Re: [talk-au] Tagging non-govt (road) ways

You can "use any tag you like" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like To put forward another suggestion, you could consider using operator:type:admin_level=4 for state, =6 for LGA and =2 for commonwealth.

Re: [talk-au] Tagging non-govt (road) ways

Thanks yet AGAIN Andrew, I believe ... *operator:type:government=state* ...best suits. I can see us using wikidata for other similar situations. Thank you for also pointing that out. Thanks again, Andrew On Fri, 12 Nov 2021 at 07:00, Andrew Harvey wrote: > My opinion is it's better to

Re: [talk-au] Is it a fence?

Thanks fellas! I must admit that it was a more than somewhat tongue-in-cheek question, as I knew it was a fence. I thought you might just get a smile though! :-) Going to be interesting to see how that one comes out in 3d! Thanks Graeme On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 at 09:27, Adam Horan wrote: >

Re: [talk-au] Is it a fence?

The golf fence is 14-15 times higher than the white fence along the bottom (counting pixels). If the bottom white fence is 2m high, then the golf fence is ~30m high. I'd agree that it's a fence. However it's also a net in the sky... so perhaps skynet? On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 20:50, Andrew

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

Nov 15, 2021, 12:14 by andrew.harv...@gmail.com: > What I'd like to hear is from those who do split, is why? Is it just because > you're trying to follow the documented rules, or is there a reason for > splitting being better? Ideally we'd document the community preferred  > approach along with

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

I'm against splitting the way into two diverging ways. The usual argument for splitting due to physical separation makes sense for longer separations as it affects routing which doesn't apply here. Splitting makes the data more complicated than it needs to be, and doesn't add more value or

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

On 15/11/21 18:18, Dian Ågesson wrote: Is there a preferred approach, or does it not really matter? If splitting ways, are u-turns restrictions required? I think it's a style question. I just took a random sample of 50 roundabouts in city and the number of roundabouts with islands, single

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

On 15/11/21 20:38, Warin wrote: I have yet to see a 'no U turn' on them and they do make a good safer place to do a u turn if you do the correct thing. I thought we were talking about where the entry and exit flares join. Fun fact, there is at least on roundabout with a no u-turn sign

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

Thanks Warin, I maybe should have explained myself a bit better; I was actually referring to the ways leading into the roundabout, rather than the roundabout itself. :) On 2021-11-15 20:38, Warin wrote: On 15/11/21 6:18 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hello, Quick question, as I'm not sure that

Re: [talk-au] Is it a fence?

On 15/11/21 20:28, Warin wrote: What else would you call it? A tall fence? I'd tag it barrier=fence height=40 I'd also say fence. But that's a 6 story apartment block, which would be about 20m tall, so somewhat less than 40. ___ Talk-au mailing

Re: [talk-au] Splitting Ways for small roundabout traffic islands

On 15/11/21 6:18 pm, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hello, Quick question, as I'm not sure that there is an established consensus in Australia for this. Where a way leading to a roundabout has a small traffic island, what is the preferred way to map? I have seen both the "traffic island as a node"

Re: [talk-au] Is it a fence?

On 15/11/21 6:23 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: So, that's the question - is it still a barrier=fence when it's ~40m tall? :-) https://goo.gl/maps/jwwJjREMKDmVKqkj9 What else would you call it? A tall fence? I'd tag it barrier=fence height=40