On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 at 19:46, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
Besides, just because something is hard to fix doesn't mean it shouldn't > be fixed. > Yes, but modal verbs are tricky. :) I agree it SHOULD be fixed, but that doesn't mean that it CAN be fixed. And even if it CAN be fixed, that doesn't mean it WILL be fixed. Redefining lanes means we also need to re-examine all of them. Some will be obvious from aerial imagery, some will need feet on the ground. And then we need to agree on an additional tag (which could just be a note, but with formal syntax) to show that the lanes tag has been used in a way that conforms to the new definition, or mappers are going to waste time checking the same roads many times. Better would be to come up with a new tag for it. That way you know if the road has an old lanes=n tag or a new whatever=n tag and don't have to re-examine if it has the new tag. However, if standard carto makes any rendering decisions based upon lanes=n (I don't know if it does or not) then the carto guys may completely ignore our nice, new whatever=n tag because they seem to have a strict rule about "no aliases" and they might consider whatever=n to be an alias of lanes=n. Oh, and you'd have to get editors and routers to support the new whatever=n tag, although that probably isn't an insurmountable problem. Don't hold your breath for a change. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
