On 2016-10-05 11:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2016-10-05 3:35 GMT+02:00 André Pirard <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com > <mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>>: > > On 2016-09-27 11:43, Marc Gemis wrote: >> Hallo, >> >> op 1/1/2017 daalt de snelheid op Vlaamse gewestwegen van 90 naar 70. >> Normaal gezien zullen we die wegen (zonder expliciete borden) dan >> moeten taggen met >> >> maxspeed=70 >> source:maxspeed=??:rural >> >> maar wat komt er op de plaats van de vraagtekens ? Volgens  staat >> daar de landcode, maar het geldt enkel voor Vlaanderen. >> Ik zou tegen dan de BENELUX presets willen aanpassen. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------- >> English: >> >> On 1/1/2017 the maxspeeds on Flemish roads is lowered to 70. We should >> map those roads (without signs) with >> >> maxspeed=70 >> source:maxpseed=??:rural >> >> Which "country" code should I use in the BENELUX plugin ? See  for >> the syntax of maxspeed. > I don't think that default values like maxspeed=*, > driving_side=*, or even oneway=no should be tagged on highways. > Most roads (in Belgium and in the world) don't contain any, BTW, > and it makes no sense using a few. > A default values specification should be used instead. > Those tags should be contained in the highest level administrative > boundary relation or equivalent in which they apply. > maxspeed=70 should apply to Flanders and maxspeed=90 to Wallonia. > > > what you propose is not working, because speed limits are about roads, > not administrative entities. You have to know the context (rural/urban > inside settlement according to traffic law, etc.) in order to assign a > maxspeed, and the only way we currently use to understand which > context applies are the source:maxspeed values. It is very simple, > doesn't require preprocessing, can be applied by everyone without > looking for and downloading surrounding administrative polygons, and > is also quite reliable. Why would we give this up? Please don't remove important quotations.
What you are saying is that every road in the world should have a maxspeed=*. driving_side=*, etc. It's far from being the case. Hurry up to do so. Presently, GPSes cannot deal with defaults. What I am saying is that there should be in the Walloon/Flemish administrative boundaries relations or so a tag saying if zone is rural then maxspeed=90/70. That is what "def:highway <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=primary <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dprimary>|highway <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway>=secondary <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dsecondary>;maxspeed <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maxspeed> = rural" does in Relations/Proposed/Defaults <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Defaults>. Instead of destroying propositions again please propose improvements. I think that this proposition is sound but I don' agree with the too complicated details of it. Yes, default speed limit rules are about administrative entities for someone who understands what Flemish and Walloon mean. No, GPS dealing with administrative polygons is not complicated as they keep saying on and on. It would even be simple with subareas but that's another subject. No tagging default maxspeed everywhere is not reliable because it depends on many tags being correct instead of a few. As to using signals, that's the worst idea. They are valid up to the next crossing, but not a private road, and they must be repeated. Indicating which direction they apply to is tricky and a source of error. The few signals I looked at were municipality limits. They were redundant with boundaries (a disparaged feature) and they did not mind indicating on which side of the signal was the indicated municipality. Imagine that with speed limits and you get the picture. Cheers André.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging