Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

Does it need the "7k" in there as well? Thanks Graeme On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 13:54, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 12:44, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >> >> Looking good. Given... >> >> Node: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22 >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3227568911 >> >> Way:

Re: [talk-au] What are the best practices for mass updating cycle paths?

Exactly. It looks like the website might also show "cycle friendly" streets which on the ground may have no infrastructure or signage, so not something we would map. On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 10:52, Ben Kelley wrote: > Practically, using this data would be difficult I think. > > Partly because

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 12:44, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > Looking good. Given... > > Node: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3227568911 > > Way: low_gears:hgv=designated > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245284221 > > Question: > > The tagging of the way does not

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

Hi Again, Would someone be able to review this tagging... https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/132233374 This is really two signs: AU:R6-22 and AU:G9-83 (ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Australia ) However, my tagging effort doesn't capture the "NEXT 7km" aspect of the

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

Looking good. Given... Node: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3227568911 Way: low_gears:hgv=designated https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245284221 Question: The tagging of the way does not use the AU:R6-22 (signage) code. Can anyone elaborate on why this is?