User talk:FrViPofm

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Besac

Salut ! Moi, à ta place, j'aurais créé une autre page wiki pour la ville de Besançon en utilisant le template "Template:FR:place" que j'ai récemment traduit (voir Mulhouse par exemple). En ajoutant la bonne catégorie, ta page se retrouvera ensuite sur cette liste : Category:City in France. Mais bon, c'est toi qui voit. --Pieren 13:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

cartes garmin

Je ne savais pas où je pouvais mettre ça : Merci pour les cartes Garmin. Donc je le mets ici ;-)

Merci pour les cartes Garmin. FrViPofm 18:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Heu... de rien ;-) mais il doit y avoir erreur, je n'ai pas fais de carte garmin Sletuffe 09:46, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Problème sur ma page d'utilisateur

Bon, j'ai corrigé. Désolé du retard, je n'avais pas fait attention que le cookie avait sauté ^^' --JonathanMM 22:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Communes du Doubs

Super, ce template:commune ! Il y a encore deux numéros de relation qui me semblent faux : Appenans : 111419 et Burnevillers : 139145. Je peux les modifier sur la page ? Damouns 12:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Fr:Glossary

Un glossaire, ça devrait rester court et renvoyer vers la page qui donne les détails. Je trouve l'entrée sur changeset trop longue. A++ -- Pieren 13:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Public transport navigation box

Hey, thanks for adding the markup to make the Template:Public_transport template appear a little more colourful! Frankie Roberto 08:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposal "orchard"

Maintenant que l'import Corine est lancé, quand est-il de ta proposition pour "orchard" ? Est-ce que tu vas lancer un appel à review sur la liste principale ? Te faut-il un coup de main ? -- Pieren 14:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Ce coup-ci, tu ne pourras pas dire que la proposition est au point mort ;-) Il faudrait que quelqu'un ajoute "berry plantations" dans la page principale. Tu t'en charges ? --Pieren 13:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

GetMap

Could you use StaticMap instead? Typical URL might be [1]. Full API at [2]. This supports all the features of GetMap. Ojw 11:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

TagWatch cleaner

Bonjour, il y a un problème avec la règle amenity=`^\D.*$` => amenity=*, ça renvoie plein de faux positifs. J'avoue ne pas être expert en regex, tu peux regarder ça ? Merci ! Damouns 08:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

[...]Étienne (qui vient d'être papa)[...]
Moi aussi depuis le 30/12/2009 ! Décidément ça risque de faire des contrib en moins ! Mais du bonheur en plus Damouns 09:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Definitions

Il faudrait renommer Relations/Proposed/Definition en Relations/Proposed/Defaults et aussi l'ajouter en lien depuis Key:maxspeed et Proposed features/trafficzone pour un peu relancer l'activité autour de cette proposition. --Pieren 10:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Karbukoo

Hi is Karbukoo available in whole Europe or FR only? If it is, how can I contribute a german translation? --!i! 09:00, 6 August 2010 (BST)

Wikiteam

Hi FrViPofm, i saw you on the wiki talk page and would like to ask if you are interested in Talk:Wiki#Forming_a_Wiki_Team? --!i! This user is member of the wiki team of OSM 16:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Template:FR:Place with Map

Bonsoir, C'est vrai qu'en utilisant les bonne variables cela fonctionne mieux ^^ Désolé pour le dérangement --Julien_N 07:36, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

IotW

Question on featured images page about meaning of BDTopo comparison. Ojw 14:16, 28 May 2011 (BST)

MH

Bonjour,

Wikipédien depuis longtemps (où je m'occupe notamment des MHs), je suis en train de me mettre à OSM. Je viens déjà de rajouter plusieurs tag wikipedia sur divers lieux et bâtiments de la ville de Rennes. Hors plusieurs de ces bâtiments sont aussi des monuments historiques (MH) et là je dois avouer que je m'y perds un peu dans les tags à utiliser… Je vois que heritage est toujours en proposed depuis 2009 (Proposed features/heritage) mais Key:ref:mhs semble déjà actif. Pourrais-tu m'éclairer voire même me pointer un exemple de ce qu'il faut faire dans l'idéal ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:45, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal "leaftype" refers to some tags of Corine Import

