Mar 2, 2019, 11:07 AM by s...@smz.it: > On 2019-03-02 09:49, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > >> >> Mar 2, 2019, 2:05 AM by >> s...@smz.it <mailto:s...@smz.it>>> : >> >>> I really-really-really like to know of a place where emergency >>> vehicles are >>> legally >>> not allowed to go... >>> >>> >>> And if there isn't such a place, why do we need ""? >>> >>> >>> And if we don't have such a need, why do we need "emergency=yes"? >>> >>> >>> Because a given road is >>> accessible >>> to a emergency vehicles? >>> >>> >> Apparently people like to explicitly tag in some situations. >> > > > > > The problem (> as I see it...> ) is that it isn't clear at all what they > are trying to explicitly tag. > > Purpose of road? Explicit signage (again, emergency=designated should be used for that)?
>> Though in all cases when I used it I should be using >> emergency=designated >> (road was signed as firefighter access road or main ambulance access >> at the hospital). >> > > ... and that's a different story, because this is valuable information > for non-emergency vehicles: "you can't go there!" > > Nope. Access may be designated for multiple uses or one use designated and other allowed. Probably the most common case: highway=path bicycle=designated foot=designated segregated=no surface=asphalt for mixed footway and cycleway. In my experience such roads are often accessible also to normal vehicles, just parking is forbidden. There are also cycleways (bicycle=designated explicit or implicit via highway=cycleway) where some motor vehicles are allowed.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
