On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 17:20, Mike Thompson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:59 PM Tod Fitch wrote:
>> My reading of the wiki [1] indicates that the more specific tag overrides
>> the less specific tag.
>
> So,
> access=yes
> foot=yes
>
> would then be redundant. I don't have an example, but I
My reading of the wiki [1] indicates that the more specific tag overrides the
less specific tag. And the transport mode section [2] of that has examples very
much like those in your question.
So:
access=no
foot=yes
Means that all access other than foot is prohibited.
And:
access=yes
- Mensaje original -
> De: "Joseph Eisenberg"
> Para: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> Enviados: Miércoles, 5 de Agosto 2020 19:46:06
> Asunto: Re: [Tagging] Rio de la Plata edit war
> Here's another issue I would like mural...@montevideo.com.uy to address:
> In
Here's another issue I would like mural...@montevideo.com.uy to address:
In Venezuela the second largest city is on a body of water called "Lago de
Maracaibo":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11334852
As mentioned in Wikipedia, local Venezolanos often refer to this as a lake
(lago), not
Am Mi., 5. Aug. 2020 um 23:21 Uhr schrieb Mike Thompson :
>
> However, access=yes is a pretty broad statement. There may be modes of
> transport not yet contemplated (or which the mapper, and even the land
> manager is not aware of) which in the future will be prohibited.
>
+1, "access=*" is a
Aug 5, 2020, 22:58 by t...@fitchfamily.org:
> so I guess my reading of the wiki doesn’t match all data consumers
> implementations.
>
Yes, in many cases support is limited. Routers are usually dealing it with
fairly well,
but for example iD editor is missing support for example for vehicle tag,
Aug 5, 2020, 22:44 by miketh...@gmail.com:
> Hello,
>
> If:
> access=no
> foot=yes
>
> Does this mean that all access except foot travel is prohibited
>
yes
> , or is it an error?
>
No, it is a correct tagging - though usually there is a better way to achieve
this
(highway=footway
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:59 PM Tod Fitch wrote:
> My reading of the wiki [1] indicates that the more specific tag overrides
> the less specific tag.
>
So,
access=yes
foot=yes
would then be redundant. I don't have an example, but I have seen that too.
> And the transport mode section [2] of
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:45 PM Mike Thompson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If:
> access=no
> foot=yes
>
> Does this mean that all access except foot travel is prohibited, or is it
> an error?
>
Correct, only pedestrians are allowed.
> If:
> access=yes
> bicycle=no
>
> Does this mean that all access
Hello,
If:
access=no
foot=yes
Does this mean that all access except foot travel is prohibited, or is it
an error?
If:
access=yes
bicycle=no
Does this mean that all access except bicycle travel is allowed, or is an
error?
Here is one example of the first case:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 04:41, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/temp#values
>
> any guesses as to what this might mean?
>
> I stumbled across it when reverting some vandalism on
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/784166844 but that street has been
> split so many times
On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 01:34, wrote:
>
>
> - Mensaje original -
> > De: "Joseph Eisenberg"
> > Para: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <
> tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> > Enviados: Martes, 4 de Agosto 2020 16:56:31
> > Asunto: Re: [Tagging] Rio de la Plata edit war
>
> > The
I'm just guessing, and I try with a sort of placeholder for saying that
some tag is "temporary"... even if this sounds not really useful :-)
Ale
On 05/08/20 10:41, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/temp#values
any guesses as to what this might mean?
I stumbled
Hi,
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/temp#values
any guesses as to what this might mean?
I stumbled across it when reverting some vandalism on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/784166844 but that street has been
split so many times by people adding turn restrictions that the "person
14 matches
Mail list logo
