John Smith <delta_foxt...@...> writes: > --- On Wed, 5/8/09, b.schulz...@... > <b.schulz...@...> wrote: > > > Otherwise 4wd_only=yes could mean "any road which is > > signposted as 4wd_only", regardless of legality. > > If it's signed on a public road sign it most likely is legally enforced since > you would be disobeying a legal directive. > > However I haven't heard of anyone being ticketed, not that it hasn't happened > but it didn't make the news. > > I'm not sure what the legality of a NPWS signs are, since that isn't the same > thing as a regular public road. > > In any case, it's on a sign and it's verifiable which is the basic premise of > mapping with OSM.
I believe in Victoria it's only a directive if it is on a white sign, yellow background signs are advisory only (not enforceable). Has anyone discussed the appropriateness of using the "4wd_only" nomenclature? It seems a bit Australia(NZ?) specific. Maybe that is why there is so much opposition. Seems the Wiki proposal is losing the vote. What about something based on "offroad", that seems to be fairly universal (in understanding). Maybe offroad_only; offroad_vehicles_only; offroad_vehicles; offroader; offroaders etc. Making it clear that this is mainly for signs as opposed to subjective opinion like the smoothness debacle seems to help as well. Of course, an en-au localisation of JOSM (Aust. translation) could show "offroad" tags as "4wd" so Australian JOSM users will recognise it instantly. BlueMM _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
