Re: [Tagging] Best practices regarding implied tags

2020-09-20 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 11:58 AM Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > The previous responses are focusing on the benefit of adding explicit tags > in situations where the current tagging is ambiguous. > > Certainly there is a benefit of adding "oneway=no" on all two-way roads >

Re: [Tagging] Best practices regarding implied tags

2020-09-20 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 20. Sep 2020, at 18:59, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > Does anyone think that it is a good idea to add those two new tags in this > particular situation? utility=power seems to be a redundant concept in general (you can see which kind of lines are attached - if they

Re: [Tagging] Best practices regarding implied tags

2020-09-20 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 20. Sep 2020, at 18:59, Joseph Eisenberg > wrote: > > Does anyone think that it is a good idea to add those two new tags in this > particular situation? while I am personally not unsatisfied with power=pole I could understand that people who want to deprecate this

Re: [Tagging] Best practices regarding implied tags

2020-09-20 Thread Joseph Eisenberg
The previous responses are focusing on the benefit of adding explicit tags in situations where the current tagging is ambiguous. Certainly there is a benefit of adding "oneway=no" on all two-way roads and "oneway=yes" on motorways to make the situation explicit. But the original question was

Re: [Tagging] Best practices regarding implied tags

2020-09-20 Thread François Lacombe
Thank you all for replies Then the current proposal sounds to be ok regarding what is said upside. I admit to automatically adding implied tags when importing data covered by the proposal, so no apparent problem is mappers add them explicitly. All the best François Le jeu. 17 sept. 2020 à

Re: [Tagging] "width" on streets: Time for a recommendation

2020-09-20 Thread Tobias Zwick
>To me it seems obvious that width values, independently on how they are >measured, are at best estimates, as measuring them is in most cases >dangerous or requires good technical equipment. I don't think this is true anymore. Did you try out "Measure" or any other ARCore/ARKit-based measuring