2011/4/30 Sebastian Hohmann :
> Am 30.04.2011 12:10, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
> "motorcar" is supposed to represent the class of "Zeichen 251" (shows a car
> from the front), which forbids all double-tracked motor vehicles (which
> includes hgv and buses etc).
this is how I see this as well.
Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
> I'd also like to point at "motor_vehicle" which doesn't seem to be
> defined reasonably (it includes all vehicles with a motor, like mofas
> and mopeds with 25 / 50 ccm motors).
All definitions we're talking about apply to highways and similar
Am 30.04.2011 um 13:08 schrieb Sebastian Hohmann:
> "motorcar" is supposed to represent the class of "Zeichen 251" (shows a car
> from the front), which forbids all double-tracked motor vehicles (which
> includes hgv and buses etc).
>
> "car" is supposed to represent the class of "Zusatzzeichen
Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
> 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke :
>> It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose.
>> Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?
>
>
> -1
> IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and not
Am 30.04.2011 um 15:10 schrieb Stefan Bethke:
> Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
>
>> 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke :
>>> It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose.
>>> Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?
>>
>>
>> -1
>> I
On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
>
> > 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke :
> >> It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose.
> >> Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?
> >
>
Am 30.04.2011 16:51, schrieb David Murn:
On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke:
It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose. Should
I use that, and add an appropriate ent
2011/4/30 Stefan Bethke :
> And if you feel you need more classifications, here's a Wikipedia article on
> the EU classification:
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/EG-Fahrzeugklasse (seems there's no English
> version)
There is no English version of this, and it seems to deal only with
trailers an
Am 30.04.2011 um 16:51 schrieb David Murn:
> On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
>> Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
>>
>>> 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke :
It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose.
Should I use that, and a
On 4/30/2011 6:56 PM, Stefan Bethke wrote:
My concrete problem is a parking lot that only cars are allowed to use, but not trucks
nor busses (technically, parking is allowed for two track vehicles with no trailers, not
exceeding a gross mass of 3.5 tonnes). Reading the Key:access page, I did n
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 00:56 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> > Maybe the alternative is to instead tag that its only suitable for
> > single-tracked vehicles (ie. access=no motorbike=yes) rather than trying
> > to figure out what isnt allowed? From how I read the discussion that
> > seems to be the
On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 17:08 +0200, Sebastian Hohmann wrote:
> But don't forget bicycle=yes, foot=yes, horse=yes, skating=yes, dog=yes, ...
But is bicycle/horse/skate/dog parking allowed? This is a discussion of
how to tag limited access to parking, in which case you dont need to say
what IS allo
Am 01.05.2011 um 01:27 schrieb David Murn:
> On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 00:56 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
>
>>> Maybe the alternative is to instead tag that its only suitable for
>>> single-tracked vehicles (ie. access=no motorbike=yes) rather than trying
>>> to figure out what isnt allowed? From ho
Am 01.05.2011 um 01:26 schrieb Nathan Edgars II:
> On 4/30/2011 6:56 PM, Stefan Bethke wrote:
>> My concrete problem is a parking lot that only cars are allowed to use, but
>> not trucks nor busses (technically, parking is allowed for two track
>> vehicles with no trailers, not exceeding a gross
On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 02:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> hgv=no might or might not be understood to include busses, but it
> certainly would not imply cars with a trailer, or small caravans.
If I was towing a caravan, I wouldnt set my navigation device to think
Im in a car or a motorbike, Id mos
2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke :
> It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose.
> Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?
-1
IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and not be used as
a generic term including busses, hgv, goods and other.
Am 30.04.2011 12:10, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke:
It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this purpose. Should
I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?
-1
IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and not be used as
a gen
17 matches
Mail list logo
