On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Andre Engels <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Roy Wallace <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Definitely a step in the right direction, i.e. separating "legal >> status" from "defacto status". >> >> I'd be tempted to also use bicycle:signed=yes/no to clarify when the >> (legal?) status is derived from evidence on the ground as opposed to a >> law book. > > Sounds unnecessary to me - How many roads and paths have their status > defined in the law book?
Isn't this what Mike was referring to when he said "... access to non-copyright information on legal status ... is reasonably available in the public domain in England and Wales" ? Andre are you saying that bicycle=yes/no should *only* be used when there is a corresponding sign on the ground? _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
