On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > > *Sigh*. I'll bite. What would be a fence which is a barrier to one, but > > not to the other? You know barrier doesn't mean "impenetrable", right? > > Well a series of boulders is a barrier to vehicles, but not even > noticeable to pedestrians. > But it isn't a fence. > > Yes, you are. And presumably certain types of barriers have different > > defaults. But a fence which allows access? > > Sure, like fences around golf driving ranges that protect people > outside from golf balls, but might have gaps. > Not sure I'd call that a fence, and even less sure I'd call it a barrier=fence. I don't know, though. > >> Oh, and add barrier=barricade, for a low anti-car obstruction. > >> (barrier=roadblock? I'm thinking of these barriers you often see around > >> parks here, two vertical poles with a long vertical pole bolted across, > >> about knee height. Usually treated pine.) > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dcycle_barrier ? > > Pretty similar - but poorly named for this instance. Most OSM tags are poorly named for a lot of instances. Personally, I've learned to treat them like terms in a foreign language. > The barriers I'm > thinking of have to do with bicycles - they keep cars out of > pedestrian areas. > That's specifically addressed on that web page. Incidentally, I notice that the definitions of "bicycle=yes", > "bicycle=no" on that page conflict with what has been said elsewhere > on this thread - they define practical access, not legal access. > Yep. Fortunately, there aren't too many ways which use both highway=* and barrier=*.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
