Am 06.05.2011 um 12:29 schrieb Nathan Edgars II: > On 5/6/2011 6:08 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Then you redefine "motorcar" to "The Map features’ Restriction section >> entry for motorcar is updated: >> Access permission for (motor) cars, including larger vehicles like >> trucks and busses. Also see car=*. See the access=* page for details." >> >> I am opposing the inclusion of busses and trucks in "motorcar", as I >> don't think that this is the common interpretation of this tag >> (whatever the wiki states about it). > > Isn't motor_vehicle used for this? In my experience, the English term 'motor > vehicle' does not include sub-motorcycle vehicles, such as motorized > bicycles. For example, Florida statutes define > > MOTOR VEHICLE.—Any self-propelled vehicle not operated upon rails or > guideway, but not including any bicycle, motorized scooter, electric personal > assistive mobility device, or moped. > > http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0300-0399/0316/Sections/0316.003.html > > I guess the one difference between this and his change to motorcar is that > the latter doesn't include motorcycles. But in the rare case that these are > treated differently, one could use motor_vehicle=yes motorcycle=no.
I'm happy to clarify the meaning of motorcar and motor_vehicle either way, but redefining the meaning of tags that have been used extensively and are "defined" (rather broadly) on the map features pages might be confusing to mappers. I'll try and add an alternative to the proposal. Stefan -- Stefan Bethke <s...@lassitu.de> Fon +49 151 14070811 _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
