>This was discussed intensely some time ago for maxheight, I suggest >you read the archives on this. I agree that a physical restriction is
Originally there was little mention of any of them tags depicting purely legal restrictions. Even access/*=no was "unsuitable or not allowed", but later, as it was deemed unverifiable, the "only legal" started creeping into all sorts of tags, where it may or may not be the common usage, or sensible. For a lorry driver it doesn't matter if a gate's width limit is legal or physical, if they can't get through, but can drive up to it. That's the history bit. Using width=* only for physical maximum width for a vehicle could only work for, for example, gates, whereas a narrow road lined with trees might be impassable for wide vehicles, but there isn't an object that could be tagged with width=* at that narrow point between two trees. Mind you, the road itself (its width=*) can be narrower than the load the vehicle is carrying, or the vehicles extents (e.g. side mirrors). Likewise, a gate is often actually wider than the gap; for an stone arch gate even several meters wider. My point being, that physical maximum width deserves some other tag than width=*. -- Alv _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
