sent from a phone
> On 16. Jul 2017, at 20:18, marc marc wrote:
>
> You can try to make a proposal that mean : those 2 way (street/sidewalk)
> are only one for the routing.
> maybe a relation like associatedstreet or that extend it.
type=area does this somehow, as it defines (as default) th
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 1:55 PM marc marc wrote:
> All crossing between a sidewalk and a driveways I have tag have the same
> type of kerb on each side. It's why I use kerb=lowered without any need
> for left/right details, it is for the whole crossing.
>
I think I'm confused again: is the kerb ke
Does it really make sense to have admin_level with office=government?
While trying to understand why an area with admin_level=4 appeared in
a government office here I saw this:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Agovernment&type=revision&diff=1465882&oldid=1346026
Which came f
Le 18. 07. 17 à 16:01, Nick Bolten a écrit :
>> All crossing between a sidewalk and a driveways I have tag have the same
>> type of kerb on each side. It's why I use kerb=lowered without any need
>> for left/right details, it is for the whole crossing.
> I think I'm confused again
highway=resident
Le 18. 07. 17 à 14:29, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
>> You can try to make a proposal that mean : those 2 way (street/sidewalk)
>> are only one for the routing.
>> maybe a relation like associatedstreet or that extend it.
> type=area does this somehow, as it defines (as default) that you can cross
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Nelson A. de Oliveira
wrote:
> Does it really make sense to have admin_level with office=government
>
I don't think so. I noticed someone's also been adding administrative
boundary relations to university campuses, which seems equally bizarre to
me.
__
Hello,
Near my parent's holiday cabin an earthslide-waiting-to-happen has
rendered the normal road accessible only in daylight.
An emergency road has been made, with the following characteristics:
- open from 22:00 to 6:00 (when the main road is closed)
- One-way, alternating every "30 minutes"
sent from a phone
> On 18. Jul 2017, at 22:11, Tijmen Stam wrote:
>
> At the start towards Abriès, an "access:forward = no" +
> "access:forward:conditional = yes @ (22:00-22:07, 22:30-22:37, ... )" tag
> over a short section, and mutatis mutandis at the other end?
I would do it similarly,
Hi,
Recently I read in OSM Weekly about new maps by MapCat. Driven by
curiosity I opened this map and when I switched to bike mode in my
city I notice a lot of non-existing cycling infrastructure. After
investigation I discovered that MapCat renders all values of cycleway
as bike lane, what in pre
On 18-07-17 22:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 18. Jul 2017, at 22:11, Tijmen Stam wrote:
At the start towards Abriès, an "access:forward = no" + "access:forward:conditional
= yes @ (22:00-22:07, 22:30-22:37, ... )" tag over a short section, and mutatis mutandis at
the
Le 18. 07. 17 à 22:55, Wiktor Niesiobedzki a écrit :
> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value?
I would use this tag only whre there is a traffic_sign that forbit
cycling where it shoul be allowed without this sign
> Should it's use be discouraged by validators / presets?
> (at le
"cycleway=no" on a highway=XX object means that the road has no cycleway
associated with it, i.e. none of the values
cycleway=yes|both|left|right|lnane|...
To my knowledge the "no" value is not documented. The tag cycleway=no is
often applied by ID users and has nesarly 20 uses.
On 18 July 201
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 9:24 AM marc marc wrote:
> Le 18. 07. 17 à 16:01, Nick Bolten a écrit :
> >> All crossing between a sidewalk and a driveways I have tag have the same
> >> type of kerb on each side. It's why I use kerb=lowered without any need
> >> for left/right details, it is for the who
13 matches
Mail list logo