In Proposed_features/leaftype it is suggested to migrate some tags of the "Corine Import". Can you have a look and state your opinion if applicable? --Rudolf (talk) 08:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposal to move the "tree list" from "tag:orchard" to "key:trees"

I poposed to move the "tree list" from tag:landuse=orchard to key:trees. See talk:tag:landuse=orchard. What do you think? --Rudolf (talk) 08:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

It is already the case. the tree list in the article tag:landuse=orchard is an inclusion of the key:trees page, or, more precisely, of the subpage Key:trees/list. This subpage was created in 2012 by Skippern. --FrViPofm (talk) 12:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
I know the situation. IMO the main page tag:landuse=orchard is less clearly arranged. In talk:tag:landuse=orchard I suggested to show the list only in key:trees as it is widely usage in the wiki (e.g. tag:tourism=information, tag:amenity=shelter). The mainpage tag:landuse=orchard will be much more clearly represented. The usage of a template for the tree list can be avoided. The editing will be much easier. The discussion about kind of trees will find a distinct place. --Rudolf (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

boundary=religious_administration

I started using your proposal "boundary=religious_administration".
Part of your proposal in the Polish language are placed in
Pl:Tag:boundary=religious_administration.

As first, I chose deaneries and parishes in the Diocese of Radom. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3749902 and relation of subareas.

I have a problem to solve:

  1. I want to add churches (area) to the relation of the parish that are within its border, but I do not know what the role to use.
  2. Similarly, the "admin_centre" for the relation of the parish.
  3. Can I add cemeteries that are owned by the parish to the relation of the parish?
  4. What about "landuse=religious", area which belongs to the church?

BTW. The denomination for most of churches are not "catholic", only "roman_catholic" :) --Władysław Komorek (talk) 08:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Nice to see that this tagging is being used! Is the set of admin_level suitable ? I see that I have made a mistake on the Religious authority boundaries with two 8 levels. But you corrected it in the pl page.
There is a problem in the relation Relation 3749902 (XML, Potlatch2, iD, JOSM, history, analyze, manage, gpx). It is composite : there are polygons as subareas, and ways as outer, in it, and the area is not closed.
I don't like too much the subareas. We have made a tool that helps making relations from multipolygon boundaries, keeping only the outer ways : ComcomMaker (see http://comcommaker.openstreetmap.fr/ in expert mode). It runs in junction with JOSM to edit the new relation. It is a simple tool (I'm not a programmer) but very handful. I use it to make parishes, dioceses... The sources are available and it is not too hard to make an instance for your country. I have an instance on my own computer. Ask the Polish community.
For your questions :
  1. On route=hiking + pilgrimage=yes (mostly on Camino de Santiago), I have added churches with the role place_of_worship, I think it is the simplest way to add the churches to parishes.
  2. The admin_center can be added with the role... admin_center as for other boundaries.
  3. Maybe you can add the cemeteries, with role cemetery.
  4. I think the landuse=religious is very not clear. What kind of religious use is it on this place that should make it a landuse=religious ? Does it mean it is :
  • a sacred space, with worship, like an outdoor chapel, so the tag should be amenity=place_of_worship without building or with building=no,
  • a place where are processions, cross way, pilgrimages. So the way should be mapped and tagged as route=hiking + pilgrimage=yes\cross_way with crosses tagged as wayside_cross.
  • a place owned or managed by a church, a monastery, a parish. So the key should be owner=* or operator=*,
  • a place owned and used by a parish for activities with youth... So the tag should be leisure=*, sport=* or whatsoever,
I think your should had details, such as churches, cemeteries... only to smallest religious entities and avoid it in deaneries, parishes... and admin_centres to the corresponding admin_level.
--FrViPofm (talk) 09:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
The area is not closed because I didn't finished yet.
Our comununity in Poland decided to add subareas to determine the relationship between relations and we have a few scripts based on subareas to facilitate editing and searching for errors in relations.
We think landuse=religious is the most obvious, in order to determine the land as a sacred space, belonging to the parish, where government representatives have no right to enter without the consent of the Church. Remember that we describe the land not area.
Thank you for your advice. I will be in touch with you.
--Władysław Komorek (talk) 21:35, 21 May 2014 (UTC)