jouw gebruik is inderdaad wat ze nu op de Duitse wiki beschrijven. De Engelse zou nog beschrijven dat het ook op wegen kan.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Guy Vanvuchelen <[email protected]>wrote: > Enkele maanden geleden is dit onderwerp ook op het forum verschenen. Toen > had ik begrepen dat het enkel op nodes mocht. > > Sindsdien gebruik ik het om aan te duiden dat twee wegen die kort bij > mekaar eindigen maar gescheiden zijn door een gracht, heuvel, bomenrij, > enz. niet op mekaar aansluiten. > > > > Guy Vanvuchelen > > > > *Van:* Marc Gemis [mailto:[email protected]] > *Verzonden:* vrijdag 4 april 2014 8:51 > *Aan:* OpenStreetMap Belgium > *Onderwerp:* [OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ? > > > > From the tagging mailing list and the German mailing list. > > > > The conclusion is that noexit should only be used on nodes and in case > there is no way for any road user to continue. So it's not used when there > is a no-exit sign with a cyclist/pedestrian on top > > > > If I recall correctly, this is different from what was discussed on this > mailing list (tag can be placed on ways as well). > > > > > > Op de Duitse en tagging mailing lists werd er gediscussieerd over noexit. > Het zou enkel mogen gebruikt worden op nodes en wanneer geen enkele > weggebruiker verder kan. Dus niet bij een doodlopende straat met daarboven > een fietser/voetganger. > > > > Ik denk dat dit anders is dan wat vroeger op deze lijst geschreven is (mag > ook op wegen). > > > > regards > > > > m > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Florian Schäfer* <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:50 PM > Subject: Re: [Tagging] noexit=yes on ways ? > To: [email protected] > > > Hello, > > Am 03.04.2014 21:22, schrieb SomeoneElse: > > > > fly wrote: > > Is noexit=yes useful on ways ? > > > Asking a slightly broader question, in what situations is "noexit=yes" > useful at all, except as a cue to subsequent mappers in the very rare > situation that one way ends very close to another one and there's > absolutely nothing (not a wall, footpath, anything) between them? > > In the diskussion on the German ML, some users pointed out, that it is > rendered on some (esp. outdoor-)maps to indicate, that the way really ends. > Because otherwise one could think that the mapper who added this way has > just entered the first part of the way and forgot to tag fixme=continue or > something similar. > And obviously there is the advantage for QA-tools to filter out > false-positive unconnected-way-errors. > > By the way: I am the user who started the discussion on talk-de. And my > intention was to define the usage of the tag more precisely and to point > out, that there are currently situations, where this tag is used but where > it makes no sense. > For example it was used at entrances of buildings, because the way ends > there of course (I oppose this usage). And the discussion showed, that it > makes no sense there, because some people can always enter an entrance, so > is not a deadend. > Another conclusion from the discussion was, that noexit=yes should only be > used where no person can travel further. > > For a more complete overview over the conclusions, see the german > Wiki-page [1] (Google translate: [2]), which I've updated today with the > insights from the discussion. > > Cheers, > Florian > > [1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:noexit > [2]: > http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.openstreetmap.org%2Fwiki%2FDE%3AKey%3Anoexit&edit-text=&act=url > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
