maxwidth is a legal limitation, typically signposted.
width is used on barriers as physical width of the passage.
maxwidth:physical is sometimes used to indicate the same concept on roads.
width is used to indicate the physical width of the carriageway. It is
typically used to indicate that a
_ _:
Node is, I think the best solution, but it also require some changes to current
editors: if you move a way, you didn't always look on each of the moved nodes if
there is a tag width=* . So editors could automatically handle that by showing a
warning like when you move a big number of
Node is, I think the best solution, but it also require some changes to
current editors: if you move a way, you didn't always look on each of the
moved nodes if there is a tag width=* . So editors could automatically
handle that by showing a warning like when you move a big number of points
or
I said that putting width on individual nodes is simple, and it's simple for
the mapper, of course.
Depending on the routing software, accessing nodes data can already be tricky
for the data consumer.
Yves ___
Tagging mailing list
Am 16.08.23 um 06:33 schrieb Kashish via Tagging:
Thanks for the responses, everyone.
It's not too important to me that we use the median width for width=*, so if we
use width:start=*/width:end=*, we can continue using width=* for the minimum
width.
Tagging way nodes with width=* or
Kashish via Tagging writes:
> Now I'm thinking of documenting two solutions on the wiki -
>
> 1. width:start=*/width:end=*, optionally with width=* for the minimum
> width of the street, and with a word of warning about the results of
> editors splitting ways.
"optionally with width=* for the
Le 16 août 2023 01:43:48 GMT+02:00, Greg Troxel a écrit :
>Timothy Noname writes:
>
>> I've always thought actual measurements should be added to an individual
>> node and the minimum width should be on the way, splitting the way at
>> significant changes.
>
>This is an awesome suggestion. It
On 16.08.2023 06:33, Kashish via Tagging wrote:
1. width:start=*/width:end=*, optionally with width=* for the minimum width of
the street, and with a word of warning about the results of editors splitting
ways.
Would you require in these cases that the road width is changing exactly
Thanks for the responses, everyone.
It's not too important to me that we use the median width for width=*, so if we
use width:start=*/width:end=*, we can continue using width=* for the minimum
width.
Tagging way nodes with width=* or width:carriageway=* was actually my first
attempt at a
Timothy Noname writes:
> I've always thought actual measurements should be added to an individual
> node and the minimum width should be on the way, splitting the way at
> significant changes.
This is an awesome suggestion. It allows recording as much data as
anybody wants to measure, and
I've always thought actual measurements should be added to an individual
node and the minimum width should be on the way, splitting the way at
significant changes.
On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, 19:21 Volker Schmidt, wrote:
> Two points.
>
> (1) Do not redefine width as medium width.
>
> (2) Do not
Two points.
(1) Do not redefine width as medium width.
(2) Do not propose tagging of ways that does not survive splitting the way
On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, 18:11 Sebastian Gürtler,
wrote:
>
> Am 15.08.23 um 14:56 schrieb Greg Troxel:
>
> >> If there are no objections, I'lpl add a section about the
Le 15.08.23 à 14:39, Kashish via Tagging a écrit :
pbnoxious suggested using width=* to specify the mean/median width
I don't think it's a good idea as it break previous usage of this key :
width=* is about the minial witch for the whole segment.
if a router want to use it, it should be able
Am 15.08.23 um 14:56 schrieb Greg Troxel:
If there are no objections, I'lpl add a section about the above to the wiki.
I strongly object, because a data router that uses just width will
conclude that the way is usable when it is not. It is a basic
principle of tagging that data consumers
BLUF: I strongly object to changing width= from minimum to average.
Kashish via Tagging writes:
> I recently purchased a laser distance meter, primarily for measuring
> road widths so as to allow better routing for various vehicles. In the
> process, I discovered that some roads can have a
I recently purchased a laser distance meter, primarily for measuring road
widths so as to allow better routing for various vehicles. In the process, I
discovered that some roads can have a gradually decreasing/increasing width.
The wiki does not cover such situations, so I brought it up in the
16 matches
Mail list logo
