Op zaterdag 12 oktober 2019 21:01:06 CEST schreef s8evq
<[email protected]>:
>On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 19:24:35 +0000 (UTC), Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Thanks Stijn for taking the time to comment.
>
>> - An interesting change is the one from access=no/destination to
>> vehicle=no/destination for the
>> C5-sign, which I support, because it's more correct. But a disadvantage is
>> that e.g. access=no/destination
>> shows on the map, but vehicle=no/destination not. Would the proposal to
>> treat access=no/destination and
>> vehicle=no/destination equally on the map make any chance?
>
>On what map does it not display? I'm personally not in favor of using both
>tags. That makes it very confusing.
A road with access=destination has grey dots:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29350445A road with vehicle=destination has
no grey dots: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26496960A road with access=no
has grey stripes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/71578088
A road with vehicle=no has no grey stripes:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28967486But perhaps I'd rather like to see
all roads with limited access (access/vehicle=destination or vehicle=no) the
same way and roads with no (public) access the same (access=no/private).I'm
also not in favor of using both tags.
StijnRR
_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
