Warin wrote on 07/04/2016 00:25: > On 7/04/2016 7:28 AM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: >> Marco Predicatori wrote on 2016/04/06 22:03: >>> Hi everybody, >>> >>> this is my first try at proposals, so please be patient if I've >>> messed up something: >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/highway%3Dfake_speed_camera >>> >> >> -1, such tagging fails verifiability and is impractical. >> >> As you recognise in your proposal, those devices are often empty >> housings that >> could be loaded with a capturing device the other day. You might >> add an additional >> tag that the device is only occasionally active, but keep the main >> enforcement tag.
Hi Tom, enforcement tag? Do you mean highway? AFAIK "enforcement" goes into the relation, not the node. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dspeed_camera > The key intermittent might be useful to indicate that the camera is > active on a random basis. > wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:intermittent Hi Warin, this makes sense. But what if there can never be a camera, for example because the installment lacks any hole or is too small? A Key:fake? I was thinking about a new tag altogether because it wouldn't require any change on the rendering side, or on the navigation apps. Besides, a "speed_camera" tag should mean that *there is* a camera, just like a building or a bridge or a tower. For example: http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/#map=16/45.4045/10.6316 There's never been a camera in any of those 5 boxes, and the OSM information in that area is totally useless. I don't think that's what OSM is meant for. -- Bye, Marco https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/marco69 _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
