The tag (class:xxx=?) isn't helpful for standard transportation, but for
recreative transportation.
mot
So class:vehicle would be of no use, but e.g. class:touring would be (e.g.
for oldtimer touring, moto turiong ...) or class:4wd. A 4wd car falls under
the same type in the access tags as the old
This tag might be useful for subjective tagging for bikes:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Class:bicycle
The idea is good, but how do we tag the same kind of information for other
vehicles? Is there a class:motor_vehicle or class:vehicle?
Peter
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: M∡rti
2011/6/14 Nathan Edgars II :
> It would be more useful to say why they should avoid, like maxheight=*.
btw.:
maxheight is a legal restriction as well.
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tag
2011/6/14 Flaimo :
> the wiki page doesn't say that the restriction need to be of a legal
> kind.
How else can you interpret: "Description For describing the legal
accessibility of an element." ?
> access=no could also mean that it is physically not accessible
> even though it might be allowed
On 14/06/2011 11:19, Flaimo wrote:
the wiki page doesn't say that the restriction need to be of a legal
kind.
The wiki page makes it abundantly clear that this is what "access" is
for. It uses words such as "/legally-enshrined right of access" and
"//dedicated to a specific mode of travel by
On 6/14/2011 6:19 AM, Flaimo wrote:
the wiki page doesn't say that the restriction need to be of a legal
kind. access=no could also mean that it is physically not accessible
even though it might be allowed legally.
Are there any common values that are neither legal nor physical?
on the other h
the wiki page doesn't say that the restriction need to be of a legal
kind. access=no could also mean that it is physically not accessible
even though it might be allowed legally. on the other hand, i don't
see "avoid" as a value, but rather as some sort of additional
information like "description".
That'll be a very big boat
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:57 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2011/6/14 Sander Deryckere :
>> It's Paul Johnson who introduced the tag, not Nathan.
>>
>> Your comment is right, but you should point it to Paul Johnson instead.
>
>
> yes, I saw this, he kept it, so they'
On 6/14/2011 5:57 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/6/14 Sander Deryckere:
It's Paul Johnson who introduced the tag, not Nathan.
Your comment is right, but you should point it to Paul Johnson instead.
yes, I saw this, he kept it, so they're sitting in the same boat ;-)
Due to previous co
2011/6/14 Sander Deryckere :
> It's Paul Johnson who introduced the tag, not Nathan.
>
> Your comment is right, but you should point it to Paul Johnson instead.
yes, I saw this, he kept it, so they're sitting in the same boat ;-)
Cheers,
Martin
___
Ta
It's Paul Johnson who introduced the tag, not Nathan.
Your comment is right, but you should point it to Paul Johnson instead.
regards,
Sander
> you are actually missusing the access-tag because it is intended for
> legal restrictions and not for recommendations. Why not use another
> tag? Thei
2011/6/14 Nathan Edgars II :
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/83524747/history
> No comment.
you are actually missusing the access-tag because it is intended for
legal restrictions and not for recommendations. Why not use another
tag? Their number is not limited...
cheers,
Martin
_
12 matches
Mail list logo
