Am 21.08.2013 11:31, schrieb Pieren: > First, "area=yes" implies that vehicules can move in all directions. > Here you place is just large as one car is long. > Then the "highway=secondary" is not appropriate since the area is > clearly not intended for the secondary road network. You could possibly > set as "unclassified" or "residential" if we follow your idea. > But more important, this area is not for cars but clearly a sidewalk > with a kerb ([1]). This is firstly an area for pedestrians that the > neightbours have to cross with their cars from their private garages. > Access is not restricted for pedestrians. So you shall primarily map > this area as a sidewalk or pedestrian area and optionally map the access > to private houses crossing this area. E.g.:
Pleas, do not start to tag these small areas as closedways/multipolygon. > highway=footway (or pedestrian) (I don't know the current trend for > sidewalks areas) > + area=yes > for the polygon > > and the private alleys have to be extended to join the main road and > simply cross the pedestrian area. > Don't forget that you are here micro-mapping at a level of details that > is not usual in OSM (mapping sidewalks first and especially mapping > sidewalks as area). Why not simply adding sidewalk=both/left/right/none to the highway=secondary and tag the total width=* ? cheers fly _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
