hell, forgot again to set the list on cc :-( see below. I think tagging is really the better place for it.
Gerd ________________________________________ Von: Gerd Petermann Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. November 2015 09:46 An: Mateusz Konieczny Betreff: AW: [OSM-talk] highway=residential_link I don't say that it makes sense here, but I confess that the case is special. I also think that the discussion short should be read by anybody: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35120619 The typical case where a way is tagged residential_link is this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288458290 Gerd (GerdP) ________________________________________ Von: Mateusz Konieczny <[email protected]> Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. November 2015 09:36 An: Andrew Guertin Cc: GerdP; [email protected] Betreff: Re: [OSM-talk] highway=residential_link On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:36:28 -0500 Andrew Guertin <[email protected]> wrote: > So the question is, should uses of highway=residential_link be edited > away, should they be left as-is (unless a different highway type is > clearly better), or should the tag be approved and documented? Can somebody give examples of locations where residential_link makes sense? In theory, it is possible that former motorway/.../tertiary with slip roads/ramps was converted to residential road, without changing road infrastructure and traffic is still grade-separated. But is it really happening anywhere? _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
