Urban normal in the UK is 100-120mm. Raised (at eg bus stops) is about 160-200mm
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Josh Doe <j...@joshdoe.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: >> >> 2011-06-22 Josh Doe: >> > I think we're definitely going for functional. The original author used >> > those height ranges, and I'm not sure if there's any value to mention >> > something specific like 16cm, so I changed it to ~0cm for flush, ~3cm >> > for lowered, and >3cm for raised. I've edited the proposal to that >> > effect. >> >> I agree with your decision to go for functional classification. However, >> I just noticed that it seems there isn't a value for "standard" kerbs? >> (One that is neither raised nor lowered?) > > Ah, I think this may be a regional distinction, and why I was confused about > the mention of "standard" kerbs. "Standard" kerbs to my US (specifically > east coast) context are in fact raised, i.e. they are somewhere between 6-8 > inches (15-20cm). If the German/British/Europe "standard" kerb is something > important to define (especially for a functional reason), then we can do so, > but should avoid the word "standard" since that will means something > different at least between the US and other parts of the world. Likewise, if > "raised" means something particular to Europeans then perhaps we can change > that word to something more neutral. > > So my question is should we have just flush/lowered/rolled/raised (in order > of increasing inaccessibility, and perhaps changing raised to something > else), or do we need flush/lowered/rolled/"European standard"/raised? > > Thanks, > -Josh > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging