Am 26. Februar 2012 09:45 schrieb Mike Valiant mike_vali...@hotmail.com:
If the gate is a node on a way that passes through the gate then I would
have thought barrier=gate and maxwidth=xxx on the node that is the
gate would be more appropriate. It defines the maximum size of vehicle
On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 20:26:05 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
Am 26. Februar 2012 09:45 schrieb Mike Valiant mike_vali...@hotmail.com:
If the gate is a node on a way that passes through the gate then I would
have thought barrier=gate and maxwidth=xxx on the node that is the
gate would be
That not what the wiki for maxwidth says: a width limit for using the way -
no mention of whether it is a legal restriction or not. And in the discussion
of maxwidth width restriction can be physical, or purely legal
//Mike
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:26:05 +0100
From: dieterdre...@gmail.com
Am 26. Februar 2012 13:17 schrieb Mike Valiant mike_vali...@hotmail.com:
That not what the wiki for maxwidth says: a width limit for using the way
- no mention of whether it is a legal restriction or not. And in the
discussion of maxwidth width restriction can be physical, or purely legal
IMHO a physical restriction is as important as a legal restriction. If I have a
wide vehicle and I was using routing software using the OSM database it would
be useful to be able to put in my vehicle's width and then the routing software
could parse for maxwidth as a restriction along the
Am 26. Februar 2012 13:53 schrieb Mike Valiant mike_vali...@hotmail.com:
IMHO a physical restriction is as important as a legal restriction. If I
have a wide vehicle and I was using routing software using the OSM database
it would be useful to be able to put in my vehicle's width and then the
This was discussed intensely some time ago for maxheight, I suggest
you read the archives on this. I agree that a physical restriction is
Originally there was little mention of any of them tags depicting
purely legal restrictions. Even access/*=no was unsuitable or not
allowed, but later, as it
Originally there was little mention of any of them tags depicting
purely legal restrictions. Even access/*=no was unsuitable or not
allowed, but later, as it was deemed unverifiable, the only legal
started creeping into all sorts of tags, where it may or may not be
the common usage, or
I agree that maxwidth=any_number should be interpreted as general
restriction without discrimination.
Generally I'd like to see a clearly distinctive tagging of legal (am I
allowed to) vs. physical (will I not get stuck) aspects, but that is
much broader issue than maxwidth.
maxwidth might
I must admit that I haven't checked the wiki. The thing started with
warnings by JOSM that said that I should not apply width to a node. I
checked tag info and that confirmed that the use is sporadic only.
To me width fits perfectly to a node of type barrier like a gate or a cycle
barrier
Volker
On 02/26/2012 09:16 AM, Mike Valiant wrote:
Originally there was little mention of any of them tags depicting
purely legal restrictions. Even access/*=no was unsuitable or not
allowed, but later, as it was deemed unverifiable, the only legal
started creeping into all sorts of tags,
I would like to tag the width (horizontal clearance) of a gate. The typical
application are mountain trails that pass through livestock fences by means
of various types of gates. The trail typically has no width, but the gate
may have it. The key width can only be applied to a way, not to a node
Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to tag the width (horizontal clearance) of a gate. The
typical
application are mountain trails that pass through livestock fences by
means
of various types of gates. The trail typically has no width, but the
gate
may have it. The key
Hi,using barrier=gate on a single node and therefore the width key is the
documented approach in the wiki. :-) However as far as I know there is nothing
specifying the thickness of the gate. Andreas
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:48:43 +
From: grahamjones...@gmail.com
To:
14 matches
Mail list logo
