Re: [Tagging] gross weight - conclusions & changes

> needed e.g. in Finland) or of >a single vehicle (needed in >most of the vienna convention > countries) By far the most common sign is - even here - of the "vehicle laden weight" variant. Only the "max gross weight of a vehicle combination" sign does not (legally) exist - here, that is. Implyi

Re: [Tagging] Open of discussion on "operational_status" (part of life cycle with disused/abandoned/demolished)

Am 29.06.2013 19:54, schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:07 AM, fly > wrote: > > Exactly, what you do describe won't work. Please use a prefix if > something is broken. Software which wants to display these kind of > broken objects can

Re: [Tagging] Open of discussion on "operational_status" (part of life cycle with disused/abandoned/demolished)

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:07 AM, fly wrote: > Exactly, what you do describe won't work. Please use a prefix if > something is broken. Software which wants to display these kind of > broken objects can look for this prefix and all other simply ignore it. This tag is for the opposite use case. Th

Re: [Tagging] gross weight - conclusions & changes

Do we really need 2 tags, maxgrossweight and grossweight? What is the difference? - maxgrossweight is a key - grossweight is no key. It is a property used on the right side of conditional restrictions, for example to express a speed limit that only applied to vehicles with a certain gross we

Re: [Tagging] Open of discussion on "operational_status" (part of life cycle with disused/abandoned/demolished)

Hi, On 06/29/13 07:37, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: This is a proposal to fill a hole in the life cycle concepts (that of facilities /intended/ to be operational): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:operational_status I have drawn from the HOT tagging, and from the experience mappi

Re: [Tagging] Open of discussion on "operational_status" (part of life cycle with disused/abandoned/demolished)

Am 29.06.2013 07:37, schrieb Bryce Nesbitt: > This is a proposal to fill a hole in the life cycle concepts (that of > facilities /intended/ to be operational): > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:operational_status > I have drawn from the HOT tagging, and from the experience

Re: [Tagging] gross weight - conclusions & changes

2013/6/29 martinq > > Based on the interesting discussion so far, following conclusions from my > side: > > (1) Remove the '_': > maxgross_weight was a horrible choice from my side. If we have > 'maxaxleload', then maxgrossweight is OK, but less irritating. > > (2) > For consistency with (1), for