2012/7/3 Markus Lindholm <[email protected]>: > Physical separation doesn't necessarily mean that it's impossible to > cross, it might be no more than a 20cm high curb that an emergency > vehicle or a SUV easily could cross.
yes, if you really want to go that deep into detail I suggest you use the area relation or something similar, which allows for exactly this: store detail information about the kind of barrier, including heights and so on. > I still think it's more straight forward to map as two separate ways > than to add tags to provide a logically consistent view about how to > drive from A to B in a legal way. and if there are interruptions in the solid line you will get really ugly separations and reconjuctions every few meters at some places? > And about pedestrians, I add sidewalks around such street and tag the > street with foot=no. to me this seems wrong. The presence of a sidewalk doesn't automatically imply a foot=no on the street, at least in some jurisdictions. E.g. in Germany as a pedestrian you have to use the street when carrying big loads or in other cases when the sidewalk is not appropriate. It also requires really a lot of connections between the two, which in the real (OSM) world seems to be a problem: the routing in all the places I saw so far got worse with explict sidewalks mapped as footways because of these missing links. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
