Hi,
I think this is in danger of getting too technical.
As a for instance; a taxi in the UK is actually legally classed as a
'hackney carriage'. However it normally carries a sign saying 'taxi' and
in general terms everyone knows what a taxi in the UK is. The driver, if
employed as a 'taxi dr
On 2014-01-16 17:55, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2014/1/16 Colin Smale
>
>> If the semantics of a tag/value are different by country, let us just
>> document the standards for that country and move on.
>
> I'd prefer to use a different tag then, because that's what tagging is about:
> de
2014/1/16 Colin Smale
> Nobody uses the archaic word "omnibus" these days.
>
this is not a real problem, rather it might be a benefit, because it will
avoid people using the term and guessing about the meaning.
> You may as well suggest replacing "car" with "horseless carriage".
>
probably
Nobody uses the archaic word "omnibus" these days. You may as well
suggest replacing "car" with "horseless carriage".
I really think we are trying to square a circle here. There are
irreconcilable differences between countries, and we should not waste
our energy in a war of attrition. Whether
2014/1/15 martinq
> "in service" was (and is) not required by the definition & description of
> the "psv" tag or the "taxi". Only in "bus" it was mixed in ("acting as a
> public service").
>
"in service" is implicit in "public service vehicle", because if they are
not in service they are not ps
On 1/15/14 2:24 PM, martinq wrote:
> because of the JOSM turn restriction plugin? What about changing that
>> plugin?
>
> no, the argument for depreciation was: There is no need for this
> artificial group: Grouping taxi (both "in service" as well as not in
> service) with only those buses acting a
I have interpreted psv (public service VEHICLE), bus and taxi as
vehicle categories in the past, but never required these keys in my
area.
So for me an empty taxi is allowed on taxi=yes.
it is not a question whether it is empty or not (it might be going to
pick up someone) but whet
2014/1/13 martinq
> I have interpreted psv (public service VEHICLE), bus and taxi as vehicle
> categories in the past, but never required these keys in my area.
> So for me an empty taxi is allowed on taxi=yes.
>
it is not a question whether it is empty or not (it might be going to pick
up some
I started mapping in Jan 2008. By that time it was already clear that
"psv" was taxis and buses. If we start questioning every consensus (even
those documented on central pages of the wiki like the access-page) we
can stop mapping now ;-)
I have interpreted psv (public service VEHICLE), bus and
Obvious issue: 200,000 uses of "bus"...
OK, probably most of them are associated with public_transport (e.g. bus
stops). So the number of bus related access-restrictions is probably
much lower.
martinq
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetma
On 1/13/14 2:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2014/1/13 Richard Welty
>
>> we may need to spend some time on this. the turn restriction
>> plugin for josm uses psv, but seemingly with the implication of
>> emergency/service vehicles (not including buses and taxis) for
>> things like u-turns on
2014/1/13 Richard Welty
> we may need to spend some time on this. the turn restriction
> plugin for josm uses psv, but seemingly with the implication of
> emergency/service vehicles (not including buses and taxis) for
> things like u-turns on motorways.
>
> i think we need some clarity about what
On 1/13/14 1:04 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> psv reads "public service vehicle", clearly a use type. "e.g. busses"
> is correct as is "i.e. busses and taxis" (but the latter might forget
> some other kind of psv). Still this clearly doesn't include any buses
> (vehicle class, usually vehicles w
Hi,
sorry, made a mistake:
2) If other restrictions (maxweight or - more precisely - maxgcweight,
maxgcweightrating or maxactualweight) are made conditional, we need an
update of our conditional tagging, for example by introducing "use":
Of course this is already possible in conditional restr
Hi,
I propose to move "psv" (including "taxi" and "bus") from the
vehicle classes section to the section "by use", because that's
what it is.
maybe that is what it should have been in the past.
Sadly the actual use in real world tagging seems to interpret "bus" also
a
2014/1/13 Kytömaa Lauri
> Country differences again. Around here (Finland) all signs(* refer to just
> vehicles registered as a bus, even those that allow buses and taxis on
> their own lanes. Effectively nobody would try to use a "personal bus"
> anyway, because the extra running costs, costly a
>>I propose to move "psv" (including "taxi" and "bus") from the vehicle classes
>>section to the section "by use", because that's what it is.
>I agree. (Usage, that relies on the current hierarchy should be limited to
>non-existent)
Country differences again. Around here (Finland) all signs(* re
2014/1/9 Martin Vonwald
> 2014/1/9 Martin Koppenhoefer
>
>> I propose to move "psv" (including "taxi" and "bus") from the vehicle
>> classes section to the section "by use", because that's what it is.
>>
>
> I agree. (Usage, that relies on the current hierarchy should be limited to
> non-existen
2014/1/9 Martin Koppenhoefer
> I propose to move "psv" (including "taxi" and "bus") from the vehicle
> classes section to the section "by use", because that's what it is.
>
I agree. (Usage, that relies on the current hierarchy should be limited to
non-existent)
And maybe it is time to think aga
I propose to move "psv" (including "taxi" and "bus") from the vehicle
classes section to the section "by use", because that's what it is.
page for reference:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@o
20 matches
Mail list logo
