sent from a phone
Am 08.09.2015 um 12:52 schrieb Carl von Einem <[email protected]>: >>> barrier=guard_rail >>> maxwidth=2.2 >>> traffic_sign=maxwidth >> >> traffic_sign is a tag used to tag actual traffic signs >> at their position, it doesn't look right together with >> a linear barrier like a guard rail which very likely >> isn't a traffic sign itself along all its way > > Did I write it must be a part of a way? The proposed tagging doesn't make any sense to me at all. guard rails neither will get maxwidth tags, despite the fact they're the physical reason for an actual maxwidth. > I think both (node or way) work, but it should definitely be on the way: as a > node on the actual position of the traffic sign it's maybe nice as a landmark > but completely useless for routing software. indeed traffic_sign=* nodes are completely useless for common routing software (maybe there's some software that could automatically interpret them, but that's not the reason why I map them, I'm doing it for other mappers to explain my mapping). > > Also the traffic_sign tag indicates (to other mappers...) that the maxwidth > value isn't just estimated. I definitely see the traffic sign: > https://goo.gl/maps/8KUw7 I'd expect on the highway: highway=* maxwidth=2.2m (or without explicit unit) source:maxwidth=sign then on another way at the position of the guard rail: barrier=guard_rail If you like you could add another node (not part of the highway) with: traffic_sign=maxwidth maxwidth=2.2 (for fellow mappers / as 'landmark') cheers Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
