Hello ! I’ve updated https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Djakk/new_tagging_scheme_for_roads
To answer the original question of this thread, I wish you can use importance_local=5 or 6 with abutters=rural or residential ;) Julien “djakk” Le dim. 3 mars 2019 à 01:01, Sergio Manzi <s...@smz.it> a écrit : > > On 2019-03-03 00:49, Mark Wagner wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 02:05:46 +0100 > > Sergio Manzi <s...@smz.it> wrote: > > > >> On 2019-03-02 01:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >>> sent from a phone > >>> > >>>> On 1. Mar 2019, at 13:45, Mateusz Konieczny > >>>> <matkoni...@tutanota.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I would tag max weight, I would not tag emergency=no. > >>> +1, it will not exclude all kinds of emergency services anyway, > >>> only those in vehicles that are too heavy, for example there could > >>> be police on bicycles who could cycle on the bridge like > >>> pedestrians can walk on it. > >>> > >>> > >>> Cheers, Martin > >> > >> I really-really-really like to know of a place where emergency > >> vehicles are *legally *not allowed to go... > > It's not "legally not allowed to go", but on Fairchild Air Force Base, > > civilian emergency vehicles are subject to the same "with permission > > only" restriction as everyone else. I suspect the same is true of most > > if not all other military bases in the United States. > > > I also suspect guards of the US Bullion Depository at Fort Knox will not > just open the gates to an unexpected ambulance even if it had full light > flashing and siren wailing. Or will they? Maybe a good idea worth trying... > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
