Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

> can only be used by cyclist The “access” tag allows to express this. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

On 27/01/19 19:51, OSMDoudou wrote: can only be used by cyclist The “access” tag allows to express this. If it is only used by cyclist ... what  do the cars on the street do? Turn around to find another route? As stated before ... The ways say what is on them. One way for the bicycles in t

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

When drain and ditch were originally introduced, was it supposed to differentiate them in size? If you read the current definitions closely you can notice the following: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:waterway ditch - An *small* artificial free flow waterway used for carrying superfluous

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Follow-up proposal - Railway tracks on highway

Dear all! The proposal for Railway tracks on highway was approved with 21 votes for, 1 vote against and 1 abstention. Thank you again very much to everyone who voted, commented and/or participated in the discussion on the mailing list! Although the proposal was accepted, there were some issues

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

But often, the cycleway crossing the road is not mapped. How would you map a bicycle only crossing if the parallel cycleway is mapped as cycleway=lane on the highway=x ? Then you need a point, and as you wrote access=bicycle or foot=no do not work, as pedestrians and cars can follow the highway=x.

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

Hi the problem is more in relation to crossing_ref. there is no description at this level for cycleway crossings. Bicycle crossing is not zebra. I prefer to use crossin_ref = bicycle Because crossing is used with uncontrolled or traffic_signals Jérôme Le dim. 27 janv. 2019 à 12:30, Marc Gemis a

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 04:12, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have edited the units page to include the long ton. > > For the benefit of mappers who do not understand the distinction or know how many pounds there are in their local ton, it would be useful to indicate that the short ton is

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 10:37, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > When drain and ditch were originally introduced, was it supposed to > differentiate them in size? > If you read the current definitions closely you can notice the following: > [...] My guess is that this is a practical matter rather than

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

Indeed, it's very strange to require mappers do the maths when there is a notation to indicate the unit and let the renderers do the maths. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 2019-01-27 17:53, OSMDoudou wrote: > Indeed, it's very strange to require mappers do the maths when there is a > notation to indicate the unit and let the renderers do the maths. Hi! Why do you talk about math? Do you expect renderers to automatically convert weights from whatever unit to

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

sent from a phone > On 27. Jan 2019, at 12:29, Marc Gemis wrote: > > But often, the cycleway crossing the road is not mapped. How would you > map a bicycle only crossing if the parallel cycleway is mapped as > cycleway=lane on the highway=x ? foot=no on the highway=crossing node Also if the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 00:13, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > That looks better though this might still be read as there being > necessarily a 1:1 relationship between a natural=cape and a > natural=peninsula (and your illustration therefore showing Pointe des > Espagnols but not Pointe des Capucins)

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 21:30, Marc Gemis wrote: > But often, the cycleway crossing the road is not mapped. How would you > map a bicycle only crossing if the parallel cycleway is mapped as > cycleway=lane on the highway=x ? Such as this: https://www.google.com/maps/@-28.5356863,153.5389423,3a,1

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 at 04:45, Markus wrote: > I tried to improve the differentiation and the illustration. > Looks good Markus! A thought. After "Note that 'cape' sometimes refers to a coastal extreme point, i.e. natural =cape

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

If I understand it correctly, you have 2 higways (both with cycleway=lane) that connect at a node further away, but cycles should cross at that point, before the point where motor traffic merge into one way. In that point I'd probably draw a cycleway (no motor traffic, no pedestrian) between th

Re: [Tagging] crossing=cycleway as a node

Actualy the "left side" highway continues to have cycle traffic throughout, so the "triangle" will be: * 1 side for motor vehicles * 1 side for cycles * 1 side for mixed traffic Sergio On 2019-01-27 23:59, Sergio Manzi wrote: > > If I understand it correctly, you have 2 higways (both with

Re: [Tagging] weight limit in short tons

On 28/01/19 04:24, Sergio Manzi wrote: On 2019-01-27 17:53, OSMDoudou wrote: Indeed, it's very strange to require mappers do the maths when there is a notation to indicate the unit and let the renderers do the maths. Hi! Why do you talk about math? Do you expect renderers to automatically co