> +1. Micromapping may be "on the rise", but that doesn't mean it's > necessarily a good thing. I'd still like to see a means of specifying, on > administrative boundaries, tags that are to be assumed (inherited) by > contained objects (e.g. sidewalk=yes, surface=paved, lanes=2, maxspeed=25 > mph, etc.). I currently don't tag these, but it would be useful to > visitors > to know them.
I agree that it'd be nice to be able to set defaults for an area such as typical speed limits. I guess it depends what you consider micromapping... Here's an area in Google Maps: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Winnipeg,+MB&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=45.957536,64.951172&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Winnipeg,+Division+No.+11,+Manitoba,+Canada&ll=49.823878,-97.201324&spn=0.009192,0.024033&z=16 Here's the same area in OSM; I've added a lot of detail to this shopping district including parking lots, buildings, and started to put in POIs. I think this is a HUGE improvement over what Google Maps shows: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.82372&lon=-97.20104&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF Tyler _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
