lesi l...@lesi.is-a-geek.net:
- In the forum somebody has suggested to add a tag for the name of the
mine
the mineshaft belongs to. At first I thought this would be the same as
operator, but actually it is not. So which tag would be appropriate?
mine=...?
to associate
no further comments, so I've changed mineshaft:type to
mineshaft_type.
I've also added the mine-tag.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
at the moment there are:
name - name of the mineshaft itself
mine - name of the mine which the mineshaft is part of
operator - name of the operator of the mine
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Dbunker.
- In the forum somebody has suggested to add a tag for the name of the mine
the mineshaft belongs to. At first I thought this would be the same as
operator, but actually it is not. So which tag would be appropriate?
mine=...?
lesi
this and replacing all this different tags with one: resource?
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
winding gears is the main purpose of a headframe IMO.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
how will you tag unmined deposits in such a scheme?
If there is a unmined deposit, the mineshaft is not in use anymore
- disused=yes
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
mostly they are not mapped because people do not know how to tag them.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
and no references to surface_mining
There is also landuse=quarry which can be used for surface mines.
But actually they are not part of my proposal - it refers only to
underground mining.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http
There is probably a good reason only tourist attractions are mapped
because you wouldn't be allowed to go near one unless you worked
there, there is a mine shaft on the other side of town but I wouldn't
get anywhere near it.
I know mineshaft you can get very close to (2-3m). With your
On 20 Oct 2009, at 12:05, Lesi wrote:
how will you tag unmined deposits in such a scheme?
If there is a unmined deposit, the mineshaft is not in use anymore
- disused=yes
Do NOT use something like disused=yes as a modifier, you instead need to
add an extra level of indirection, so
is to express if
the headframe is visible, because it is a prominent point of reference. Look
at the examples in the wiki.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
meant adit and not audit. Some people would call it a gallery.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
=yes is widely used and not
deprecated. So there is no reason to use a different system with mineshafts.
I would recommend to start a proposal to deprecate disused=yes and replace
it with =closed;closed=.
lesi
___
talk mailing list
talk
but when the mine shaft is disused the winding gear is removed
I can not confirm this. All disused mineshafts I know still have their
winding gear, only the cables are removed.
But even if the winding gear is removed you can tag with headframe=yes. Of
courde, if the whole headframe is
how will you tag unmined deposits in such a scheme?
If there is a unmined deposit, the mineshaft is not in use anymore -
disused=yes.
lesi
I wasn't thinking of disused, i was thinking of still there, with or
without a
mineshaft
Perhaps, my English is too bad, but I do not really
Underground resources can not be mapped.
why not?
isn't that what a geology map does?
I was commenting on the resource proposal really
Now I get your point.
The resource-tag describes for which resource the mineshaft was built.
If the mineshaft is disused, it is irrelevant if the deposits
25 matches
Mail list logo
