Don't agree with this... there have been discussions in the past about whether the "width" of a "way" includes the pavements etc... Where a road goes under a bridge, where do you measure the "height" of the road? The highest point (not good enough for vehicles) or the "lowest highest point" or "in the middle of the road"? I would expect maxheight:physical to apply to a "normal vehicle", of maybe 2.5m width.
There is no difference between the signs for a width/height limit for "environmental" reasons or for real physical obstructions (although qualifications like "except for access" may give a clue). But this distinction is extremely important for emergency vehicles which can ignore "environmental" limits but not physical ones. //colin On 2015-05-13 10:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2015-05-13 10:31 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>: > >> maxheight and maxwidth are indeed not advisory, but they are both still only >> "legal" and have ":physical" subtags to indicate the actual width/height of >> the obstruction. We won't be needing that for maxspeed I think. > > on a sidenote: the :physical postfix is also about signposted information > AFAIK. For the actual width/height you could use "width" and "height" > > cheers, > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: ------ [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
