Complementing, why not just use ownership
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ownership, operator
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator or something else,
instead using a tag created for borders?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreet
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> I don't see a problem to add admin_level on government offices.
>
> If you are looking for boundaries you will have to look for a combination of
> boundary=administrative with a proper admin level (while in the past looking
> only on
sent from a phone
> On 18. Jul 2017, at 17:31, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
>
> For me it doesn't look right to appropriate an already well defined
> tag (admin_level) to say that a government office is from a federal
> instance/court, for example.
I don't see a problem to add admin_level on
2017-07-18 23:18 GMT+02:00 Tijmen Stam :
> On 18-07-17 22:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>>
>> At the start towards Abriès, an "access:forward = no" +
>>> "access:forward:conditional = yes @ (22:00-22:07, 22:30-22:37, ... )" tag
>>> over a short section, and mutatis mutandis at the other end?
>>
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Wiktor Niesiobedzki wrote:
>
> Can anybody point me to explanation of this tag value? Should it's use
> be discouraged by validators / presets? (at least combinations as
> highway=cycleway + cycleway=no)
>
highway=cycleway + cycleway=no is definitely a nonstarter.
2017-07-19 10:37 GMT+02:00 Adam Snape :
> I agree with Wiktor that we shoud use the access tag bicycle=no when
> cycling' is prohibited.
> I agree with Volker that the logical meaning of cycleway=no is that there
> are no cycle tracks or lanes along a section of highway. This might be
> useful info
