Hi! We have taken a few days of discussion with key *«Obstacle»* (it derives from «Difficult_Passability»... I have tried to answer all questions and I have been added the proposals. I apologize if in any case it has not been:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Obstacle Do you think that something isn't right or need more revisions? There are some inconsistencies? More suggestions or doubts? I think that the page needs to be cleaned, but all seems me important... Any suggestions? Thanks a lot! (and thanks for the comments received) ALBERT 2012/10/14 Konfrare Albert <lakonfrariadelav...@gmail.com> > Hi John! > > I like the problem that you proposed ;) > > I'm thinking in a very hard condition... > I propose different solutions: > > 1. First, you must evaluate the obstacles. Probably one will be better > for pass. For example, the heap permites the pass to pedestrians but the > hole is difficult to cross it. More landslides could be occured. In this > case I propose to use: > - NODE or WAY with tags: > - obstacle=hole > - obstacle:bicycle=heap > - hazard_prone=yes > - hazard_type=landslide > - (optionally) obstacle_description: Landslide with heaps and > holes, and more landslides risk. > 2. Other option (not the best) would be use two nodes (In this > example, I use the generic «obstacle», that represents impediment for > pedestrians). The nodes must be over the highway, therefore one will be > first and the other last: > - 1st NODE with tags: > - obstacle=hole > - 2n NODE with tags: > - obstacle=heap > - Chunk of way affected: > - hazard_prone=yes > - hazard_type=landslide > 3. Other option (the bad, for me) could be: > - NODE or WAY with tags: > - obstacle=yes > - obstacle_description= Landslide with heaps and holes, and more > landslides risk. > - hazard_prone=yes > - hazard_type=landslide > > If there isn't risk of more landslides, you must omit the «hazard» tags. > > If only there is risk of landslide that not occured, there aren't > objective obstacles in the trail, only a warning. In this case, I propose > to use: > > - NODE or WAY with the tags: > - hazard_prone=yes > - hazard_type=landslide > > I hope I have answered your question ;) > Thanks and regards! > > PD: This mail will be sticked to the discussion page. > > ALBERT > > > 2012/10/14 John F. Eldredge <j...@jfeldredge.com> > > >> >> >> Would the same landslide tag be used both where part of the hill above >> the road had slid into the road, and where part of the road had slid >> downhill, leaving a hole? >> >> Also, how would you tag a point where cracks had started to appear, but >> the full-scale landslide hadn't happened yet? >> -- >> John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com >> "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than >> not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > > > -- > *KONFRARE ALBERT* > La Konfraria de la Vila del Pingüí de La Palma > WEB: http://www.konfraria.org > TWITTER: http://twitter.com/La_Konfraria > FACEBOOK: > http://ca-es.facebook.com/people/Konfraria-Vila-Del-Pingui/100001918952076 > > > -- *KONFRARE ALBERT* La Konfraria de la Vila del Pingüí de La Palma WEB: http://www.konfraria.org TWITTER: http://twitter.com/La_Konfraria FACEBOOK: http://ca-es.facebook.com/people/Konfraria-Vila-Del-Pingui/100001918952076
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
