There's two things that distinguish HSLs/LGVs/NBSs: high maxspeed
(typically 250-320, though some would include the new lines in Switzerland,
which are only 200), and a lack of slow traffic (freight, stopping
passenger services) because they have alternative routes.
In some cases, you can get
On 09/08/2012 00:03, Richard Mann wrote:
I've copied the info to a new passenger_lines tag, since it would
appear that some people would prefer to use the tracks tag for a
different purpose.
No, All users except you, for the reason it was created which is clearly
defined in the wiki.
For
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Disappointing that you didn't rescind your track edits first
Then do it. The current tagging of your example with tracks=4 is simply wrong.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
As every track segment has a maximum speed, why not just apply the
existing maxspeed=* tag to the tracks? It is not clear to me whether
your intention with traffic=fast refers to some attribute of the track
itself, or the use to which it is put. Is it some official designation
(from Network
Hi tagging list,
the Extended Conditions proposal has been shot down by a majority, and
therefore there is still no official way of tagging quite a lot of things.
(As a side note, the Extended Conditions proposal is still the de facto
standard.)
Therefore, I expected that those people who had
Hi,
On 08/09/2012 01:41 PM, Eckhart Wörner wrote:
Therefore, I expected that those people who had voted against the
proposal came up with a well-designed alternative proposal
You have to work on your expectations then. Has it occurred to you that
some people don't find extended conditions
While I agree with Frederik almost completely, the absence of a
tagging scheme for conditions will have some unwanted side effects. A
current example in my opinion would be this great and completely
intuitive n2/n3 tagging that was just invented. It was already
documented in the german access
Hi Frederik,
Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012, 14:36:40 schrieb Frederik Ramm:
You have to work on your expectations then. Has it occurred to you that
some people don't find extended conditions important enough at all?
Personally, I think that most of the extended conditions that the
Hi tagging list,
the Extended Conditions proposal has been shot down by a majority, and
therefore there is still no official way of tagging quite a lot of
things. (As a side note, the Extended Conditions proposal is still the de
facto standard.)
Therefore, I expected that those people who
(Foolish me - meant to send that email to the tagging list. It's now posted
there so suggest any more responses are to the tagging list.)
Yep, many formats can be used. First thing is to see if the idea is liked
by anyone, including Eckhart, who raised the issue on the tagging list
today.
Ole Nielsen / osm on-osm@... writes:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Conditional_restrictions
A short comment on the proposal: The actual conditions go into the tag
value. The transport mode (vehicle catagory) and the direction stay in the
key in accordance with
There's usage=main and usage=branch, but that is pretty crude. You might
use that to reproduce the old BR network map (before Railtrack/NR went and
made all the lines the same width).
The norm on four track railways is for two of the lines to be designated
the fast lines (or main lines on Great
Hi Ole,
Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012, 17:55:24 schrieb Ole Nielsen / osm:
First of all I actually approved the proposal but later realized that
having variable keys is less than ideal.
then *please* tell me the reason why you believe this is the case, because I
haven't seen any compelling
Hi Rob,
Am Donnerstag, 9. August 2012, 17:33:59 schrieb Rob Nickerson:
Can I therefore give alternative suggestions:
* maxspeed=120; 80?wet; 60?wet+hgv
Ask a few mappers not participating in this discussion what this key/value
combination is supposed to express, and I'll bet most of them
14 matches
Mail list logo
