Le 21.11.19 à 22:51, François Lacombe a écrit :
> Those two boxes will be hard to describe on the same node, although they
> can be located on the same pole.
> Should we recommend to put as many nodes as required around the pole or
> choose another option?
the easiest way to use the data is to put
On Sun Nov 10 21:09:26 UTC 2019 Volker Schmidt wrote:
> In most EEU counties I believe pedelecs are treated like bicycles and
> S-pedelecs as mofas or light motorcycles. So for these two vehicles we do
> not need new access tags. They are covered by existing tags.
I don't think this is always tr
sent from a phone
> On 22. Nov 2019, at 19:18, s8evq wrote:
>
> So in Belgium, I think we do need a specific access tag for speed pedelecs.
> People have been using moped_p=* for a while now, but this never went through
> the proposal process.
are there specific traffic signs for P e-bikes
The variation of drawing and setting tags.
1. People draw in the carriageway road as a wayline. Wayline middle of the
road. Exactly, where it is.
1.1 Then they decided that there is a sidewalk, on the right, tagging
sidewalk=right, this says there is somewhere a sidewalk on the right next to
the
Now your questions @ Markus.
Your example:
Example (to be displayed with a fixed-width font):
┃ ┆ ┃
┃ ┆ ┃ <- driveway
┃ ┆ ┃
━━┛ ┆ ┗━━
┄┄┄1┄┄┄ <- sidewalk
─┆─
2
Yes, there are specific traffic signs for class P (speed pedelecs). They are
shown in the links I added:
Some examples:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:C3_met_jaagpad_met_uitzondering_voor_speed_pedelecs.png
Class A (mofa) and P (speedpedelec) allowed, not B (moped)
https://wiki.openst
On 22/11/19 23:11, marc marc wrote:
Le 21.11.19 à 22:51, François Lacombe a écrit :
Those two boxes will be hard to describe on the same node, although they
can be located on the same pole.
Should we recommend to put as many nodes as required around the pole or
choose another option?
the easies
> The following pedestrian router already seems to work quite well with
sidewalk=* tags and highway=crossing nodes (examples):
When something "works" 99.9% of the time, it's the edge cases that matter.
But, because this is a network problem, a single edge case can disrupt tons
of paths.
Here's an
I'm a big fan of this proposal and like others I think it could be useful
in many scenarios. Expansion beyond connecting sidewalks to streets would
be great!
I would propose that under an expansive definition it be thought of this
way: a "footway link" is a path connecting pedestrian-accessible wa
