Morten Kjeldgaard schrieb: > On 05/08/2009, at 10.09, Frederik Ramm wrote: > >> Maybe it makes sense to use a variation of the "motorcar" tag which is >> already widely used to model car access (e.g. highway=tertiary, >> motorcar=4wdonly - or even highway=tertiary, motorcar=no, >> motorcar:4wd=yes or something)? > > This is going in the wrong direction IMHO. > > There is no limit to the number of vehicles that could be defined in > this way. What about armored_tanks=yes ? :-) > I think it's a mistake to use tags that depend on anything but the > terrain. For example, terrain=*. That would tell people what they want > to know from a map, namely what the terrain is like, not what kind of > vehicle someone thinks can go there.
Resp. for a way there is surface=* But never the less I think if 4wd-only is common in that region, why not tag it? The more data, the better. But I'm unsure if the renderer should implement it, as it could just be used in this area, whereas surface=* can be applied to every way. Peter _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
