On 06/12/2009, at 5:17 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/12/6 James Livingston <doc...@mac.com>: >> I'd hope that bicycle=no would have the same implications for having a >> bicycle without riding it as other *=no tags would for their transports. For >> example I would guess that where horse=no is used, you often can't walk your >> horse as well as not riding it. So maybe having a separate tag for things >> which are not allowed (e.g. prohibited=bicycle;horse;explosives) could be >> the way to go. > > erm, wouldn't horse=prohibited be closer to current usage, eg horse=no.... ?
If horse=*, bicycle*, motorcar=* are for tagging the restrictions on using them as a vehicle, then I'd say not. prohibited=* would also let you tag other items that are not allowed, such as explosives, dogs, or whatever else. What I'm thinking about is that activities should be tagged as *=no, so not being allowed to ride a bicycle -> bicycle=no, but certain items being prohibited in an area could be prohibited=* _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
