On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 9:56 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Am Do., 28. Feb. 2019 um 13:26 Uhr schrieb Fernando Trebien > <fernando.treb...@gmail.com>: >> Currently, it actually would because emergency=* is nested under >> motor_vehicle=* in the access tags hierarchy. [1] So to express that >> motor vehicles (cars, trucks, etc.) are forbidden but emergency >> vehicles are not, both motor_vehicle=no + emergency=yes are required. > > it depends on the specific implementation. Yes, there is an "emergency" key, > but it is not clear how people will interpret the absence of such tag. If you > assume that emergency vehicles in emergency service are not bound by legal > restrictions in general (not too far fetched IMHO), it implies emergency is > always "yes" unless tagged otherwise.
So access=no without emergency=yes may imply emergency=yes? That's not written anywhere in the main articles on the topic [1][2]. If that's the general interpretation, then emergency=* should not be nested under acccess=*. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions -- Fernando Trebien _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
