On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:45 PM, <osm.tagg...@thorsten.engler.id.au> wrote:
> I never said anything about _*not*_ having some way to encode such > default rules. In fact, if you look at my recent posts here, you will see > that I specifically pointed out the current lack of such a schema as an > issue that needs to be solved. I also pointed out that the lack of > “permission” relations is another issue that needs to be solved. I’m > directly affected by both of these as I’m in Queensland and “no u-turn at > signal controlled intersections” is the law in queensland. > Right, agreed, we should work out a scheme for dealing with this. If we can work that out, then, *awesome*, we can start working with data consumers (like our implementation of reference, Osmand) about getting some support for this on the consumer end, too. Perhaps something like relation=default, where membership requirements are similar to that of a multipolygon. I'm entirely open to suggestion for how to handle turns. For speeds, could be something like maxspeed=25 mph (just throwing that out there since a *lot, lot* of places in my state does this). Of course, any ways tagged with other values would override this. > In regards to the wiki, while it may not be “gospel”, there are usually > reasons for the statements there, especially with things that have been > unchallenged for a long time and which had been discussed in detail before > (you did bother to look at the iD issue I linked, right?) So as long as it > isn’t case of recent drive-by-night wiki fiddling, some thought should be > put into figuring out why that statement is in the wiki instead of simply > disregarding everything. > I find it's less than productive for finding solutions to problems the wiki is currently advising to leave unresolved (such as this), or ambiguous (like primary vs trunk vs motorway in the US).
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
