> I expect the "width" of a way to be the actual width of the object it > represents. It depends on how we define "highway" in the OSM sense. You could also assume that sidewalks etc. are "sticking" on the highway merely for pragmatic reasons. Depending on the point of view, sidewalks and highways represent different entities. (There is no law definition here, I only find a German court decision that deals with street widths and thus means the distance between the curbs, with carriageway and parked vehicles, so as definition 2 above.)
But I agree that it would be better to always specify which width is meant exactly when mapping widths on streets (especially to use "width:carriageway" for the rating of traffic suitability). Nevertheless, a default, which meaning of "width" is meant without a prefix/suffix, would still be helpful. Fun Fact: On the wiki highway page - in contrast to what is discussed here - it says since 2012 that "width" means the width of the carriageway (but it does not look like this paragraph has ever been discussed): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways#Surface.2C_width_and_lighting Alex
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
