On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Markus Lindholm <[email protected]> wrote:
The proposal with "divider=solid_line" has a disadvantage : the meaning of a solid line differs in countries/continents. It should be better tagged with "divider=no_u_turn" or "no_crossing" or whatever you like describing the restriction, not the painted line itself. Another issue is the limitation of one divider per OSM way. > As I said earlier physical separation doesn't necessary mean "cannot > pass", And so what ? The standard defining the limit for dividing highways is long established in OSM (since beginning). > I think that it would be a more pressing objective to be able to > provide a legal route from A to B than to cater for all the shortcuts > that are possible but not legal. Of course the former doesn't exclude > the latter and one could conceive of new schemes to indicate where > it's possible to drive but not legal. Of course. Like drawing all possible ways to cross a wood. Or the points where you can climb a wall or a fence. Endless, no ? Pieren _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
